Do you really think the evidence he’d offered is strong enough to support the accusation. And his concern about foreign interference in Canada appears uneven to put it politely. Not afraid to call India out; China not so much.
It appears that you are ascribing some extraordinary motive here, at odds with the facts and common sense. The Canadian government obviously caught the Indian government with whatever is akin to "red handed". No one upsets the apple cart so thoroughly without being utterly confident of the truth, and without a reality check from their allies. The only common thread here is that both countries are authoritarian, and in a state of perpetual war - with each other, and with internal dissidents.
The government's response to each case was necessarily different, primarily because Canada did not catch the Chinese state red-handed assassinating Chinese dissidents in Canada.
But regardless, the Federal government were pilloried by opposition parties and the press for their supposed white-glove treatment of China. Why then should they also be pilloried for presumably learning from their "mistake"?
David is right - just b/c a leader makes a claim, it doesn’t make it true. If they had, say, surveillance footage or communications why not release them, or at least tell us the nature of the evidence. Ujal Dosanj pointed out on ‘Full Comment’ that India has been seeking to extradite Sikhs accused of terrorism (from the US in one case). So why use the law in one case, and assassination in another?
I think that if you read what the US has said as well as Australia you would understand better. Also the PM said it was "credible evidence" of the Indian security service doing the dirty deed. Try using facts and not a bias as your belief.
He described it in the House as "credible allegations" regarding a "potential link". All this obtained by American surveillance by in an Indian Embassy located in Ottawa. I am sure India is non too pleased about that either.
I admire Mr Wells for trying to see the big picture, to find some good in the Prime Minister intentions regarding relations with India.
The problem is that Trudeau’s past performances for wiggling out of tight spots has involved a lack of forthrightness and hoarding of information.
Standing in Parliament to toss a grenade into diplomatic relations with a democratic nation is serious business, but the rationale from Trudeau is that Canadians will have to trust him. No further details will be made available. I think Canadians have been burned by that tactic before, so why should we trust Trudeau now?
Trust would be easier to lend to the Prime Minister if he would have demonstrated any sense of commitment to the Global Affairs file over the long haul.
Everything this Government does is refracted through a prism of political self interest. Due to the lack of transparency and hoarding of information since the stunning announcement in the HoC, we can only hope that the police and intelligence agencies work hasn’t been compromised.
I mean, a minimum of 30% of the country is always going to be Liberal, no matter what, and a minimum of 30% is always going to be Conservative, no matter what - neither is ever going to go much below that, mostly because of tribalism.
I still don’t understand why he took his eldest son to India? And from his son’s Instagram account, it looks like all he did was have coffee dates and partied. Trudeau is a poser; a vapid grandstander who loves the sound of his own breathy voice. I don’t doubt there is credible evidence but we don’t really trust him to get it right. His incompetence and that of his entire Cabinet has been on display for years. I’m tired. I’m not even touching #NaziGate. SMH 🤦🏼♀️
The interesting thing to me is how the Canadian media, many of whom have decided that it’s time for the PM to go and therefore he can’t do anything right, have made the public airing of the incident, and not the incident itself, the big issue.
Let’s be clear: there is reason to think that agents of a foreign government assassinated a Canadian citizen, on Canadian soil. A citizen, by the way, who committed no crime on Canadian soil.
American officials have made it clear that the information, from Five Eyes, is credible. The much maligned Jody Thomas made two trips to India to discuss the issue privately, and to share information.
Foreign media have also made it clear, as the Economist puts it, that if the information pans out (and it is likely it will) “there must be consequences”.
This is the issue – not the consequences for the standing in the polls of the major players.
If discussion of such a flagrant violation of our sovereignty is going to be subordinated to horse race politics, what hope is there for a mature, stable democracy in Canada? I feel a great hole opening up below all of us.
Two things are very clear. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau likes attention, and when the opportunity presents itself, he hops a jet. All this attention-getting travel may result in one being a bit lax in prioritizing his responsibilities.
We could ponder that had the Prime Minister spent more time in Canada tending to our domestic affairs, the government of Canada would possibly have taken more seriously the reports regarding the Pro-Khalistani extremist activities in British Columbia.
