Jaishankar’s America Speech: Canada’s Embassy Bombing Demands Attention

Amidst mounting tensions between India and Canada, India’s External Affairs Minister, Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, delivered a notable address during a press conference held in Washington. His remarks shed light on India’s unwavering commitment to freedom of expression while emphasizing the importance of responsible exercise of this fundamental right.

Dr. Jaishankar’s statement came in response to growing concerns and debates regarding freedom of expression and its boundaries. He unequivocally asserted that India, as a sovereign nation, does not require external counsel or advice on matters pertaining to freedom of expression. This declaration underlines India’s strong belief in its democratic values and legal framework that protect and promote this vital aspect of individual liberty.

Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, India’s External Affairs Minister, has drawn attention to concerning incidents involving India’s diplomatic mission in Canada. His remarks underscore the gravity of these incidents and the need to address them with due seriousness.

Dr. Jaishankar’s statement highlights the disturbing nature of these incidents, which include the throwing of smoke bombs at the Indian mission, threats directed towards diplomats, and the placement of posters targeting diplomatic personnel at various locations. These actions not only pose a direct threat to the safety and security of Indian diplomats but also raise significant questions about the respect for international norms and diplomatic immunity.

Jaishankar Stated That if Anyone Has Any Concrete Information, Share It

Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar has extended an open invitation for cooperation and dialogue in response to recent incidents involving India’s diplomatic mission in Canada. His statements emphasize the importance of adherence to international norms and obligations, particularly under the Vienna Convention, which dictates the responsibilities of host countries in providing a safe environment for foreign diplomatic missions to operate.

Dr. Jaishankar’s call for concrete information indicates India’s willingness to engage constructively with Canadian authorities to address the reported incidents. It underscores the need for transparency and cooperation between nations in matters concerning the safety and security of diplomatic personnel and missions.

The Minister also raises a pertinent question about how other nations would have responded if similar incidents had occurred against their diplomatic missions. This inquiry underscores the universal principles of diplomacy and the expectation that nations will uphold the same standards of security and respect for diplomatic personnel regardless of the country involved.

Dr. Jaishankar’s assertion that this issue transcends bilateralism and pertains to established international rules and conventions highlights the broader implications of these incidents. It reinforces the idea that nations should adhere to the principles of diplomatic immunity and safety as outlined in international agreements.

Jaishankar Stated That Reality is Different From Rhetoric

Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar has provided a candid assessment of the situation, emphasizing the importance of aligning actions with words and principles when it comes to matters of territorial integrity and non-interference in internal affairs. These remarks reflect India’s commitment to upholding the principles of international relations and diplomacy.

In his discussions with a think tank in Washington, Dr. Jaishankar highlighted that discussions on these issues have been held with the United States, reinforcing India’s position on the importance of respecting territorial integrity and refraining from interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign nations. The Minister’s assertion underscores the necessity for consistency and integrity in international discourse, particularly when the actual situation differs from the rhetoric employed.

This statement follows a previous remark made by Dr. Jaishankar, where he emphasized the need to address terrorism, extremism, and violence without political convenience. These comments allude to the broader context of tensions between India and Canada, stemming from allegations made by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau regarding the Indian government’s involvement in the killing of Khalistan terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar. India has vehemently refuted these allegations, terming them as baseless.

An Issue Was Raised About Nijjar by the US Foreign Minister

During a meeting between India’s Foreign Minister, Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, and the United States’ Foreign Minister, Antony Blinken, the issue of Khalistan terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar’s killing was brought to the forefront. This discussion took place late at night, according to Indian time, and was later confirmed by a US official, as reported by Reuters.

The fact that the issue was raised during this high-level diplomatic meeting underscores its significance and the importance attached to it by both India and the United States. Additionally, it reflects the mutual commitment to addressing security concerns and promoting cooperation in matters related to counterterrorism.

America’s Stand on the India-canada Dispute So Far

The United States’ stance on the India-Canada dispute involving the accusation of India’s involvement in the killing of Khalistan leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar has evolved over a series of statements and actions:

• September 18: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made the accusation against India. In response, the United States expressed its interest in seeing an impartial investigation into the matter. This initial stance emphasized the importance of a fair and unbiased inquiry into the allegations.
• September 22: US National Security Adviser (NSA) Jack Sullivan voiced support for Canada’s efforts to investigate India in the murder case. Sullivan emphasized that no nation should receive special privileges in such investigations, regardless of their status or origin. This statement reiterated the call for a thorough and objective inquiry. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken echoed concerns about the allegations made by Prime Minister Trudeau. Blinken emphasized the importance of accountability in the case, reiterating the United States’ interest in a credible investigation into the matter.
• September 24: The New York Times reported that US intelligence agencies had provided assistance to Canada in gathering intelligence related to Nijjar’s assassination. This information enabled Canada to conclude that India was involved. However, it’s worth noting that the intelligence report cited by Canada in its accusation against India was itself collected intelligence.

If He Had to Choose Between India and Canada, a Former Pentagon Official Would Choose India

The remarks by former Pentagon official Michael Rubin highlight the significance of the relationship between the United States and India, as well as his perspective on the ongoing dispute between Canada and India, particularly in light of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegations against India. These statements provide insight into the views of some experts on international relations:

• Importance of India-US Relationship: Rubin’s statement underscores the substantial importance of the relationship between the United States and India. This bilateral relationship has grown in strategic significance over the years, encompassing economic, security, and diplomatic aspects. The recognition of India as a key partner aligns with the broader foreign policy objectives of the United States.
• Assessment of Canada-India Dispute: Rubin’s analogy of the Canada-India dispute being akin to a “fight between an elephant and an ant” suggests his view that the dispute, given its scale and geopolitical implications, could potentially have a more significant impact on Canada than on India. This viewpoint is based on the premise that India’s diplomatic, economic, and geopolitical influence in the region and globally is substantial.
• Consideration of Leadership Dynamics: Rubin’s observation regarding the potential change in leadership and Trudeau’s declining popularity reflects an understanding of how political dynamics can influence foreign policy. Leaders can shape the trajectory of international relationships, and changes in leadership can impact the direction and priorities of a nation’s foreign policy.
• Long-Term Perspective: Rubin’s speculation that the United States may seek to strengthen ties with Canada again after Trudeau leaves office highlights the adaptable nature of international relations. Foreign policy decisions often consider long-term interests, and relationships between nations can evolve over time, depending on leadership, circumstances, and priorities.

On June 18th, Nijjar Was Killed

The tragic incident on June 18, 2023, in British Columbia, Canada, marked the death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, the chief of the Khalistan Tiger Force terrorist organization. Nijjar was targeted and fatally shot by two individuals in the parking lot of a gurdwara. Regrettably, he lost his life on the spot as a result of the attack.

It is important to note that Hardeep Singh Nijjar had been declared a fugitive by India, with a reward of Rs 10 lakh offered for information leading to his apprehension. His alleged involvement in terrorism and his status as a fugitive were matters of significant concern for Indian authorities.