New Delhi, October 17, 2024: The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) responded strongly to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s deposition before a Commission of Inquiry. The late-night statement from the official spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal of MEA reiterated India’s position that Canada has failed to provide any substantive evidence supporting Trudeau’s allegations of Indian involvement in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a pro-Khalistan activist and terrorist as designated by India.
The statement squarely blamed Trudeau for the deteriorating bilateral relations, asserting that his actions were politically motivated.
“What we have heard today only confirms what we have been saying consistently all along – Canada has presented us (India) with no evidence whatsoever in support of the serious allegations that it has chosen to level against India and Indian diplomats,” read the MEA’s statement.
Further, it charged that “The responsibility for the damage that this cavalier behaviour has caused to India-Canada relations lies with Prime Minister Trudeau alone.”
This rebuttal follows Trudeau’s testimony earlier on Wednesday, during which he admitted that his government had no “hard evidentiary proof” but rather intelligence-based information linking Indian agents to Nijjar’s killing in June of the previous year.
Trudeau, testifying before a public inquiry into foreign interference in Canada’s political and democratic institutions, however, reiterated accusations that Indian diplomats were involved in intelligence gathering on Canadian nationals opposed to the Indian government.
The inquiry testimony triggered a fresh wave of tensions, with Trudeau claiming again without hard evidentiary proof, “The Indian government made a horrific mistake in thinking that they could interfere as aggressively as they did in the safety and sovereignty of Canada.”
He also alleged that Indian diplomats were sharing intelligence with both the Indian government and criminal groups, including the notorious Lawrence Bishnoi gang, a charge that Canada has yet to substantiate with any concrete evidence.
India has consistently rejected these claims. The MEA’s response reaffirmed New Delhi’s strong stand over what it termed a “politically motivated” campaign by Trudeau.
“The Canadian government has not shared a shred of evidence with the Government of India, despite many requests from our side. This latest step follows interactions that have again witnessed assertions without any facts. This leaves little doubt that on the pretext of an investigation, there is a deliberate strategy of smearing India for political gains,” read a statement from the MEA earlier this week.
The diplomatic crisis reached new heights after New Delhi expelled six top Canadian diplomats, a move that followed Trudeau’s failure to provide concrete proof for the allegations.
The Indian government has emphasised that the core issue remains Canada’s leniency toward pro-Khalistan elements, whom New Delhi accuses of operating freely on Canadian soil.
Trudeau’s government has consistently denied sheltering any individuals linked to terrorism, although Nijjar, the figure at the centre of this controversy, was designated a terrorist by India in 2020.
Trudeau’s testimony also touched on broader concerns about foreign interference in Canada’s internal matters. He stated that Canada’s intelligence services had uncovered multiple ongoing investigations into what the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) called “credible and imminent threats to life” specifically targeting the South Asia community.
The RCMP claimed that these threats were linked to criminal activity involving Indian agents, including violent incidents like drive-by shootings, home invasions, and extortion. The Indian government has categorically denied these claims, with the MEA dismissing them as part of a smear campaign.
The global community has closely followed the unfolding diplomatic standoff. While the UK and the US have called on India to cooperate with Canada’s investigation, both nations have avoided taking a hardline stance. “We have made clear that the allegations are extremely serious and need to be taken seriously. We want to see the government of India co-operate with Canada in its investigation,” said US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller. Similarly, the UK Foreign Office issued a statement supporting Canada’s judicial process, expressing confidence in its integrity and fairness.
Despite these calls for cooperation, New Delhi has maintained its strong position. The Ministry of External Affairs has emphasised that Canada’s allegations lack credibility and have not been backed by tangible proof. Indian officials have repeatedly pointed to the broader issue of pro-Khalistan groups in Canada, which they argue poses a direct threat to India’s national security.
As the diplomatic crisis deepens, the future of India-Canada relations appears increasingly bleak. Both countries had already experienced frosty ties in recent years, largely due to concerns over separatist activities in Canada.
The current standoff, however, marks a significant downturn, with trade talks between the two nations stalled and a growing sense of mistrust on both sides.
In the backdrop of this diplomatic feud, the Trudeau government has faced growing pressure at home and abroad to substantiate its claims or risk further damaging Canada’s relations not only with India but with its broader international partners. For now, the stalemate continues, with both nations holding firm to their respective narratives in a rapidly deteriorating diplomatic climate.
