Relations between India and Canada have hit an unprecedented low, with both countries expelling top diplomats in response to the assassination of Canada-based Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar. Nijjar, a vocal supporter of the pro-Khalistan movement, was labeled a terrorist by India, while Canadian authorities are investigating alleged involvement by Indian agents in his death. This recent turmoil follows a history of periodic disputes but represents a stark escalation in the diplomatic standoff.
The origins of the rift trace back to 1974, when India’s nuclear tests shocked the world and fractured relations with Canada, which had provided India with plutonium for peaceful purposes. Yet, even at that point, no expulsions of top diplomats occurred. Tensions simmered for decades, largely due to Canada’s handling of Sikh separatist movements within its borders, but trade, education, and community links held strong. Analysts, however, point to a growing disconnect: Canada views pro-Khalistan support as activism protected under free speech, whereas India considers it a dangerous domestic threat.
According to Wilson Center’s Michael Kugelman, Canada’s perceived leniency toward Sikh separatist activists has repeatedly strained ties. Meanwhile, Canadian political dynamics have only complicated matters, with a significant Sikh diaspora influencing federal politics. As Trudeau’s government faces low approval ratings, some have speculated on political motivations, although experts suggest this crisis is more a symptom of long-standing Indian frustrations over Canada’s approach to separatist activists.
Historically, India and Canada’s relationship has been strengthened by a shared diaspora of 1.3 million people and extensive trade, with India ranking as Canada’s tenth-largest trading partner. Still, the deepening impasse casts doubt on high-level relations as both nations head toward elections. This stand-off marks a historic low in bilateral relations, with India’s recent accusations against Canada bearing a similarity—and even greater intensity—to its long-standing rhetoric against Pakistan.
