On India-Canada diplomatic relations | Explained

the story So Far:

RRecently, Canada and India each expelled its top diplomats due to the fallout Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegations last year that he had possible ties to Indian intelligence Murder of Canadian citizen Hardeep Singh Nijjarin Canada. India classified Nijjar as a Khalistani terrorist (he faced no criminal charges in Canada, but he was put on the no-fly list and his bank accounts were frozen). This controversy seems to be increasing Canadian Hindu-Sikh tensions.

Is there any historical reference?

India has long complained that Canada serves as a safe haven for Khalistani separatists/extremists. Its biggest grievance is Canada’s failure to prevent the 1985 Air India bombing (perpetrated by Canada-based Khalistani extremists) and its lack of support in the subsequent investigation.

329 people (including children) were killed in the bombing, the worst airline terrorist act before 9/11.

Is there a Sikh ‘vote bank’ in Canada?

Vote bank is an Indian term that is unfamiliar to Canadians. Sikhs constitute only 2% of Canada’s population, but their political clout is enormous due to their geographic concentration. At one time there were four Sikh ministers in the Trudeau cabinet. Most of the Sikh MPs are from Trudeau’s Liberal Party. However, there is no public evidence to suggest that the Trudeau government’s sole motive for making these allegations against India is to pander to Sikh voters (of whom Khalistanis are the only minority).

What we have as ‘evidence’ is that the Trudeau government removed the words Sikh and Khalistani from a government report that, for the first time, identified Khalistani extremism among the top five terrorism threats in Canada; The Canadian Parliament observed a moment of silence to mourn Nijjar’s murder; Mr. Trudeau and other party leaders were taking part in celebrations of the Sikh community that featured Khalistan flags and the glorification of Air India bombing mastermind Talwinder Parmar; And are also getting support from known Khalistani supporters. But not only the Liberal Party, but all the parties have been involved in such acts. While Mr. Trudeau and his government have affirmed India’s territorial integrity, they have not explicitly condemned the Khalistani insurgency. But this ‘vote bank’ is not what India understands. In surveys, 54% of Sikhs in Canada intend to vote for the Conservative Party and 21% for Trudeau’s party in the next election.

The Trudeau government has already come under criticism over its failures to counter Chinese interference in Canadian elections. A public inquiry into foreign interference has currently been launched by the Canadian government. Therefore, such an allegation could strengthen its weak image.

But the Canadian newspaper, Earth And Match, which exposed Chinese interference and published allegations regarding India last year (before Mr. Trudeau went public), and other news outlets criticized Mr. Trudeau for merely using a serious national security issue for political posturing. To do. As India alleges, the case is being manufactured to woo Sikh voters.

EditorialCanadian frostbite: on India-Canada diplomatic war

Are there any political and cultural misconceptions?

There are misunderstandings on both sides. Canadian scholars have argued that despite the fact that the majority of the victims of the Air India bombing were Canadian citizens (of Indian origin), the Canadian government had long viewed it as a “foreign tragedy” and the victims as victims of the Air India bombing. Not as “real Canadians”, clearly betraying systemic racism. Both Conservative and Liberal governments treated the victims poorly until an official apology was issued by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2010. This racial bias is also reinforced by the fact that despite it being Canada’s worst terrorist act, 90% of Canadians had little or no knowledge. about it, and more than 50% of people under the age of 35 had never even heard of it. Furthermore, since no Khalistani terrorist acts have been committed in Canada since then, the public is unaffected, and unaware of Khalistani activism.

On the contrary, the Indian public believes that institutions work as they do in India. The rule of law is implemented in a more systematic manner in Canada than in India. Canadian police protect independence, and there has been huge public outcry whenever politicians have attempted to intervene illegally. Former Liberal cabinet minister Ujjal Dosanjh, himself a victim of deadly attacks by Khalistani extremists, has argued that although Canadian politicians have allowed Khalistani ideas to flourish, law enforcement has not been soft on Khalistani terrorism. Although the Air India investigation largely failed, the available evidence does not suggest, as is believed in India, that they were politically motivated to support Khalistani extremists. Instead, the public inquiry into the Air India bombing was scathing about the security and investigation failures, calling them “unimaginable, incomprehensible, inexcusable, incompetent”.

Additionally, India is angry that the Khalistan referendum takes place in Canada and Khalistani parades glorify the assassination of Indira Gandhi. However, freedom of speech and expression is a highly protected value in Canada and there is a high threshold for hate speech that can be prosecuted. Referendums and advocating non-violent separatism are legal in Canada, and referendums have been held for Quebec to secede from Canada. Burning a Canadian flag or a Bible is not criminal in itself.

However, Canadian critics have argued for tighter legal oversight around Khalistani hate speech, especially when threats are issued.

What are the legal implications?

India’s extradition requests for those it calls Khalistani terrorists are often rejected not for political reasons, but because they do not meet Canadian legal standards. Western democracies are wary of extradition to countries with very poor human rights records, where political dissidents and opponents are held in prison for long periods of time without criminal conviction, and without trial and bail, especially under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Under anti-terrorism laws. (UAPA). Other reasons include the weakness of the evidence relying only on statements of the accused in custody, and (as noted by journalist Praveen Swami) the inadmissibility of Indian intelligence evidence in courts abroad because it was collected under the Indian Telegraph Act and the Information Technology Act. are not done. , Only six wanted persons have been extradited from Canada to India from 2002–2020 (this number is 10 for the US, and just one for the UK).

Notably, India has not managed to secure the extradition of Mehul Choksi, Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi and Vijay Mallya (the last three from the UK with whom India has friendly relations).

What role has the media played?

The Canadian media has asked some tough questions of the government and presented India’s side about the dangers of Khalistani diaspora politics. In contrast, the TV media in India, while rightly questioning Western hypocrisy on some matters, has replaced journalism with chauvinism, and has pushed the government’s narrative without criticism. It has spread disinformation that no one was convicted for the Air India bombings (bomber Inderjit Singh Reyat spent nearly 30 years in prison); Mr. Trudeau “admitted” there was no evidence for his allegations, etc.

in parallel, globe and mail (and other newspapers) who last year called on Mr. Trudeau to provide more facts on his allegations, currently criticizing the Indian government for being soft on its “manifestly hostile” actions and “curiously reluctant to admit that.” The reason is that the revelations this time are from the Canadian police and are not just “credible allegations” but “strong evidence.” ” Are. It remains to be seen whether this will pass muster in the courts.

Nissim Mannathukkaren is Professor, International Development Studies, Dalhousie University, Canada