New Delhi: Last week’s global news coverage of the India-Canada diplomatic row has been marked by descriptions of Sikh extremist Hardeep Singh Nijjar as an “activist”, suggestions that Canadian intelligence on Indian links to his killing is “solid”, and Canadian political cartoons poking fun at India and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But there were notes of scepticism on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s motivations as elections near, and the impact on the country’s foreign policy in the Indo-Pacific.
Editorials and analyses by NZ Herald, France 24, Bloomberg and Reuters referenced either the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi in Turkey or the alleged poisoning of former Russian military intelligence officer Sergei Skripal in the UK in 2018. Saudi Arabia and Russia were accused of the killings, respectively. But such Western analyses made no mention of Israel and the US who have also been accused of overseas assassinations. As Congress MP Shashi Tharoor put it while criticising a BBC analysis: “I never cease to be amazed by the blinkers regularly put on by Western media…The two foremost practitioners of extra-territorial assassinations in the last 25 years have been Israel and the US!”
An editorial in The Globe and Mail urged Trudeau to come out with what the evidence is, while a podcast by The Economist’s diplomatic editor described the controversy as a “blow” to international diplomacy.
While The Guardian, in an editorial, concluded that the pursuit of better relations with India has been a matter of “wishful thinking” and compared it to how Western expectations of China were once misguided, Bloomberg’s editorial board went as far as to suggest that India would greatly lose out if, as with Saudi Arabia, the controversy forces its relationship with the US to become “transactional”.
This comes as the US and other leaders have been wooing New Delhi, which they view as a potential counterweight to China.
Financial Times’s South Asia bureau chief John Reed doesn’t just see this as a wager on India, but “the person of Modi”.
In an op-ed Friday, he said Modi has sought to project power overseas, but that the actions of key figures in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have led some of India’s “partners to question its democratic standards”.
Meanwhile, in Canada, political cartoons have depicted Western leaders riding a wild tiger — thought to signify India — and illustrated PM Modi in a beaver tail hat to signify he’s “hunted” his prey.
Also Read: How Hardeep Nijjar’s killing stoked row, leading to India & Canada’s tit-for-tat diplomat expulsions
Ex-officials speak out
Ten days prior, Canadian news outlet Baaz — co-founded by a former Executive Director of the World Sikh Organisation (WSO), viewed by New Delhi as a Sikh separatist outfit supporting terror groups — made waves on 15 September when it published a report naming an Indian diplomat in Canada as an alleged “counterintelligence agent”. It named Bikram Pal Singh Bhatty, not Pawan Kumar Rai, who was expelled by Canadian authorities days later.
But former members of the Canadian security establishment have begun airing their views on how watertight they think Canada’s case is or isn’t and what to expect next.
“I don’t think the criminal investigation in Canada is going to go very far,” former Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) director Richard Fadden told CBC News Thursday, adding that Ottawa may have to start thinking of what parts to “freeze” in its bilateral relationship with India.
Another former CSIS director Ward Elcock indicated that CSIS may be on “guard” for a potential attack by Sikh militants who feel “sufficiently motivated” by claims that Indian agents were behind Nijjar’s killing.
“Clearly, this is an unacceptable act, but we need to make sure that there isn’t a Canadian role here, and we aren’t tolerating terrorist groups operating from Canada,” he told Cable Public Affairs Channel (CPAC) Tuesday, recalling the 1985 Kanishka bombing allegedly carried out by Sikh militants.
Former officials also highlighted Trudeau’s domestic compulsions.
Omer Aziz, a former foreign policy advisor in Trudeau’s government, explained it plainly: “Trudeau did not want to lose the Sikh vote to Jagmeet Singh.” Singh is the leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP), which is in a governing arrangement with Trudeau’s Liberal Party.
Aziz recalled watching domestic battles distort Canada’s long-term foreign policy, in an op-ed for The Global and Mail titled ‘The real reasons Canada’s relationship with India is broken‘ Sunday.
