Home Minister Amit Shah Stands Strong: Defending India Against Trudeau's Malign Influence Campaign

November 03, 2024 Tathagata Roy and Prof. Srinivasan Balakrishnan
In recent months, the diplomatic landscape has shifted dramatically with Canada making serious allegations against India concerning the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Khalistani separatist. Home Minister Amit Shah has found himself at the centre of a politically charged narrative that seeks to vilify India and its leaders. It is essential to address these accusations critically and contextualize the situation to reveal the underlying motivations and implications of such claims.
First and foremost, it is crucial to recognize that India, like any sovereign nation, has the responsibility to protect its citizens and uphold its national security. The Khalistani movement, which seeks to create a separate Sikh state in India, has been linked to various violent acts and terrorism. Nijjar, as a prominent figure in this separatist movement, was known for his violence and separatism. In February 2018, Nijjar was listed on a "most wanted" roster provided by then Punjab Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh to Prime Minister Trudeau. He was briefly detained in Canada in April 2018 but released without facing charges. By January 2019, he was elected unopposed as the head of Surrey’s Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara. Importantly, Canada’s 2018 Annual Report on the Threat of Terrorism marked the first time that "Khalistani extremism" was identified as a potential risk.
The release of this report sparked backlash from Sikh communities, who called for the removal of references to Sikh extremism and Khalistan. Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a prominent supporter of Khalistan and leader of the banned group Sikhs For Justice (SFJ), accused Trudeau of portraying Sikhs as "terrorists" and exploiting them for electoral gain.
As the Sikh diaspora represents a significant portion of the Liberal Party's voter base, the report created a dilemma for Trudeau's government ahead of elections. Organizers of the annual Khalsa parade in Surrey even threatened to prevent any Liberal Party member from speaking at the Baisakhi event. Under pressure, Trudeau’s administration released a revised version of the report in April 2019, omitting references to Sikh extremism and Khalistan. This situation highlights a potential conflict between Canada’s stated commitment to human rights and its willingness to accommodate individuals who promote violence and terrorism, raising critical questions about the consistency of its positions and the motives behind its absurd accusations against India.
Administrative Realities
A key point often overlooked is that Home Minister Amit Shah, as part of the Indian government, is not administratively responsible or merely don't have any role for calling the shots in the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), India’s external intelligence agency. The intricate workings of intelligence agencies are typically shielded from the direct involvement of political leaders, reflecting the realities of governance and operational protocols.
In a recent parliamentary panel meeting, Canada’s Deputy Foreign Minister, David Morrison, claimed that a top-ranking official in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government was behind plots targeting Sikh separatists in Canada. Morrison’s statements imply a level of direct involvement that contradicts established protocols of separation between political oversight and intelligence operations.
However, this narrative took a turn when Nathalie Drouin, Trudeau's National Security and Intelligence Adviser, contradicted Morrison. She stated, “This is not the information we provided to the Washington Post journalist,” distancing herself from Morrison’s claims. Drouin further clarified that she did not require Prime Minister Trudeau’s authorization for sharing information and emphasized that no classified intelligence had been leaked before India’s diplomatic expulsion of six Canadian diplomats.
This incidentally raises the question as to why the leak was made to the Washington Post and not to the Toronto Star or The Globe and Mail, two of Canada’s foremost print dailies? The obvious answer, which is a half-joke, will make many Canadians wince: Canada is the 51st state of the US.
This discrepancy raises critical questions about the motivations behind Canada’s accusations. The Intelligence adviser Drouin said that leak was "part of a communication strategy" that she and Morrison came up with to ensure that the American Media outlet got Canada’s version of the ongoing diplomatic row, she added that the communication strategy was overseen by Trudeau's office. This orchestrated approach highlights a troubling willingness to politicize intelligence for domestic narratives, casting doubt on the credibility of the allegations against India.
A Campaign of Disinformation
It is increasingly evident that the foreign malign influence activities targeting Home Minister Amit Shah are under the direct supervision of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The disinformation campaign spearheaded by Deputy Foreign Minister Morrison seems aimed not only at discrediting Shah but also at diverting attention from Canada’s own shortcomings in addressing extremism.
