India and Canada have targeted to increase bilateral trade to $50 billion by 2030.
| Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto

Suhasini Haidar: You took charge of India-Canada ties at a time when relations hit rock bottom. Would you call yourself the reset ambassador?

It’s taken us some time to get here. It’s been over a year since Prime Minister Modi was invited to the G7 summit at Kananaskis in Alberta. But we have built momentum. I happened to arrive at the time that we started this reset, and now we have gone well beyond a reset. We are in a kind of dangerous time globally. We have two very hot wars going on (the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the West Asia conflict). We’ve got trade disruptions going on. We’ve got climate change. We’ve got AI, the challenge and opportunity. And it happens to be that this period in which we are re-establishing our relationship is the one that works the best for us. In all of the 80 years or so that we have had diplomatic relations, I don’t think we have ever had an environment which draws us together in that same way.

Suhasini Haidar: Do you see a big announcement round the corner? Prime Minister Narendra Modi is heading to North America in December for the G20 summit in the U.S. Do you expect his first bilateral visit in more than a decade this year?

Yes, a continuing string of events over the last year will culminate this year, we expect, in the visit of Prime Minister Modi to Canada. The two Prime Ministers, when Prime Minister [Mark] Carney came here in March, set out this kind of road map in a joint statement. I think it has 50 or more deliverables and we are trying to fulfil those commitments. There are commercial deals in the offing. There’s a broader range of areas where we are doing things together, for example, in defence. So, it’ll become a bit more tangible to the average person. In October, we have the largest trade mission coming to Mumbai and Bengaluru.

Suhasini Haidar: Have Canada-India trade relations been spurred by the Donald Trump administration’s actions? And will the push remain once Canada and the U.S. sort out their problems and go back to normal?

A lot of people ask that question. The Canada-U.S. trade deal is a negotiation and there’s no question we will get there at some point. Mr. Trump is a hard bargainer. Well, so are we. That’s why the Prime Minister pulled out of talks that were going to produce a deal that wasn’t good enough for us. The pressures that we are getting from the U.S., yes, have accelerated certain things in Canada, but already Canada was shifting. The polling, the recent byelections we had, all demonstrate that across the country, from one end to the other, Canadians actually support the direction that we are taking. We can see that we had too many eggs in one basket. We don’t want that degree of dependence. We want to diversify. And I think it will be good for India and the relationship with India because at the top, at the political level, the two Prime Ministers have a good chemistry. They have met four times over the last year. There’s a lot of political eye-to-eye view at this point. I think even if there were changes in government, that would survive this.

Sharad Raghavan: Can you estimate what level of progress we are at on the trade deal? What are the sticking points?

Canada is the ninth biggest economy in the world. India is the fourth biggest, and we should have a lot more trade. While the trade itself is rather modest, we generate a lot of employment and investment. Canadian pension funds and other big institutional investors have invested about $80 billion (U.S. dollars) in India. That makes us, along with Singapore and the UAE, the largest investors in your country, which is kind of funny – little, tiny countries in this big country, and we are the biggest investors. There are some tax issues, but generally speaking, they (Canadian investors) are very bullish on India. On the CEPA, the free trade agreement, we are now going to have the fourth round of discussions here in Delhi in a few days’ time. Previously, we discussed for 12 years, and we got no trade agreement. This time, we started in March 2026. We’ve probably done more in these six months than we did in those 12 years. That looks like pretty good math. Our hope is that we get there by the time of a Modi visit to Canada, which would mean achieving this in about nine months [since March]. That’s like a child – we hope this is a really nice baby.

Canadian High Commissioner to India Christopher Cooter being presented a memento by Varghese K. George, The Hindu’s Resident Editor, New Delhi. The Hindu’s Diplomatic Affairs Editor Suhasini Haider, and S. Ramanujam, The Hindu’s Assistant Vice President, Finance Administration, are also seen. 
| Photo Credit:
SUSHIL KUMAR VERMA

Varghese K. George: In which sectors could India and Canada enhance their bilateral cooperation in trade and meet the $1-trillion investment goal?

