There are a variety of reasons why Canada might not provide proof to your satisfaction. One might be that it would expose intelligence channels that they are trying to keep alive (literally, in some cases). It has also only been a few days, and there is likely some pretty serious maneuvering on both sides where withholding information is important.
I can also assure you that most Canadians, including the PM do not care in particular about "Khalistanis", or really know what that means in the context of Indian politics. Before this week, I would be surprised if most Canadians knew there was a rift between Hindus and Sikhs
Canada does need to provide proof, but in Canadian politics you simply don't make an announcement like this as the PM without strong evidence.
India has provided ample evidence including via Interpol (whatever the process is called, red something notice or whatever) regarding various Khalistanis and Canada hasn't acted. Culprits from Air India bombing in the 80s were acquitted since Canadian intelligence had decided to erase evidence. Just look at the videos of the Gurudwara in question, it has posters calling for assassination of Indian diplomats. Graffiti was painted in Hindu temples in Canada. Etc. Etc.
It is very clear that Canadian governments and politicians have a soft spot for Khalistanis since they constitute a sizeable vote bank. I believe NDP leader is also a Khalistan sympathizer, has to be if he wants Sikh votes in Canada.
Having said that, I still believe that this is not a rift between Hindus and Sikhs. This is limited to a vocal, but powerful, minority of Sikh diaspora. Khalistan is a non-issue within India, but can flare up which is why governments need to be careful.
Edit: I have no idea how good/bad Canada's National Post is, but I found this to be a rather logical opinion piece : https://nationalpost.com/opinion/canadas-remarkably-slapdash...
Obviously, yes. This isn't exactly a new phenomenon - governments do this all the time.
The Air India bombing killed 268 Canadian citizens. I do not understand how anyone can begin to imply that the Canadian Government would be more interested in "protecting" Khalistani terrorists than providing justice for their own citizens.
Was it a catastrophic prosecution and investigation? Yes. But to jump to malice for something that every Canadian wanted justice for is ludicrous.
> Khalistan is a non-issue within India
Pretty sure it's a fairly significant issue inside Punjab. Or is your implication that the rest of Hindu India doesn't consider their opinion important? If so, you've just self-explained why the Khalistan movement exists in the first place.
> I have no idea how good/bad Canada's National Post is
The National Post was founded by one of the 2 main inspirations for the character of Logan Roy on succession. Overall they do not lean TOO conservative (https://www.allsides.com/news-source/national-post-media-bia...), however these days Justin Trudeau inspires INTENSE hatred from those even mildly conservative in Canada, and they foam at the mouth to criticism him for anything, especially when it fits into their narrative of him being Too Young, Too Arrogant, and Not Respected On The International Stage.
Do you have evidence to support that?
Khalistan has been a non-issue in Punjab since the late 80s or so. There is no militancy nor is this an issue during elections or in the manifesto of any political party. Akali Dal, which is kinda Sikh religious party is not in government for last 2-3 elections and before that I believe it was in coalition with BJP, the so called Hindu-nationalist party, which is currently in power in center. Current and previous state governments are from centrist national parties.
Whether or not it is discussed in hushed tones or not is something obviously I don’t know.
Can it flare up again? Sure it can, and that is the hope of the Khalistanis in Canada and fear of people in India, which is why the sensitivity.
May be a hyperbole, but when is comes to Khalistanis, Canada is playing with fire shattering these terrorists, many of whom have links with Punjabi organized crime and it is going to bite them hard.
Sikh Gurudwaras have banners calling for assassination of Indian diplomats. I don’t know of any other civilized nation that would allow that to happen.
It is genuinely impossible to find any information except from biased sources screaming that Sikhs don't want it.
I cannot find an impartial survey of Sikh support for Khalistan EXCEPT in the international diaspora. This of course is itself problematic. One take is the diaspora outside of India is the only one free to offer an honest perspective. The other equally correct side is that the opinion of the international diaspora is irrelevant. Only the opinions of Sikhs in Punjab matter.
I made an assumption and it might be flawed. I would love to find some concrete data.