NYT columnist bets proof is ‘solid’
While Trudeau is yet to provide evidence linking Indian agents to Nijjar’s killing, prominent American political commentator Nicholas Kristof said he’s “betting it’s solid”. (Kristof wrote his piece after Trudeau spoke to editors and reporters at The New York Times newsroom).
“This episode should be a warning to Western leaders, including President Biden, who have fawned over Modi,” wrote Kristof, who has criticised Modi in previous op-eds as well.
But Al Jazeera’s Toronto-based columnist Andrew Mitrovica had a starkly different take.
In two pieces published last week, Mitrovica chose to focus on Trudeau’s domestic compulsions as he gears up for elections and took swipes at Canada’s role in the world stage.
“Canada is the world’s doormat…a perpetual minor-leaguer in the major leagues of international affairs and diplomacy,” he wrote in a piece titled ‘If India killed a Canadian Sikh, Trudeau and other Liberal PMs are at fault’.
At a time when Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre is faring better than Trudeau in opinion polls, Mitrovica wrote in a piece on 18 September: “Trudeau should have followed his father’s sensible lead and…realised that his time was up and the baton ought to be passed.”
In a CNN editorial, Michael Bociurkiw has said that a “cynic might say that prematurely publicising the explosive findings against India is a diversion tactic to steer attention away from the China interference file and the domestic issues piling up.”
Asian news outlets, meanwhile, focused on the fall out on the Indo-Pacific strategy at large. Ravi Velloor, associate editor of The Straits Times, lamented over the fact that the issue puts the Indo-Pacific coalition in “a difficult spot”.
Some reports by international media have elicited strong reactions from Indian politicians.
Also Read: 1998 sanctions, civil nuclear deal, Sikh extremism — the ups & downs in India-Canada relations
Descriptions of Nijjar, comments from Pannun
Almost all global media, including the Global Times, has refrained from describing Nijjar as a militant or terrorist. There are also no mentions that he was chief of the Khalistan Tiger Force (KTF) — a militant group outlawed in India and formed by Jagtar Singh Tara, who is serving life imprisonment for the assassination of former Punjab chief minister Beant Singh. Nijjar was also declared a terrorist in India in late 2020.
France 24, Le Monde, BBC, and TIME magazine, have instead used phrases such as “Canadian national”, “Sikh activist” or “prominent Sikh leader” to describe Nijjar.
The Telegraph’s deputy US editor seemed to provide a line of context unseen in other reports: “Pakistan, India’s chief foe, is widely suspected of fanning the [Khalistan] movement.”
While Indian news channels have been warned by the Modi government against giving a platform to individuals with terror links, the likes of CNN have spoken to those like Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a controversial Sikh separatist and chief of India-banned Sikhs for Justice (SFJ).
Pannun told the news outlet that Nijjar was asked by Canadian authorities to be careful and avoid giving “big talks” or he would be targeted.
‘Muted’ reactions from Canada’s allies
Almost all international media, including Chinese news outlets, seem to share the same observation that Canada’s allies have been “muted” on this issue, especially the Five Eye allies — the US, the UK, New Zealand and Australia.
While these countries have backed Ottawa’s probe, they reportedly resisted Trudeau’s plans for a joint statement on Nijjar’s killings. On Saturday, US Ambassador to Canada David Cohen confirmed that one of the Five Eyes nations provided intelligence to Ottawa on the case.
BBC’s Landale noted that Canada’s allies are for now, “staying loyal but cautious”. He warned that Western countries may soon have to choose either upholding “rule of law or the hard necessity of realpolitik”.
NZ Herald, in an editorial, said Ottawa’s allies are under pressure and commented on the “muted language” in their statements.
The Chinese Communist Party’s shrill mouthpiece Global Times interpreted the reactions from other Western countries as an example of Western “hypocrisy”. “Western elites are well aware of the substantial differences between India’s so-called ‘democracy’ and their own,” stated a report from the Chinese state-owned outlet.
(Edited by Richa Mishra)
Also Read: Canadian diplomatic strength is three times that of India’s, besides an extra Mission