The Enigmatic Indian Dilemma: Navigating America’s Allies and Their Impact

Get valuable updates on The FT View for free

Subscribe to receive a daily digest of myFT, an email summarizing the latest news from The FT View every morning.

No western government wants to engage in a conflict with India. India is regarded as a future market and a crucial counterbalance to China. From Washington to Canberra, and from Tokyo to London, Narendra Modi’s India is being hailed as an important partner. However, the allegations that India may have supported the killing of a Sikh leader on Canadian soil must not be ignored.

The first step is to establish the facts before considering appropriate action. Indian claims that Canada and the UK have been too lenient on Sikh separatists also deserve attention within this process.

This dilemma has arisen since last Monday when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau revealed that Canadian intelligence had “credible allegations” of Indian agents’ involvement in the assassination of a Sikh separatist in Vancouver in June. India has dismissed these allegations as “absurd.” It has since emerged that US President Joe Biden and other Western leaders privately expressed concerns about these claims to Modi, India’s Prime Minister, at the G20 summit this month. If the allegations are verified, they would highlight the consequences, if not the moral jeopardy, of America’s and its allies’ approach in downplaying questions about Modi’s track record.

For nearly a decade, the Hindu nationalist leader was denied a US visa due to “severe violations of religious freedom.” This referred to his alleged failure to prevent communal violence during his tenure as Gujarat’s chief minister. However, since assuming office nine years ago, he has been increasingly embraced by the US and other Western powers. Earlier this year, Modi received grand receptions in Paris and Washington. Modi is seen as a crucial Asian ally at a time when Washington and Beijing have strained relations. In recent years, any Western concerns have been kept hidden. However, as a wise Western policymaker noted, turning a blind eye often leads to an unpleasant surprise.

Western diplomats may argue that the best approach is to limit their response to general expressions of concern. They may contend that maintaining a working relationship with Modi’s government is of utmost importance. Even if Indian involvement in the June killing is confirmed, they might suggest a cooling in official language for a year or so—preferably without any state visits—before returning to normalcy.

Supporters of this position may compare it to the cycle of the relationship with Saudi Arabia after the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents in Istanbul in 2018. The details of Khashoggi’s murder in the Saudi consulate were so clear and shocking that Washington felt compelled to speak out and distance itself from its old ally Riyadh. However, this phase was short-lived, and now Western governments and investors are actively courting Saudi Arabia as if nothing had happened.

Given the geopolitical context, this argument is understandable. However, if it is indeed proven that the Indian government was involved in the killing, ignoring the incident will only encourage New Delhi to act with impunity. It will also reinforce Beijing and Moscow’s argument that the West is utterly hypocritical, a belief that has contributed to the developing world’s indifference to the West’s appeals for support regarding Ukraine.

Foreign policy can be messy, but sometimes, values must take precedence. This is one such case. Due legal process must be followed. Canada should release all the evidence supporting its allegations and resist suggestions to keep it in the shadows. Then, it will be up to Western democracies to decide how to proceed.