Canada has huge amounts of natural resources and technology that would be very apt in the Indian setting. Take nuclear, for example. We have been cooperating on nuclear since the 1950s. So, most of your reactors are based on Canadian CANDU (Canada Deuterium Uranium) models. Eighteen of India’s 24 reactors are actually CANDU-based. We are looking at different types of technologies, different kinds of reactors, smaller ones, medium-sized ones, and then the whole cycle, right up to the decommissioning of other plants. I mean, we have got the things that you actually need, like energy. Canada is the fourth largest producer of oil, fifth largest in LPG, fifth largest in LNG. We have 20% of the world’s tungsten. We are No. 1 in potash, No. 2 or 3 in titanium. We are the only G7 country that can produce batteries for EVs (electric vehicles).

Saptaparno Ghosh: Why has the hydrocarbon trade between the two countries not really picked up?

On fossil fuels, what Canada lacks, which the U.S. has, is enough west coast ports. India has got some Canadian oil through the Gulf ports of the U.S. as well, but we have just completed the TMX (Trans Mountain Expansion Project) pipeline in 2024, and it can produce about 9,00,000 to 1,000,000 barrels a day now, and that’s coming out in Vancouver. Vancouver is a little bit shallow for some of the largest ships, so we’ve got to look at getting deep water ports. We have just announced another pipeline project that will go to deep water, and that will allow us to really have economies of scale, which we don’t have yet on the west coast of Canada for India.

Suhasini Haidar: The more you describe this almost utopian state of the relationship, we have to see the contrast to exactly three years ago, when then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau came to India for the G20 summit and had a tense meeting with PM Modi over the investigation into the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. How are security talks progressing now, given that the officials involved are the same – the Canadian officials who accused the Indian security apparatus of carrying out a killing in Canada, and the Indian officials who accused Canada of harbouring terrorists?

I don’t want to say the issue [over the Nijjar killing] is gone. I want to say that we have made progress, but relationships require investment. They require maintenance. We have had a security dialogue established. To tell you the truth, I was at the first meeting of that security dialogue, and it was like everybody took a deep breath. Where are we going to go with this? Are we going to continue what we had before, or are we going to go forward? Prime Minister Carney inviting Prime Minister Modi to Canada was a big leap. That took some political courage, but it was an important step forward and I think that risk was worth it because it set the stage for this discussion. It’s going to continue in a way that benefits both countries, not only for the overall bilateral relationship. I think there are some issues that actually go beyond the two countries. Scam centres, for example, in south-east Asia; fentanyl, which is a plague in Canada. We want to prevent precursors coming into North America. Things like that. I’m sure there are other areas. So, you know, as we calm down, establish trust, realise who we are, make that connection at the official level, this whole process is moving forward. But it requires maintenance. And we never know, something will happen, somebody will say something. But now we have got the channels of communication to manage it. We are putting in place mechanisms to deal with future difficulties. It’s not simply being naive and saying, well, let’s just ignore what happened. [We are saying] let’s take into account what happened and let’s build from that to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

Suhasini Haidar: Why is the trial taking so long? It has been three years since Mr. Trudeau stood in Parliament and accused Indian officials of involvement, surely some evidence should have been produced by now?

I can’t comment on that. It’s a court process. Every case is different. What I can say is other things have happened in Canada, which have improved the atmosphere. Declaring the [Lawrence] Bishnoi gang a terrorist organisation, for example. We have a financial crimes task force that is looking at some of these issues. We have taken firmer action on extortion cases that have been affecting the Indian community in Canada.

Suhasini Haidar: The High Commissioner of India, your counterpart at the time, was declared a PNG (persona non grata) along with other diplomats. If they were indeed guilty of something, we should have heard some evidence by now. If not, does Canada owe India an apology?

