Upholding Harmony: Countering the Threat of Khalistani Extremism in Australia

Proposed anti-harassment laws by Victoria’s Premier and uneven anti-terror enforcement expose gaps in protecting Indian diaspora communities, especially Hindus from Khalistani & Islamists. Triveni Kaul Australia prides itself on being a vibrant multicultural society, celebrating diversity and fostering harmony among its communities. However, recent incidents involving Khalistani extremism have disrupted this balance, targeting Indian and Hindu diaspora. The emergence of such extremism poses a grave challenge to Australia’s social fabric and raises urgent questions about the safety of vulnerable communities within this framework. Addressing this issue is critical to preserving Australia’s inclusive ethos and ensuring justice for those affected. Over the past few years, Khalistani extremists—advocates for a separate Sikh state carved out of India—have amplified their activities in Australia. While they claim to pursue political objectives, their actions have often crossed into the realm of harassment, vandalism, and violence, disproportionately affecting the Indian and Hindu diaspora. These incidents demand immediate attention to safeguard the multicultural ideals that underpin Australia’s identity. Australian Indian/Hindu Diaspora Indian Australians, particularly Hindus, have increasingly found themselves at the receiving end of targeted attacks fueled by Khalistani extremism. Reports of temple vandalism, such as the defacement of iconic Hindu temples in Melbourne earlier this year, have sent shockwaves through the community. Graffiti glorifying separatist leaders and slogans promoting violence have not only defiled sacred spaces but also instilled a sense of insecurity among devotees. Harassment and intimidation tactics have extended beyond physical locations to digital spaces, where diaspora members have faced online abuse and threats for expressing their views. Community leaders have reported incidents of individuals being followed, heckled at public events, and receiving threatening messages for opposing extremist narratives. The psychological toll on victims, compounded by fears of escalating violence, has been profound. The most alarming aspect of these challenges is the sense of alienation it fosters. Many Indian Australians feel let down by the lack of decisive action to address their grievances, raising concerns about equitable protection within Australia’s multicultural framework. This growing disillusionment risks undermining trust in the system and eroding the social cohesion that defines Australian society. Legal Frameworks Disparity Australia has robust laws to counter terrorism and hate crimes. However, the rise of Khalistani extremism highlights gaps in existing frameworks, particularly in addressing forms of violence that straddle the line between political activism and community harm. Victoria has recently proposed anti-harassment laws aimed at protecting individuals and communities from targeted abuse. These laws, if enacted, could offer a crucial safeguard for diaspora groups facing systematic intimidation. However, critics argue that enforcement will be key, as legislation alone cannot deter well-organized extremist networks. Australia’s anti-terrorism legislation—designed to counter threats from all forms of extremism—provides mechanisms to monitor and prosecute individuals engaging in terror-related activities. Yet, its application has been uneven, with limited cases of enforcement against those propagating Khalistani extremism. This disparity underscores the need for nuanced legal interpretations that recognize the diaspora’s unique vulnerabilities. Recent dialogues between Indian and Australian authorities have signaled a shared commitment to combating extremism. Joint initiatives to curb funding channels for extremist groups, coupled with intelligence-sharing agreements, mark important strides. However, tangible outcomes remain elusive, necessitating deeper collaborations and policy alignment. Policy Recommendations To address the growing threat of Khalistani extremism and protect the Indian/Hindu diaspora, a multi-pronged approach is essential. Key recommendations include: Concluding Observations Targeting of Indian and Hindu diaspora by Khalistani extremists represents a direct threat to Australia’s multicultural values. Proactive measures are essential to protect the rights of vulnerable communities and uphold the principles of diversity and inclusion. Australia’s commitment to multicultural harmony must translate into decisive action against extremism. By strengthening legal protections, fostering community engagement, and enhancing collaborations with India, Australia can ensure that its social fabric remains resilient in the face of divisive forces. Safeguarding the Indian and Hindu diaspora is not just about protecting a minority; it is about preserving the ideals that make Australia a beacon of coexistence and mutual respect. (Author is a corporate professional and foreign affairs enthusiast, she is a contributing writer at CIHS)

