Fallout from Canada-India clash

Canada-India relations are reeling from the announcement that Canadian security agencies had uncovered evidence linking the Indian government to the assassination of an Indian-born Canadian citizen in British Columbia earlier this year. Canada Institute Associate Xavier Delgado outlines what's at stake for both countries and their allies in the Indo-Pacific.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that Canadian security agencies have obtained credible evidence linking the Indian government to the unsolved murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen and notable advocate for Sikh separatism. 

Nijjar was shot by two masked assailants outside a Sikh temple in British Columbia earlier this year in an attack that Canada alleges has since been connected to agents of India.

The Indian foreign ministry decried the allegations as absurd and, in the aftermath of the announcement, exchanged tit-for-tat expulsions of senior diplomats from Ottawa and New Delhi.

The dispute has shined a sudden spotlight on the Canada-India relationship, which, prior to the Nijjar incident, had been trending in a positive direction. Geopolitical developments, economic ties, and demographic trends over the past ten years had set the stage for closer cooperation between the two former British colonies. India’s prominence in Canada’s 2022 Indo-Pacific Strategy and high-level negotiations between the two states for an early progress trade agreement (EPTA) gave supporters of the relationship plenty of reasons to be optimistic.

Now, the allegations that the Indian government orchestrated the assassination of a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil have cast a cloud of doubt over the path ahead for the bilateral relationship.

Trade will likely be the first major casualty of the fallout, with negotiations for the EPTA being put on hold. Both countries declared that they would pause trade talks with each other earlier this month and Canadian Trade Minister Mary Ng has indefinitely postponed a trade mission to New Delhi that had been planned for October. The negotiations were a notable part of Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, which listed the EPTA as a critical step towards a larger comprehensive economic partnership agreement (CEPA) that would bolster trade ties between the two countries.

The stalled trade talks have put a US$17 billion bilateral trade relationship under strain. Canadian merchandise trade with India grew from approximately US$3.87 billion in 2012 to US$10.18 billion in 2022, with major increases in the export of Canadian energy products and import of Indian consumer goods. In that same year, services trade between the two countries measured US$6.96 billion. 

A reduction in the flow of Indian immigrants, which constitute almost one in five of all recent immigrants to Canada, could be even more devastating than a deterioration of trade relations.

Canada recently reached the 40-million-population milestone off an influx in inbound migration following the COVID-19 pandemic. In fact, Canada’s population growth, which is the fastest in the G7, is mainly driven by migration ‑ four in five new Canadians from 2016 to 2021 were immigrants. 

Indian immigration to Canada has tripled since 2013, overtaking and pulling away from the Philippines and China as the top source country for new Canadians in the 2021 census.

That census also counted 1.3 million ethnic Indians living in Canada, over 1 million of whom resided in British Columbia or Ontario. 77% of that group – 771,790 people – follow Sikhism, making Canada’s Sikh population the largest in the world outside of India. 

India also tops a notable subcategory of immigration ‑ international students, 34% of international students in Canada from 2015 to 2019 came from India, providing a critical source of revenue for Canadian academic institutions; by 2022, that share had grown to 40%. These numbers directly translate to the labor force, with Indian graduates from Canadian programs accounting for the largest share of post-graduate work permit holders in 2018 over China (20%) and the United States (1%).

Beyond the bounds of Canada-India relations, the dispute between the two countries may throw a wrench in the emerging Indo-Pacific framework of institutions and alliances.

India, with its economic might and security capabilities, has been hailed by the United States and democratic allies as a regional counterweight to China. Washington included India as a founding member of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and the freshly-anointed I2U2 bloc with Israel and the United Arab Emirates.

Both countries are also founding members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QSD or Quad), a strategic security dialogue that includes Japan and Australia.

Canada, for its part, was not invited to join the Quad or IPEF at the conception of either group, nor was it included alongside Five Eyes allies Australia and the United Kingdom in the AUKUS security pact. After inviting Canada to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership during the Obama administration, the United States opted to not join the agreement, leaving both countries without a shared major economic or security institution in the Indo-Pacific. 

A chilling of relations with India could hinder Canada’s ability to join the network of Indo-Pacific institutions, both because regional allies will be wary of angering the Modi government and because India itself could block Canadian membership in certain groups.

Ottawa is clearly aware of India’s influence and power in the region. The Canadian Indo-Pacific strategy, published in late 2022, has an entire section dedicated to India that reads, “India’s strategic importance and leadership – both across the region and globally – will only increase as India – the world’s biggest democracy – becomes the most populous country in the world and continues to grow its economy.”