Well, again, it’s a judicial process, so we’ll see what comes out at the other end. And that could take, I don’t know how long. I have no idea when the date for the trial, actually, if it’s even been set. So, there’s nothing more I can say about that.

Vijaita Singh: As part of Operation Hardball, which was announced in July, has India provided any specific information on how Lawrence Bishnoi was running this gang from jail because his lawyer has said he is in solitary confinement and does not have access to any communication devices?

I can’t answer that question. I don’t know what Lawrence Bishnoi is able to do. The joint operation was a good example of cooperation. It wasn’t just India-Canada but also the Europeans and the Americans working together on a common problem. And I think the outcomes are, again, part of this, at least between India and Canada, part of this overall improvement in the way we work together to solve problems and to make both our countries more safe for our citizens. We also declared the Bishnoi gang a terrorist organisation. That’s a pretty strong step. I think there’s tangible results happening for the communities in Canada, so it is going in the right direction.

Vijaita Singh: Have you sought Lawrence Bishnoi’s extradition and has India sought the extradition of his Canada-based aide Satinderjeet Singh alias Goldy Brar?

Not to my knowledge.

Suhasini Haidar: Another sore point in India is over students, where Canada is cutting down on visas, raising guarantees required, and making education and housing more expensive. Does Canada want less Indian students now?

Look, we remain the host to more Indian students than any other country in the world – more than the U.S. – at about 4,27,000 students. We think they are a great bridge between the two countries. What we had found for a period was that there were just too many students, not just Indian students, students from all kinds of countries, and we couldn’t accommodate them. Housing was a problem in certain smaller communities. Some of the colleges, frankly, took too many students and too much of their income; too much of their revenue was coming from foreign students. They were overdoing it. And there were fraud cases. So, the rules were clamped down. They were tightened. But the signal seems to have gone out that somehow Canada’s closed to any students. And that’s not at all the case. We welcome all good students. It’s true that the financial requirements have gone up, but they go up with inflation. I can tell you, having spoken to the university presidents, including of our very top universities; they all say the same thing – we would love to have more great Indian students. Now, Prime Minister Modi has said he would like universities to come in and open bricks-and-mortar campuses, and they’re looking at that too, but already there are joint degrees and joint programmes that are up and running.

A.M. Jigeesh: Are there specific Canadian universities that are going to open in India?

We have had a lot of universities come through here. They have met government [officials], but they are also speaking to institutions, the IITs, and some of the new up-and-coming private universities. Yes, they are looking at campuses in India. McGill [University] made an announcement when Prime Minister Carney was in India, and 13 new MoUs between different universities, Canadian universities, and Indian universities were also announced.

Suhasini Haidar: How does Canada really see India’s hosting of the BRICS summit? Given the Western consensus against Russia, what are your hopes from President Vladimir Putin’s visit here?

We do recognise that the Global South is a more and more important factor in global geopolitics. India is hosting BRICS, it hosted the G20, which we are part of. We have had India at our G7 summit. India’s practically a member of the G7, frankly. It is true we have some differences with some of the people that will be coming to your summit. But Prime Minister Carney has been very clear that we will not refuse to talk to people. That doesn’t mean we have to agree with them, but we will have a broader approach to discussions with people because we have to do that. We look forward to seeing what the outcomes of the BRICS summit are.

Suhasini Haidar: Do you see a role for India as a mediator in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

I think anything that brings peace would be welcome. It’s been five years. So, if India can help achieve that, absolutely. And on any other conflicts that are out there as well. India has a credibility and a weight; it is the world’s largest nation by population. And if you can use your gravitas, your influence to bring about outcomes that we all want, then we would say more power to you.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, left, meets with Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi, during the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France on June 16, 2026.
| Photo Credit: AP

A courtroom sketch of Tahawwur Rana in a federal court in Chicago. Ahead of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit to India, the government is pushing to revoke the citizenship of Tahawwur Rana Hussain, accused of playing a key role in the 2008 Mumbai terror attack.
| Photo Credit: AP

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi for a discussion on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, on November 23, 2025
| Photo Credit: ANI

Union Minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal. File.
| Photo Credit: PTI

India’s Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri (L) with Canada’s Minister for International Trade Maninder Sidhu on November 12, 2025. Photo: X/@@HardeepSPuri

New Delhi:

The Centre has informed the Parliament that Canada has presented “no evidence whatsoever in support of the serious allegations” claiming that Indian citizens were involved in crimes committed in the country.

