Vote bank gimmicks of Canada will result in international humiliation

For a few days, there has been some popular discussion in relation to the Canadian allegations over the murder of a declared terrorist- Hardeep Singh Njjar, which Canada claims to be an assassination by India. While the killing of Mr. Hardeep is nothing recent as he was killed on 18th June, this incident has been politically utilized only recently.

Though allegations that have been seen as a fatal mistake by the opposition member of Canada and were alomost were unexpected, it was observable for months by the tone of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that as the 45th elections draw nearer, his Pro-Khalistan cards will be used more often. It was earlier warned by EAM Jaishankar that Canada was being driven by ‘vote bank politics’.

Recently at the Indian G20 summit during a press conference, Trudeau’s words on the matter of anti-India activities in Canada were - “Canada will always defend freedom of expression, freedom of conscience, and freedom of peaceful protest and it is extremely important to us, at the same time, we are always there to prevent violence and to push back against hatred". After his talks with the Indian PM Mr. Modi, Trudeau had claimed to have talked about “foreign interreference”.

But the current sensitivity of the western publications on alleged international extra judicial killings and the concerns of PM Trudeau on the killing of Mr. Nijjar which are being bannered by the western newspapers today were invisible in his answer regarding anti-India activities which can’t be seen without the context of numerous attacks of Khalistan’s forces in Canada against Indian citizens, Canadian Hindus and against the unity and integrity of India.

It can’t be seen without the context of highly viral and discussed events of 4th June in Brampton city where in a rally organized by Khalistani elements with fixed models depicted the assassination of former Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi on the 39th anniversary of operation Bluestar. One can only wonder as to what 'pushback against hatred' implies when such activities celebrating murder of a sitting PM of democratic nation are being allowed by another established government.

The answer to this is clear- it is not a stable sense of morality or justice which will decide what is ‘hate’ but it is the electoral alliances of Canada and political expedience that will decide its meaning and application. It is often the realpolitik- the hard realities of a self-serving world that decides many things.

Here it is the alliance between the power hungry politicians of the coalition government of the Liberal party led by Mr. Trudeau and the New Democratic party led by Jagmeet Singh(who holds the votes of Indian Sikh diaspora) that is forcing the Canadian PM to play beyond his national interest internationally so as to achieve the domestic interests, where he will require consolidated and favorable Sikh vote as the white voter base comes to his criticism.

But then it is the same realpolitik that delves into the questions of international relations under the skin of liberal and soft stances and features some phrases like ‘rules-based world order’ and ‘rule of law’. The realpolitik power play appears to have become a card mostly against Canada. Indian Foreign Minister had predicted in his book The India Way about the diverging alliances of the West as the US hegemony loosens.

This irreversible change was visible since the start of the Ukraine war wherein many NATO members were buying Russian oil when US was actively advocating sanctions. This rising urge for self-interest and a post-Trump US that is more focused on immediate priorities and is ready to concede to another player will be a situation very painful to smaller states that do not possess significant negotiating power or strategic value in geostrategy.

As a result, it will be obvious and expected of such states to leave the position of authority and to be mindful of the rising potential of other powers. Canada today appears to be a rank holder on the list of such states.

In the realpolitik aspects Canda appears mostly spineless with no substantial leverage in the world order, especially when it attempts to claim it by its postures in international conferences such as the G20. Its defense budget for instance is a mere 26.5 billion dollars compared to the massive defense budget of India which is nearing 75billion dollars.

Looking at the data of the global fire power index 2023, Canada has merely 63 fighter jets, 70,000 active personnels and a navy which has zero destroyers and primarily only 12 frigates which is incomparable to India’s 577 fighter aircrafts, 14,50,000 strong Army and a navy which boasts 2 aircraft carriers. In essence Canada is far behind many states, even that of the middle easter region such as Iran in term of hard power and can’t be compared with India.

But the biggest card in favor of India apart from its massive military is its strategic location and its complex and abnormal relationship with China. Following the Thucydides doctrine which states that it is inevitable for a rising power to be not hurdled by the existing bigger power so as to prevent a change of the world order, US requires India to as a counterbalance to China.

Unfortunately, or fortunately US is the existing power today which is declining and it is faced with the realities of an increasingly powerful China and multipolarity. To set the balance of power in Asia to its favor and to prevent the rise of an unchallengeable China, the west is bound to strengthen India, the only hard power with the capability to challenge a possible Chinese hegemony in Asia both economically and strategically, apart from a pacifist Japan, which is also faced with a declining birth rate. In such comparisons, Canada doesn’t occupy any significant strategic importance for US.

