top of page

By:

Dr. V.L. Dharurkar

12 February 2025 at 2:53:17 pm

From Frost to Thaw

After years of diplomatic chill, India and Canada have attempted a strategic reset driven as much by geopolitics and trade anxieties as by a desire to repair a damaged partnership. For nearly three years relations between India and Canada resembled a prolonged winter. Yet, the visit of Canada’s Prime Minister, Mark Carney to India at the start of the Month suggests that the thaw may finally have begun. If the past few years were marked by recrimination and mistrust, the present moment hints...

From Frost to Thaw

After years of diplomatic chill, India and Canada have attempted a strategic reset driven as much by geopolitics and trade anxieties as by a desire to repair a damaged partnership. For nearly three years relations between India and Canada resembled a prolonged winter. Yet, the visit of Canada’s Prime Minister, Mark Carney to India at the start of the Month suggests that the thaw may finally have begun. If the past few years were marked by recrimination and mistrust, the present moment hints at a cautious but deliberate reset. Both sides have shown a keenness to replace acrimony with pragmatism. The chill began during the tenure of Justin Trudeau, whose government publicly alleged that Indian agents may have been involved in violent activities on Canadian soil. India rejected the accusations as unfounded and politically motivated. The dispute triggered tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions, the freezing of high-level dialogue and an atmosphere of mutual suspicion. For two countries that had long prided themselves on democratic affinity, shared Commonwealth ties and large diaspora links, the rapid deterioration was remarkable. Canada is home to one of the world’s largest Indian diasporas, numbering well over a million people. Trade and educational links have grown steadily since the late twentieth century. Canadian universities attract tens of thousands of Indian students each year, while Indian professionals and entrepreneurs have contributed significantly to Canada’s economic life. These human connections had long acted as ballast in the relationship. But politics, as ever, can overwhelm social ties. Symbolic Weight Carney’s New Delhi visit therefore carries symbolic weight. A former governor of both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, he has entered politics with a reputation for technocratic competence rather than ideological theatrics. His five-day visit to India, from late February to early March, was carefully choreographed to signal renewal. Beginning in Mumbai, India’s commercial capital, he met industrialists, bankers and policymakers, emphasising economic cooperation as the cornerstone of the revived relationship. India today is among the world’s fastest-growing major economies, with ambitions to expand its industrial base, modernise infrastructure and transition towards cleaner sources of energy. Canada, meanwhile, possesses abundant natural resources, technological expertise and capital. The two economies are complementary in ways that diplomacy had recently obscured. One of the most notable outcomes of the visit was a long-term agreement on uranium supply. Canada’s mining giant Cameco and India’s Department of Atomic Energy concluded a ten-year deal worth roughly $2.6bn to supply more than 20m pounds of uranium. For India, which is expanding its civil nuclear programme to meet rising energy demand while limiting carbon emissions, reliable access to uranium is strategically important. The agreement will help fuel a new generation of small and medium reactors, which India sees as crucial to its energy transition. Canada, for its part, is among the world’s leading producers of uranium. Renewed nuclear cooperation therefore reflects not only diplomatic reconciliation but also the convergence of economic interests. Previous agreements between the two countries had faltered amid political tensions. This time both governments have emphasised implementation and timely delivery. Trade Boost Trade, too, looms large in the reset. Bilateral commerce between India and Canada currently hovers around $10bn to $12bn annually, a modest figure for economies of their scale. Both governments have spoken of raising that number dramatically, potentially to $50bn by the end of the decade. Negotiations on a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), long stalled, have been revived with renewed urgency. Here global geopolitics provides an additional incentive. The increasingly protectionist trade policies of the United States under Donald Trump have unsettled many of Washington’s traditional partners. Tariff threats and economic nationalism have encouraged countries to diversify their commercial relationships. India and Canada, both heavily exposed to the American market, now see advantage in strengthening bilateral trade and investment as a hedge against volatility emanating from Washington. Education and innovation are another pillar of the renewed engagement. Canadian universities are exploring the possibility of establishing campuses in India, enabling Indian students to access Canadian education without leaving the country. Joint research programmes and technological collaboration are expected to deepen intellectual ties that already run deep. Beyond economics lies a broader strategic calculation. The Indo-Pacific has become the central theatre of twenty-first-century geopolitics. As China’s influence expands across Asia, many countries are seeking new partnerships to preserve a balance of power and maintain open sea lanes. India has positioned itself as a leading voice in this effort, promoting a vision of a free, stable and inclusive Indo-Pacific region. Strategic Dynamics Canada, though geographically distant, has begun to pay greater attention to the region’s strategic dynamics. Collaboration with India could therefore form part of a wider network involving countries such as Australia, Japan and New Zealand. For Ottawa, engagement with New Delhi offers a way to remain relevant in Asia’s shifting geopolitical landscape. For India, Canadian support adds another partner to its growing Indo-Pacific coalition. Yet enthusiasm should be tempered with realism. Diplomatic resets are easier to announce than to sustain. The political sensitivities that strained relations in the past have not vanished entirely. Canada’s domestic politics, particularly debates surrounding diaspora activism, remain complex. India, meanwhile, is unlikely to tolerate external criticism on matters it considers internal. Managing these differences will require careful diplomacy and mutual restraint. Nevertheless, the symbolism of the present moment matters. The revival of high-level dialogue, the signing of concrete economic agreements and the visible warmth between leaders all suggest a shared desire to turn the page. In the grand sweep of history, relations between India and Canada have always rested on deeper foundations than temporary political quarrels. If the current reset succeeds, it could transform a once-strained partnership into one of the more promising relationships in the Indo-Pacific era. (The writer is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)