Hindus Human Rights

521

Dangerous Global Bias Goes Unchecked

Hindu Temples, places of worship, communities in Western democracies and Islamic nations face grave threat and metamorphosed into a huge crisis. Dr Shailendra Kumar Pathak There’s a pattern to it. Hate and violence against Hindu communities has gone global. From Hindu temples, individuals and organizations have experienced extreme violence, vandalism and intolerance. These acts and incidents of violence have been reported in continuum with no respite to Hindus that seek to practice their faith in peace or live the Dharmic way propagating peace, tranquility and provide hope to humanity that’s under stress. From Brampton and Mississauga in Canada to Bangladesh where scores of temples have either been vandalized or closed down ‘by force’, Hindu minorities have been at the receiving end. Khalistani terrorists, jihadists to Christian evangelists have targeted temples and places of worship even in Bharat that’s home to over a billion Hindus. Most disturbing is that these violent incidents that totaled to over 300 in last few months went largely unnoticed or unreported. Intolerance is something that’s common to most of the violent incidents. For instance, on November 3 in Brampton, Canada, aggressive Khalistani terrorists attacked Hindu mandir in Brampton as practicing Hindus lined up for peaceful worship and Indian government representatives were busy verifying documents of elderly Sikhs and Hindus to ensure continuity in payment of pension back home. Devotees were beaten up, harassed, roughed up and pushed around violently while the Canadian police played dumb and deaf. It’s not an isolated incident. Mississauga Hindu temple was also vandalized with anti-Hindu graffiti and intimidation of extreme variety. On November 12, 2024, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) released a comprehensive report documenting a series of attacks on Hindu communities around the world underscoring the need for attention to what many see as an escalating crisis. VHP report for 2024 documented hate crimes and attacks on temples in several nations like Canada, United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. Sharp rise in hate crimes targeting temples, cultural centers, and individuals has sent shock waves globally among 1.4 billion strong hindus spread across about 100 countries. In Canada, multiple Hindu temples faced attacks over the year including desecration of Gauri Shankar Mandir in Brampton and BAPS Swaminarayan temple in Windsor, which were both defaced with anti-Hindu slurs. United States temples in New Jersey, California and Texas vandalized and practicing Hindus harassed and defacement that included hateful messages specifically targeting Hindu beliefs and symbols were reported. This disturbing pattern suggests that these incidents are not random but part of a broader anti-Hindu agenda that is spreading in Western democracies. In United Kingdom, similar wave of anti-Hindu violence has been reported. Just last year, Leicester, a city with large South Asian population, witnessed intense anti-Hindu violence. Hindu homes, businesses and temples were attacked as mobs chanted slogans against the community, forcing Hindu families to stay indoors in fear. VHP’s report underscore that incidents like these signal an emboldened campaign against Hindu communities in societies that have long prided themselves on tolerance and inclusivity. Australia, too, has not been immune to this wave of hostility. The VHP’s November 2024 report documents attacks on Hindu temples in Melbourne where Hindu symbols were defaced with graffiti linking Hinduism to unrelated political disputes. This graffiti, filled with hateful rhetoric, was intended to shame and intimidate the Hindu community. Such acts reflect a deepening Hinduphobia that is no longer limited to casual prejudice but has manifested into violent, organized attacks on religious and cultural symbols. For Hindus living in these Western democracies, these incidents are betrayal of the promise of freedom and equality. VHP’s comprehensive report also highlights a dire situation for Hindus in neighboring Islamic countries including Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan where the situation is far more severe. In Pakistan, targeting Hindus has reached what some activists call protracted genocide. Hindu temples are routinely desecrated or destroyed, often with little to no response from authorities. Hindu girls, particularly in Sindh, face an alarming risk of abduction, forced conversion and marriage to much older Muslim men. VHP’s report included recent cases of Hindu girls being forcibly converted, torn from their families and left without any recourse for justice. Such violence and intimidation have become daily reality for Hindus in Pakistan where systemic discrimination allows these crimes to go largely unchecked. In Bangladesh, Hindus are staring at total erasure. VHP report notes that in early August 2024 in a span of five hours more than 50 attacks were recorded on Hindu homes, temples and businesses across various districts in Bangladesh. In places like Feni and Dinajpur, Hindu temples were desecrated and homes looted. Reports indicate that mobs of hundreds gathered to burn Hindu homes and assault community leaders as witnessed in multiple Bangladeshi districts such as Khulna, Satkhira and Bogura. This wave of violence has drawn international attention, as videos of the attacks went viral on social media showing mobs surrounding Hindu households, desecrating temples and forcing residents to flee their homes. VHP’s extensive list of incidents in its November 2024 report illustrates alarming scale and frequency of these attacks. It emphasizes that this violence against Hindus often has ideological backing, particularly from radical Islamic factions or Khalistani extremists which justify hostility toward Hindus under religious pretexts. VHP draws attention to anti-Hindu sentiment driven by certain missionary groups which promote aggressive conversion agendas in South Asia. This dynamic, the VHP argues, reveals that anti-Hindu prejudice is not only pervasive but systemic, fueled by a mix of religious and cultural biases. Equally concerning is general lack of accountability or response. When Hindu temples are attacked in Canada or Australia, political leaders and media outlets often remain mute spectators contrasting sharply with the swift response seen for crimes against other communities. This discrepancy has led many within the Hindu diaspora to question double standard practiced in international houses in reporting hate crimes. VHP has noted that Hinduphobia remains underreported and misunderstood, even as acts of Hindumisia (hatred for Hindu beliefs and practices) rise steadily. Unlike Islamophobia or anti-Semitism which are widely

