On September 18, 2023, speaking in the House of Commons, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada said that intelligence indicated “agents of Indian government” were involved in the assassination of a Sikh community leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil. A few days later, however, the Canadian government took the initiative to make a concession to the Indian government, attempting to gradually quell the public outcry surrounding this case. While the suspects remain at large, the pressure on Trudeau has not subsided, leaving the world waiting for his response. How can Trudeau navigate this formidable challenge?
Is it true that Ottawa possesses intelligence and makes accusation, yet fails to produce any concrete evidence?
The intelligence agency of the USA is renowned as one of the world’s most professional intelligence organizations. It has deployed an extensive intelligence network all over the world, not to mention in the North American continents. Historically, the FBI has conducted notable collaboration with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on many cases.
Regarding the case of Nijjar, US ambassador to Canada David L. Cohen revealed in an interview that Washington has shared key intelligence of “the involvement of the Indian agents in the assassination” with Ottawa through the intelligence-sharing mechanism of the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance. It was the shared US intelligence that helped lead Canada to the claims that Trudeau made against Indian government in Canadian parliament.
However, why did Canada opt not to disclose the aforementioned evidence?
As articulated by Gideon Rachman in his article published in Financial Times, titled “Why the west cannot turn a blind eye to a murder in Canada ”, “Indeed, it seems that much of the initial intelligence (regarding the assassination of Nijjar) actually came from the US. So these allegations are unlikely simply to disappear into thin air. But (if Canada has convincing evidence while) allowing India to commission a murder on Canadian soil — if that is what happened — would pose a much more immediate danger to national security than a temporary setback in efforts to counter China. …If Canada provides convincing evidence of an Indian role in the Nijjar killing, then there will be legal and diplomatic processes unleashed that cannot simply be wished away (just because the US, Britain and their western allies want to get along with India). ” It is evident that the Canadian government’s reluctance to disclose the evidence stems from its unwillingness to expose its potential weakness in intelligence capabilities, while having to actively respond to the US strategy of contending with some influential country. This evidence may remain concealed forever.
Let’s examine the phenomenon of “diplomatic expulsion with double standards”. In late September, one Indian diplomat in Ottawa was expelled. On October 19, as Canadian foreign minister Mélanie Joly confirmed, 41 Canadian diplomats in New Delhi were expelled. However, she curiously added that “the Canadian government will not revoke the diplomatic immunities for Indian diplomats to prevent the situation from getting worse”. Why prompts this sudden change of heart from the Canadian government?
Interestingly, this is not the first time that Ottawa has resorted to expelling foreign diplomats. A similar incident unfolded earlier this year. At the outset of the year, the Canadian government launched a public inquiry into the matter of “foreign interference”. This inquiry triggered significant reactions within the Canadian parliament and society, dragging many officials, politicians, businesses, institutions and individuals into a web of “secret investigation”. Canada even took the extraordinary step of expelling some foreign diplomats. Regrettably, despite these actions, no compelling evidences were even made public. To some observers, it appeared that Ottawa was just making groundless accusations and manipulating conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, the “suspected individuals involved in foreign interference cases” suffered heavy reputational and financial losses.
In the case of Nijjar’s murder, Canada took an unusual step of only expelling one Indian diplomat in Ottawa, despite the fact that 41 Canadian diplomats in New Delhi were expelled. It remains a mystery for many people as to the reason behind Canadian government’s “standards for diplomatic expulsion”.
Where are the suspects hiding now?
It has been nearly five months since the assassination of Nijjar, although the culprits remain at large. As Nijjar’s son revealed in an interview that prior to Nijjar’s murder, the officials of Canadian security and intelligence agency would meet with Nijjar on a weekly basis, warning of potential assassination plots against him. Surveillance video footage from the crime scene, along with eyewitness accounts, indicate that a total of six criminals were involved in the killing.
The baffling question arises: why has it proven so challenging to track down and arrest the suspects, especially given the prior intelligence alerts, the significant number of individuals involved in the assassination and the presence of eyewitnesses and surveillance footage? Adding to the perplexity, just days after Nijjar’s murder, at least three Sikh activists in US received alarming warnings of “serious personal safety risks” from the FBI.
It appears that one or more malevolent criminal gangs operate actively in US and Canada against Sikh communities. The intelligence and law enforcement agencies in the two countries have maintained vigilance over these criminals for an extended period. However, why are they reluctant to take any action, even after Nijjar’s murder?
On a contrasting note, the US and Canada governments once executed a direct arrest of a senior executive from a foreign high-tech company at a Canadian airport. They subsequently engaged in a protracted process of collecting and supplementing what they termed “evidence”, causing repeated delays in legal proceedings. Ultimately, due to insufficient evidence, the prosecution had to be abandoned. So why does the “highly-efficient cooperation in law enforcement between US and Canada” suddenly fail to function in the case of Nijjar’s murder?
Human rights Vs. Politics. For a long time, Canada has portrayed itself as “a champion of human rights”. However, when confronted with the case of Nijjar’s killing, the Canadian government only made some accusations, and then kept unusually silent and indifferent to this matter for a prolonged period of time. Even Canada’s largest media outlet CBC News acknowledged in its reporting that “As much as there will be pushback around even raising the ‘P’ word around this, everything is political…”
This raises the question: What exactly does “politics” mean in this context? An article written by Matthew Lee for Associated Press (AP) on October 7, titled “US fears Canada-India row over Sikh activist’s killing could upend strategy for countering China, ” may provide a compelling answer. It suggests that Ottawa, driven by its alignment with Washington and its “allies’ political agenda,” has made the regrettable choice to prioritize these political considerations over human rights.