Trudeau’s claim that Canada has no "smoking gun" to prove India’s alleged involvement sparked a fresh wave of criticism, as officials in Ottawa had previously implied a more definitive link. India’s foreign ministry, responding to the developments, reiterated its earlier stance that the accusations are politically motivated and part of a broader campaign to undermine India’s global standing. The Canadian Prime Minister’s acknowledgment that his government lacks hard proof only added to the mounting pressure on Ottawa to clarify its position and substantiate the serious allegations.
Diplomatic relations between India and Canada have deteriorated sharply since Trudeau made his initial public statement about the assassination in mid-September, suggesting Indian agents were involved in the killing of Nijjar, who was designated a terrorist by India. Nijjar, a vocal advocate for Khalistan—a proposed independent Sikh homeland—was shot outside a Sikh temple in British Columbia in June, and his death has since become the flashpoint for a rapidly escalating geopolitical dispute.
Canada’s allegations were met with immediate denials from New Delhi, which expressed outrage over the accusations and warned of their potential to harm bilateral relations. Following Trudeau’s latest remarks, India’s foreign ministry underscored its position once again, pointing to the Canadian government’s lack of substantive evidence. An official from India’s Ministry of External Affairs stated that the accusations were an "unfounded smear campaign" and reiterated calls for Canada to focus on addressing the issue of extremist elements within its borders.
The assassination of Nijjar has prompted widespread protests from Sikh groups across Canada, demanding an international investigation into his death. Trudeau, however, has been facing growing pressure from both domestic political rivals and international observers to provide more clarity on Canada’s intelligence sources and the credibility of the information used to make such a serious allegation against a foreign state.
India has long maintained that Trudeau's government has tolerated the rise of Khalistani separatism within Canada, with Indian officials citing multiple instances where extremist factions have openly propagated anti-India rhetoric. The issue of Sikh separatism has been a major point of contention between the two countries, as India has accused Canadian authorities of turning a blind eye to the activities of individuals and groups supporting the Khalistan movement. India’s National Investigation Agency had been monitoring Nijjar for years due to his alleged involvement in terrorist activities and his role in organizing referendums on Khalistan.
The diplomatic fallout over the assassination has already impacted various aspects of the relationship between the two countries. India temporarily suspended visa services for Canadian nationals in response to Ottawa's initial accusations, citing security concerns at its consulates. Canada, in turn, withdrew several of its diplomats from India, further escalating the standoff. Trade negotiations, which had shown promise in earlier months, have also stalled, with both countries pausing discussions on a proposed trade deal.
Observers have noted that Trudeau's admission of the lack of direct evidence complicates the Canadian government’s position on the matter, as it raises questions about the strength of the intelligence that formed the basis of the accusations. Several political analysts have speculated that the timing of Trudeau’s public statements was influenced by domestic political considerations, particularly given his government's reliance on support from Sikh political factions in key Canadian provinces such as British Columbia and Ontario.
The broader geopolitical implications of this diplomatic conflict have also drawn attention. Western allies of Canada, particularly the United States and the United Kingdom, have expressed concern over the growing tensions, but have largely refrained from taking sides publicly. Washington has indicated that it is in touch with both Ottawa and New Delhi, while encouraging dialogue and restraint. Meanwhile, the ongoing spat has complicated India’s relationship with other members of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance, of which Canada is a part. It remains unclear to what extent, if any, other members of the intelligence alliance were privy to the information used by Canada in its initial accusation.
As the diplomatic rift deepens, the international community continues to monitor the developments closely. India’s growing geopolitical influence, particularly through its leadership role in organizations like the G20, has made the stakes even higher for both countries. Analysts suggest that while the diplomatic fallout may be manageable in the short term, long-term repercussions could emerge if the standoff is not resolved through diplomatic channels.
Trudeau’s statements have also sparked criticism from within Canada, as political opponents argue that the Prime Minister’s handling of the situation has been hasty and has risked Canada’s international credibility. Opposition leader Pierre Poilievre called for greater transparency and urged Trudeau to provide a full accounting of the intelligence behind the allegations. Other critics have pointed to the economic ramifications of deteriorating ties with India, warning that the diplomatic row could hurt Canadian businesses with interests in India, one of the world's fastest-growing economies.