Canada recently acknowledged that it strategically leaked sensitive information to The Washington Post about alleged criminal activities by Indian officials in Canada, which have been linked to the withdrawal of Indian High Commissioner Sanjay Verma and five other diplomats from the country. Canada initially stated it “expelled” these diplomats after India refused to waive their diplomatic immunity amid accusations of involvement in criminal actions against Canadian citizens associated with pro-Khalistani separatism.
National Security Advisor Nathalie Drouin revealed the leak during a parliamentary panel session, explaining that it was intended to counter perceived misinformation from India. She referred to it as a “strategic decision” to partner with an “international news outlet that had already published on the subject,” aiming to provide a record that aligned with Canada’s perspective on the matter. The Globe and Mail, a leading Canadian newspaper, had also identified Drouin and Deputy Foreign Minister David Morrison as key figures who briefed the American media on these allegations.
Central to this controversy is the serious accusation that India’s Home Minister Amit Shah authorized attacks on Canadian Sikhs who are aligned with the pro-Khalistan movement, which advocates for an independent Sikh state. This allegation was included in the Washington Post report, drawing significant international attention. During the parliamentary hearing, Deputy Foreign Minister Morrison acknowledged that he had confirmed Shah’s alleged involvement to the Post reporter, although he emphasized that he did not volunteer the information himself. Instead, he confirmed it only when directly questioned. Morrison recounted, “The journalist called me and asked if it was that person. I confirmed it was that person,” but provided no further elaboration.
This leak is an unconventional step in diplomatic relations, where countries typically navigate sensitive allegations through private diplomatic channels. By involving a major media outlet, Canada appears to have chosen a distinct approach, perhaps in an effort to strengthen its stance and convey the gravity of the accusations against India on the world stage. This action has also underscored Canada’s commitment to defending its perspective amidst India’s consistent denials of the allegations.
For Canada, the accusations surrounding the Indian officials touch on an important issue of sovereignty and safety for its citizens. The victim was reportedly a Canadian citizen involved in pro-Khalistan activities, a cause that has often strained relations between India and Canada. India considers the Khalistan movement a threat to its national unity and has frequently voiced concerns about diaspora communities in Canada, which India believes support separatist elements.
The implications of Canada’s media-focused approach are significant, with India responding by halting visa issuance for Canadians, leading to further deterioration in diplomatic relations. Analysts suggest that while Canada’s decision to leak sensitive information to the media underscores the seriousness of its position, it also risks deepening the existing rift between the two countries. This escalation has highlighted the tension between India’s concerns over secessionist movements abroad and Canada’s support for free speech and assembly rights, which Canada maintains apply to its Sikh diaspora community.
In shifting from closed-door diplomacy to a public media strategy, Canada has taken an assertive step to assert its stance and refute what it perceives as disinformation. The long-term impact of this action on India-Canada relations remains to be seen, but both countries face pressure to manage the diplomatic fallout and seek a path forward to prevent further deterioration in their relationship.