Hardeep Singh Nijjar did not come to Canada to start a new life, instead he came to use Canada as a base from which he could plot the overthrow of an established government and create a separate Khalistani state in the Punjab region of India. As you point out the majority of the people in Punjab do not support separation, so it is so futile. India authorities many times, and Interpol as well according to public sources, brought to the attention of the Canadian government their concerns of what they described his terrorist activities, but those concerns were ignored, granting him citizenship in 2017.
Once a Canadian citizen, he was protected by our laws, and as he has now been killed he government of Canada will seek justice for his death. If it is true that agents of the Modi government murdered Nijjar, the Canadian government is now obligated to bring the killer(s) to justice. What a sad state of affairs.
I just need to vent regarding the situation resulting in Speaker of the House Rota's resignation. I find it understandable that perhaps Speaker Rota did not think through that if Yaroslav Hunka fought against Russia during WWII, he would have done so in collaboration with Nazi Germany. Should the Prime Minister himself or his staff not have figured this out? Most importantly though Deputy Prime Minister Freeland with her Ukrainian heritage would definitely have been aware of this, as would President Zelenskyy and his wife, but they all gave the man a standing ovation. That I find absolutely baffling.
You find it baffling because you really don’t understand the way things work. And so long as you “know” things you will always fall short. But your total lack of respect for the office of the PM will catch up eventually when it’s open season on your pick for the top job. I hate having to say that I am not a Liberal, but I am not. But I also do not believe that Trudeau is at fault for every last little thing that happens. Just because social media has made it possible for every person’s personal opinions or critiques of things they only have the vaguest knowledge of does not mean they should spew it all out over and over again.
How do you “know” that Nijjar only came to Canada to become a terrorist at a distance? Did you ring him up to tell him that the folks in Punjab were not interested? Were Interpol’s and India’s concerns valid and why were they ignored if they were? If you know so much don’t you have a responsibility to do something except pontificate after the fact?
The Speaker of the House does not have to share information regarding invitees to the House with the PMO, the PM, or anyone else. It’s his House it is his rules. If you (and many like you) actually read a little bit of history instead of going off...again, you might look at the situation differently.
Like most things, a little bit of context helps. Yaroslav Yunka was 18 years old when he joined the Waffen SS. It was pretty much the only game in town at the time. He fought the Red Army in 1944 and he was in a POW camp in Italy when the war ended. It was unlikely that he was the rabid Nazi SS man he is being painted as. He says that there were two great forces growing up in his village, faith in God and love of Ukraine. He wanted to kill Russians. He hated the Soviet Union. Everyone in his village did. They didn’t like Poles or Jews much but the issue was Russia. Stalin had already shipped some family and friends to Siberia by train. The Holodomor affected everyone, not just those in the Bloodlands. Enemy of the State was a very real thing. His son asked Mr Rota if they could come to the HoC to hear President Zelenskyy speak. He did not ask for special treatment, to be singled out, to be applauded, though I think it was warranted. He is a proud Ukrainian-Canadian. The fact that he fought in Hitler’s army is really such a small point that has been blown all out of proportion but it is easier to tar everyone with the same brush. Everyone, once again, wants to be seen as being directly affected. But they aren’t and they weren’t.
And just because you may have Ukrainian heritage or are Jewish does not give you Nazi-radar.
Paul you let him off too lightly. Any leader has to choose their priorities. I f everything is a priority then nothing is. Almost his entire caucus has been relegated to cheer leader status. What kind of priority was the event in Montreal? We have an Environment Minister ( although...) who could have gone to Washington. London was a mess of his own making because he treats backbenchers like clapping seals.
No words of how poor the government internal systems were that no one caught the Nazi in HoC. They don’t do briefing books when world leaders address the HoC?
100%. Everything is a show, and mostly about himself. That excerpt PW posted from PMJT's memoir contained the words I, me, and my thirteen times in (barely) ten lines of text.
Everything PMJT speaks publicly about will include one or more of the following bromides:
- Let me be clear
- We will not rest until *insert issue here* is resolved (affordability, climate change, etc)
- We will continue to work hard for *insert voting bloc here* and all Canadians
- We will continue fighting tirelessly for the middle class, and those striving to join it
- We are in a teachable moment that all Candians can learn and grow from
- We have always had Canadians backs and always will
- Unlike the Conservatives who still follow the playbook of Stephen Harper
I generally appreciate Paul's analysis, but think he's really (really) stretching it in his 'defence' of PMJT in this piece. While I appreciate the sentiment that we should not have foreign governments putting hits on our citizens, the brazen way PJMT threw a bomb (credible allegations) into the House was a very obvious strategy to look strong and change the channel in the face of brutal polling, and also to get out in front of the G&M story. The result?