Yes, because the ones who migrated and cry out for Khalistan are a bunch of cowards seeking refuge in the West in the name of oppression. If they were actually interested in freedom, they would have stayed in India and carried on the fight. At least the majority of Kashmiris had the courage to stay back and carry on the fight, even under the covers, and not migrate en masse.
I had attended an event for the Sikh community a few years back, which was attended by Sikhs from all over the world, including from USA, Australia, the UK and India. Nowhere in another community have I seen a strong culture of brotherliness and felicitation for good. And while there were a few Canadian Sikh families, they were far too few to be countable in one hand. Tells a lot about the kind of Sikhs that Canada is harboring, tbh.
History is full of figures that have eventually only succeed in liberating some oppressed people from exile.
Not saying that's the situation with Sikhs or that's who Nijjar is.
But it does seem like he would have good reason to believe that advocating for Khalistan from inside India would get him into jail or worse.
And if the work is important to the Sikhs in Punjab, it would definitely stand to reason that he might have had to do it from Canada.
> I had attended an event for the Sikh community a few years back, which was attended by Sikhs from all over the world, including from USA, Australia, the UK and India. Nowhere in another community have I seen a strong culture of brotherliness and felicitation for good. And while there were a few Canadian Sikh families, they were far too few to be countable in one hand. Tells a lot about the kind of Sikhs that Canada is harboring, tbh.
Is your criticism that Canadian Sikhs do not engage with the international Sikh diaspora? Not being a part of that community I guess I don't know why that might be. But since Canada contains the largest Sikh population outside of India, it's possible that they have their own self-reinforcing community (That amongst Canadians has exactly the same reputation as you mentioned - "a strong culture of brotherliness and felicitation for good") that they've disconnected from the international or Punjab Sikh community? That's not necessarily a problem - African Americans don't have a strong connection to Africans.
On the other hand, there are peaceful movements in India that are still happening for separate statehood, or at minimum the removal of certain extremely biased and abusive Acts (such as the AFPSA). Irom Sharmila, for instance, fought against the Indian government with a fast unto death, was constantly arrested, released and rearrested. There was a successful decades long movement for the creation of a separate state for the state of Telangana. There is currently another peaceful decades long movement for the creation of a separate state for the eastern part of Uttar Pradesh, where the current Prime Minister contested his seat from. I don't see people from either of those movements being oppressed in the 21st century.
The core reason why other Sikhs don't stand for Khalistani Sikhs is because Khalistan is in essence a theocracy in Punjab. Khalistanis want a separate nation that is firmly rooted in Sikh religious principles, something which the majority of Sikhs in India don't really want. Even in the diaspora, apart from Canada, Khalistanism is a fringe element, simply because most countries except Canada don't allow refugee status based on claims of "oppression" by an Indian government in this century (they would have had more standing in the 80s for that claim). And like others mentioned, the ones migrating to Canada are often part of the leadership of various gangs and mafias in Punjab, something that another country like the US would easily prevent from entering their soil.
Are you asking if Nijjar was advocating for secession from the US, or if he was in the US instead of Canada?
If it's the latter, I think the US would've done exactly as Canada.
If you're asking what the US would've done if it was in India's shoes, you're absolutely right - it would've successfully pressured Canada into giving him up.
However, this is not a gotcha. That the US is insecure enough in it's freedom that it overreacts to "protect" it (see, the 2000's and the invasion of Iraq) is one of the reasons it is a flawed democracy. If the US had done what India has done, Canada might've cooperated, but the uproar from our citizens (and from me here), would've been identical.
According to the latest complete 2022 rankings of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World, Canada is the 5th freest country in the world. The United States is 61st. India is 87th.
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_Index, Canada is 12th in the world. The United States is 30th. India is 46th.
> The core reason why other Sikhs don't stand for Khalistani Sikhs is because Khalistan is in essence a theocracy in Punjab. Khalistanis want a separate nation that is firmly rooted in Sikh religious principles, something which the majority of Sikhs in India don't really want. Even in the diaspora, apart from Canada, Khalistanism is a fringe element, simply because most countries except Canada don't allow refugee status based on claims of "oppression" by an Indian government in this century (they would have had more standing in the 80s for that claim). And like others mentioned, the ones migrating to Canada are often part of the leadership of various gangs and mafias in Punjab, something that another country like the US would easily prevent from entering their soil.
