A year after PM Trudeau’s allegations, mistrust blights India, Canada ties

On September 18 last year, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rose in the House of Commons and made a statement that there were “credible allegations” of a potential link between Indian agents and the killing of pro-Khalistan figure Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, British Columbia, three months earlier.

The wounds to the bilateral relationship caused by that bombshell have not healed, and continue to fester and, over the next 12 months, could even worsen.

India described that accusation as “absurd” and “motivated.” The immediate backlash from New Delhi included a retaliatory expulsion and suspension of issuing of visas to Canadian nationals. Issuance of visas resumed in November but by then India had asked Canada to reduce the number of its diplomats in the country from 62 to 21 as it sought “parity” in such presence. Canada’s foreign minister Mélanie Joly described their departure from India as “expulsion”.
Trudeau’s statement has yet to be validated with evidence and India’s attitude remains unchanged. Sanjay Kumar Verma, India’s High Commissioner to Ottawa, said, “Till the time we do not see anything informed to us regarding the allegations that he has made, we will still consider it as unsubstantiated and unfounded.”
There are plenty of pitfalls in the year ahead. First, there is the trial of four Indian nationals who were arrested in connection with Nijjar’s murder. Karan Brar, 22, Kamalpreet Singh, 22 and Karanpreet Singh, 28, were apprehended from Edmonton in Alberta on May 3. The fourth, Amandeep Singh, 22, was already in custody in the Greater Toronto Area on different charges, when he was named in this context.
Their trial is expected to begin in earnest on October 1 and could help clarify the accusations and offer proof of India’s involvement, if any. While announcing the three arrests on May 3, assistant commissioner David Teboul, Pacific Region federal policing program commander, said there were “separate and distinct investigations ongoing” including “investigating connections to the Government of India.” The direction of the trial may define how bilateral ties evolve.
The second point of conflict will be over the final report of public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions, headed by Justice Marie-Josee Hogue, expected by December 31. The initial report, released in May, accused India of foreign interference, and of engaging “in a range of activities that seek to influence Canadian communities and politicians.”
It did point out that the focus of such Indian influence efforts was driven by concerns over Khalistani separatism in Canada. Importantly, it recognised “Canada-based Khalistani violent extremism” though that was described as “relatively small” and added India does not differentiate between that and “lawful, pro-Khalistani political advocacy.”
On June 4, a report from the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians or NSCIOP stated bluntly that India has “emerged as the second-most significant foreign interference threat to Canada’s democratic institutions and processes” displacing Russia.
The final findings of the Commission will significantly influence the relationship going forward even as New Delhi has been chagrined that “no credible” Indo-Canadian organisations were recognised by it to testify and “counter anti-India propaganda”, a view that has been communicated to Ottawa.
There remains the major stumbling block, activities of pro-Khalistan separatists in Canada. The secessionist outfit Sikhs for Justice or SFJ has openly stated it feels “emboldened” by Trudeau’s statement. In fact, they have managed to change the narrative since Nijjar’s killing, going from being described by Canadian media as “extremists” to “activists”. Thus, empowered they have staged multiple protests attacking Indian leaders, its senior-most diplomats in Canada, displayed floats depicting the assassinations of Indian leaders, threatened the Hindu community and desecrated temples. There have been no repercussions.
The standard Canadian response to such activity in its territory has been that it’s “awful, but lawful.” That sentiment or versions of it have been repeated by Joly in conversations with external affairs minister S Jaishankar, and, most recently, when Weldon Epp, assistant deputy minister for the Indo-Pacific, visited New Delhi and met officials there in July. Provocation from pro-Khalistan groups will not diminish, not till Federal elections are held as scheduled in October 2025, if not earlier.
On the positive side, business contacts remain strong. As Verma said, “Most of the functional domains between our two countries, all of them are growing well, whether it is an investment, whether it is science and technology, number of people travelling to each other’s countries.”
Things should improve, said Vina Nadjibulla, vice president, research and strategy, at the Vancouver-based Asia-Pacific Foundation of Canada. She said, “There’s no two ways there was a diplomatic crisis and we’re still dealing with the aftereffects. But, at the same time, we can see that other parts of their relationships are resilient.” Trade and investment continue, and provinces like Saskatchewan and Ontario have been amenable to forging stronger ties. “I think we’ll have to see on balance the long-term potential of the relationship is very much there and it’s strong,” she said.
Shinder Purewal, professor of political science at Kwantlen Polytechnic University, was equally hopeful. “Canada’s strategic self-serving objective is served by a strong alliance with a fellow Commonwealth democracy as a bulwark against authoritarianism,” he said. He placed the blame for the rupture on Trudeau. “It is Prime Minister Trudeau’s decision to please the Khalistani lobby that is working against this natural Canada-India alliance. Even this decision to please his political backers has a sunset clause,” he said. “Canada-India relations will start normalising now onward and certainly after the next Federal election,” he observed.
However, that remains a year away unless Pierre Poilievre, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, manages to precipitate an earlier election. With a steady lead of nearly 20 percentage points over the ruling Liberal Party, the Conservatives are nearly certain of governing Canada by the end of 2025. Will that change the equation? That will depend on the political debts they may have to pay off, and, as importantly, public perception based on any future revelations in the Nijjar probe.