- Sewered relations with an important trading partner (gee, I wonder if the Canadian lentil industry's farmers and processors appreciated the PM's public grenade)?
- Strained relations with our traditional allies who have been increasingly rolling their eyes at our amateurish 'governance' since 2015 (not helped by the nazi boner just a week later)
Clearly if India was behind the 'hit' this should definitely be addressed, but can we not do so in a more behind the scenes and frankly mature & diplomatic manner? 'To hell with tone'? Really, Paul? I'm with you that a PM should speak frankly on issues such as this, but on the floor of the HofC, with 'credible allegations'? C'mon. If they have the goods on Modi, then take it to the UN / Interpol / whoever. If not, this was collosally reckless and poorly thought out by our PM.
Paul: you are striking “a fine balance” -tough to do in these times. Best quote from this article: “ a government that isn’t afraid to alienate Narendra Modi shouldn’t be afraid to alienate Canadians who flout the law to prosecute grudges.” It has been said elsewhere, but bears repeating: diaspora politics cannot or should not override principled (foreign/security/human rights) policy. Will any federal party be willing to renounce diaspora politics ahead of the next election? As a former foreign service officer, I wonder how my ex-colleges at Global Affairs are managing to cope. And for the mess that the Speaker created on Friday, the focus should not only be on Canada, Canadian reputation etc.; what is Zelensky thinking? A waste of a trip to a friendly country?
...diaspora politics cannot or should not override principled (foreign/security/human rights) policy.
It is inevitable that diaspora politics has had exactly the results you deplore.
You just have to look at many cabinet appointments where it is clear that the person has been chosen for their ability to deliver a block of votes without complete indifference to their ability to master their portfolios.
"I’m pretty happy to have a prime minister who states a simple principle: you don’t get to kill Canadian citizens on Canadian soil."
Okay - fair enough, but for several decades we have turned a deaf ear when the Indian government made the same argument about killing Indians on Indian soil (or in passenger aircraft, but I digress) in asking for Nijjar's extradition (and others). To put this in Canadian terms: if there was a group of FLQ supporters continuing to support violence in Canada from a base in France, would we be satisfied with a French response that matched Canada's in relation to Khalistani activists / terrorists?
Shoe-leather reporting in Surrey by the Washington Post suggests Nijjar’s murder was far more elaborate than some simple case of road rage.
Sure - more elaborate than road rage; maybe slightly more organization than the killing of Ripudaman Malik? Does that serve to implicate India? Nijjar's killing was not beyond the organizational and logistic capability of a community that planned the Air India bombings.
It wasn't a 'community' that planned the Air India bombing. It was a group of individuals. Language matters - using 'community' tars all Sikhs with this crime. And don't forget that some Sikhs were also victims of the bombing.
Fair comment, Kaycee. The point remains that there are some members of the Sikh community who were more than capable of planning and carrying out violence, so we can't assume that Nijjar's killing implies a state-level actor.
I realize that Katie has given very strict instructions that any article on any subject published in Canada must contain at least one picture of her boss.
But, I would implore you to risk her wrath and publish future articles without any photos of the Father of the Nation. After almost eight years with every day bringing with it a tsunami of photos, we all know what he looks like.
Or, at a minimum, a trigger warning would be most appreciated.
Agreed, Vivian! I came here earlier to make a joke that half of people would see this picture of the PM and say, "Ugh, another picture of that guy I hate! This is Liberal propaganda!" and that the other half would look at this picture and say, "Why are you using such a bad picture of the PM? This is Conservative propaganda!" You truly can't win sometimes doing Paul's job.
Why does anyone want to be prime minister again? I certainly empathize with the man's life this month, as much as i can in my distinctly ''not a prime minister lifestyle', but he's burned a lot of bridges lately. I really hope we can get a leader soon who will look at our security and intelligence issues seriously. Canada is in need of a hard reset. I hope we don't have to learn the hard way.
