The diplomatic conflict between India and Canada over the recent killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh Canadian citizen wanted on terror charges in India, places the United States (US) in a difficult position, given its close relationships with both countries.
Canada, the US’s northern neighbor, has been a steadfast ally with whom the US shares a rich history. The US’s alliance with India is relatively new but has been lauded as a defining relationship of the 21st century by multiple presidents. However, this conflict presents a challenging position for the US.
Complicating the issue is the possibility that Canada received the intelligence on the killing from the US. US ambassador to Canada, David Cohen, partially confirmed this notion by stating that it was ‘shared intelligence among Five Eyes partners’ that suggested potential Indian involvement. (Five Eyes includes Britain, Australia, and New Zealand besides Canada and the US.)
This possibility contributes to the measured tone of the US response to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s charge. National security advisor Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have expressed support for Canada while refraining from criticizing India.
Three distinct perspectives are emerging from this conflict. The first perspective is that repairing the damage to India-Canada relations could require a Herculean effort. Trudeau’s remarks triggered a strong reaction from India due to the historical context. The strained relationship between New Delhi and Ottawa dates back to the 1980s when the Khalistan separatist movement was at its peak. India accused Canada of harboring terrorists who undermined India’s sovereignty and caused death and destruction. The second perspective highlights the impact the dispute is having on the Indian diaspora, both in Canada and the US. Sikh and Hindu Canadians have complained of being targeted and feeling insecure, and the diplomatic fallout may affect Indian immigration to Canada and the number of Indian students studying there.
The third perspective focuses on the challenging position of the US in this rift. Some in India and the diaspora speculate that the US may have shared intelligence with Canada and guided Trudeau to raise the issue, possibly to curb India’s increasing global influence. However, it is in America’s interest to maintain its relations with India and prevent it from getting closer to Russia and China.
Given the complexity of this conflict and the US’s strategic international objectives, it will be a challenge for the US to determine whether its best approach is to stay on the sidelines, act as a referee, or get directly involved in problem-solving.
In reality, the India-Canada dispute came at an inopportune moment for the US, potentially fracturing the coalition it has been carefully building in the 21st century. The US has invested significantly in its relations with India, especially since the days of the civil nuclear deal. The US must carefully navigate this situation to ensure the preservation of its relationships with India and Canada while pursuing its strategic objectives.