On the Brink

Mamata Banerjee’s cynical brand of communal appeasement has turned West Bengal into a powderkeg of sectarian violence.

West Bengal
West Bengal

Few Indian chief ministers have built a cult of personality quite like Mamata Banerjee. But fewer still have done so by playing with the matchbox of identity politics in a region already soaked in the kerosene of sectarian tension. West Bengal’s recent descent into deadly violence, sparked by protests against the Waqf (Amendment) Act, has exposed the dangerous underbelly of Banerjee’s political strategy - relentless minority appeasement dressed as secularism, and a studied ambivalence when the state’s integrity is under siege.


Three people, including a father and son, have been killed in Murshidabad as per reports. Police vans have been torched, stones hurled, roads blocked and security forces injured. The rule of law has taken a backseat to the rule of mobs – a familiar scene in West Bengal.


Banerjee, in typical defiance of the BJP-ruled Centre, has made clear the Waqf Act, passed by both Houses of Parliament and signed into law by the President of India, would not be implemented in West Bengal.


This is not a principled stance on federalism but a political calculation aimed at maintaining a carefully cultivated vote bank. This time, Banerjee’s declaration is no mere administrative defiance but an incitement cloaked in victimhood.


Her message seems to be that the law is Delhi’s burden which Bengal’s Muslims need not obey. Unsurprisingly, this was interpreted by radical groups as a wink and a nod.


In most of the country, protests over the Waqf amendments have remained peaceful or non-existent. But in Bengal, Muslim-dominated areas like Murshidabad, have exploded into violence.


Banerjee and her nephew, Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee, have accused shadowy forces of sowing discord to malign Bengal. But it is their own politics of patronage, communal tokenism, and selective outrage that have eroded public trust. Their habitual finger-pointing at the Centre, rather than quelling unrest, has normalised it. Banerjee insists her hands are clean. Yet intelligence reports had warned of possible unrest and her administration did little to pre-empt it.


Over the years, the TMC, as part of its appeasement game has shielded radical clerics and turned a blind eye to the mushrooming of sectarian outfits, thereby encouraging a culture of impunity. Law and order, a constitutionally mandated responsibility of the state, is generally outsourced to central forces only after the house is already ablaze.


Banerjee, with her lethal politics, has turned Bengal into a laboratory for a perverse kind of secularism that tolerates intolerance so long as it comes wrapped in minority garb. When protestors burn buses and stone police, the state dithers. When Hindus are attacked in communal flare-ups, the government responds with silence or spin.


In refusing to enforce the Waqf Act, Banerjee has not only pandered to fringe elements but also undermined the authority of Parliament and the President. That her defiance came in the midst of violent protests is doubly damning as it legitimises lawlessness as a bargaining chip in electoral politics.


The BJP, for its part, has seized on the unrest to bolster its claim that the Trinamool government is appeasement-driven and anti-Hindu. But grandstanding alone will not solve Bengal’s deeper malaise with currently reels under a fractured civic identity, corrupted state machinery and a ruling party that sees governance as theatre and populism as policy.


West Bengal has long been a land of contradictions: intellectual yet combustible, proud yet divided. But under Mamata Banerjee, it is increasingly becoming a cautionary tale of how populism and identity politics, when cynically mixed, can rot the foundations of democracy. This is not the Bengal of Vivekananda, Tagore or Syama Prasad Mookerjee. It is a Bengal teetering on the edge - abandoned by its leaders, preyed upon by extremists and betrayed by the very state that claims to protect it. Unless CM Banerjee course-corrects swiftly, Bengal’s fire will not remain contained.

Comments

bottom of page