Congress MP Manish Tewari today asked the government in the Lok Sabha, whether it has taken note of the development in the US and Canada over alleged criminal activity involving Indians, to which Minister of State in the External Affairs Ministry, Kirti Vardhan Singh said, “Government is aware of the allegations about the involvement of Indian nationals in purported acts or intent in the US and Canada.”

“As part of ongoing security cooperation with the United States, certain inputs shared by the US side pertaining to the nexus between organized criminals, gun runners, terrorists and others that impinge on India’s national security interests as well are being examined by a High-Level Enquiry Committee that has been constituted for this purpose,” he added.

“In so far as Canada is concerned, it has presented no evidence whatsoever in support of the serious allegations it has chosen to level,” the minister informed the Parliament.

Mr Tiwari further asked the Centre, about the impact of these allegations on our bilateral relations with the US and Canada; whether the government engaged with the countries diplomatically and the measures taken by the Centre to ensure the safety and security of Indian citizens in the countries in case of “of any potential fallout of these matters”.

Mr Singh in his response said, “In addition, its public narrative on this issue appears to be in service of an anti-India separatist agenda. Persisting with such a narrative can only be harmful for any stable bilateral relationship. Government have therefore repeatedly urged the Canadian authorities to take action against anti-India elements operating from their soil.”

“The welfare, safety and security of Indian nationals who are living, working and studying in the US and Canada remains of utmost importance to the Government of India. Issues faced by Indian nationals in the US and Canada are brought to the attention of relevant authorities, whenever they arise, for swift redressal,” he added.

India’s relations with Canada deteriorated after Justin Trudeau made allegations that Indian agents could be involved in Hardeep Singh Nijjar’s killing, leading to strong resistance from New Delhi and the expelling of diplomats from both sides.

Meanwhile, the US alleged that Vikash Yadav, also known as Vikas Yadav, a former Indian intelligence officer once associated with the Research and Analysis Wing, or R&AW – was the shadowy central figure in a failed plot to kill Gurpatwant Pannun, a Khalistani terrorist and founder of the banned Sikhs For Justice.

The purported plot involved another Indian, Nikhil Gupta, who was extradited from Czechia to the US in June.
 

The story so far:

Recently, Canada and India each expelled their top diplomats due to the fallout from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegation last year that there were possible links of Indian intelligence with the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in Canada. India had categorised Nijjar as a Khalistani terrorist (he had faced no criminal charges in Canada, but was put on a no-fly list and his bank accounts were frozen). The row seems to be escalating Canadian Hindu-Sikh tensions.

Is there a historical context?

India’s long-held complaint has been that Canada acts as a safe haven for Khalistani separatists/extremists. Its biggest grouse has been Canada’s failure in preventing the 1985 Air India bombing (perpetrated by Canada-based Khalistani extremists) and the lack of support in subsequent investigations.

The bombing killed 329 people (including children), the biggest airline terrorist act before 9/11.

Is there a Sikh ‘vote bank’ in Canada?

Vote bank is an Indian terminology unfamiliar to Canadians. Sikhs constitute only 2% of Canada’s population but their political clout is far disproportionate because of geographic concentration. At one point, there were four Sikh ministers in the Trudeau cabinet. Most of the Sikh MPs are from Trudeau’s Liberal Party. However, there is no public evidence to state that the only motive for the Trudeau government to lay these accusations against India is to pander to Sikh voters (of whom Khalistanis are only a minority).

