On Monday, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau got here ahead with a stunning allegation: that “brokers of the federal government of India” had assassinated a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil.
The person, named Hardeep Singh Nijjar, was killed in British Columbia again in June. He was a world chief within the Sikh separatist motion, which referred to as for an unbiased state on land at present contained in the Indian state of Punjab. New Delhi had beforehand alleged that Nijjar was not merely an activist, however a militant concerned in terrorist plots. Now he’s lifeless — and the Canadian authorities believes India is accountable.
It’s laborious to know the way correct these allegations are: Canada has not shared the intelligence supporting its declare publicly, and India has vehemently denied accountability. However the Canadians did share their findings with different Western intelligence businesses earlier than publicly pointing a finger at India. And it could be a catastrophe for Trudeau, each at dwelling and overseas, to make such an allegation and for it to be confirmed false.
India’s international intelligence company — the Analysis and Evaluation Wing, or RAW — is broadly believed to commonly spy on Sikhs overseas. One Sikh diaspora supply I spoke to whereas reporting this text refused to talk on the document on account of earlier threats made by Indian brokers in opposition to members of the family nonetheless residing within the nation.
However the killing of a NATO nation’s citizen inside their borders would signify a large and worrying escalation. Within the twenty first century, fellow democracies virtually by no means assassinate one another’s residents on one another’s territory, even when they’re suspected of significant crimes. “Transnational repression,” the political science time period for going after dissidents and critics overseas, is usually practiced by the world’s most brutal regimes — locations like China, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.
“Most of us nonetheless consider that we’re the great guys and our authorities doesn’t do this type of factor,” the Indian economist Mihir Sharma writes in Bloomberg. “If India really did conduct an assassination on Western soil — which its international ministry strongly denies — it could signify a fairly main escalation of the nation’s covert battle in opposition to each non-violent dissidents and energetic supporters of militant separatism overseas.”
India has been transferring in a distinctly autocratic route for some years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in energy since 2014, has led an escalating warfare in opposition to India’s democratic establishments — attacking press freedoms, weaponizing safety providers in opposition to his political opponents, and demonizing the Muslim minority. Considered on this mild, killing a Sikh dissident overseas can be yet one more signal that the world’s largest nation is touring down a harmful highway.
All of this has put the USA in a really robust spot.
The Biden administration’s grand strategic imaginative and prescient has centered on rallying the democratic world in opposition to an aggressive Russia and rising China. However in observe, its international coverage just isn’t as idealistic as that framing may counsel. India is a working example: Regardless of its retreat from democracy, New Delhi’s rising energy and proximity to China has led Washington to downplay its considerations.
But when India really has carried out this brazen killing in Canada, America’s neighbor and largest buying and selling accomplice, then the USA is confronted with a alternative. It could actually rise up for its NATO ally and democratic values, or it might probably proceed turning a comparatively blind eye to an more and more autocratic India within the title of (allegedly) defending democracy’s future from the Chinese language risk.
How Canada acquired roped into an Indian battle over secession
To grasp how India-Canada relations reached this low level, you have to perceive a bit bit about historic tensions between the Sikhs and the Indian authorities — and the function Canada has performed in them.
The Sikh non secular minority in India numbers about 22 million individuals — a bit underneath 2 % of the large (and majority Hindu) Indian inhabitants. However within the northern Indian state of Punjab, Sikhs represent a majority. Some Sikhs consider that they’d be higher off in an unbiased nation, constructed out of Punjab, that they name Khalistan.
The battle between the Indian authorities and Sikh separatists actually kicked off within the Nineteen Eighties. In 1984, the Indian Military attacked the Golden Temple, the holiest web site in Sikhism, which was sheltering a militant separatist chief. In retaliation, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s Sikh bodyguards assassinated her when she was en path to an interview. For roughly a decade afterward, the Indian authorities performed a low-level counterinsurgency marketing campaign in opposition to Khalistani militants in Punjab — a battle that claimed some 30,000 lives.
