Over the last week, people I respect from outside India have asked me a variation of the same question: Why are Indians so angry about the charges levelled by the US and Canada regarding possible Indian involvement in assassination plots?
Other questions usually follow: Many Indians have openly opposed what the Narendra Modi government has done within India. Why are we so reluctant to extend that criticism to the government’s activities abroad? Do we really want to support a government that goes around bumping people off?
I have tried hard to explain my position on this issue, but because the questions keep coming, I thought I would put down my responses here.
Indians aren’t naive
We do not take the line that the government of India is as pure as the driven snow or that these charges are entirely unfounded. Most of us accept—especially when it comes to the US charges—that there is a case to answer. And we accept that yes, some officials of the Indian government may have been involved in these plots.
Even the government of India seems to have accepted as much. It sacked a R&AW officer after the Americans informed them of his involvement.
Nobody in the government will comment while an official inquiry is ongoing, but I haven’t heard anyone in authority deny that there is clearly a problem with how our secret services operate.
Also read: If you believe the theories, Lawrence Bishnoi is doing what even Dawood Ibrahim couldn’t
Difference between Canada & US
Why are we taking the American charges more seriously than those levelled by Canada? Well, because the Americans don’t have a dog in this race. From everything we know, the matter has been treated as a law enforcement issue, and the investigations have been judicious. Even when the case was escalated to higher authorities, Washington did not try to politicise it or attempt to humiliate India.
Canada’s behaviour, on the other hand, has been completely different. Unlike Joe Biden, Justin Trudeau does have a dog in this race. Almost from the moment he came to power, Trudeau has supported Sikh separatists for electoral benefit. Despite innumerable complaints from India about Khalistanis issuing threats to our diplomatic personnel in Canada and doing their best to revive the separatist movement in Punjab, Canada has done nothing.
Instead, Trudeau has pushed ahead to appeal to his Khalistani supporters. When he decided to accuse India of organising the murder of one such separatist, Trudeau played it for maximum effect, hoping to please his Khalistani allies. As he himself admits, he did not have any hard evidence to present to the Indian government—only intelligence reports he had received.
Last week, even as we were asking Canada to guarantee the safety and security of our diplomats, Trudeau named our High Commissioner and top diplomats as persons of interest in the murder investigation. In diplomatic terms, this is virtually unprecedented. Clearly, he wanted to pick a fight with India to please a domestic constituency.
India and separatists
None of Trudeau’s Khalistani pals actually live in Punjab. Their closest connection to today’s India is listening to modern Bhangra hit songs. They have no stake in what happens in Punjab.
Unlike them, we care because we live with the consequences of separatism and terrorism. Nobody who was alive in the 1980s will forget the violent separatist movement that destroyed normal life and peace in Punjab. Nor will we forget that an Air India plane was blown up, killing hundreds, by Canada-based Khalistan supporters. When we tried to gain custody of the bombers, the Canadian government, then headed by Justin Trudeau’s father, ignored us.
Now, when the young Trudeau depends on Khalistanis to keep him in office and enjoys calling India out, no Indian will take him seriously. We understand that his agenda is not justice but re-election.
Also read: Sikh separatists & their gang wars in Canada are not India’s problem. Call the troops back
What is international morality?
There was a time when it was considered shocking for countries to try to assassinate their enemies. Thanks to America’s behaviour in recent years, that idea no longer seems as horrifying.
It is America that makes its president sign kill orders and draw up a kill list. Then American forces hunt down and assassinate those deemed threats to the US. They are killed in missile attacks, bombings, and drone strikes. All of these occur outside the United States and in many cases, they violate the sovereignty of independent nations.
I make no judgements about this: perhaps targeted assassination is the best way to fight terrorism. But when US presidents boast about killing their enemies at press conferences—“He died like a dog,” President Donald Trump bragged after one such assassination—and Hollywood makes movies glorifying Israeli assassination squads, it is clear we are in a moral grey area.
So when the rest of the world (mainly the West) tells us that assassinations of those who advocate violence against Indian citizens are very bad, can anyone expect us to take this posturing seriously?
You cannot base international morality on the principle that America and its allies can kill whomever they want while the rest of us are forbidden from using this method to protect ourselves.
Our internal debate
To believe that educated Indians will never question their government is silly. We question the government every single day. At present, many of us are worried about how our spy agencies are run. The officer fired by the Indian government appears to have been an extremely dodgy character involved in criminal cases even while workIng for the government. How could this be allowed?
Regardless of your views on whether India should act against terrorists and separatists living abroad, there is no doubt that the sloppy manner in which this operation against Gurpatwant Singh Pannun was conducted is worthy of the Keystone Cops or the Kapil Sharma comedy show.
Moreover, it is not clear why R&AW should be so obsessed with North American Khalistanis. Doesn’t India have other enemies who present a more serious threat?
Also read: What Trudeau said about India in testimony before Canada’s Foreign Interference Commission
That’s why we are angry
I hope this clarifies things for those who have told me that our responses are jingoistic. And for all those well-meaning people who have told me that it is wrong for nations to assassinate their violent and dangerous enemies: perhaps you should start by agitating against America, because this is a regular feature of US foreign policy.
The charges levelled by Canada and America do worry us. But the double standards, the hypocrisy, and attempts to bash India to win votes in Canada worry us even more.
Vir Sanghvi is a print and television journalist, and talk show host. He tweets @virsanghvi. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)