Canada Hindus

639

NYT Faulters, Khalistanis Go Beserk

Indian security concerns cannot be reflected from Khalistani terror lens. Rohan Giri Is it reasonable for reputed media platforms like The New York Times to arrive at conclusion even before piece the facts? In her recent piece, “Sikh Activists See It as Freedom. India Calls It Terrorism,” Anupreeta Das paints the Indian response to Khalistani extremists’ movement as ‘overtly harsh and not based on genuine security concerns’. The writer avers that Indian position against Khalistanis was overtly influenced by Hindu nationalist motives rather than security concerns. A closer look at the article reveals limited scope of investigation, relying on selected sources that shaped public perception in a skewed way. By referring to select incidents, individuals, the write up risks simplifying a complex geopolitical issue, missing both historical and current context needed for a well-rounded understanding. Emphasis on Canadian, US Perspectives The article opens by focusing on Canadian and US claims of assassination plots against a terrorist thereby implying that India’s responses were excessive as “Khalistan movement” was regarded as a bygone issue. The New York Times or Anupreeta Das presented evidence to conclude that Indian government had any role in assassinations. The write up also seem to have ignored the nuanced and ongoing nature of Khalistan issue within and beyond India’s borders. Khalistan-linked activities have not disappeared into thin air and Indian officials are cautious about connections between separatist groups, criminal elements and terror networks—connections that merit thorough analysis rather than dismissal as nationalism-driven rhetoric. Findings from Indian and international intelligence agencies point to violent but fringe Khalistani elements receiving support, both material and ideological, from Pakistan, particularly through the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), known for its dirty tricks to destabilize India. This interlinked dynamic, often referred to as “bleed India with a thousand cuts” strategy is noted in several independent reports. Overlooking this context leaves out a significant geopolitical layer in the discussion. What about Khalistan-Linked Violence? One striking omission is the absence of data on violent history of Khalistan movement and its continued association with criminal activities. 1980s and 1990s saw that Punjab was virtually torn apart by extremist violence with thousands of civilians, law enforcement personnel and officials impacted by Khalistani terrorism. Ignoring these historical facts reduces the weight of ongoing vigilance against terrorist movements. By leaving out the history of violence and its effect on Punjab’s socio-economic landscape, the article doesn’t fully address why the Indian government views the Khalistan issue as a legitimate security concern. Indian law enforcement including National Investigation Agency (NIA), reports that recent crimes tied to Khalistan include drug trafficking, gang violence and extortion contributing to Punjab’s drug crisis. A 2023 NIA report estimated that drug-related crimes in Punjab make up nearly 60 per cent of all drug cases nationwide, underscoring seriousness of the issue and suspected role of Khalistani networks. The absence of such statistics paint an incomplete picture of the government’s concerns. Cherry Picking of Experts The NYT article relies heavily on selective quotes from experts and analysts who cast India’s approach as extreme or unjust. For instance, statements from Gunisha Kaur on purported targeting of Sikhs under national security are included without broader context of the debate. By emphasizing voices critical of India’s measures against separatism, the article overlooks other scholars, counterterrorism experts, and analysts who have recognized valid security challenges India faces with Khalistan-linked extremism. Certain Khalistani groups exploited Sikh religious sentiment to justify violent actions and criminal enterprises. Multiple forums have highlighted ties between these factions, drug and arms smuggling networks, often supported by ISI. Leaving out such perspectives raises questions about balance and intent to inform versus sway readers. Impact of Biased Reporting on Public Understanding When impactful media like The New York Times publish such pieces with biased slant, they risk cementing stereotypes and shaping public opinion misleadingly. For readers less familiar with Khalistan issue, India’s actions might appear authoritarian rather than responses to real and documented threats. Reporting with an apparent “predetermined” conclusion reinforces narratives that misrepresent India’s security concerns as mere authoritarian impulses. This approach can erode trust in international relations. For instance, framing Canada’s reluctance to act against pro-Khalistan activists as a free speech issue disregards that many Western nations actively counter extremist ideologies promoting violence, from neo-Nazism to Islamist extremism. Yet when addressing Khalistani extremism, Canada’s stance is portrayed as liberal tolerance rather than a political decision. This selective framing risks distorting public understanding of global security policies, potentially engendering sympathy for extremist movements. Conflating Sikh Identity with Khalistan Das’ article could be read as equating India’s vigilance over Khalistani separatism with attack on Sikh identity, an oversimplification that overlooks the fact that most Sikhs globally do not support Khalistan. For instance, San Jose California Gurudwara chief Bhupinder Singh Dhillon gave only five-minutes ultimatum to Khalistani supporters and drove them out of Nagar Kirtan. Similarly, Ujjal Dosanjh, former premier of British Columbia and federal cabinet minister under Liberal prime minister Paul Martin told Canadian newspaper ‘National Post’ that “a silent majority of Sikhs does not want to have anything to do with Khalistan, adding that less than five percent of the total Canadian Sikhs support Khalistani movement.” India is home to one of the largest Sikh populations, with significant representation in the military, government, and business. Articles like Das’ risk alienating this community by implying Sikh identity aligns with separatism, which could strain relationships within the Sikh diaspora and between Sikhs and the Indian state of Punjab. India’s Broader Counter-Terrorism Efforts India’s response to separatism is not limited to Khalistan issue but spans various secessionist and insurgent movements from left-wing extremist naxalites to Islamist terrorism. In each instance, India’s approach has been complex, encompassing political dialogue, social programmes and security measures. For example, reducing violence in Kashmir through de-radicalization and security efforts shows a strategy aimed at balancing security with stability. Ignoring broader policies and isolating Khalistan issue risks misrepresenting India’s comprehensive security approach. Importance of Balanced Journalism Responsible media coverage should present readers with a complete view, allowing them to

