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.)

Silencing Separatism

Decades of defiance unravel as former separatists line up to pledge loyalty to India’s constitution.

Jammu and Kashmir
Jammu and Kashmir

For three decades, the Hurriyat Conference held the Valley in a stranglehold, dictating terms to both Srinagar and New Delhi. From enforcing shutdowns to legitimising Pakistan-backed militancy, it was the self-appointed custodian of Kashmiri separatism. Yet today, the once-feared conglomerate of separatist leaders is a relic of the past with its members dead, incarcerated or, as recent events show, scrambling to sever all ties with the cause. The Narendra Modi government, with Amit Shah as its enforcer, has done what previous administrations hesitated to do: dismantle the Hurriyat’s influence with a ruthless efficiency that has redrawn Kashmir’s political landscape.


The most striking indication of this shift came this week when Shahid Saleem, former Hurriyat Conference leader and chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir People’s Movement (JKPM), publicly renounced separatism. Declaring his allegiance to India’s Constitution, Saleem announced that both he and his organisation had “no connection or affiliation with either APHC(G) or APHC(A) or any of their constituents or any other entity pursuing separatist or similar such agenda.” His statement, which included a legal warning against those who might associate him with the Hurriyat, marked a dramatic break from his past. It was swiftly followed by a similar declaration from Advocate Mohammad Shafi Reshi, a former chairman of the Democratic Political Movement (DPM) and a member of Tehreek-e-Hurriyat. He, too, cited the Hurriyat’s failure to address the legitimate aspirations of Kashmiris and pledged loyalty to India’s Constitution.


As Shah noted in a triumphant post on X, the Modi government’s policies have “tossed separatism out of J&K.” The prescribed disassociation form now required from former Hurriyat members compels them to renounce separatist politics in writing and pledge that neither they nor their organisations have “any inclination or sympathy for the ideology of All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC).” The message is clear: separatism is no longer a viable political position in Kashmir. The government has ensured that those who once thrived on defiance must now make a choice and publicly reject their past affiliations or risk legal consequences.


The crackdown on the Hurriyat is part of a broader strategy to reshape Kashmir’s political and security environment. Alongside detaining separatist leaders, the Modi government has dismantled Jamaat-e-Islami, a powerful Islamist organisation linked to militant groups. It has aggressively pursued counterinsurgency operations, reducing terrorism-related incidents and neutralising key militant commanders. Economic measures, such as the promotion of tourism and infrastructure development, have further weakened the separatist cause. The government’s argument is that as the old paradigm of appeasement and dialogue has failed, a strong-handed approach is the only way to establish lasting stability.


This shift has yielded results. For the first time in decades, Kashmir is not under the shadow of separatist diktats. Shops no longer down their shutters at the Hurriyat’s command, and stone-pelting incidents have dramatically declined. Even Pakistan, long the patron of Kashmiri separatists, has toned down its rhetoric, preoccupied as it is with domestic crises and a fraying economy. The political vacuum left by the Hurriyat has also provided an opening for a new generation of leaders, albeit ones operating within the constitutional framework.


Yet, despite these successes, the BJP’s triumph is not without risks. The absence of an organised separatist movement does not necessarily mean the disappearance of separatist sentiment. Without a credible political alternative to absorb dissent, frustration could manifest in unpredictable ways, including the resurgence of underground militancy.


Nonetheless, Modi and Shah have accomplished what was once considered unthinkable by rendering the Hurriyat irrelevant. In doing so, they have rewritten the rules of engagement in Kashmir. The days when separatists dictated terms to the Indian state are over. The challenge now is to consolidate this victory, ensuring that Kashmir’s future is shaped by progress rather than repression. The battle for Kashmir’s soul is far from over, but for the first time in decades, it is New Delhi and not the Hurriyat that is calling the shots.

Comments

bottom of page