Looks to me like Jody Thomas gave Trudeau bad advice. Did she seriously think that India was going to 'help with the investigation'? Surely foreign policy experts at Global Affairs would have advised against creating a diplomatic blow up which has resulted in visa problems for Canadians and a more challenging murder investigation.
You say that as if there was somehow a neat, clean, elegant solution that could ensure justice and that the perpetrators would be punished, and that disinclines the other murderers that Canada does business with from acting similarly, while also encouraging more business with India, and softening the borders generally. There isn't. Just the cards dealt, and the government played them the best way possible.
They played the hand horribly. We are never going to bring the killers to a trial in Canada - just not going to happen. So how do we make our displeasure known. Turkey produced lots of evidence in the murder of Jamal Koshogi, and didn’t directly accuse the Saudi government of murder while it was clear from the evidence the Saudis were guilty. They avoided this “ok prove it response” especially when it doesn’t appear we can prove it.
I am still questioning why Jody Thomas had to be travelling to India, twice, to discuss this murder investigation with Indian government officials? As a bureaucrat, and now top security adviser to the PMO, is this really her area of expertise? Further, at the time of her visits the surveillance alleging a potential link to India, captured by United States in India's Embassy in Ottawa, was not known. Why was she really in India?
Exellent, balanced, analysis of this debacle. Also worth noting is Andrew Coyne's revelation in Saturday's Globe (cribbed from "independent national security reporter Sam Cooper") that the PMO blocked a "CSIS planned major intervention in 2017" to shut down an intelligence network in Vancouver. This was reported by NSICOP in 2019. It was shut down due to "political sensitivity" likely related to the then upcoming trip by the PM to India. This is a repeat of the Liberal government's misguided policy v-à-v China.
Also worth reading is Justin Ling's deep dive into the complicated war-time situation in Ukraine, on Substack ("About the SS Officer in the Gallery"). Important context for who Mr. Hunka really is.
The most offensive part of this article was where Paul referred to Trudeau as a “hick from the sticks”. As I read this late last night while watching combines slowly grind through the fields of East Central Alberta, I found this implied affinity with my ilk extremely offensive and quite frankly upsetting. I’ll await your apology, Paul.
Ha! Yeah, "sticks" are relative. If you're from Lethbridge, maybe you feel like the elites are in Toronto; but as real elites go, Canada is to the superpowers what Gem, AB, is to Canada.
Modern day agriculture is truly a miraculous thing and the players, the ones who ensure that there is ever more food to feed the world, deserve only our respect.
However, I am leery of living in a society where apologies are owed to someone because that someone has been offended.
Discourse would become impossible which, of course, is why the Liberals salivate over the prospect of being able to silence people for giving offence.
It's strange to me that Paul Wells, who is for my money the funniest Canadian journalist of my lifetime by leaps and bounds, attracts so many readers who are so literal that they can't recognize an obvious joke when they see one. I think some of it is that Paul's often critical of the prime minister of the day, so he picks up readers who think of him as The Guy Who's Mean To That Guy I Hate (I mean, that's how I first became a fan too), but I primarily think of him as an excellent and frequently hilarious writer.
Yeah I agree with you. Probably part of the audience is also political junkies who take every topic with dead seriousness. Those tend to be the types who fail to recognize the humour in the situation. Sort of like the HBO show Veep. They take themselves so seriously they fail to see how ridiculous they really are
Some readers may recall that shortly after our Long National Nightmare began in October 2015 the PM granted an interview to the state organ of the Democratic party, also known as the New York Times.
Notably, he said the following of Canada "There is no core identity...".
Given the Canadian government's disinterest in reports regarding Pro-Khalistani extremist activities in British Columbia one has to wonder if the people fighting for the establishment of that nation are of the view that it too should have "no core identity".
For someone who is all for a country with no core identity the Father of the Nation seems to spend a great deal of time in diaspora politics, i.e. currying the votes of various groups who seem very much concerned with preserving a core ethnic or religious identity.
Do you really think the evidence he’d offered is strong enough to support the accusation. And his concern about foreign interference in Canada appears uneven to put it politely. Not afraid to call India out; China not so much.