See this is a fascinating paragraph. Because the whole time until the last sentence, I was nodding along, learning more about the situation, and gathering a more nuanced worldview. Then you finish it with a blanket dismissal of Sikhs in Canada as gangsters and mafios. Punjabi Organized Crime is huge in Canada. And the Punjabi diaspora in Canada is likewise large. (Almost 3% of the Canadian population).
It shows a clear bias you have against the potential for peace from any Punjabi Canadians.
I'm not painting all Canadian Sikhs as gangsters and mafiosos. What I said was that, compared to other places such as Australia and the UK, Canada has a lower barrier to entry for someone claiming to be a refugee. A Khalistani Sikh cannot obtain refugee status in either Australia or the UK, simply because the bar for claiming refugee status is much higher, and it's very difficult to show "oppression" in a country where the former Prime Minister was a Sikh. In Canada, the barrier is much lower and the existing Sikh community was connected enough, so you have all sorts of people passing through, including many of the gang leaders and members involved in the drug mafia. They find safe refuge in Canada, simply because they find a lower barrier to entry compared to the US or the other commonwealth countries.
This situation is effectively the exact same one as Pakistan harboring Osama bin Laden, then USA killing him on Pakistani soil, in spite of the two of them being "allies". Replace Pakistan and USA with Canada and India respectively.
> This situation is effectively the exact same one as Pakistan harboring Osama bin Laden, then USA killing him on Pakistani soil, in spite of the two of them being "allies". Replace Pakistan and USA with Canada and India respectively.
There was absolutely no dispute in the international community about the guilt of Osama bin Laden and the direct connection between him, Al Queda, and dozens of terrorists attacks including 9/11.
As far as I understand, the same is not the case about Nijjar, and he is in no way believed to be the core "mastermind" the way Osama was.
>I made an assumption and it might be flawed. I would love to find some concrete data.
These two together don't compute. You obviously have a tilt that anything coming out of India is "biased source" while international one is unbiased somehow. So, why even pretend that you want some concrete data.
And that basically is the issue. Indian evidence, data and proofs are treated with suspicion. While Western data is somehow clean. If this is not a classist mindset I don't know what is.
I said the ones that I found seem biased because they bring in a lot of clear opinion into the matter.
Consider the same is true about the US - if you try to find information and land on FOX News and the Wall Street Journal Opinion page, you will see a lot of bias.
I see the same with the Indian news stories I find. I can see the bias.
Is there a Indian equivalent Reuters or Associated Press that has data on internal opinions on Khalistan?
The wiki page you quoted for Operation Bluestar. Read the background portion of the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Blue_Star#Background
The party which made the separatist demand is called Shiromani Akali Dal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiromani_Akali_Dal
The party shifted to a moderate agenda in the 90s. Funnily enough, this party has been working with Modi's Hindutva party or BJP.
In comparison, J&K demands were raised by a party called National Conference. This party has never shifted its agenda and continued with demand for sometimes separatism and sometimes special status for J&K.
Politics runs on supporting specific agendas. J&K agenda is still supported. No one denies that. You will not find any Indian sources claiming that. While there is no popular party supporting the Khalistani agenda. So, Indian sources claim that.
While there are parties in Canada supporting and pushing this. So, you'd surely find facts in the international media saying there is support.
Obviously because they are brown Canadians and their lives count for less. Anyone who saw the outcome of the Canadian "investigation" and the following court trials where witnesses were murdered, would say the same thing.
> Khalistan is a non-issue within India
Its not a non-issue, but Punjabi Sikhs don't care about it in India. Elections are never fought on this topic and candidates with Khalistani leanings always lose. Sikhs are well integrated into Hindu society because Sikhism itself is an offshoot sect of Hinduism (now a formal religion), no matter what the Sikhs say. There are Sikh Gurudwaras and holy places across India. Khalistan is an issue in India in the national security context. Indians want to see the government to be acting against forces threatening India.