What we have as ‘evidence’ is the Trudeau government dropping the words Sikh and Khalistani from a government report which identified, for the first time, Khalistani extremism amongst the top five terrorism threats in Canada; the Canadian parliament marking Nijjar’s killing by holding a moment of silence; Mr. Trudeau and other party leaders attending Sikh community festivals which featured Khalistan flags and the glorification of Talwinder Parmar, the Air India bombing mastermind; and also drawing support from known Khalistani sympathisers. But all parties, not just the Liberal Party, have indulged in these kinds of acts. While Mr. Trudeau and his government have affirmed the territorial integrity of India, they have not explicitly condemned Khalistani extremism. But this ‘vote bank’ is not as India perceives it. In surveys, 54% of Sikhs in Canada intend to vote for the Conservative Party and 21% for Trudeau’s party in the next elections.

The Trudeau government has already been pilloried about its failures in countering Chinese interference in Canadian elections. A public inquiry into foreign interference has currently been instituted by the Canadian government. Therefore, an accusation such as this could bolster its weak image.

But the Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, which exposed Chinese interference and was about to publish the allegations regarding India last year (before Mr. Trudeau went public with it), and other news outlets, have criticised Mr. Trudeau only for using a serious national security issue for political grandstanding, rather than manufacturing the case to pander to Sikh voters as India alleges.

Editorial |Canadian frostbite: On the India-Canada diplomatic war

Are there political and cultural misunderstandings?

There are misunderstandings on both sides. Canadian scholars have argued that despite the fact that a vast majority of the victims of the Air India bombing were Canadian citizens (of Indian descent), the Canadian government, for a long time, had seen it as a “foreign tragedy” and the victims as not “real Canadians”, clearly betraying systemic racism. Both Conservative and Liberal governments treated the victims shoddily until an official apology was issued by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2010. This racial prejudice is also emphasised by the fact that despite it being Canada’s worst terrorist act, 90% Canadians had little or no knowledge of it, and more than 50% under the age of 35 had never even heard of it. Further, as no Khalistani terrorist act has been perpetrated in Canada since then, the public is unaffected, and ignorant of Khalistani activism.

The Indian public, conversely, assumes that institutions work the same as in India. The rule of law is enforced in a more systematic manner in Canada than in India. Canadian police independence is guarded, and whenever there were attempts by politicians to interfere illegally, there has been a huge public outcry. Ujjal Dosanjh, a former Liberal cabinet minister, who himself was subject to life-threatening attacks by Khalistani extremists, has argued that while Canadian politicians have allowed Khalistani ideas to flourish, the law enforcement has not been soft on Khalistani terrorism. While the Air India investigations failed to a large extent, the evidence on hand does not suggest, as believed in India, that they were politically motivated to support the Khalistani extremists. The public inquiry that went into the Air India bombing, instead, was scathing about the security and investigation failures and termed them: “inconceivable, incomprehensible, indefensible, incompetence.”

Additionally, India is angry that Khalistan referendums are held in Canada and that Khalistani parades glorify the assassination of Indira Gandhi. However, freedom of speech and expression is a much guarded value in Canada and there is a high threshold on what constitutes as hate speech that can be prosecuted. Referendums and non-violent separatism advocacy are legal in Canada, and referendums have been held to seek the separation of Quebec from Canada. Burning the Canadian flag or the Bible in themselves are not criminal.

However, Canadian critics have argued for stronger legal vigilance around Khalistani hate speech especially when threats are issued.

What are the legal complexities?

India’s extradition requests, for those who it terms as Khalistani terrorists, are very often denied not due to political reasons but because they do not meet Canadian legal standards. Western democracies are wary of extraditions to countries with much poorer human rights records, where political dissenters and opponents are jailed for prolonged periods without criminal culpability, and without trial and bail, especially under anti-terror laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Other reasons include the weakness of evidence solely relying on statements from the accused in custody, and (as journalist Praveen Swami has noted) the inadmissibility of Indian intelligence evidence in courts abroad as it is not gathered under the Indian Telegraph Act and the Information Technology Act. Only six wanted individuals have been extradited to India from Canada from 2002-2020 (this number is 10 for the U.S, and just one for the U.K.).

