What to Make of the India-Canada Spat?

The diplomatic rift between India and Canada continues to grow over Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s public accusation that Indian intelligence was behind the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, an alleged Sikh terrorist living in exile in British Columbia. Nijjar was long a proponent of Sikh separatism in India’s Punjab, better known as the Khalistan movement. Last year I was privileged to be part of a study group about the issue led by the Hudson Institute’s Aparne Pande, Husain Haqqani, and C. Christine Fair. The whole report is useful background on Khalistani separatism and the shadowy groups supporting it.

India, for its part, has denied culpability. Over the course of the week, the two countries have expelled top diplomats and threatened other immigration and business sanctions. The Biden administration seeks to walk a tightrope between the two allies, hoping the crisis fades away before either can force Washington to choose sides. That is a cowardly approach. Both India and Canada may be close allies, but the United States should make clear it sides with India.

India denies culpability, and there are reasons to believe Indian officials. First is timing. Justin Trudeau’s accusations come amidst declining poll numbers and might represent cynical pandering to Sikh activists in some swing districts. Bolstering this theory is the sharp divergence with the closest parallel: The mysterious death of Pakistan human rights activist Karima Baloch in Toronto. Suspicion swirls about the involvement of Pakistani agents in her drowning, yet the Canadian government then deferred the matter to the police rather than trumpeted it from the prime minister’s office.

The second reason why India might be right is because of divisions within the Sikh community. Last year, Ripudaman Singh Malik, a former Khalistani militant who had since embraced moderation, was murdered in British Columbia. The gunmen allegedly had links to Nijjar. Simply put, alternate explanations have merit and bear investigation.

The third reason is Canadian behavior in the aftermath of Trudeau’s accusation. Compare the Nijjar case to Turkey’s accusation that Saudi Arabia murdered Jamal Khashoggi, a former Saudi intelligence agent-turned-dissident. Few in Washington care for Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, but he provided overwhelming evidence against Saudi authorities to back his charge. Trudeau has not offered evidence. Perhaps there is some there, but if it was too sensitive to expose, then why did Trudeau sanction India publicly when the matter might have been addressed quietly?

Even if India was culpable, a related question was whether New Delhi could be right to target Nijjar? Certainly, no diplomat is going to defend publicly extrajudicial assassination, but such targeted assassinations are both legal and a common tool of statecraft, even among democracies. While Saudi Arabia was wrong to kill Khashoggi because he was not involved in terrorism, the United States was right to target Usama Bin Laden. The question then becomes: Is Nijjar’s case more analogous to Khashoggi or Bin Laden?

While most Americans may be unfamiliar with Khalistani terrorism, the answer is Bin Laden. Canadians may say Nijjar was a plumber who dabbled in politics on the side, but that akin to saying Bin Laden was a building contractor who had an interest in aviation. Nijjar was involved in a terror group in India, fled to Canada under a false name, initially lost his asylum case but ended up gaining citizenship through marriage. From his Canadian safe-haven, he set up a terror training camp and helped plan a number of deadly attacks inside India. A broader debate might ask why Canada allows itself to be a safe-haven for terror and terror finance.

The United States embraces India as a counter-terror partner. If this is to extend beyond rhetoric, it is time Washington (and Ottawa) realize such partnerships are not one-way. The United States cannot demand New Delhi’s support against anti-Western terror groups while ignoring New Delhi’s concerns about terror groups targeting India.