It appears that you are ascribing some extraordinary motive here, at odds with the facts and common sense. The Canadian government obviously caught the Indian government with whatever is akin to "red handed". No one upsets the apple cart so thoroughly without being utterly confident of the truth, and without a reality check from their allies. The only common thread here is that both countries are authoritarian, and in a state of perpetual war - with each other, and with internal dissidents.
The government's response to each case was necessarily different, primarily because Canada did not catch the Chinese state red-handed assassinating Chinese dissidents in Canada.
But regardless, the Federal government were pilloried by opposition parties and the press for their supposed white-glove treatment of China. Why then should they also be pilloried for presumably learning from their "mistake"?
''No one upsets the apple cart so thoroughly without being utterly confident of the truth, and without a reality check from their allies''
Really now, how would you define the USA 's ''incontrevertible evidence '' of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, supported by the UK no less ?
It's quite absurd to compare these circumstances.
Canada is not the US - not the richest or most powerful country. Nor is Iraq like India - not a democracy, not an economic asset.
Moreover, the US wanted to escalate, while Canada wants to de-escalate.
What is the evidence that leads you to conclude India was caught red-handed?
I am not a PC; how could I possibly know? How could anyone who is not, outside of the security apparatus?
If you don’t know, then don’t claim the evidence is strong.
David is right - just b/c a leader makes a claim, it doesn’t make it true. If they had, say, surveillance footage or communications why not release them, or at least tell us the nature of the evidence. Ujal Dosanj pointed out on ‘Full Comment’ that India has been seeking to extradite Sikhs accused of terrorism (from the US in one case). So why use the law in one case, and assassination in another?
I'm fairly comfortable taking the advice of government in these circumstances. I don't have to have been there when the trigger was pulled.
I think that if you read what the US has said as well as Australia you would understand better. Also the PM said it was "credible evidence" of the Indian security service doing the dirty deed. Try using facts and not a bias as your belief.
He described it in the House as "credible allegations" regarding a "potential link". All this obtained by American surveillance by in an Indian Embassy located in Ottawa. I am sure India is non too pleased about that either.
Both are serious. Bizarre to claim that foreigners interfering with our elections is a trivial problem.
No one is saying murder isn’t serious. But so is undermining democracy. Both are serious yet you seem to think the latter isn’t.
I admire Mr Wells for trying to see the big picture, to find some good in the Prime Minister intentions regarding relations with India.
The problem is that Trudeau’s past performances for wiggling out of tight spots has involved a lack of forthrightness and hoarding of information.
Standing in Parliament to toss a grenade into diplomatic relations with a democratic nation is serious business, but the rationale from Trudeau is that Canadians will have to trust him. No further details will be made available. I think Canadians have been burned by that tactic before, so why should we trust Trudeau now?
Should we not trust him? After all he has said many, many times that he has our back! What other Prime Minister has been so protective and devoted?
Trust would be easier to lend to the Prime Minister if he would have demonstrated any sense of commitment to the Global Affairs file over the long haul.
Everything this Government does is refracted through a prism of political self interest. Due to the lack of transparency and hoarding of information since the stunning announcement in the HoC, we can only hope that the police and intelligence agencies work hasn’t been compromised.
Is this a serious comment? Or sarcasm?
Sarcasm!
Sorry. It’s just shocking to me that this guy still pulls ~30% approval ratings after everything we’ve seen from him
I mean, a minimum of 30% of the country is always going to be Liberal, no matter what, and a minimum of 30% is always going to be Conservative, no matter what - neither is ever going to go much below that, mostly because of tribalism.
I still don’t understand why he took his eldest son to India? And from his son’s Instagram account, it looks like all he did was have coffee dates and partied. Trudeau is a poser; a vapid grandstander who loves the sound of his own breathy voice. I don’t doubt there is credible evidence but we don’t really trust him to get it right. His incompetence and that of his entire Cabinet has been on display for years. I’m tired. I’m not even touching #NaziGate. SMH 🤦🏼♀️
The interesting thing to me is how the Canadian media, many of whom have decided that it’s time for the PM to go and therefore he can’t do anything right, have made the public airing of the incident, and not the incident itself, the big issue.
Let’s be clear: there is reason to think that agents of a foreign government assassinated a Canadian citizen, on Canadian soil. A citizen, by the way, who committed no crime on Canadian soil.
American officials have made it clear that the information, from Five Eyes, is credible. The much maligned Jody Thomas made two trips to India to discuss the issue privately, and to share information.