Canada Hindus

525

Guardians or Bystanders!

Canadian police remain mute spectators to violence and vandalism unleashed in Hindu temples by Khalistani extremists backed by Trudeau. Rahul Pawa On a quiet Diwali weekend, two temples in Canada, long-standing beacons of peace for Hindu diaspora became flashpoints of violence. In Brampton, at Hindu Sabha Mandir where a towering 55-foot statue of Lord Hanuman stands in majestic repose, sanctity of worship was violently interrupted. In Surrey, around same time, similar desecration played out but with an unsettling twist: Canadian police, rather than offering protection from violence, reportedly turned their back on the very devotees they are sworn to safeguard. This spiraling saga of aggression against Canada’s Hindu community speaks of growing dissonance, one in which Anti-hindu allegiances and violent extremist ideology have found combustible alignment. These events call into question not Canadian authorities role in preserving peace and apparent lack of justice in face of rising extremism against Hindus. The incidents bear markings of a broader issue that Canada under the guise of neutrality may have dangerously fueled. Hindu Sabha Mandir in Brampton stands as a symbol of spiritual and cultural unity for Hindu community with its towering Hanuman statue —serving as proud reminder of ancient heritage in Canadian landscape. Yet, as Indian consular officials visited the temple to offer routine services, scenes of unrest unfolded that shattered the temple’s tranquility. Khalistani extremists, aligned with banned Sikhs for Justice extremist group, staged a violent protest that devolved into open aggression against temple-goers. Video footage shared across social media captures harrowing moments as Hindu devotees were set upon, beaten, and confronted with huge sticks by extremists. Aggressive violence by these extremists was unprovoked assault on peaceful community engaged in their sacred observances. Sikhs for Justice, a group with known links to Pakistan and history of terrorism linked to violent Khalistan secessionist movement had explicitly voiced their desire to disrupt consular services outside official premises, claiming these events posed a “threat” to Khalistani cause. Peel Regional Police, responsible for overseeing law enforcement in Brampton, have faced sharp criticism for their response or lack of it. Widespread violence notwithstanding, no arrests were made, a decision that many say reflects a worrisome leniency. Peel Police released a brief statement pledging to “investigate any acts of violence or threats,” yet to date, no charges have been filed. This inaction starkly contrasts with the force’s rapid response to similar instances of disorderly conduct in other communities. For Hindu Canadians, these events highlight troubling trend. Liberal MP Chandra Arya condemned the incident, calling attention to what he described as “free pass” given to Canadian Khalistani extremists. As he noted, “These extremists receive a degree of immunity that raises serious questions about Canada’s commitment to protecting its citizens equally.” Across the country in Surrey, a gathering of Hindu devotees at a temple similarly faced intimidation from Khalistani extremists operating with impunity in Canada. As people of all ages congregated to pray, the Khalistanis arrived with charged slogans, invoking Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a notorious Khalistani extremist recently slain under murky circumstances. Far from remaining a peaceful protest, the event quickly turned menacing, with calls for Hindus to “go back to their country.” Yet what unfolded next is perhaps more disturbing than the protest itself. As tensions escalated, members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) intervened—but not to protect the threatened Hindu worshippers. Instead, in an act that has left the Hindu community in shock and disbelief, RCMP detained three Hindu devotees who were then escorted from temple grounds in full view of the protestors who had incited the incident. The reason for these detentions remains undisclosed, but the message it sent was clear: the victims of intimidation were cast as the culprits. This police action has left many questioning the RCMP’s impartiality. At a time when Hindus in Canada felt increasingly vulnerable, police response was inadequate or complicit. The pattern of law enforcement intervening against Hindu Canadians, rather than protecting them, has fostered deep resentment and fear. A local temple spokesperson pleaded for calm, reminding the community to await further information but the undercurrent of fear was palpable. Canadian authorities’ seeming unwillingness to protect Hindus or even acknowledge the intimidation they face revealed a chasm in the justice system they are meant to trust. Indian High Commission in Ottawa released a statement expressing disappointment at the violence allowed to mar routine consular events. “As in previous years,” the statement read, “the High Commission and Consulates General of India have planned consular camps during this period to assist local life certificate beneficiaries.” However, despite clear forewarning and requests for heightened security, Canadian authorities failed to prevent Khalistani disruption. This dereliction of duty has left Hindus in Canada and beyond questioning the nation’s dedication to ensuring safety for all religious communities. Diplomatic tensions sparked by Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau between Canada and India have simmered in recent months, with baseless accusations fueling discord. Yet Canada’s handling of these incidents hints at something more insidious— normalization of extremism under the guise of free speech. It appears that Canada is struggling, or perhaps choosing not to confront, a deeply ingrained bias in its approach to law enforcement where Khalistani sympathisers were concerned. India’s high commission has been left with few choices but to remind Canadian authorities of their duty to protect citizens and consular staff engaged in routine activities. The community they represent, however, feels abandoned, exposed to aggression with no recourse to justice. As Canada’s Hindu diaspora reflects on these violent episodes, an unsettling reality emerges: their homeland may be an ocean away, but the conflicts it faces seem to have followed them to Canadian shores. Devotees who once sought refuge in Canada, a country that promised peace and safety, now find themselves targeted, harassed, and abandoned by a system that seems unwilling to defend their rights. In these attacks, there is bitter irony—Canada’s celebrated multiculturalism, once source of pride, has been weaponised against the very people it claimed to protect. As Canadian authorities continue to walk the line

