(Credit: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)
After the G20 Summit in New Delhi, diplomatic relationships between Canada and India seem tense, and trade talks between the countries have been paused. Supposedly, at the summit, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met on the sidelines and had a tense exchange in which Modi expressed concern about “anti-India activities of extremist elements in Canada.”
Although the movement to establish an independent Sikh nation called Khalistan has been going on for several decades, because Canada has the largest population of Sikhs outside of their home state of Punjab in India, Sikh Canadians have been hosting demonstrations for the movement there recently. According to Modi, the protestors are “promoting secessionism and inciting violence against Indian diplomats, damaging diplomatic premises, and threatening the Indian community in Canada and their places of worship.” However, Trudeau expressed concern about foreign interference in Canadian politics, and said that he would defend freedom of expression and peaceful protest.
Canadian trade minister Mary Ng is postponing a trade mission to India that was supposed to occur in early October. Although the announcement of the postponement came with no stated reasons, Ng has mentioned to reporters that both parties are simply taking time to reflect on the negotiations. Indian trade minister Piyush Goyal gave a similar reason, claiming that the two countries need to make sure they are on the same page “geopolitically and economically.” However, he also mentioned that there were issues of concern to India that they are hoping to get resolved before proceeding, likely referring to the tensions over Sikh secessionist protests.
(Credit: Left – David Kawai/Bloomberg; Right – Sajjad Hussain/AFP/Getty Images)
Before the G20 summit, Indian-Canadian trade relations seemed to be progressing fairly well. In 2022-23, two-way trade between the two countries was worth $8.16 billion. Additionally, nine rounds of negotiations on a free trade agreement (FTA) had already taken place since the countries relaunched the initiative in March 2022. The countries had been discussing various sectors, including automobiles, agriculture, and information technology, and aiming to sign an initial trade agreement this year, however, talks have now been paused, with both sides saying they are taking time to reflect.
It is interesting to note how different sources have portrayed the issue. Some, like Bloomberg, use more uncertain or neutral words, such as “contentious” and “allegedly,” while others, such as Reuters and Hindustan Times seem to favor one side over the other. Whereas Reuters describes how Modi “scolded” and “snubbed” Trudeau at the G20 conference, and only met with him informally on the sidelines as opposed to a formal meeting like he hosted with other world leaders, Hindustan Times mentions multiple times the supposed promotion of “secessionism” and “extremist” and “subversive” elements. Although the basic story in all three sources remains the same, the use of certain quotes or strong words can leave the reader feeling that one country is to blame more than the other.
This is reminiscent of the disagreements between Federalists and Anti-Federalists over the Constitution, specifically through Federalist 10 and 51 and Brutus 1. All three of these sources mentioned the same phrase, “ambition must be made to counteract ambition,” but each gave it a positive or negative spin. Whereas Madison praised this as an effective way to keep the government in check, Brutus criticized this as ineffective because people would constantly be clashing against each other rather than making progress forward. Ultimately, both sides were a little bit right.
Canada Postpones Trade Mission to India in Early October as Tensions Rise | Bloomberg
Canada trade minister is postponing a planned trade mission to India | Reuters
India puts FTA talks with Canada on hold over subversive moves | Hindustan Times
2 comments:
I like how you analyzed how different sources conveyed the issue in a different light. I think its interesting how political bias can have such a profound impact on how current events are portrayed, like with the Hindustan Times, an Indian newspaper, siding so strongly with India in regards to this issue. I also think that the Khalistan movement draws a comparison to the Kurdistan movement. Like with Sikhs, many Kurds advocate for creating an independent Kurdish nation, in this case from lands in Iraq, Turkey, Syria, and Iran. Also similarly to Sikhs, many Kurds live in western nations. Similar to the tension between India and Canada that you discussed, the presence of Kurdish nationalism has led to tension between some of these nations, especially Turkey, and some of the western nations where Kurdish nationalism is present. Most importantly, this tension has led to Turkey to delay the ratification of Sweden's acceptance into NATO because they claim Sweden houses terrorists who support Kurdish nationalism. I hope that Canada and India will be able to resolve their issues before the tension between them worsens to such a level.
https://www.npr.org/2023/07/11/1187077453/swedens-deal-with-turkey-to-enter-nato-stirs-concern-in-kurdish-community
I loved your analysis of the bias implied by 3 different sources. Even when the facts are constant between sources, the influence that reporting has on our perception of issues is massive. As news sources grow in number and include more radical options, this seemingly innocuous bias has created a huge political divide, at least in the US. Ironically, the way in which this issue was reported may be an example of what created it in the first place: echo chambers of media that divide one group from another.
Post a Comment