Foreign media have also made it clear, as the Economist puts it, that if the information pans out (and it is likely it will) “there must be consequences”.
This is the issue – not the consequences for the standing in the polls of the major players.
If discussion of such a flagrant violation of our sovereignty is going to be subordinated to horse race politics, what hope is there for a mature, stable democracy in Canada? I feel a great hole opening up below all of us.
The “hole” is opening up and Trudeau and the Liberals are responsible for digging this hole under Canada.
Why is there reason to think this?
Two things are very clear. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau likes attention, and when the opportunity presents itself, he hops a jet. All this attention-getting travel may result in one being a bit lax in prioritizing his responsibilities.
We could ponder that had the Prime Minister spent more time in Canada tending to our domestic affairs, the government of Canada would possibly have taken more seriously the reports regarding the Pro-Khalistani extremist activities in British Columbia.
Hardeep Singh Nijjar did not come to Canada to start a new life, instead he came to use Canada as a base from which he could plot the overthrow of an established government and create a separate Khalistani state in the Punjab region of India. As you point out the majority of the people in Punjab do not support separation, so it is so futile. India authorities many times, and Interpol as well according to public sources, brought to the attention of the Canadian government their concerns of what they described his terrorist activities, but those concerns were ignored, granting him citizenship in 2017.
Once a Canadian citizen, he was protected by our laws, and as he has now been killed he government of Canada will seek justice for his death. If it is true that agents of the Modi government murdered Nijjar, the Canadian government is now obligated to bring the killer(s) to justice. What a sad state of affairs.
I just need to vent regarding the situation resulting in Speaker of the House Rota's resignation. I find it understandable that perhaps Speaker Rota did not think through that if Yaroslav Hunka fought against Russia during WWII, he would have done so in collaboration with Nazi Germany. Should the Prime Minister himself or his staff not have figured this out? Most importantly though Deputy Prime Minister Freeland with her Ukrainian heritage would definitely have been aware of this, as would President Zelenskyy and his wife, but they all gave the man a standing ovation. That I find absolutely baffling.
You find it baffling because you really don’t understand the way things work. And so long as you “know” things you will always fall short. But your total lack of respect for the office of the PM will catch up eventually when it’s open season on your pick for the top job. I hate having to say that I am not a Liberal, but I am not. But I also do not believe that Trudeau is at fault for every last little thing that happens. Just because social media has made it possible for every person’s personal opinions or critiques of things they only have the vaguest knowledge of does not mean they should spew it all out over and over again.
How do you “know” that Nijjar only came to Canada to become a terrorist at a distance? Did you ring him up to tell him that the folks in Punjab were not interested? Were Interpol’s and India’s concerns valid and why were they ignored if they were? If you know so much don’t you have a responsibility to do something except pontificate after the fact?
The Speaker of the House does not have to share information regarding invitees to the House with the PMO, the PM, or anyone else. It’s his House it is his rules. If you (and many like you) actually read a little bit of history instead of going off...again, you might look at the situation differently.
Like most things, a little bit of context helps. Yaroslav Yunka was 18 years old when he joined the Waffen SS. It was pretty much the only game in town at the time. He fought the Red Army in 1944 and he was in a POW camp in Italy when the war ended. It was unlikely that he was the rabid Nazi SS man he is being painted as. He says that there were two great forces growing up in his village, faith in God and love of Ukraine. He wanted to kill Russians. He hated the Soviet Union. Everyone in his village did. They didn’t like Poles or Jews much but the issue was Russia. Stalin had already shipped some family and friends to Siberia by train. The Holodomor affected everyone, not just those in the Bloodlands. Enemy of the State was a very real thing. His son asked Mr Rota if they could come to the HoC to hear President Zelenskyy speak. He did not ask for special treatment, to be singled out, to be applauded, though I think it was warranted. He is a proud Ukrainian-Canadian. The fact that he fought in Hitler’s army is really such a small point that has been blown all out of proportion but it is easier to tar everyone with the same brush. Everyone, once again, wants to be seen as being directly affected. But they aren’t and they weren’t.
And just because you may have Ukrainian heritage or are Jewish does not give you Nazi-radar.