While Canada is majorly dependent on US for its own security, it is also a client state of the US for crucial technologies and defense equipment. There is, in essence nothing from its northern border that alarms US. Thus it appears from the realpolitik chess board that Canada cannot continue its assertive allegation for long, and it is painful for US and its allies to keep up the condemnation of India beyond a certain limit.

But this is not the only issue poking the Justine Trudeau led liberal party. The recent Yaroslav Hunka incident where a Nazi veteran was lauded by the Canadian Parliament in presence of Ukrainians President has led to another humiliation of the current government, where Mr. Trudeau had apologized. This had has strengthened the Russian assertions that their activities in Ukraine are a struggle against Nazism.

Such incidents are not uncommon where unfortunately Mr. Trudeau was lectured on secrecy by Chinese President Xi Jimping in Bali G20 of 2022 and in the Delhi G20, he was stuck in India due to some technical issues in his aircraft. Such series of unfortunate events have created an irresponsible image for Justin Trudeau and his revelations of his allegations against India without presenting any evidence is another source of humiliation for him.

But even so, if the West wishes to hide its stances behind the lofty words like Law and Justice then this incident where India has been criticized that too for the ‘credible allegations’ and not ‘credible evidence’, for the ‘judgments’ given by the Canadian Prime Minister in an undecided criminal case. It presents an opportunity to bring forth the western hypocrisy in the realm of its use of force as an act of state which often involve extrajudicial killings.

The achievements of former Secretary of State Henery Kissinger are a good proof of the fact that when the question arises between choosing shared interests and shared values, it is the shared interests or even unilateral interests that are prioritized. When Blood Telegrams in 1971 were sent from the then East Bengal, reporting the mass atrocities against Bengalis by the Pakistani forces, it was ignored and in place of criticism, Pakistan was greeted with security assistance when the 7th fleet of the US was sent in Pakistan’s support, which under a military rule, against an India which had a functioning and established democracy, or when the secret visits were paid to China after the heavily criticizing the Tiananmen incident of 1989 which was followed by deep relations between China and the west- a significant reason for China’s current rise.

If killing a terrorist on foreign soil is an offence then was the killings of Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Usamah al-Muhajir, by the flag-bearing US troops and assets, not an extrajudicial killing? what is more notable is that their deaths were celebrated in official declarations by the US and in regards to the aforementioned names, US military sites such as that of CENTCOM accept the responsibility of their forces in their killings, which is nowhere found in the allegations made in the Nijjar case. If an argument is yet made that killing absolute and brute terrorists is an act of a different moral standing, one should never forget the assassination of a sitting Iranian military general- Gen. Qasim Sulemani by a US drone strike which was ordered by the then US President Mr. Trump himself.

But another problem remains, which is the Western definition of ‘terrorism’. For a long time, who is a terrorist and what is terrorism has been very fluid. Usually, the elements involved in the same acts as the popular terrorist outfits but who have provided support the West are termed as ‘freedom fighters’ or ‘revolutionaries’. Another term to whitewash terrorism is to use the words like ‘radical’ and ‘militant’ but as soon as they flip their sides suddenly, they become terrorists.

This was the case with Taliban which were no ‘terrorists’ when the Red forces of USSR were being challenged by them but post 9/11 they were suddenly terrorists in the popular literature to varying degrees, for US they were officially- insurgents while for other western states like UK factions like the Haqqani Network were designated as terrorists. For a long time, the global narrative of terrorism has been driven by the declarations of the West based on their own convenience.

The idea was that the world must accept the Western declarations of terrorists while the West may look and sometimes completely ignore other’s declarations even when they are based upon unmistakable substance. Very unfortunately this also appears to be happening in the Nijjar case where the death of a known and declared terrorist (which may have directly prevented heinous crimes) is being used as a pressure slash. Terrorist Hardeep Nijjar is being called 'Sikh activist' by multiple Western publications such as The Guardian.

Such attempts to demonize India will only result in a mass hysteria against India in long term which will result in public pressure against the rising US-India ties that too when it will be based upon false propaganda.

Notwithstanding the temporary allegations, the realpolitik dictates that such allegation are unmaintainable when west requires Indian cooperation in Asia and in South China Sea, and such allegations are bound to lead to humiliation, which is again established by the recent statement of Foreign Minister of Canada, Melanie Joly on India-Canada issues that such issue should be resolved through private talks, she said – “We are in contact with the government of India. We take Canadian diplomats' safety very seriously, and we will continue to engage privately because we think that diplomatic conversations are best when they remain private," which can be seen as an apology and change of stance especially when it is the Canadian Prime Minister who has stated his unproven allegation on a public platform, but the lust of vote bank has again poked the Canadian PM who is again discussing this issue with foreign heads of states which may result is derailment of Canadian ties to India substantially.

Artticle by

Shreeacharya Mishra & Rudransh Singh Rajput
Younginker
Law Student