Concerns about foreign interference in Canadian politics have resurfaced for many Canadians from diaspora communities following the release of the Foreign Interference Commission’s report earlier this year. Especially for Indian Canadians, these concerns have remained top of mind since the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar on June 18, 2023.
Nijjar, a supporter of Sikh separatism, was killed outside a gurdwara (place of Sikh religious worship) in Surrey, British Columbia. Soon after, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau cited credible allegations linking agents of the Indian government to the killing, calling it an extrajudicial “killing of a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil.” This claim, backed by intelligence from Canada and its allies, sent shock waves through the Indian-Canadian community. In particular, it deepened tensions between Sikhs and Hindus based on divisions about the actions taken by the Indian state and, subsequently, the announcement by Prime Minister Trudeau.
Nijjar’s assassination reignited discussions surrounding Khalistan, a sovereignty movement that advocates for a Sikh homeland in Punjab. The movement dates back to the partition of British India in 1947, when India emerged as predominantly Hindu and Pakistan as predominantly Muslim, leaving Sikhs without a homeland and with unfulfilled aspirations for self-determination.
The Khalistan movement garnered global attention in 1984, intensified by the events of Operation Blue Star, a military operation ordered by India’s then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, who aimed to remove armed Sikh separatists residing within the Golden Temple in Amritsar, Punjab. In a sacrilege of the holiest Sikh site, Prime Minister Gandhi ordered heavy-handed tactics, including the use of tanks and artillery on the temple complex. Operation Blue Star marked the beginning of one of the darkest moments in Sikh history, with the operation widely perceived as an offence of the highest order by Sikhs worldwide.
In retaliation for the Indian government’s actions against Sikhs, Gandhi’s two Sikh bodyguards assassinated her on October 31, 1984. This triggered the state-orchestrated anti-Sikh pogroms of 1984 across India, in which thousands of Sikhs were killed. The wounds left by the events of 1984 have remained for the Sikh community across the world and fuel ongoing support for Khalistan and Sikh self-determination in India.
The aftermath of 1984 saw an influx of Sikhs seeking asylum in Canada out of fear of persecution in Punjab. It was this fear of voicing one’s support for Sikh separatism in India that led to the Khalistan movement gaining such popularity abroad, including within the largest Sikh diaspora in Canada.
Amidst the waves of Sikh migration to Canada, a troubling narrative began to unfold as the Government of India took action against individuals involved in Khalistani activism, branding them as “terrorists” and “extremists.” This characterization was solidified after the Air India Flight 182 bombing on June 23, 1985, the deadliest terrorist attack in Canadian history, which took the lives of 329 passengers including 268 Canadian citizens. Investigations suspected the involvement of Sikh separatists affiliated with a fringe faction of the Khalistan movement known as Babbar Khalsa. However, with a fraught investigation spanning over two decades, the tragedy culminated in mistrust between Canada and India on this topic and the acquittal of two of the accused Sikh separatists.
This case remains contentious, as one of the two men acquitted in the Air India bombing, Ripudaman Singh Malik, was assassinated in British Columbia in July 2022. A CBC Fifth Estate documentary provided evidence to suggest that Indian interference was once again at play. While some posit that the Air India bombing was part of India’s state-sponsored smear campaign to discredit Sikh activism, it remains a divisive issue among Sikhs themselves, and notably between Sikhs and Hindus.
Today, Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) has been increasingly linked to overt foreign interference tactics. These tactics include withholding visas, online harassment, rampant misinformation and threats to the lives of Sikh activists like Nijjar. The goal is to suppress political dissent, even when it occurs abroad. In response, the Canadian government launched a public inquiry in the aftermath of Nijjar’s death to investigate foreign interference on Canadian soil.
Understanding the impact of foreign interference requires direct engagement with the communities most affected. Too often, people use the term South Asian as a broad label, overlooking the vast diversity of identities and opinions that exist within this community. These differences are crucial for understanding who is most vulnerable to foreign interference and how they can be best protected. As members of the “South Asian” diaspora find themselves caught in the middle of this ongoing diplomatic strife, a survey of Canadians casts light on important intragroup religious identities and the role these play in South Asian–Canadian public opinion.
Within the context of Nijjar’s assassination, data were collected via an original survey, sampling 1,313 Canadians (provided by Dynata) between September 25 and October 2, 2023. This survey gathered an oversample of Canadians who identify as “South Asian” and of people who live in British Columbia, as this is where the extrajudicial killing occurred. The results of the survey analysis found that religious identities (such as being a Sikh or a Hindu) are important indicators of public opinion on foreign interference in Canada.
When comparing concern for Indian foreign interference in Canadian elections and society, Sikhs in Canada are more concerned about Indian interference than Hindus. Even when compared to other Canadians outside these two religious groups, Hindu Canadians are less worried about India’s interference in Canada overall. As the assassination of Nijjar was an event that directly impacted the Sikh community, it is unsurprising that Sikhs are more concerned with Indian interference, with this event reinforcing fears of India’s transnational repression in their community.
When respondents were asked their thoughts and opinions “about the Government of Canada announcing that the Government of India ordered an assassination on Canadian soil,” 35.4 per cent of Sikh respondents supported the Canadian government’s actions, compared to just 13.1 per cent of Hindus. Nearly half (46.3 per cent) of all Hindu respondents felt sceptical or negative about Trudeau’s response, while only 20.4 per cent of Sikhs felt the same way. Some Sikhs reported fear in expressing their opinions, while some Hindus echoed narratives from Indian state media, such as claims that Trudeau was pandering for votes or that Canada was harbouring extremists. Many respondents, regardless of religious identity, felt that more investigation and evidence were needed before taking a firm stance.
The analysis highlights a crucial point: diaspora communities are not monolithic. Religious, political and historical differences shape their perspectives in ways that broad labels such as South Asian or Indian fail to capture. Importantly, religious identities are just one way of approaching this. There are many cleavages within diasporic communities as they pertain to foreign interference, and beyond, that must be considered.
One thing is clear: as Canadian politics becomes increasingly intertwined with the politics of Canada’s diasporic communities, we must move beyond generalizations and broad labels to engage with these groups on a deeper level. Understanding these complexities isn’t just important – it’s essential for protecting Canadian sovereignty and democracy, and our most vulnerable communities.