The Canadian authorities was not concerned on this battle. However the North American nation is dwelling to the most important Sikh inhabitants outdoors of India; in reality, Sikhs make up a bigger proportion of the inhabitants in Canada than in India. Canada’s Sikh diaspora emerged as a hotbed of assist for the Khalistan motion, at instances to lethal impact.
In 1985, Sikh militants planted a bomb on Air India Flight 182, originating in Toronto, and killed all 329 passengers when the airplane exploded over the Atlantic. The assault was deliberate and executed on Canadian soil, main Indian intelligence to turn into deeply involved about pro-separatist rigidity within the Sikh diaspora (each in Canada and elsewhere). The RAW has continued to contain itself of their inner politics, together with recruiting spies in Sikh cultural and political organizations overseas.
“India has a really succesful intelligence company and views Canada as a risk — they usually act accordingly,” says Stephanie Carvin, an professional on intelligence at Carleton College in Ottawa.
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24938054/1515203252.jpg)
Sikh politics — and by extension, the Sikh diaspora — have turn into a extra urgent concern for India in recent times, because the seemingly moribund Khalistani trigger skilled a minor revival. The proximate trigger seems to be a collection of protests in 2020 and 2021 — the most important anti-government protests since Modi took energy — led by a gaggle of closely Sikh farmers. Whereas the huge bulk of protests centered on agricultural reform, a small minority of the demonstrators appeared sympathetic to secession.
“Internally, we’re all for Khalistan,” protest chief Gurcharan Singh Bapuji instructed the Washington Put up. “If we had our personal Khalistan, we wouldn’t should beg in protests like this.”
Since then, the Indian authorities has been more and more vocal about its considerations about Khalistani terrorism. It’s unclear how severe the risk is; there have certainly been some violent incidents, however nothing approaching the extent of the Nineteen Eighties. But the Indian authorities’s actions this yr have been dramatic: authorities in Punjab have shut down the web, censored social media, and arrested over 200 individuals.
It is smart that, on this context, the Indian authorities would turn into extra involved the actions of the Sikh diaspora — the place assist for Khalistan is considerably extra distinguished than it’s in Punjab itself. It additionally is smart that the Canadian authorities can be skeptical of India’s claims that one among its residents was planning terrorist assaults in India.
The slain Canadian, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, was certainly a vocal advocate for an unbiased Khalistan. However there’s restricted public proof that he had taken the subsequent step into really planning violence in Punjab: The New York Occasions reported that he’s just about unknown within the state. Nijjar himself had lengthy denied prices of supporting or planning violence, claiming that India had by no means formally requested his extradition.
However Nijjar nervous that violence was coming for him. Shortly earlier than his killing, he claimed to be on a “hit checklist” in an interview with a Canadian journalist.
“I’m already on the enemy’s goal,” he stated.
How this controversy impacts America — and the way forward for international democracy
It’s hardly unusual for democratic states to have political tensions with one another, or conduct intelligence operations on the opposite’s territory. Sometimes, although, an allegation {that a} international democracy’s citizen is responsible of crimes can be dealt with by way of an extradition request. It’s usually fairly uncommon for a democracy to kill one other’s citizen in any respect, and intensely controversial when it occurs — simply have a look at Israel’s current killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh.
However even that occurred contained in the Israeli-controlled West Financial institution, not on American soil. It’s almost unprecedented for a democracy to kill one other’s citizen on its territory, because it’s such an excessive violation of the precept of nationwide sovereignty that it calls for a big diplomatic response, one that would trigger a disaster in bilateral relations.
Because of this, the Canadian authorities reportedly tried to deal with this concern discreetly — with little to point out for it. When Trudeau raised Nijjar’s killing privately with Modi on the G-20 assembly in India in early September, the Indian prime minister launched a public assertion criticizing Trudeau for tolerating virulent anti-India protests amongst Canadian Sikhs.
Given the failure of personal diplomacy and the severity of the fees, Trudeau seemingly felt he had no alternative however to go public with allegations. The consequence has been an escalating diplomatic warfare: Canada expelled an Indian diplomat suspected to be the top of RAW of their nation, main India to expel a senior Canadian diplomat in retaliation. Indian-Canadian relations seem like at their lowest level in historical past, and it’s not clear precisely when and the way they’ll get higher.
