External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has sharply criticized Canada amid escalating diplomatic tensions between the two countries. Speaking at the NDTV World Summit, he described Canada's actions as indicative of a "double standard," stating that this term is "a very mild word" for what Canada is doing in its diplomatic dealings with India.

Jaishankar highlighted the contrasting treatment of diplomats, noting that Canada has requested Indian diplomats to undergo police inquiries while allowing its own diplomats in India to operate without similar scrutiny. He emphasized that Canadian diplomats are active in gathering intelligence and profiling individuals in India, which he argues is not reciprocated in Canada.

He criticized Canada's stance on freedom of speech, pointing out that threats against Indian officials are often dismissed under this pretext, while minor criticisms of Canadian officials are labelled as foreign interference. This inconsistency, according to Jaishankar, reflects a biased approach to diplomatic relations.

The remarks come in the wake of heightened tensions following allegations made by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau linking Indian officials to the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen and Khalistani separatist. In response to these allegations, India has expelled several Canadian diplomats and recalled its own High Commissioner from Canada.

Jaishankar also referenced the historical backdrop of India-Canada relations, mentioning past incidents such as the 1985 Air India bombing, which continues to influence current perceptions and interactions between the two nations.

What Specific Actions Did Canada Take That Jaishankar Considers A Double Standard

EAM S Jaishankar has identified several specific actions by Canada that he considers indicative of a double standard in diplomatic relations:

1. Police Inquiry Request: Canada requested that India subject its High Commissioner to a police inquiry. In response, India chose to withdraw its High Commissioner and other diplomats from Canada, highlighting the perceived inconsistency in how each country treats its diplomats.

2. Information Gathering: Jaishankar criticized the fact that Canadian diplomats in India are allowed to collect sensitive information about India's military and police, as well as profile individuals, while Indian diplomats face restrictions when attempting to gather information relevant to their safety and security in Canada.

3. Freedom of Speech Vs Foreign Interference: He pointed out the hypocrisy in Canada's stance on freedom of speech. When threats against Indian officials are made, they are often dismissed as freedom of speech. Conversely, if an Indian journalist makes a comment about a Canadian official, it is labelled as foreign interference.

4. Handling of Terrorism/Extremism: Jaishankar noted Canada's reluctance to act against extremist elements operating within its borders that pose threats to India, contrasting this with the strict scrutiny Indian diplomats face.