When the Khalistan govt. crackdown, and violent riots happened in India in 1984/85 I saw that first hand. These fugitives from India are a mix of Political aspiration (nothing wrong there), bigotry, criminal mafia, and vengeful militias that wields political power in Canada - Canada has opened its doors to trouble. Some of the grievances are no doubt legit, but there is (effectively/relatively) zero religious repression of Sikhs in India (unlike other minorities in India who have experienced problems, based on their religious views, that are covered in the media).
The vast majority of Sikhs want nothing to do with these extremists. Sure they want to protect their distinct identity, and culture, a beautiful thing in itself. Obviously, the Indian govt can do much more and be more effective if it tries, within its own borders - but thats a matter of political will or games. But India has already paid the price, and been there.
Canada has no clue they're dealing with a major social/political/criminal nuisance.
The issue is that an extrajudicial, extraterritorial killing of a foreign citizen is a pretty serious step to take. There is no evidence that India tried to extradite or otherwise bring this gentleman to justice, nor what exactly his crime would be. India has accused him of a lot with not a lot of specificity.
Flip this on its head: if Canada were to identify the assassins, would it be appropriate to send Canadian agents to India to have them assassinated? How would Indians react to such an act?
They were almost all of Indian or South Asian ethnicity since the flight was to India.
The wiretaps with critical evidence were intentionally destroyed by the Canadian govt, according to the RCMP, resulting in two perpetuators walking away.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37604552
> There is no evidence that India tried to extradite or otherwise bring this gentleman to justice, nor what exactly his crime would be
You're completely out of the loop on this. India put out two Interpol notices in 2014 and 2016, put him on most wanted lists and requested the Canadian government multiple times for an extradition.
Article from a year ago https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/pu...
Canada refused, just like the current Canadian PM's dad refused to extradite the mastermind of the Air India bombing in the early eighties when he was the PM because "India recognizes the Queen as the Head of the Commonwealth but not as head of state".
Silence and carry on is what false accusations deserve. The issue is, I don't think Modi can afford to stay silent, whether the accusations are true or not.
But I feel that in the given the context, both external and internal in India, Indian government had to react rather than let silence be assumed to be an admission of guilt. That would have been worse since it frees people to draw their own conclusions.
Anyway, I'm just an observer. This is a royal mess and hope it gets resolved quickly, though I doubt it.
Only if there is a robust justice system which will protect you from the effects of false accusation. International law and a lot of countries not as developed as the west have no such systems.
People in less developed nations don't have that luxury.
The tit for tat means that everything is real, and India is simply pissed about being called out on it.
Trudeau isn't going to open his mouth on a false accusation that is just going to cause him grief.
This activist who was killed was an illegal immigrant and criminal fugitive, and Canada PM wants to protect his interests. It’s clearly political pressure and the rule of law might be an excuse .
I’m pretty sure there’s other nations that have carried hit jobs in Canada - China , Saudi Arabia etc and we never hear about those. The leader of NDP is a Sikh and is kingmaker in Canada politics- I have a feeling Trudeau is just trying to cling to his job
This has to be a joke, or naivety. Trudeau is a politician, he’s no saint. As such no stranger to lying or fabricating things, especially after a really bad G20. The timing, immediately after G20 is also rather suspect.
This accusation IS causing him grief--right now. If Trudeau announced this, he perceives that A) announcing this gives him an advantage somehow or B) not announcing it will cause him more grief that announcing it.
Now, it could be that Trudeau is a complete and utter dolt--I haven't been tracking Candian politics particularly strongly. It could also be that Modi somehow really pissed Trudeau off.
However, successful politicians don't generally spout lines that can be factually refuted or that can be verfied to cause allies problems. Trumpistan is the exception, not the rule.
I don’t think so.
The onus is on Canada to provide evidence, not on India. Remember, innocent until proven guilty - or would you like that legal principal to be changed?
Secondly, I’ll say that silence is an admission of guilt. India is daring Trudeau to show evidence or retract.