This isn’t only a drawback for the 2 nations concerned. It’s a huge mess, particularly, for the USA — a rustic that claims to be main a world motion to defend democracy but additionally is making an attempt to recruit autocratizing India as a accomplice in its efforts to include China.
“Biden has been speaking recreation about Western liberal values, the rule-based worldwide order, yadda yadda yadda. But when your ally is getting individuals whacked, [then] what?” says Steve Saideman, a world relations professor at Carleton College.
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24938059/1258955030.jpg)
Thus far, the White Home has supported Canada’s investigation into the killing and referred to as for the perpetrators to be delivered to justice. However that’s comparatively costless. The state of affairs actually turns into messy if the Canadians floor laborious proof that this killing was performed by India and licensed on the highest ranges.
If that have been the case, then a blanket dedication to liberal values would demand America take a more durable line on India — the best way it did after Russia poisoned two dissidents within the UK in 2018. However in observe, India could show far too essential to America’s counter-China marketing campaign to alienate.
On this respect, the state of affairs might find yourself resembling one other 2018 case of transnational repression: the Saudi killing of Jamal Khashoggi, an American everlasting resident and Saudi murdered by the dominion’s brokers in Turkey.
Initially, it appeared that Biden may take a tough line on the killing. He vowed through the 2020 marketing campaign to show Saudi Arabia right into a “pariah” in response and tried to maintain the Saudis at arm’s size throughout his first yr in workplace. However as his time period went on, points like rising fuel costs, the Ukraine warfare, and competitors with China modified the calculus. Biden has more and more cozied as much as the Saudis, even floating a proper settlement to defend Saudi Arabia in alternate for a peace settlement with Israel. The dominion, with its pivotal function within the oil market and Center East geopolitics, merely proved too essential to marginalize.
India is significantly extra highly effective than Saudi Arabia. It’s a lot bigger, nuclear-armed, and situated in a extra essential neighborhood. Furthermore, India’s alleged sufferer has no direct ties to the USA. It’s seemingly that, in the long term, the US will do its finest to mollify Canada’s (seemingly justified) anger with out jeopardizing its relationship with New Delhi.
The issue of allying with human rights abusers is in fact a perennial one for democratic states. All through the Chilly Warfare, the USA repeatedly backed repressive regimes, even murderous ones, within the title of combating communism. In these circumstances, the prices in human life have been not often definitely worth the strategic profit.
However the issue is particularly acute at the moment, when the administration is attempting to place itself because the champion of worldwide democracy in opposition to a rising autocratic wave. If what you’re doing isn’t merely working in opposition to a geostrategic rival, however championing the very concept of democracy, how are you going to justify constructing such a detailed relationship with India — a rustic quickly sliding down an autocratic path to the purpose the place it’s prepared to kill the citizen of a NATO ally in North America?
You possibly can’t, in fact. Seemingly recognizing the issue, the Biden staff has lately downplayed its democracies-versus-autocracies rhetoric in public.
“I do assume we’re coping with the gathering and march of autocratic forces,” Nationwide Safety Adviser Jake Sullivan stated in June. “[But Biden] has additionally been clear that in that bigger effort, we want constructive relationships with nations of all completely different traditions and backgrounds.”
This awkwardness factors to a basic drawback within the “democracies-versus-autocracies” geopolitical body: a conflation between challenges to democracy within the twenty first century, on the one hand, and more and more aggressive international insurance policies in Moscow and Beijing on the opposite. The latter is definitely an issue, however not the principal reason for the previous: Democratic backsliding in nations like India and the USA is primarily a perform of home politics, not interference by Russia and China.
Generally, defending democracy and checking authoritarian adventurism are overlapping causes: combating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an apparent instance. However different instances, like US coverage towards Modi’s India, they arrive into battle. The controversy over Nijjar’s killing exposes this actuality in an particularly clear method — one that ought to trigger policymakers in Washington to query what it actually means to face for democracy within the twenty first century.
