New Delhi: Last September after Canadian citizen and Khalistani sympathiser Hardeep Singh Nijjar was shot dead in Surrey, British Columbia, relations between India and Canada have been strained. Subsequent to Nijjar’s death Justin Trudeau said that Canada had “credible allegations of a potential link” between Indian government agents and Nijjar’s killing. After these accusations, both nations withdrew their diplomats and India also put a freeze on diplomatic services for Canadians.
The situation has only worsened since then and on Monday India expelled six Canadian diplomats and announced withdrawing its high commissioner and other officials from Canada. This came after Canada came out with allegations that India’s envoy and other diplomats were “persons of interest” in investigations related to Nijjar’s death that took place last year. India “strongly” rejected the “preposterous imputations” from Canada and argued that Canada had not shared a “shred of evidence, despite many requests from our side”.
Since Canada first came out with allegations against India in relation to Nijjar’s killing last year, Justin Trudeau has said that he has shared information related to this with the members of the Five Eyes alliance, which is an intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. While the five-eyes members both last year and now have only stated that they are ‘troubled’ with the allegations, there has not been any action or stern word against India from any of the members. As this issue is only expected to continue for some time more, India would sooner or later have to make up its mind as to how they will deal with the issue.
Is integration with ‘five-eyes’ worth it?
While India and Canada have always shared a tumultuous relationship, since last year things are at an unprecedented low. Canada, while implicating Indian nationals in the Nijjar killing of last year, has failed to provide any proof of it. Publicly it has said that it has proof of India’s involvement which it has shared with its’ five eye’ alliance members, that is Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
This though has not affected India much. All the ‘five eye’ members have only voiced mild discontent and India has not suffered for it. The alliance was formalised in the post-war era by the UKUSA Agreement in 1946 and as the Cold War deepened, the intelligence sharing arrangement was formalised under the ECHELON surveillance system in the 1960s. Nonetheless, from the Indian perspective not much has transpired from this arrangement.
There are two other extensions of this arrangement, a ‘nine eyes’ group which apart from the core group also consists of Denmark, France, Netherlands, and Norway. Then it is the ‘fourteen eyes’ alliance which also includes Belgium, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden.
What is important in the context of the situation for India is that despite Canada ‘sharing information’ with the five eyes alliance, nothing has materialised. This could either mean that much of substance has not been shared or is likely not present. India is one of the world’s biggest and fastest growing powers and no country wants to disrupt its own relations with India. Considering this as well India has not had a problem and the five eyes alliance members have been calm on the issue, unlike Canada.
India though should use this opportunity for its own benefit. It can join the five eyes or fourteen eyes alliance at this point. Not only will it trump Canada’s effort but will also be of use to India.
One of the key concerns of the Five Eyes alliance in recent times has been to curb the growing influence of China. India plays a huge part in this and the West’s anti-China efforts also factor India hugely. It would also be of use to India in intelligence sharing, which was a problem during the 2008 Mumbai attacks (26/11 attacks). Considering India’s global ascendency, the agreement would be a benefit for both parties involved and good for security and international cooperation in the Indo-Pacific.
