Justin Trudeau
American and Pakistani media report that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had cold shouldered his Canadian counterpart’s visit. There is no official word. On his part, Modi gave no such impression; in fact, he offered his customary hug to Trudeau when he received him at a formal ceremonial reception in the forecourt of imposing British built Indian Presidential Palace.
Rather strangely enough, the meeting between the two prime ministers was billed for a day before Trudeau was to return home. Well it is a matter of mutual convenience. Anyhow, by then, the Canadian leader had a feel of India what with the chief minister of prosperous Punjab province- the home to Golden Temple - giving him an earful for courting the Sikh extremists as a part new Trudeauism - a brand of real politick that takes short term look at politics of survival in the power game rather than long haul politics with the eye firmly fixed on the domestic scene.
It is this Trudeauism of alleged soft attitude towards Khalistani sympathisers or activists living in Canada that is pump priming the question about the success of his India visit. Horror is that one of thehardcore Khalistanis–Jaspal Atwal, was personally invited to a reception at the Canada House in New Delhi.
This was no more than a brash act of insensitivity on the part of Canadian diplomatic mission in the Indian capital since Canada had battled separatism in the province of Quebec in the past. And it is not difficult to understand the sense of disbelief and dismay amongst the Indians since Atwal is a former member of the banned International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF) and he had been convicted for ambushing and shooting Punjab minister Malkiat Singh Sidhu in 1986.
The invite to Atwal was “rescinded” after it became a headline news. It was an avoidable new low in the Canada-India relations since Trudeau has been speaking of a re-set in the bilateral ties. Well, the Prime Minister termed the Atwal invitation saga as a mistake; but as everyone knows that such remarks are neither here nor there.How could a mistake of that magnitude be committed for a formal event to be attended by high profile diplomats, ministers and top politicians?
The controversies surrounding the Trudeau visit make one thing clear though. Canada has continued to play host to many Sikh extremists and allows them to be active under the garb of free speech.
Trudeau’s assertion in India that he did not support the extremists looks less convincing when he is unable or unwilling to take effective steps to curb their activities on the Canadian soil. More so when India is said to have raised concerns over the growth of Sikh extremist groups, especially those seeking a “referendum 2020” for the worldwide Sikh diaspora to vote on an “independent khalistan” several times in the recent past particularly in the pull aside meetings Modi and Trudeau had at the G-20 summit in Hamburg in July 2017, and in Manila during the East Asia summit.
Freedom of speech is fine, but should it include ‘freedom’ to preach violence and hatred against another country and its people. It is common knowledge in in Canada that a large number of Sikh extremists had left India, clandestinely or otherwise, in late 1980s and acquired Canadian citizenship by speaking of fear of ‘persecution’ in India.
Obviously, majority of Sikhs in Canada do not subscribe to the subversive and violent ways advocated by the Khalistanis, but moderate voices are drowned by the louder voices of the extremists, who appear to have the political clout.
Amrinder Singh was probably more upfront in expressing his misgivings about the influence of Sikh extremists in Canada when he met Trudeau. He reportedly handed him a list of suspects against who he would like some action taken.
The Indian case, as many of its diplomats have been articulating, is simple and appears to be somewhat logical too.
“No one is asking the Trudeau government not to engage with the Sikh community that forms their constituency, but why it is necessary to pander to extremist Khalistani elements is the question,” the Indian egg-heads are reported as saying. In so many words, their contention is that Trudeau should not be tempted to use his visit to India to score with his Sikh constituency back home, which affectionately calls him ‘Justin Singh’.
Well, they have a point since four out of the six cabinet ministers who had travelled with him were Sikh, as were an overwhelming number of MPs who also travelled with him.
How Canada proceeds with the Indian grievance will have a bearing on the bilateral relations. The ‘Framework for Cooperation for Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism’ marking the Trudeau visit provides an opening for re-set.
The Framework consists of institutionalized cooperation “between the National Security Council Secretariat of the Republic of India and the office of Canada’s National Security and Intelligence Advisor”, and “regular exchanges and coordination” between India and Canada. It will be “guided” by the joint National Security Advisor’s Dialogue,according to an official statement.
The short point is the ball is firmly in Trudeau’s court. He has to walk his talk that India is a “natural partner and friend”, and that his discussions with India focused on “deepening and strengthening people-to-people ties”. Will he? Well, he may at least in the near to medium term with an eye on the huge Indian market for “energy” since Canada is energy super power.