Canada World

514

Ottawa Falls

Justin Trudeau’s biggest blunder was to rely on ISI, CCP to tie up with anti-India Khalistani extremists; Five Eyes, US deep state purported inputs to make baseless accusations against India. “At that point it was primarily intelligence, not hard evidentiary proof,” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated during foreign interference inquiry, alluding to the claims he made against India, linking ‘Indian agents’ to Khalistani Canadian terrorist Hardeep Nijjar’s death in a gang war outside the gurdwara in Surrey, Canada.

Disinformation Hindus Misinformation Security World

615

Canada Unsafe for Indians & Hindus

Recent years have posed significant challenges to Canada’s reputation as a safe destination for immigrants, particularly for Indians. Nation’s appeal as a place of opportunity and inclusivity notwithstanding, reports of hate crimes, violence against Indians, Hindus and racial prejudice have increased. This radicalism and governmental biases have mounted concerns regarding safety. (Author Pummy Pandita is head of operations at Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, a non-partisan think tank based in New Delhi)

Geopolitics World

544

Trudeau’s Lost Plot with India

Trudeau’s political gambits with Canada-based extremists threaten to undermine the fabric of Canada’s national interests, casting a long shadow over its democratic values and international relations, especially with India. Rahul PAWA In a development that could further complicate the already strained ties between Ottawa and New Delhi, a commission established by the Trudeau administration to probe foreign interference allegations has officially called on the government to release information about India’s possible role in meddling with Canada’s electoral processes. This request unfolds against a backdrop of concerns raised by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, which has pointed to covert efforts by China to influence the outcomes of Canada’s recent federal elections. A top-secret briefing report, later obtained by various news organizations, highlights the urgent need for Canada to strengthen its defences against such covert activities. The document sheds light on the sophisticated and wide-ranging campaign led by the People’s Republic of China, leveraging everything from diplomatic channels to grassroots community organizations to influence every stratum of society and governance. Adding a new layer to the narrative, the agency has expanded its scrutiny to include India, expressing its apprehensions in a detailed three-page memo that categorises India alongside China as a formidable threat to the democratic integrity of Canada. The report expressly singles out India, anticipating an uptick in interference efforts and strongly advising on the critical importance of bolstering Canada’s democratic systems and institutions to guard against external meddling. In an unfolding scenario that seems straight out of the saying ‘the pot calling the kettle black’, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, recently labeled as the worst Canadian Prime Minister in the last fifty years, is fervently aiming for a fourth term in office—a milestone last reached in 1908. Despite facing significant hurdles, including trailing behind the opposition Conservatives in polls throughout 2023, Trudeau is unwavering in his quest for re-election, seeking to surpass the achievements of his father, Pierre Trudeau, who narrowly missed winning a fourth electoral term in 1979. Yet, Trudeau’s relentless pursuit of power bears a hefty price for the Canadian people, especially against the backdrop of deteriorating ties with India, the world’s fifth-largest economy, which is seemingly distancing itself from Trudeau’s politics. This growing estrangement is largely credited to Trudeau and his close confidant, Jagmeet Singh Dhaliwal of the New Democratic Party. Since ascending to office in 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in alliance with Jagmeet Singh, has navigated the complex waters of