Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has revealed that his government provided “intelligence and no proof” to India regarding the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Khalistani terrorist, on Canadian soil. Trudeau testified before a foreign interference inquiry, explaining that Canadian intelligence had suspicions linking India to Nijjar’s killing. However, despite multiple requests, Canada lacked concrete evidence to substantiate these claims.
Prior to going public with the accusations, Canadian intelligence agencies attempted to engage diplomatically with India. According to Trudeau, his government urged India to investigate the matter. In response, New Delhi requested substantial proof, which Canada was unable to produce. This admission marks a crucial development in the ongoing diplomatic standoff between the two countries.
During the recent G20 Summit in New Delhi, Trudeau personally conveyed Canada’s suspicions to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In return, India expressed frustration over the presence of anti-government individuals and separatist activities within Canada, particularly those linked to the Khalistan movement. India has long accused Canada of allowing pro-Khalistan elements to operate freely, further straining relations between the two nations.
The situation escalated after Trudeau’s public accusations, with India vehemently denying involvement in Nijjar’s death. New Delhi dismissed the allegations as politically motivated, accusing Trudeau of engaging in “vote bank politics” to secure support from Sikh voters in Canada, where Khalistani separatism remains a sensitive issue.
In retaliation, India expelled six Canadian diplomats, intensifying diplomatic hostilities. This action followed earlier moves by both countries to reduce their diplomatic presence, amid mounting tensions. The expulsion of diplomats marks a significant decline in Canada-India relations, which have become increasingly fraught over issues of terrorism, separatism, and foreign interference.
As both nations continue to trade accusations, the prospect of diplomatic resolution remains uncertain, with no sign of either side backing down. The situation underscores the broader complexities of foreign relations shaped by domestic political considerations.