Canada is not the only party that stands to lose from this dispute. The allegations can damage India’s public image as a democratic nation committed to a rules-based order or, more critically, its perception as a trustworthy ally in the competition against China. Canada’s Five Eyes partners could reevaluate intelligence sharing and law enforcement cooperation with India if Canadian officials uncover definitive proof of India’s involvement in Nijjar’s murder. 

Disputes between allies are common and, in the diverse roster of countries that constitute the emerging Indo-Pacific architecture, should be expected. Governments disagree frequently over trade policies, environmental practices, and other issues that don’t pose a threat to their diplomatic relationships.

The Canada-India dispute is unique in that the severity of the allegations, the economic and demographic ties between the two countries, and the geopolitical context in which the situation unfolded have raised the stakes for all parties, including the United States.

To prevent spillover damage to the nascent Indo-Pacific alliances, Washington will need to approach the situation carefully. Beijing benefits the most from in-fighting between major US allies, but regardless of how the coming weeks play out, both Canada and India will still have poor relations with China and good relations with the United States. One reason for this is the values that all three countries nominally share. US leaders should remember this and remind Ottawa and New Delhi that the path forward must be paved by justice and a commitment to due process to deviate from those values would be to bring relations between all three countries into uncharted and volatile territory.

 

G20 decisions, what next for Pakistan?

The G20 conference has come to an end in Delhi, where a lot happened which can become a permanent topic separately.

For example, the Indian media mentioned a statement by the Prime Minister of Italy regarding BRI, the Prime Minister of Canada spoke about Khalistan while standing in the Indian capital and when the rights of Sikh in Canada holding a referendum on Khalistan.

Muhammad Mehdi, Chairman of the Institute of International Relations and Media Research has discussed the concept of the Global South that President Biden arrived in Delhi with this concept, and the leadership of the Global South will be handed over to India according to Washington’s vision. 

According to Mehdi, for Pakistan any situation that affects the region is extremely important because the country would be affected whether it likes it or not. The Global South's vision is to prepare India to compete with China's BRI project.

India does not have enough economic size to be able to do this on its own, so its economic needs will be fulfilled by the United States as much as it needs compared to China.

The next and very important question is, whether the US economy under the debt of US$7.6 trillion has enough power to meet these needs or not? In order to promote the concept of the Global South, an MoU was signed during the G20 summit in India.

This economic corridor project will connect ports and rail links to the Middle East, Israel and Europe. The project is being named as India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC).

It includes United States, India, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and the European Union. The goal of this project is to connect India's ports with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia by developing a large-scale rail network and then get access to Israel and Europe from there. And apart from the Suez Canal, another route should be developed while China's BRI project should also be made a response to it.

Discussions on this project started in 2021 at a Business Forum between the United States, India, UAE and Israel, and later Saudi Arabia also joined these discussions.

When the Abraham Accords was being signed between certain Arab countries and Israel under the patronage of the United States, Mehdi had said that it should not be seen only in the context of the Arab countries and Israel, but it will have far-reaching consequences on the region where Pakistan is located and that has started happening.

Saudi Arabia does not recognize Israel, but it has recognized Israel's position in this agreement. Now, what does the US want to achieve by including the Arab countries in it? It is clear that through the BRI project, China's footprints are clearly visible on the Arab land.  

This is not only limited to economic matters, but by standing with Saudi Arabia and Iran, China has given a clear message that now its political position has also become strong in this region and the UAE and Saudi Arabia have also joined BRICS, which also includes India, but its souls are China and Russia.

According to Mehdi, United States cannot afford such a situation. When the Ottoman Empire disintegrated as a result of the First World War, the British shadow remained over the Arab region from that time until the end of the Second World War, and then later the United States replaced the United Kingdom and enjoyed its position solely.

But China's recent successes have put many question marks on the presence of the US supremacy in this region and its future, and the supwer is taking steps to maintain its supremacy by presenting the concept of the Global South. And in order to achieve this goal, India is being encouraged.

Narendra Modi will face polls and in order to win he needs to put his nation behind a truck light similar to what he has achieved by holding this conference and promoting this economic corridor.

This is called a political slogan because there is a very strong belief that the current US economy, which will have a debt of US7.6 trillion by the end of year 2024, is not strong enough to support this project. 

Regarding the same thing that happened to the New Silk route project announced by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during the Obama era, an economic route would be made from Afghanistan, but then it could never be implemented.

The real goal of the current plan seems to be to confuse the Arab world with the fact that the United States is coming down a new path and to make them think about how far they should go with China and how much should be carried forward.

If the US succeeds in getting the Arab countries into this mess, it will be a success. Because these Arab countries are concerned about their internal and international security, and they still depend on the largest suppliers of arms and military might.

Muhammad Mehdi is the Chairman of the Institute of International Relations and Media Research