Diplomatic ties between India and Canada, though usually healthy, have soured over the last year. Trade and cultural exchange has historically defined relations between the two countries, but Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegation that India played a part in orchestrating last year’s killing of a prominent Sikh activist has led to a bitter standoff.
On June 18, 2023, a shooting outside a Sikh temple in Surrey, Canada, killed Hardeep Singh Nijjar. A Canadian citizen and prominent activist, Nijjar had long advocated for an independent Khalistan, a Sikh state that, if realized, would break away from India’s Punjab.
India has vehemently denied the charge, and the rift deepened in recent months, both countries have traded barbs and expelled diplomats. In October, the Indian government released a statement accusing the Canadian government of providing “space to violent extremists and terrorists to harass, threaten, and intimidate Indian diplomats and community leaders in Canada.”
The statement also accused Canada of misapplying the concept of “freedom of speech” to supposedly justify allowing “death threats” against Indian leaders.
The clash stems from competing narratives. For Canada, a commitment to free speech allows pro-Khalistan activists to call for an independent Sikh state. India, though, is fiercely opposed to what it calls “terrorist elements” that threaten its sovereignty.
India considers the Khalistan movement a terrorist organization and views Canada, home to a sizable Sikh diaspora population, as tacitly endorsing secessionist violence. Meanwhile, Sikh Canadians’ political loyalties and perspectives are far from monolithic, but the community has now found itself in the crossfire of a worsening geopolitical storm.
In Canada, Trudeau’s political opponents have accused his government of jeopardizing relations with an important trade partner. Yet, for the country’s Sikh separatist activists, the Canadian government’s tough response has emerged as a cause for celebration.
Canada’s Allegations, India’s Denials
The diplomatic crisis erupted publicly in September 2023, when Trudeau stated in Canada’s parliament that security agencies had “credible evidence” linking Indian agents to Nijjar’s murder. He described India’s alleged involvement as a violation of Canadian sovereignty.
More than a year later, Canada expelled an Indian diplomat whom the country described as the head of India’s intelligence operations in Canada.
India swiftly responded, expelling Canadian diplomats and blasting Trudeau’s allegations as “politically motivated.”
“Of course, the retaliation has also been stubborn from the Indian side, and that has really aggravated the troubles,” Kumar said.
In response, India’s Ministry of External Affairs criticized Canada’s “preposterous imputations,” accusing the Trudeau government of a “political agenda … centered around vote bank politics.”
Experts say Canada’s internal politics, especially in light of Trudeau’s minority government, has partially contributed to Trudeau’s forceful response. The Liberal Party relies on support from the New Democratic Party (NDP), whose leader, Jagmeet Singh, is a vocal advocate of Sikh rights and has drawn attention to what he describes as India’s persecution of Sikhs.
“Driven by Nationalism”
Girish Kumar, a geopolitical expert and a political science professor at Kerala University in southern India, says that with Canadian elections on the horizon, Trudeau’s government likely views Khalistan sympathizers as an important political constituency. “Trudeau needs to shore up support from the Sikh community, which holds political sway in certain districts,” Kumar explained. “This might explain the timing and assertiveness of his allegations.”
“Of course, the retaliation has also been stubborn from the Indian side, and that has really aggravated the troubles,” Kumar said.
Meanwhile, the diplomatic standoff is exacting a toll well beyond Canada’s domestic politics. Canada’s policies on minority rights and free speech clash with India’s security-driven view of the Khalistan issue. “Both nations are now following a muscular foreign policy,” Kumar added, “driven by nationalism rather than cooperation.”
On the other hand, India also faces an electorate that increasingly values “national pride” and sovereignty. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has been vocal about its opposition to what it views as external interference, especially when it comes to separatist issues — a position that aligns with its recent foreign policy strategies across the region.
