Amid Indian belligerence, ‘Canada may lose face’
Indian and Canadian PMs Narendra Modi and Justin Trudeau
By Manish Anand
New Delhi, October 3: External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar left none in doubt that India accords least value to the accusation of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over the killing of separatist Hardpeep Singh Nijjar. The western commentators are now converging on the view that India will be least interested in rapprochement with Canada, and it may come down for Trudeau to lose face on the international stage.
Trudeau made a sensational claim in the Canadian parliament that there were “credible allegations over the involvement of the Government of India in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar”. His claim, it emerged out later, was on the basis of intelligence shared by the US as part of the Five Eyes partnership that involves also the UK, Australia and New Zealand.
Christine Fair, a Professor at Georgetown University, wrote in the Lawfare that India is least expected for a rapprochement with Canada. Her claim is also seen to be in sync with Jaishankar firmly rejecting the arguments put forth by the western commentators on the Nijjar killing, as he reiterated in Washington that the “US shared its views on the issue, and we shared our views”. That largely meant that India will not buy the western lecture on the Nijjar case, as New Delhi condemns Canada as the “safe haven of terrorists”, as charged by the spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs Arindam Bagchi.
“Canada will back down. The only way for India to save face —which has to happen to safeguard the free world’s anti-China alliance — is for Canada to lose some,” wrote Tinku Varadrajan in the Wall Street Journal, as he summed up that the western stakes in India outweigh Trudeau’s allegations against New Delhi over the killing of Nijjar, who was a designated terrorist by India’s National Investigative Agency.
The western commentators now appear opening their ears to strong views of India against free space given to anti-India elements on their soil. “The speech protections afforded by the Western democracies where they settled expanded their opportunities for Khalistan activism. Not only was this diaspora a source of diplomatic and financial support, but it also helped enable Pakistan’s involvement in fueling Sikh separatist efforts. Sikhs in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States played important roles in arranging for cadres to travel to Pakistan, where they received financial and military assistance,” argued Fair.
Tracking the Nijjar issue, she further stated in her column that “when India raised its concerns with Canada, Canadian police said in 2016 that they were aware of the allegations against Nijjar but noted that he had not been charged in Canada. To India’s dismay, even after India shared information on over a dozen criminal cases of murder and other terrorist activities and despite the Interpol notice, Canada’s response was simply to place him on a no-fly list.”
About The Author