Notably, India has not managed to secure the extraditions of Mehul Choksi, Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi and Vijay Mallya (the last three from the U.K. with which India has friendly relations).

What role has the media played?

The Canadian media has asked some tough questions of the government and presented India’s version about the dangers of Khalistani diaspora politics. Conversely, the TV media in India, while rightly questioning Western hypocrisy on some matters, has substituted journalism with jingoism, and uncritically pushed the government’s narrative. It has spread disinformation that nobody was convicted for the Air India bombings (Inderjit Singh Reyat, the bomb-maker, spent nearly 30 years in jail); that Mr. Trudeau “admitted” that there was no evidence for his accusations, etc.

Parallely, the Globe and Mail (and other newspapers) which had asked Mr. Trudeau to provide more facts on his allegations last year, is presently attacking him for being soft on the “overtly hostile” actions of the Indian government, and for “curiously unwilling to acknowledge that India is, if not an enemy quite yet, certainly an adversary.” The reason is that this time around, the revelations are from the Canadian police and are not just “credible allegations” but “strong evidence.” It remains to be seen if it passes muster in the courts.

Nissim Mannathukkaren is Professor, International Development Studies, Dalhousie University, Canada

New Delhi:

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday evening strongly condemned the “deliberate attack on a Hindu temple in Canada” – referring to a shocking incident last week when men breached the gates of a temple in Brampton, Ontario, while the Indian High Commission held a consular camp.

The PM also criticised “cowardly attempts” to intimidate Indian diplomats in that country.

“Such acts of violence will never weaken India’s resolve. We expect the Canadian government to ensure justice and uphold the rule of law,” he said in a short post on X.

The Prime Minister’s social media post comes hours after the External Affairs Ministry said the Indian government “condemns acts of violence perpetrated by extremists and separatists”, and called on its Canadian counterpart to ensure all places of worship are adequately protected.

I strongly condemn the deliberate attack on a Hindu temple in Canada. Equally appalling are the cowardly attempts to intimidate our diplomats. Such acts of violence will never weaken India’s resolve. We expect the Canadian government to ensure justice and uphold the rule of law.

— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) November 4, 2024

“We also expect that those indulging in such violence will be prosecuted,” spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said in a statement issued this afternoon. Mr Jaiswal said the Indian government remains “deeply concerned” about the and security of its citizens in Canada.

READ | “Deeply Concerned About Indians’ Safety”: Govt On Canada Temple Attack

The ministry’s response came after the incident at the temple and a clash between those protesting that attack and the police cops. A video showed a cop assaulting a protester.

Earlier, the High Commission said the “violent disruption” to the consular camp came despite an advance request for strong security measures, and that it feared for Indian citizens’ safety.

The violence was condemned also by Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose relationship with India is in the doldrums following repeated, and unsubstantiated, claims about “agents” of Delhi involved in the killing of Khalistani leader Hardeep Nijjar, branded a terrorist by India.

Indo-Canadian MP Chandra Arya said a “red line” had been crossed and Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown called for punishment to the “greatest extent of law” for those who participated in the violence.

The violence comes amid ongoing diplomatic back-and-forth between India and Canada, including two rounds of expulsion of diplomats. On Saturday, Ottawa named Delhi as a cyberthreat adversary, suggesting state-sponsored actors could be spying against it. India firmly dismissed the claim.

READ | India A “Cyber Adversary”, Says Trudeau Govt, Delhi Shreds Claim

All of this comes after Canada accused India of orchestrating the 2023 killing, in Vancouver, of 45-year-old naturalised Canadian citizen Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a prominent Khalistan activist.

Last year, a Hindu temple in Windsor, also in Ontario, was defaced, sparking widespread calls for action from both Canadian and Indian officials. Similar earlier incidents in Brampton saw temples targeted as well, drawing strong reactions from the Indian community in Canada.

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.