Hacker News Reader

Comment by deskamess | Hacker News Reader

The consensus is that they succeeded in Canada. There is nothing much Canada can do but complain. The US is a different matter though.

View on HN

Given the absolute over-the-top histrionics by the Indian contingent regarding Canada's revelation (one that was basically forced when media got ahold of the info), clearly Canada complaining meant an enormous amount to India and Indian expats. That whole situation was utterly bizarre. Canada abandoned free trade talks with India.

The best part was the continued assertions that Canada stood alone (courtesy of our navel gazing, self-critical media which is how it should be, but is a bit asymmetrical when countering fanatics), all the while the US continually stated that they backed Canada. Indeed, it is overwhelmingly likely that the intel for both incidents had a common source.

Another interesting revelation that flew under the radar-

https://techcrunch.com/2023/10/30/indian-opposition-leaders-...

The Modi government of India is basically acting like an autocracy now. All of the Indians who spent so much time attacking Canada might spend a little more time looking inwards.

This ex Indian diplomat analyses the recent Indian affair in context of BRICS and US’s views on the matter, and Modi’s “security state”:

https://www.indianpunchline.com/nijjar-affair-poses-an-exist...

”All in all, the Nijjar affair takes the lid off the acute contradictions in India’s foreign policies. The assumptions driving the foreign policy’s China-centric thrust turn out to be delusional; the “westernist” trajectory has landed in a cul-de-sac; the assiduously propagated larger-than-life global image of India turns out to be a mirage; foreign policy built on personality cult and opportunism rather than rational and consistent principles attuned to the world in transition got battered; and, most important, the hubris in India’s diplomacy boomeranged.

The Nijjar affair poses an existential dilemma. Surrendering to the US diktat will make India look a surrogate state and a laughing stock in the Global South. Indians won’t approve of it.

On the contrary, ignoring the diktat will be hugely consequential. Make no mistake, Five Eyes had a gory history against the Soviet Union; in the post-cold war era, it all but destabilised Hong Kong, and is today an active player in Myanmar and Thailand in India’s neighbourhood. Its entry in the subcontinent is ominous.“

And then (strangely more vigorous)

https://www.indianpunchline.com/india-wont-be-bullied-in-mul...

I wouldn't dig too deep into M. K. Bharadkumar's views. He was part of the Indian Attaché to the Soviet Union and later Russia and Uzbekistan, and worked closely with both them when supporting the Northern Alliance during the Afghan Civil War in the 90s [0][1]

He leans pro-Russia and anti-American.

[0] - https://valdaiclub.com/about/experts/341/

[1] - https://new.thecradle.co/columns/mk-bhadrakumar

Clearly, since India had warm relations with USSR and it was an important diplomatic portfolio and the diplomats top caliber. That simply means he was one of their top diplomats.

> He leans pro-Russia and anti-American

Good for him. It’s a free world and he’s entitled to his views and preferences. Regardless, he is intelligent, highly experienced, and provides a fresh (“oh no”) perspective on these matters.

So? Why would being pro-some country or anti-some other country mean he should be ignored?

It's an autocracy that delivers though, realistically he is not at risk until growth drops below 4%.

A totally uncritical media, owned by crony businessmen who supports him, just amplifies his party's message and creates the impression that he delivers. Imagine if 95% of the viewership is for some version of fox news. His dramatic failures (like the botched up demonitization) are silently forgotten. Combine this with a huge social media propaganda machinery that circulates fake news, most Indians are forced to live in an alternate reality.

> like the botched up demonitization

Another disaster was his handling of Covid. People were literally begging on streets for oxygen cylinders. He can't put together a sentence to speak in front of media w\o reading from a prompter. He's winning elections by hyped-up narratives, playing with emotions, oppression, lies, religion and caste play cards.

All media is owned by cronies for parties. It's how Indian politics works.

For example, in Punjab the main Punjabi news channel (PTC) is owned by the Badal family - who used to control Punjab as leaders of SAD until 2018 when they lost elections to the INC and then the AAP in 2022.

The main Tamil language news media company Sun Group is owned by the grand-nephew of the founder of the ruling DMK.

The 2 main Telegu language media companies - ETV and Sakshi TV - are owned by businessmen related to the leaders of the BRS and YSRCP respectively.

The BJP will end up losing power at some point, but Indian media is already owned by political dynasties and that will never change.

It's all good as long as the trains run on time?

Actually this is the way the world works, whether we like it or not, whether we can change it or not. Doesn't hurt to constantly call attention to it but it may not make much of a difference if its consequences are kepr below the threshold of acute suffering.

I am not making a value judgement, I am telling you how it is.

From an American perspective, unfortunately, yes. It’s long been known that autocracies deliver foreign policy goals more reliably than democracies.

You mean to say autocracies are easier to predict because they behave with a firm consistent control (until they leave). They are obviously not always aligned with our foreign policy goals. All you have to do is name a handful of current autocracies that come to mind.