The Sikh Diaspora and Khalistan Movement
Canada is home to more than 700,000 Sikhs, making it one of the largest Sikh populations outside India. While many Sikh Canadians are critical of India’s human rights record, opinions on the Khalistan movement vary widely within the community. Some view it as a political right, some as a cultural movement, while others see it as a troubling call for secession.
Though the idea of a separate Sikh state in India’s Punjab dates back to as early as the 1930s, the Khalistan movement in its current form emerged during the late 20th century, rooted in grievances around religious autonomy, economic inequity, and cultural preservation. Demands for a separate state grew during the 1970s, and by the early 1980s, tensions had peaked.
In 1984, Indian forces launched Operation Blue Star. It sought to remove militants led by a then popular Khalistan leader Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale from the Golden Temple, Sikhism’s holiest site in Amritsar.
The operation and its violent aftermath left lasting scars within the Sikh community and catalyzed the assassination of then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards. Anti-Sikh violence erupted across India, further entrenching feelings of marginalization among Sikhs and fueling the separatist sentiment that persisted through the 1980s.
“Alienated”
“It was during that era that a section of the [Sikh] population also started to feel alienated, because they felt that this entire operation was very [heavy]-handed. So, it alienated them,” Bharat, a researcher at New Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, explained.
Bharat believes that the diaspora’s continued support for the movement reflects this historical disconnect. “But now the Khalistan issue has evolved into an elitist diaspora movement,” Bharat said. “In Punjab, few support secession, but affluent Sikhs abroad keep the movement alive as part of their identity, often unaware of current dynamics in Punjab.”
Former Indian Diplomat and TP Sreenivasan observes that the wealth and resources of the Sikh diaspora keeps the movement alive but there is little that they can achieve. Advocates of a breakaway Khalistan state “don’t realize they can’t get anything done unless there is a movement in India, which there is not,” Sreenivasan argued. “Nobody has any energy to fight for an independent Khalistan.”
Sreenivasan also believes that the current standoff wont have long term diplomatic repercussions between two countries. “This is actually not an issue between India and Canada, but the fact that the Khalistanis are operating there and Canada is supporting them for their own political reasons. So, it is not animosity between the two countries as such,” he added.
International Repercussions
Beyond Canada and India, the dispute has captured global attention. Canada, as a member of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance alongside the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, has brought its concerns to these partners. The US and UK have each urged both countries to pursue dialogue, with the Biden administration reportedly sharing intelligence with Canadian officials.
“There is clear frustration from India,” Kumar said. “India sees Canada’s position as both hypocritical and politically motivated.”
Still, India maintains that Canada’s allegations lack concrete evidence. Official statements from India’s Ministry of External Affairs have consistently criticized Canada for hosting what they call “terrorist groups,” with particular ire directed at public celebrations of figures like Bhindranwale and the commemorations of Indira Gandhi’s assassination.
“There is clear frustration from India,” Kumar said. “India sees Canada’s position as both hypocritical and politically motivated. Canada’s free speech protections allow space for anti-India rhetoric that India finds unacceptable.”
“Ups and Downs”
Canada has also voiced concerns over student visas, trade talks, and people-to-people ties, many of which have been impacted as both sides issue warnings and adjust their diplomatic stances. Canada remains a popular destination for Indian students and professionals, with thousands emigrating each year. The long-term impact of these moves particularly on Indian students, who represent one of the largest groups of international students in Canada, remains unclear.
For now, as both nations are at an impasse, and the future of their relationship rests on navigating the complexities of Sikh identity, national sovereignty, and diaspora politics.
“The reality is that both countries are stronger when they work together,” Sreenivasan said. “This is a bump, albeit a significant one, in an otherwise extensive relationship.”
Experts, however, believe that the issue may not linger for long because of what is at stake. “India-Canada relations have always experienced ups and downs,” Kumar observed. “The long-term economic and cultural interests shared by both countries may eventually compel them to bridge this divide, though much will depend on how the Khalistan issue is addressed moving forward.”