Canadian politics with a strategy that leans heavily on the support of Pakistan backed and homegrown Khalistani separatist factions in Canada. This reliance is not merely a reflection of contemporary political strategy but also echoes a longstanding tradition within Canadian politics of providing sanctuary to individuals and organizations known for their dissent against Indian sovereignty. Throughout his tenure, Canada’s political landscape has seen Trudeau’s open endorsement of factions with a history of terrorism and violence within the Khalistani context, a stance that became more marked in the face of competition for the same voter base from Jagmeet Singh. This tactical courtship of Khalistani supporters and sympathisers by Trudeau has significantly influenced his administration’s policies towards India and its substantial diaspora in Canada evidenced by stands taken during India’s farmers protests and during illegitimate referendum dramas in Canada. This demographic, consisting of individuals from both India and Pakistan represents a critical vote bank, ostensibly enabling Trudeau to maintain his grip on power. However, this approach has raised concerns over the compromise of the broader interests of the Canadian people, highlighting a scenario where Trudeau’s political gain is seemingly placed above national welfare. Further demonstrating how their own Prime Minister has placed political gain above all, disrupting the delicate balance between fulfilling national interests and chasing personal political ambitions, especially by jeopardising the economic, moral, and internationally friendly relations with India and her citizens. In a resolute and unified rebuttal to the latest misadventure to the accusations raised by the commission under the Trudeau government, the Indian Foreign Ministry vehemently dismissed the accusations as “baseless,” “absurd,” and “motivated.” The Ministry highlighted that similar claims had been brought up during Trudeau’s discussions with the Indian Prime Minister, only to be “completely rejected.” Furthermore, the statement from the Indian Foreign Ministry emphasised, “It is not the policy of the Government of India to meddle in the democratic processes of other countries. Contrary to these allegations, it is, in fact, Canada that has been found interfering in India’s internal matters.” The statement also reiterated India’s longstanding concern regarding Canada’s approach towards separatists, terrorists, and anti-India groups. This sharp rebuttal does more than just dismiss the claims; it redirects the focus onto the underlying diplomatic friction between the two nations, emphasizing India’s strongest objections to Canada’s treatment of elements opposed to Indian interests. The intensifying diplomatic standoff between Ottawa and New Delhi marks a pivotal moment, casting a spotlight on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approach of political appeasement toward Canada-based Khalistani extremist factions. This strategy, aimed at securing votes and maintaining power, appears to have jeopardised the broader interests of Canada in favour of Trudeau’s personal political ambitions. The engagement with Khalistani elements by the Trudeau administration has not only soured relations with India but also underscored the fragile interplay between domestic political tactics and the responsibilities of international diplomacy. The firm rejection by the Indian government of the allegations put forth by a commission established under Trudeau’s government deepens the diplomatic divide, signalling a dramatic shift away from a foundation of mutual respect and shared democratic ideals. This situation has led to a moment of reckoning, with India responding with decisive words that challenge the veracity of the Canadian Prime Minister’s stance, thereby reshaping the contours of an intricate bilateral relationship. (Rahul Pawa is director of research at the Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies in Delhi, India, specialising in international law, crime, security, future-tech & futuristic warfare.)

