Follow us on social

Canada's assassination charge against India puts Biden in a pickle

Canada's assassination charge against India puts Biden in a pickle

Experts say the risks of not openly backing Trudeau are far outweighed by the danger of confronting Modi right now.

Analysis | North America

Canada has blamed the Indian government over the assassination of a Sikh leader in British Columbia in June, sparking a diplomatic crisis between the two countries and confronting the Biden administration with a difficult choice.

"Over the past number of weeks, Canadian security agencies have been actively pursuing credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen," said Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Parliament on Monday.

"Canada has declared its deep concerns to the top intelligence and security officials of the Indian government,” he added. “Last week at the G20 I brought them personally and directly to Prime Minister Modi in no uncertain terms."

India’s Ministry of External Affairs denounced the allegations as “absurd and motivated,” accusing Canada of harboring “Khalistani terrorists and extremists” who “continue to threaten India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” New Delhi expelled a Canadian diplomat on Tuesday in a tit for tat response to Canada’s expulsion of an Indian diplomat the day before.

The victim, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, was a leading proponent of the Khalistan movement for the establishment of an independent Sikh state in India’s northern Punjab region. His ethno-religious separatist activism did not earn him many friends in the Modi administration, with the Indian government accusing him in 2018 of being involved in multiple targeted killings.

“From the vantage point of India, he is a terrorist… the very fact that this guy had extreme political preferences, in the mind of the Indian government, would make him not only an extremist but a terrorist,” Max Abrahms, Associate Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at Northeastern University and leading terrorism expert, told Responsible Statecraft. “Clearly India views his political preferences — an independent Khalistan — as extreme and also as ipso facto evidence of supporting terrorism…”

The Khalistan issue has loomed over Canada-India relations for years. Canada, home to the largest Sikh community in the world, has been the site of previous Sikh-led protests that have invited sharp rebuke from Indian officials. New Delhi criticized the Canadian government for turning a blind eye to what it described as the “extremist” activities of Khalistan movement activists with Modi expressing concerns over previous Sikh protests to Trudeau on the sidelines of the G20 summit earlier this month.

“They are promoting secessionism and inciting violence against Indian diplomats, damaging diplomatic premises and threatening the Indian community in Canada and their places of worship,” the Indian government said in a statement at the time.

The two sides have frozen negotiations over a proposed trade deal that both countries hoped would be finalized by the end of the year, with Indian officials reportedly citing “certain political developments.”

Beyond the ongoing fallout between Ottawa and New Delhi, Trudeau’s Tuesday remarks have put many of Canada’s closest allies in a difficult spot. On the one hand, the White House has made it a top strategic priority to court India amid its intensifying standoff with China. On the other hand, the Biden administration has built its foreign policy brand on the importance of marching in lockstep with its Atlantic partners — failing to publicly back Canada could deal at least a symbolic setback to the Biden administration’s grand vision of a united Atlantic front.

“The United States deeply values the bilateral relationship with India and has invested substantially in this relationship, evidenced most recently by the very public hosting of Modi at the White House as well as the very high-profile one-on-one meeting between Biden and Modi at the G20 a few weeks ago,” said Abrahms.

“Washington deeply values and is investing in this relationship and, therefore, I find it very unlikely that Biden will interject himself in a way that will create any meaningful friction with the development of relations with India, which are seen as essential in terms of containing China as well as taking a leadership stance in the global south,” he continued, adding that U.S.-China trade ties and a desire not to alienate the domestic Indian vote could also be salient factors for the administration.

Abrahms noted that the potential costs of not backing Canada are outweighed by the dangers of confronting India because New Delhi, unlike Ottawa is a geopolitical pivot player. “Canada doesn’t have the option of moving away from the United States, nor would it want to, whereas with India, one of the reasons why we’re courting it so much is because it has a history of independent foreign policy during the Cold War with respect to the Soviet Union,” he said, adding that that Washington cannot take for granted New Delhi’s support against Beijing.

“It’s not entirely clear that India will be the ally that the United States wants against China in the Indo-Pacific, so the U.S. is doing this charm offensive not just because India is rightfully seen as important but because, without it, there could be a real risk that India won’t be the kind of ally that we need in any future direct conflict with China.”

Asked if the White House could possibly sanction the Modi government over Trudeau’s assassination claims, Abrahms said he would be surprised even by “just a rhetorical dressing-down of India.”

It is an open question how Canada’s leadership would respond if Washington does, in fact, choose to stand aside. Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly parsed the assassination claim more delicately than Trudeau, referring to the incident as an “allegation” that would constitute a “grave violation” of Canada’s sovereignty “if proven true."

It appears the door has been left ajar for de-escalation — how Ottawa chooses to proceed, and the full extent of the damage that the Khalistan assassination row will do to the Canada-India relationship, remains to be seen.


Canadian PM Justin Trudeau (Shutterstock/Asatur Yesayants), India PM Narendra Modi and President Biden (White House photo)
Analysis | North America
Francois Bayrou Emmanuel Macron
Top image credit: France's Prime Minister Francois Bayrou arrives to hear France's President Emmanuel Macron deliver a speech to army leaders at l'Hotel de Brienne in Paris on July 13, 2025, on the eve of the annual Bastille Day Parade in the French capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe facing revolts, promising more guns with no money

Europe

If you wanted to create a classic recipe for political crisis, you could well choose a mixture of a stagnant economy, a huge and growing public debt, a perceived need radically to increase military spending, an immigration crisis, a deeply unpopular president, a government without a majority in parliament, and growing radical parties on the right and left.

In other words, France today. And France’s crisis is only one part of the growing crisis of Western Europe as a whole, with serious implications for the future of transatlantic relations.

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Middle East

Europe appears set to move from threats to action. According to reports, the E3 — Britain, France, and Germany — will likely trigger the United Nations “snapback” process this week. Created under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), this mechanism allows any participant to restore pre-2015 U.N. sanctions if Iran is judged to be in violation of its commitments.

The mechanism contains a twist that makes it so potent. Normally, the Security Council operates on the assumption that sanctions need affirmative consensus to pass. But under snapback, the logic is reversed. Once invoked, a 30-day clock begins. Sanctions automatically return unless the Security Council votes to keep them suspended, meaning any permanent member can force their reimposition with a single veto.

keep readingShow less
Vladimir Putin
Top photo credit: President of Russia Vladimir Putin, during the World Cup Champion Trophy Award Ceremony in 2018 (shutterstock/A.RICARDO)

Why Putin is winning

Europe

After a furious week of diplomacy in Alaska and Washington D.C., U.S. President Donald Trump signaled on Friday that he would be pausing his intensive push to end war in Ukraine. His frustration was obvious. “I’m not happy about anything about that war. Nothing. Not happy at all,” he told reporters in the Oval Office.

To be sure, Trump’s high-profile engagements fell short of his own promises. But almost two weeks after Trump met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska and European leaders in Washington, it is clear that there were real winners and losers from Trump’s back-to-back summits, and while neither meeting resolved the conflict, they offered important insights into where things may be headed in the months ahead.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.