Relations between India and Canada have hit a new low after both countries expelled top diplomats in connection with the assassination of a prominent Khalistani separatist, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in Canada last year.
The diplomatic row escalated when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly accused India of being involved in Nijjar's murder. This sharp accusation significantly worsened bilateral ties, which virtually collapsed on October 14 when India retaliated against Canada’s demands for diplomatic accountability, leading to the expulsion of diplomats on both sides.
ALSO READ | India, Canada expel diplomats as ties hit new low
The crux of the dispute centres around Canada’s allegation that Indian intelligence agents were involved in the killing of Nijjar, a Canadian citizen residing in British Columbia and a prominent figure in the Khalistan movement.
The Trudeau government has claimed it possesses credible evidence linking India to the assassination, which it says was part of a broader campaign by Indian intelligence to target critics of the Indian government, especially Khalistani activists, living in Canada. India has vehemently denied the allegations, describing them as politically motivated and factually incorrect.
Canada’s demand to waive the diplomatic immunity of several Indian diplomats, including the High Commissioner, Sanjay Kumar Verma, further inflamed tensions. Canadian authorities wanted to question these diplomats and potentially arrest them in connection with Nijjar’s assassination, accusing them of being involved in criminal activities, such as harassment and intimidation of Khalistanis.
This led to the expulsion of these diplomats by Canada (although India had already decided to withdraw them), a move that prompted India to expel six Canadian diplomats in retaliation. Among those expelled was Stewart Wheeler, the acting high commissioner in India.
The Indian government responded strongly, accusing Canada of fostering extremism by allowing the Khalistani movement to thrive within its borders. India has long maintained that the Khalistani movement, which advocates for a separate Sikh state, is driven by violent extremists. From New Delhi’s perspective, the Nijjar assassination and the broader Khalistan issue are part of a pattern of radical activities allowed by the Canadian government. India’s official stance is that Trudeau’s administration has failed to take action against these extremist elements, many of whom are on India’s wanted list for terrorism-related activities.
In turn, Canada argues that its legal and judicial systems are fully capable of dealing with any criminal activity, including extremist violence, within its borders. It maintains that Nijjar was a Canadian citizen who had the right to freedom of speech, regardless of his political views.
Canada’s reluctance to crack down on Khalistani activists has long been a point of contention in its relations with India, with New Delhi accusing Ottawa of turning a blind eye to separatist activities because of political reasons.
Trudeau’s critics, both in India and abroad, argue that his approach to the Khalistan issue is influenced by domestic politics. Sikhs make up a significant and politically influential minority in Canada, and many have historically supported Trudeau’s Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party (NDP).
The NDP, which was formerly in an alliance with Trudeau’s government, is led by Jagmeet Singh, a Sikh politician who has voiced support for the Khalistan movement in the past. India claims that Trudeau’s reluctance to act against Khalistani activists stems from his need to maintain political support from these groups.
India's accusations against Canada are not new. New Delhi has long contended that Khalistani separatists are exploiting Canada’s liberal laws to promote their agenda of an independent Sikh state, which India views as a threat to its national security. The Indian government has also cited specific incidents, such as a 2023 parade in Canada celebrating the assassination of former prime minister Indira Gandhi, as evidence that Canada is not taking the issue seriously. India’s official position is that the Khalistani movement is driven by extremism and terrorism, not legitimate political dissent.
On the flip side, Trudeau is facing a series of domestic challenges that have diminished his political standing. Once hailed as a progressive leader with a global appeal, Trudeau’s popularity has significantly declined due to a combination of economic and political crises.
High inflation, rising housing costs, and scandals have marred his government, leaving him with some of the worst approval ratings of any Canadian prime minister in recent history. The Nijjar case, which has drawn international attention, could be a political opportunity for Trudeau to rally support, particularly from Sikh voters in Canada, but it also risks further isolating Canada on the world stage.
But the India-Canada standoff is not merely a bilateral issue. It has significant geopolitical implications, particularly for the west which has been working to strengthen ties with India in recent years.
India’s growing economic and military clout, coupled with its strategic role as a counterbalance to China, makes it an indispensable partner for the United States and other Western nations.
While Canada’s allegations against India are serious, the broader geopolitical context suggests that the US and its allies may be hesitant to fully back Canada in this dispute. India’s importance as a counterweight to China, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region, means that the West may be reluctant to take sides in a manner that could harm its relations with New Delhi.