Disinformation Insurgency Misinformation Pakistan Policy Security World

605

Bharat’s G-20 Presidency for World

Roadmap for human centric, inclusive & green development with climate justice; re-designing multilateral banks, leadership for global south big takeaways Narendra Modi During its time, India achieved the extraordinary: It revitalised multilateralism, amplified the voice of the Global South, championed development, and fought for the empowerment of women. Today marks 365 days since India assumed the G20 presidency. It is a moment to reflect, recommit, and rejuvenate the spirit of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam — “One Earth, One Family, One Future”. As we undertook this responsibility last year, the global landscape grappled with multifaceted challenges: Recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic, looming climate threats, financial instability, and debt distress in developing nations — all amid declining multilateralism. In the midst of conflicts and competition, development cooperation suffered, impeding progress. Assuming the G20 chair, India sought to offer the world an alternative to the status quo, a shift from a GDP-centric to human-centric progress. India aimed to remind the world of what unites us, rather than what divides us. Finally, the global conversation had to evolve — the interests of the few had to give way to the aspirations of the many. This required a fundamental reform of multilateralism as we knew it. Inclusive, ambitious, action-oriented, and decisive — these four words defined our approach as G20 president, and the New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration (NDLD), unanimously adopted by all G20 members, is testimony to our commitment to deliver on these principles. Inclusivity has been at the heart of our presidency. The inclusion of African Union (AU) as a permanent member of G20 integrated 55 African nations into the forum, expanding it to encompass 80 per cent of the global population. This proactive stance has fostered a more comprehensive dialogue on global challenges and opportunities. The first-of-its-kind ‘Voice of the Global South Summit’, convened by India in two editions heralded a new dawn for multilateralism. India mainstreamed the Global South’s concerns in the international discourse and has ushered in an era where developing countries take their rightful place in shaping the global narrative. Inclusivity also infused India’s domestic approach to G20, making it a People’s Presidency that befits the world’s largest democracy. Through “Jan Bhagidari” (people’s participation) events, the G20 reached 1.4 billion citizens, involving all states and Union Territories (UTs) as partners. And on substantive elements, India ensured that international attention was directed to broader developmental aims, aligning with the G20’s mandate. At the critical midpoint of the 2030 agenda, India delivered the G20 2023 Action Plan to Accelerate Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), taking a cross-cutting, action-oriented approach to interconnected issues, including health, education, gender equality and environmental sustainability. A key area driving this progress is the robust Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI). Here, India was decisive in its recommendations, having witnessed the revolutionary impact of digital innovations like Aadhaar, UPI, and Digilocker first-hand. Through the G20, we successfully completed the Digital Public Infrastructure Repository, a significant stride in global technological collaboration. This repository, featuring over 50 DPIs from 16 countries, will help the Global South build, adopt, and scale DPI to unlock the power of inclusive growth. For our One Earth, we introduced ambitious and inclusive aims to create urgent, lasting, and equitable change. The Declaration’s Green Development Pact addresses the challenges of choosing between combating hunger and protecting the planet, by outlining a comprehensive roadmap where employment and ecosystems are complimentary, consumption is climate-conscious, and production is planet-friendly. In tandem, the G20 Declaration calls for an ambitious tripling of global renewable energy capacity by 2030. Coupled with the establishment of the Global Biofuels Alliance and a concerted push for Green Hydrogen, the G20’s ambitions to build a cleaner, greener world are undeniable. This has always been India’s ethos, and through Lifestyles for Sustainable Development (LiFE), the world can benefit from our age-old sustainable traditions. Further, the Declaration underscores our commitment to climate justice and equity, urging substantial financial and technological support from the Global North. For the first time, there was a recognition of the quantum jump needed in the magnitude of development financing, moving from billions to trillions of dollars. The G20 acknowledged that developing countries require $5.9 trillion to fulfil their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by 2030. Given the monumental resources required, the G20 emphasised the importance of better, larger, and more effective Multilateral Development Banks. Concurrently, India is taking a leading role in UN reforms, especially in the restructuring of principal organs like the UN Security Council that will ensure a more equitable global order. Gender equality took centre stage in the Declaration, culminating in the formation of a dedicated Working Group on the Empowerment of Women next year. India’s Women’s Reservation Bill 2023, reserving one-third of India’s Parliament and state legislative assembly seats for women, epitomises our commitment to women-led development. The New Delhi Declaration embodies a renewed spirit of collaboration across these key priorities, focusing on policy coherence, reliable trade, and ambitious climate action. It is a matter of pride that during our presidency, G20 achieved 87 outcomes and 118 adopted documents, a marked rise from the past. During our G20 presidency, India led deliberations on geopolitical issues and their impact on economic growth and development. Terrorism and the senseless killing of civilians are unacceptable, and we must address them with a policy of zero tolerance. We must embody humanitarianism over hostility and reiterate that this is not an era of war. I am delighted that during our presidency, India achieved the extraordinary: It revitalised multilateralism, amplified the voice of the Global South, championed development, and fought for the empowerment of women everywhere. As we hand over the G20 presidency to Brazil, we do so with the conviction that our collective steps for people, planet, peace, and prosperity, will resonate for years to come. (Author is Prime Minister of India)

Disinformation Geopolitics Insurgency Misinformation Security

553

India’s Firm Message to Canada: Tackle Khalistani Extremism, Preserve Bilateral Ties

