The attack on devotees at the Hindu Sabha Mandir in Brampton, Canada, is not an isolated incident; rather, it is the latest eruption of the wound that Canada has allowed to fester on its soil for decades. This problem has been inflamed by relentless, tacit support to the Khalistani separatists and terrorists under the guise of free speech. Canada’s indulgence of these elements has emboldened them enough to not only attack India from afar but to target Hindu communities within Canada’s borders, turning places of worship into sites of fear. Each defaced temple, each threat to the Hindu population, and each incendiary speech made openly on Canadian soil reveals the troubling extent to which Canada has allowed extremist ideologies to take root.
This attack on a temple wasn’t the first of its kind either; Hindu temples in Windsor, Mississauga, and Surrey have been defaced with anti-India graffiti, and the Surrey temple even saw gunshots fired at the residence of its president’s son. Each incident has been met with tepid responses from local authorities and deafening silence from Ottawa, only reinforcing the perception that Canada is willing to ignore the fear and insecurity of its Hindu population to accommodate a radical section of the Sikh community.
The Canadian government also seems hell-bent on creating one fiasco after another; both on diplomatic fronts with India as well as regarding the security of its citizens within its borders. For decades, India’s plea to Canada to contain the Khalistani threat has fallen on deaf ears; in fact, under PM Justin Trudeau, Canada has doubled down on its position to harbour radicals and extremists with him famously uttering: “You come here, you can be who you are”. Justin Trudeau must understand that, with statements like these, he is not coming across as the woke, liberal champion of free speech that he thinks he is; instead, as the veteran Sikh leader and former Premier of British Columbia Ujjal Dosanjh succinctly put it: “Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is an idiot, as far his sociological and political understanding of Canada is concerned”.
Canada has, till date, not been able to publicly produce a single shred of evidence that India was complicit in the killing of the Khalistani separatist leader, Hardeep Singh Nijjar. In fact, this should bother Canada more that its “honourable citizen,” Hardeep Singh Nijjar, was a designated terrorist, a separatist deeply involved in violent campaigns against India. His links to the banned Khalistan Tiger Force (KTF), a group notorious for its militant calls for an independent Khalistan, are well-documented. Nijjar openly incited violence, encouraging attacks on Indian officials and funding radical separatist efforts, all while positioning himself as a voice for Sikh rights. Nijjar’s ties with Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, are no secret either. This is the individual for whom Canada’s Parliament held a mourning. Yes, the Canadian Parliamentarians stood in silence to mark the death anniversary of a designated terrorist. Even if one assumes, for the sake of argument, that Nijjar was innocent; this still escapes justification why the Parliament of a nation would hold a mourning for an insignificant, common citizen.
While Canada brazenly accuses India of assassinating a terrorist without presenting proof, at the same time, it turns a blind eye to India’s well-substantiated claims regarding Sandeep Singh Sidhu, or “Sunny Toronto”, an employee of the Canadian Border Security Agency (CBSA). Sidhu is allegedly implicated in the assassination of Balwinder Singh Sandhu, an anti-Khalistan activist and Shaurya Chakra awardee in Punjab, India. Despite India’s documented evidence, Sidhu remains free on Canadian soil. The hypocrisy is truly staggering.
Internal chaos within Trudeau’s administration further undermines Canada’s position. David Morrison, Canada’s Deputy Foreign Minister, admitted to leaking sensitive information to the Washington Post, suggesting that Trudeau’s office was more interested in painting India as a villain than in securing truth or justice. Nathalie Drouin, Canada’s national security adviser, claimed that the leak was a mere “communications strategy”, exposing the Trudeau administration’s willingness to manipulate narratives. Such contradictions reveal a government more committed to theatrics than diplomacy—a government more interested in appeasing extremists than protecting the integrity of its alliances.
Canada’s approach is not only irresponsible but rooted in hostility for hostility’s sake, rather than seeking any resolution. This was starkly evident when it recently accused the Indian High Commissioner in Ottawa, Sanjay Kumar Verma, and other senior diplomats of being “persons of interest” in an unspecified investigation, without providing any details or public evidence. In response, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) swiftly rejected these claims, calling them “preposterous imputations”.
The MEA pointed out that such baseless allegations were part of the Trudeau government’s political agenda, which is increasingly centred around vote-bank politics. By making these accusations without transparency or substantiation, Canada is not only undermining diplomatic relations but also indulging in a dangerous game of political posturing that risks escalating tensions unnecessarily. In a tit-for-tat move, New Delhi also expelled six Canadian diplomats on the same day the allegations were made on the Indian officials.
The Indian government’s response to the escalating violence in Canada was swift and resolute. Following the attack on the Hindu temple in Brampton, Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned the deliberate assault on the temple and the intimidation of Indian diplomats. In a social media post on November 4, 2024, PM Modi emphasised that such acts of violence would not deter India’s resolve, urging the Canadian government to ensure justice and uphold the rule of law. This statement echoed the concerns expressed by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), which had earlier condemned the violence and called on Canada to protect all places of worship.
MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal further stressed the Indian government’s deep concern for the safety and security of its citizens in Canada, demanding the prosecution of those responsible for such violence. India’s message was clear: the protection of its people and interests must be prioritised, and violent extremism should never go unpunished.
Justin Trudeau’s reckless gamble with India — a consequential player on the global stage — has reached alarming proportions, jeopardising not just bilateral relations but also tarnishing Canada’s reputation as a responsible nation. His tacit support for Khalistani extremists and his failure to condemn their violent acts have drawn ire not just from India but also from other nations, including Australia, which has openly criticised Canada’s handling of the situation.
By allowing Canada to become a hotbed for radicals, extremists, and terrorists, Trudeau is not just undermining the very fabric of Canadian society but is also eroding his country’s soft power on the world stage. He may believe that cozying up to Khalistani separatists will secure him political support, but in reality, he is merely paving the way for his political downfall. The irony is bitter: in attempting to cling to power through divisive politics, Trudeau risks becoming a pariah, with his legacy marked by chaos and discord.
And it’s not as if Trudeau has been without guidance or wise counsel on this pressing issue. Ujjal Dosanjh, who was also a fellow MP with him in 2008 and 2011, has been vocal in his criticism of Trudeau’s approach, asserting that it has “emboldened Khalistani extremists” and instilled fear among Sikhs in Canada who hold moderate views. In a poignant column for the National Post, the 78-year-old remarked that a large number of Sikhs do not support Khalistan but refrain from speaking out due to fears of violence and repercussions. He lamented the identity crisis facing Canadian Sikhs, stating, “Canadians now equate Khalistanis with Sikhs, as if we are all Khalistanis if we’re Sikhs.”
Dosanjh recalled his past interactions with Trudeau, especially how the Prime Minister, during their discussions about identity and religion, opted to side with the Khalistani activists rather than him — a choice that now seems emblematic of Trudeau’s broader failure to engage with the complexities of the Sikh community and the dire consequences of his political calculations that Canada is facing today.
The writer takes special interest in history, culture and geopolitics. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.