India’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, accused Canada of harboring criminals from India, particularly those affiliated with the Sikh separatist movement, following recent RCMP arrests in connection with the homicide of Sikh activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, B.C. Nijjar was a vocal advocate for Khalistan, a Sikh homeland, and his death led to protests against Indian diplomats in Canada. The tensions between the two countries escalated when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau implied that India played a role in the homicide. Jaishankar emphasized that the issue of Sikh separatism is more pronounced in Canada than in the U.S., and criticized the Canadian government for giving legitimacy to extremist and violent elements in the name of free speech.
During a forum in India, Jaishankar responded to questions about Canada’s relationship with India and its handling of the Sikh separatist movement. He accused the Canadian government, including the governing Liberals, of pandering to Sikh separatists for votes and tolerating extremism. Jaishankar also highlighted last year’s protests against Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government in Canada, which included provocative posters inciting violence and offering rewards for information on Indian officials. He raised concerns about attacks and threats made towards Indian diplomatic missions in Canada and criticized Ottawa for allowing wanted criminals from Punjab to operate in the country and associate with Sikh separatists.
India’s accusations against Canada have not been substantiated under Canada’s legal system. Canadian officials have stated that India’s definition of terrorism doesn’t always align with Canadian legal standards and have offered workshops to their Indian counterparts on the rule of law. Despite India’s claims, Canada has maintained that there is no concrete evidence linking individuals accused of terrorism to criminal activities in Canada. Jaishankar warned that there would be pushback against calls for Khalistan’s separation, although he did not specify the source of this resistance. The Indian high commission in Ottawa did not provide clarity on whether the pushback would come from India or non-state actors.
Several human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch, have criticized the Indian government’s handling of civil rights and highlighted instances of violence against non-Hindu citizens. There have been calls for India to investigate potential involvement in Nijjar’s death, citing the government’s historical failure to hold law enforcement accountable for unlawful killings. India has also urged Canada to prosecute individuals who glorify those associated with the 1985 Air India bombing, which was a tragic event following a period of ethnic violence. These issues continue to strain the relationship between India and Canada, with accusations and tensions on both sides.
The accusations made by India against Canada have sparked a diplomatic dispute between the two countries, with each side offering different perspectives on the situation. While India insists that criminal elements from Punjab are finding refuge in Canada and associating with Sikh separatists, Canada maintains that there is a lack of concrete evidence to support these claims. The ongoing tensions have highlighted the complexities of managing international relations, especially when dealing with issues related to terrorism and separatist movements. The need for dialogue, cooperation, and respect for each country’s legal system is essential to navigate these challenging situations and prevent further escalation of conflicts. Both India and Canada will need to find common ground and address concerns in a constructive manner to maintain a peaceful and productive relationship.
