Editor
I am writing in response to the article, “Liberal MPs call for Trudeau’s resignation even as Canadian PM focuses on smearing India for political gains” (ST, Oct 16, 2024). This article makes it sound as if Mr Trudeau has a personal vendetta against India — a narrow subjective view that runs the risk of distorting the truth. If there is even the slightest truth to the Canadian intelligence claim that the Government of India played a role in killing Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil — this should be examined seriously, first and foremost by citizens of India. Since the government is supposed to represent them and act in their name, citizens of India should vigorously protest any misdeeds by their own elected government.
Yours etc.,
Deepa Majumdar
Via email
Tense Indo -Canadian Relations
Editor,
With the expulsion of six diplomats by both countries, the Indo-Canadian Relations has further deteriorated after the Canadian Prime Minister accused Indian intelligence agencies of being involved in the murder of a Sikh separatist killing. Since 2023 when Justin Trudeau said that he had evidence linking Indian agents to the assassination of Sikh leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian territory and the Government has now ‘clear and compelling evidence that agents of the government of India have engaged in and continue to engage in activities that pose a significant threat to public safety.
These activities involved clandestine information-gathering techniques, coercive behaviour, targeting South Asian Canadians and involvement in over a dozen threatening and violent acts, including murder, Trudeau said.
It may be mentioned here that Nijjar who migrated to Canada in 1997, became citizen in 2015 and had advocated for a separate Sikh state known as Khalistan carved out of India. He is wanted by Indian authorities for alleged terrorism and conspiracy to commit murder. Four Indian nationals have been arrested in connection with his murder, which took place in the parking lot of a Sikh temple in Vancouver in June 2023.India has long denied Mr Trudeau’s accusations. Canada is home to around 770,000 Sikhs, who make up about 2 per cent of the country’s population, with a vocal minority calling for an independent state of Khalistan. It is home to the highest population of Sikhs outside their home state of Punjab and demonstrations in recent years have irked India.
Now Canada names the Indian ambassador as a person of interest in the Nijjar killing. Nijjar was an Indian born citizen of Canada and he owned a plumbing business. India designated him a terrorist and at the time of his death had been seeking his arrest for alleged involvement in an attack.
The first victims of this tense relationship will be the students who are going there in big numbers with the hope of getting good opportunities. Canada had already changed the rules for students which are not favourable to them. There are over 60 percent student visas so there will be frustration among those whose visas had been rejected and there are chances that they will become the soft targets of illegal travel agents and ultimately it will be a national loss where so many students will be a frustrated lot.
As far as international norms are concerned, Justin Trudeau’s behaviour does not conform to the norms his country has referred to while withdrawing its diplomats from India. Since the time of Justin Trudeau’s father Late Pierre Trudeau who also was Prime Minister of Canada, that country has offered political patronage to Khalistani separatists whose only agenda is to split India. Despite knowing well the fact that Khalistani terrorists were working to destabilise India and posing a threat to the sovereignty of India by way of colluding with such nefarious and dangerous elements, Canada has offered them shelter.
India is not wrong in raising the pertinent question -Did Canada’s act conform to international norms when it offered a safe haven to anti-sovereignty forces posing threat to India. Is it right for Canadian politicians like Justin Trudeau to shield Khalistani terrorists in his country, only for the sake of appeasing domestic vote-banks? Of course, Canada will find it difficult to answer these questions. It must realise that the world order is not the same old one where some powerful nations would offer asylum to secessionists of other countries and try to wield influence at the negotiating table. Hence, messing up and mixing up domestic politics with International norms, is not going to have the same effect it might have had in the olden days. In the changed scenario such attempts will only fetch International ridicule for Canada. Also Canada must not overlook the facts in the public domain.
Instead of upholding International norms by acting to protect the sovereignty of a friendly nation, Canada chose to tread the path of self-harm. Canada must realise that India of today spares none of the perpetrators of anti-India acts and their supporters.
Nehru founded the Non Aligned Movement along with Marshal Tito and Anwar Saddat and over a hundred countries joined it. As at that time Nehru was at the epicenter of all international developments the same goes for PM Modi today. Previously we were proud of Nehru and now we have the same feeling for Modi. Whether it is Putin or Biden or Macron all are speaking in praise of Modi for his foreign policy. Hence it is in the interest of Canada to maintain harmonious relations with India.
Yours etc.,
Yash Pal Ralhan,
Via email
Justice system skewed
Editor,
After the old and ailing Stan Swami died in jail, former Delhi University Professor, G N Saibaba, died after spending nearly a decade in jail. After his release, he could enjoy life out of prison for barely seven months. He developed life-threatening complications in Nagpur prison that he blamed on poor living conditions and inadequate medical treatment. Saibaba had gone on hunger strike while he was in prison several times in protest. All of these took a toll on his health.
He was acquitted by the Bombay High Court on March 5, after he endured eight and a half years of imprisonment. The 58-year old academic and poet became ninety percent disabled after he had permanent post-polio paralysis at an early age.
Prof Saibaba was arrested on May 9, 2014 under the UAPA. After his release, he said, “My mother passed away while I was in prison. She carried me to school as I was disabled but she wanted me to get a good education. When she died, I was not allowed to see her. I was denied parole and even permission to attend the funeral. Post-funeral performing rites, I was denied.”
It is utterly bewildering that while the rape convict Gurmeet Ram Rahim got 15 paroles in 4 years, Saibaba did not get even the permission to attend the funeral of his mother. What a skewed justice system we live in!
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Kolkata