Rohan Giri Diplomatic relations between India and Canada have been thrown into a state of disarray after insinuations on possible Indian involvement in murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a proscribed terrorist identified as a member of Khalistan Tiger Force. These claims by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have ignited tensions, prompting a sharp rebuke from India’s Ambassador to Canada, Sanjay Kumar Verma that criticised Canada for damaging bilateral relations. Verma asserted that the accusations lack substantial evidence and may have been influenced by high-level directions. Allegations of India’s involvement in reported murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Khalistani terrorist who had obtained Canadian citizenship, emerged after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s address in the country’s Parliament on September 18. He had claimed to have “credible evidence that the Indian government assassinated a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil.” This serious assertion put a strain on bilateral relations. However, India recognised as a robust and healthy democracy, has no historical record of engaging in such clandestine activities and consistently championed the path of peace both regionally and globally. In an interview to ‘The Globe and Mail’, Indian envoy Sanjay Kumar Verma offered a forceful rebuttal to these allegations chastising Canada for failing to furnish any concrete or pertinent details that would substantiate their accusations. He expressed apprehension regarding the investigation’s integrity, hinting at possibility of high-level interference in investigative proceedings. The accusations triggered significant diplomatic fallout and unilaterally Canada escalated further by suspending an Indian diplomat. Retaliating, India declared a Canadian senior diplomat persona non grata and requested the Canadian government to withdraw a substantial number of its diplomatic staff from India. This diplomatic spat loomed as a potential threat to the broader bilateral engagement between the two countries. Verma scrutinised validity and admissibility of the purported evidence underpinning Canada’s claims, pointing out that diplomatic exchanges were safeguarded by international law and not admissible in a legal context or for public revelation. He called on Canada to explain the methods used to obtain these conversations and raised the possibility that the alleged wiretaps could have involved impersonated voices. India has on multiple occasions drawn attention to its pending extradition requests, which it alleges Canada has consistently overlooked. Following the accusations against India, the Ministry of External Affairs labeled Canada as a “safe haven for terrorists, gangsters, and criminals.” This characterisation is not made lightly; it mirrors the perception of contemporary Canada and has added further tension to the already strained diplomatic relations. The fabric of India-Canada relations has been further frayed by a deeply troubling series of events in Canada. There is a growing wave of hostility, as sacred Hindu sites and the assets of the Indian community have come under repeated attack. This disturbing trend has escalated to a point where the safety of Indian diplomats in Canada is now in jeopardy. The aftermath of the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar has unleashed a torrent of direct threats and vitriolic hate speech aimed at the Indian diplomatic corps. The atmosphere of intimidation has been starkly illustrated by the appearance of menacing posters throughout Canada. These posters not only advocate for the assassination of Indian officials but audaciously depict them as adversaries of the Canadian state, ratcheting up the diplomatic tension to an alarming degree. This volatile situation casts a shadow over the Indian community in Canada and puts the diplomatic ties between the two nations on a knife-edge. In a comprehensive analysis, as an international think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, raised alarm in its latest report about the escalating threat of Khalistani extremism in Canada, particularly during Prime Minister Trudeau’s administration. The report stressed that this radical movement, bolstered by Pakistani support, has intensified, putting a strain on Canada’s social fabric and its long-standing multicultural values. Ties between Canada and India have deteriorated, attributed in part to Trudeau’s interactions with Khalistani proponents and his unsubstantiated accusations against India. These actions have not only marred Trudeau’s leadership but reflect political influence of Jagmeet Singh, the NDP leader known for his Khalistani linkages and frequent anti-India commentary. CIHS report warned that the Canadian government’s perceived indifference towards growing Khalistani presence could incentivise separatist sentiments, potentially triggering a secessionist referendum. Such developments threaten Canadian unity and sovereignty. The think tank underlined the urgency for Canada to repair its diplomatic relations with India. Moreover, it called on Western nations to tackle Khalistani extremism with an unwavering adherence to the rule of law and a commitment to security, human rights, and democratic principles. The response to this issue is critical, the report concludes, as it will significantly shape the future of international relations and the global order. Trudeau has seemingly overlooked these critical issues. The unchecked growth of separatist movements poses a real and significant threat to the security of Canada. It seems he fails to acknowledge the true character of terrorism, which knows no religious or ideological limits. No amount of diplomatic veneer can mask this reality. Historical patterns suggest that the consequences of neglecting such threats often have a way of returning to their origin with compounded force Addressing these challenges with substantive dialogue and addressing the influence of Khalistani factions in Canada is crucial for restoring confidence and strengthening the bilateral relationship. The current diplomatic impasse highlights the importance of adhering to diplomatic norms, international law, and the protection of envoys abroad. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approach, which seems to prioritise internal political advantages over international protocol, reflects a departure from statesmanlike conduct. Such a strategy may jeopardise the diplomatic bond with India and other law-abiding democracies worldwide. (author is manager – operations at New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Disinformation Geopolitics Misinformation Policy Security

507

Canada’s Darkening Horizon: Red Flags and Alarming Trends

The dynamics between India and Canada are treading on thin ice, revealing a landscape where Canada’s interests seem to be diverging significantly from Prime Minister Trudeau’s actions and statements. It’s crucially morphing into a “Canada versus Trudeau” scenario, highlighting an urgent call for a recalibration of Canada’s stance. Dive deeper into the unfolding scenario and explore potential resolutions in CIHS special report on “Canada’s Darkening Horizon: Red Flags and Alarming Trends”

Blog Post