India’s Contrasting Responses to Canada and US Amidst Khalistan Controversy

The US Attorney for New York has filed murder-for-hire charges against Indian national Nikhil Gupta for an alleged plot to kill Khalistani separatist Gurwatpant Pannun in the US. What makes this case significant is that the US investigations clearly state that Gupta was acting under the direction of an “Indian government employee,” establishing a connection similar to the one made by the Canadian government, which referred to “agents of the Indian government.”

The US press release contains damaging information. Firstly, it reveals that Gupta, who allegedly worked with the “Indian government employee,” has a history of involvement in serious crimes such as “international narcotics and weapons trafficking.” Secondly, it exposes the entire process by which the plot to kill Pannun was foiled, including US undercover officers obtaining direct information from Gupta about the instructions he received from the “Indian government employee.” For instance, the official press release mentions that on June 20, 2023, the “Indian government employee” sent Gupta a news article about the intended victim and messaged him, stating, “[i]t’s [a] priority now.”

The US undercover operation also establishes a connection between Gupta’s case and the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada. The press statement reveals that just two days before Gupta received the message from the “Indian government employee” instructing him to prioritize the assassination of Pannun, Nijjar was killed in British Columbia on June 18. The statement quotes Gupta as telling an undercover officer on June 19 that Nijjar “was also the target” and that they had “so many targets.”

In contrast, the Canadian government has not disclosed any details of its investigation thus far. On September 18, Justin Trudeau made a significant allegation against India in the Canadian parliament, and Foreign Minister Melanie Joly announced the expulsion of an Indian diplomat.

The manner in which these revelations were made likely contributed to India’s strong reaction. There were two issues at play. Firstly, Trudeau made the statement in parliament while investigations were still ongoing, departing from the approach of quiet diplomacy. Secondly, Joly’s office identified the expelled Indian official to the Canadian media and disclosed that he headed the Canadian branch of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), despite the official being listed as a minister for economic, coordination, and community affairs on the Indian High Commission’s website.

India’s concerns regarding Canada’s lenient approach towards Khalistan separatists and its territory being used for a secessionist referendum had already created a backdrop for increased friction following Trudeau’s statement. Consequently, India responded with visa restrictions and threatened to revoke the diplomatic immunity of diplomats, leading to the return of 41 diplomats to Canada last month.

The reason why New Delhi has not adopted a similarly forceful approach with the US remains unclear. Some speculate that it is because Canada is not the US. However, a more plausible reason seems to be that while the US conducted an investigation and disclosed details and charges, Trudeau may have acted prematurely due to domestic political considerations.

Given the formal announcement of charges by the US, the attention from international media, and the fact that the tip-off to Canada about the Nijjar killing came from the Five Eyes (possibly the US), India’s response will be closely observed.