By crafting narratives that imply direct involvement from Indian officials in acts of violence, the Canadian government risks escalating tensions and undermining the integrity of international relations. This strategy appears to be a calculated move to bolster domestic political support by framing the issue as a defence of national values against foreign interference, rather than addressing the genuine concerns surrounding the presence of Khalistani extremism within Canada.
Canada's Troubling Record
While Canada accuses India of extraterritorial actions, it is imperative to highlight that Canada has, in many instances, turned a blind eye to the activities of Khalistani terrorists operating on its soil. The Canadian government's failure to clamp down on extremist elements poses a security threat not just to India but to the broader international community. This inconsistency raises questions about Canada’s own commitment to combating terrorism while selectively targeting the actions of other nations.
Moreover, Canada's historical relationship with state-sponsored terrorism, particularly in how it has engaged with various extremist groups under the guise of free speech and political expression, warrants scrutiny. By allowing such groups to thrive, Canada inadvertently fosters an environment that can lead to violence and instability. In this context, the allegations against Amit Shah seem more like a diversion from Canada’s own shortcomings in addressing the root causes of extremism within its borders.
Diplomatic Double Standards
The accusations directed at Amit Shah highlight a broader trend of diplomatic double standards. Canada’s attempts to project itself as a defender of human rights often clash with its willingness to harbour individuals advocating for violence and Terror. Such a stance undermines the principles of justice and fairness, and raises legitimate concerns about the motivations behind its allegations against India.
Furthermore, these accusations can be seen as an affront to the dignity and sovereignty of India as a nation. By attempting to publicly shame an elected official from another country, Canada not only challenges India’s authority but also sets a dangerous precedent for international relations. It opens the door to further politicization of diplomatic discourse, wherein state-sponsored narratives can be weaponized against nations. This will be a classic example of an overt Foreign Malign Influence operations against India in recent times.
It would not be out of place to refer to Canada’s own case, where the person embarrassing Canada was not its Prime Minister but the French hero General De Gaulle who, on Canadian soil, openly supported the separatist vive Quebec Libre movement. "Vive le Québec libre !" , 'Long live free Quebec!') was a phrase in a speech delivered by French President Charles de Gaulle in Montreal, Quebec on July 24, 1967, during an official visit to Canada for the Expo 67 world's fair. While giving an address to a large crowd from a balcony at Montreal City Hall, he uttered "Vive Montréal ! Vive le Québec !" ("Long live Montreal! Long live Quebec!") and then added, followed by loud applause, "Vive le Québec libre !" ("Long live free Quebec!") with particular emphasis on the word libre. The phrase, a slogan used by Quebecois who favoured Quebec sovereignty, was seen as giving his support to the movement. The speech caused a diplomatic incident with the Government of Canada and was condemned by Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, saying that "Canadians do not need to be liberated". This ought to be an eye-opener to Trudeau about how a sovereign nation feels when the violators of its sovereignty are supported, however obliquely, by heads of government of another sovereign nation.
The Way Forward
As the geopolitical landscape continues to evolve, it is vital for nations to engage in constructive dialogue rather than resorting to sensationalism and unfounded allegations to score brownie points with a section of their own electorate. Amit Shah’s commitment to combating terrorism and insurgency internally, should be recognized as a necessary component of national security strategy. It is imperative for Canada to reassess its approach to dealing with terrorism, ensuring that it does not become an unwitting accomplice to the very extremism it claims to oppose in the name of democracy.
The malign allegations against Amit Shah are not just an attack on an individual but a challenge to India’s sovereignty and its right to safeguard its national interests. It is essential for Canada to navigate these complex issues with a sense of responsibility, focusing on cooperation against common threats rather than allowing political agendas to dictate the narrative. Only through genuine dialogue and mutual respect can we hope to foster a world free from the scourge of terrorism and extremism.
About the Author:
Shri Tathagata Roy has served as the Governor of Tripura, Arunachal Pradesh & Meghalaya and Prof. Srinivasan Balakrishnan is currently serving as the National President of Bharatiya Yuva Seva Sangh (BYSS)
Note:
The article reflects the opinion of the author and not necessarily the views of the organisation.
Share this article:
© Copyright 2025 Indic Researchers Forum | Designed & Developed By Bigpage.in