> autocracies are easier to predict because they behave with a firm consistent control

Correct. This is actually a criticism of Cold War era U.S. foreign politics, where a short-term “win” was prioritised over strategic alignment, the lesson being it almost always backfired.

The only way we can build resilient alliances is by turning friends into allies, not those we’d like to ally with into “friends.” My concern is we’re doing the latter, again, with India.

There are multiple instances of Cold War era US autocratic allies developing into democracies, such as Portugal, Spain, South Korea, Chile, Argentina, and Greece. The claim that these alliances “almost always backfired” is just not true; it succeeded more often than it failed.

When those goals involve use of force, quite possible, but for anything involving trade or non-military alliances, I'm doubtful.

The basic problem being the need for trust that things will last past the head of state.

No I am not claiming this is not true as a rule, and most autocracies in fact fail badly at delivering basic services.

But any government that delivers 8% growth is safe, and currently Modi is doing so.

True democracies want selfish things like nationalizing their natural resources.

I hesitate to respond, but in this case, it is actually a relevant argument. In Italy ( and other nations for that matter ), fascism became popular, precisely because it was 'more efficient' than the pesky democracy with all its turns and stakeholders and all that. In a sense, it delivered ( while also providing high amounts of power to its leaders -- and as we know from history, power tends to corrupt ).

What's you thoughts on Canada harboring Khalistani separatist and not acting since years? Same with US - Pannun is US Citizen, also designated terrorist, openly threatening to blow Air India plane.

Canada (or US) is no saint here. I think India is just learning these tactics from West. If you can't get the criminals and terrorist in front of your court because they operate from other countries which encourages such people and use them as a tool to interfere and destabilize your society, you are left with no option but to get rid of them using similar tactics.

Do you actually believe that Canada, the US, or any other part of the West is trying to "interfere and destabilize" India? If so you really need to touch grass and put down the propaganda pipe. Many Indians seem to think that because Canada doesn't actively stomp on activities that you personally don't approve of it's sanctioning them, seemingly having no concept of how freedoms work.

If the West were trying to destabilize India I suspect it would be incredibly easy to achieve, which is exactly why there is that defensiveness and hitting at shadows. But the West isn't because India has long been a useful counter to regional powers.

What is absolutely true is that the Modi government is spectacularly corrupt. Every opponent of Modi is a "terrorist" -- even opponents in government. The government is falling further and further down the well towards fascism, all while proud Indians convince themselves that everyone else is actually the problem.

For someone so uninformed about the geopolitical history of India, you speak far too confidently.

This is a common tendency for many Americans, read 10 uni-dimensional articles in your favorite newspaper on some topic, do not bother to read any history on said topic, then come to strong opinions and bully people who see things differently. Maybe it is you who should put down the "propaganda pipe" and consider this issue for the complicated nuanced thing it is.

For example, read https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38381987

If they had solid evidence the person committed a serious crime, particularly actual terrorism, it'd have been no problem getting Canada to turn them over.

The real issue is they wanted to kill someone who wasn't a criminal. Which, ultimately, is just plain old homicide.

I just checked and India and Canada do have an extradition treat (unlike Canada and China), so there is merit to this comment. They had requested extradition of Nijjar, but didn’t give time for the request to even go to court.

Tactics from the west?

When has germany deployed assassination?

Is this a serious comment? You've bombed and killed several terrorists without any trial?

OK, name a few.

The USA has employed drone strikes on non-US soil against Al Qaeda members who were, as I recall, quite eager to terrorize and destabilize "the great Satan", as they called it.

Canada’s allies are remiss for not providing a united front on this. Where were the UK, US, Oz, and NZ in joint condemnation here?

Busy profiting from their relationships with India, that's where.

Same thing happens when Canada criticizes Saudi Arabia, etc.

I would be amazed if Sunak condemned Modi for something that happened in Canada, stands to gain more from their relationship than with Canada I imagine. (Perhaps, and I don't mean it conspiratorially or that it would be a reason, but just as an aside - even more so with a breakdown in India-Canada relations than without at the same time.)

> stands to gain more from their relationship than with Canada

In the short-term, maybe, but none of them are benefitting from an India who feels it can bully any of the other five

I'm not saying it's the best move for the country long-term (nor that it isn't!) - just that I'd be surprised to see it from Sunak. 'In the short-term, maybe' only adds to it: there'll be a general election before the end of Jan '25.

Fair enough, and doubly a shame as Sunak’s criticism would probably carry more weight there than most of the others, given his heritage. He has been a very underwhelming PM, which is a shame given his obvious potential, and the very low bar his predecessors set.

Canada is yet to still present the evidence too few people know the 1985 air India bombing was mostly affecting Canadian citizens and perpetrated by khalistani Sikh extremists

Reply on news.ycombinator.com