Paul you let him off too lightly. Any leader has to choose their priorities. I f everything is a priority then nothing is. Almost his entire caucus has been relegated to cheer leader status. What kind of priority was the event in Montreal? We have an Environment Minister ( although...) who could have gone to Washington. London was a mess of his own making because he treats backbenchers like clapping seals.
No words of how poor the government internal systems were that no one caught the Nazi in HoC. They don’t do briefing books when world leaders address the HoC?
100%. Everything is a show, and mostly about himself. That excerpt PW posted from PMJT's memoir contained the words I, me, and my thirteen times in (barely) ten lines of text.
Everything PMJT speaks publicly about will include one or more of the following bromides:
- Let me be clear
- We will not rest until *insert issue here* is resolved (affordability, climate change, etc)
- We will continue to work hard for *insert voting bloc here* and all Canadians
- We will continue fighting tirelessly for the middle class, and those striving to join it
- We are in a teachable moment that all Candians can learn and grow from
- We have always had Canadians backs and always will
- Unlike the Conservatives who still follow the playbook of Stephen Harper
I generally appreciate Paul's analysis, but think he's really (really) stretching it in his 'defence' of PMJT in this piece. While I appreciate the sentiment that we should not have foreign governments putting hits on our citizens, the brazen way PJMT threw a bomb (credible allegations) into the House was a very obvious strategy to look strong and change the channel in the face of brutal polling, and also to get out in front of the G&M story. The result?
- Sewered relations with an important trading partner (gee, I wonder if the Canadian lentil industry's farmers and processors appreciated the PM's public grenade)?
- Strained relations with our traditional allies who have been increasingly rolling their eyes at our amateurish 'governance' since 2015 (not helped by the nazi boner just a week later)
Clearly if India was behind the 'hit' this should definitely be addressed, but can we not do so in a more behind the scenes and frankly mature & diplomatic manner? 'To hell with tone'? Really, Paul? I'm with you that a PM should speak frankly on issues such as this, but on the floor of the HofC, with 'credible allegations'? C'mon. If they have the goods on Modi, then take it to the UN / Interpol / whoever. If not, this was collosally reckless and poorly thought out by our PM.
As usual.
Paul: you are striking “a fine balance” -tough to do in these times. Best quote from this article: “ a government that isn’t afraid to alienate Narendra Modi shouldn’t be afraid to alienate Canadians who flout the law to prosecute grudges.” It has been said elsewhere, but bears repeating: diaspora politics cannot or should not override principled (foreign/security/human rights) policy. Will any federal party be willing to renounce diaspora politics ahead of the next election? As a former foreign service officer, I wonder how my ex-colleges at Global Affairs are managing to cope. And for the mess that the Speaker created on Friday, the focus should not only be on Canada, Canadian reputation etc.; what is Zelensky thinking? A waste of a trip to a friendly country?
...diaspora politics cannot or should not override principled (foreign/security/human rights) policy.
It is inevitable that diaspora politics has had exactly the results you deplore.
You just have to look at many cabinet appointments where it is clear that the person has been chosen for their ability to deliver a block of votes without complete indifference to their ability to master their portfolios.
Right, Harjit?
"I’m pretty happy to have a prime minister who states a simple principle: you don’t get to kill Canadian citizens on Canadian soil."
Okay - fair enough, but for several decades we have turned a deaf ear when the Indian government made the same argument about killing Indians on Indian soil (or in passenger aircraft, but I digress) in asking for Nijjar's extradition (and others). To put this in Canadian terms: if there was a group of FLQ supporters continuing to support violence in Canada from a base in France, would we be satisfied with a French response that matched Canada's in relation to Khalistani activists / terrorists?
Shoe-leather reporting in Surrey by the Washington Post suggests Nijjar’s murder was far more elaborate than some simple case of road rage.
Sure - more elaborate than road rage; maybe slightly more organization than the killing of Ripudaman Malik? Does that serve to implicate India? Nijjar's killing was not beyond the organizational and logistic capability of a community that planned the Air India bombings.
It wasn't a 'community' that planned the Air India bombing. It was a group of individuals. Language matters - using 'community' tars all Sikhs with this crime. And don't forget that some Sikhs were also victims of the bombing.
Fair comment, Kaycee. The point remains that there are some members of the Sikh community who were more than capable of planning and carrying out violence, so we can't assume that Nijjar's killing implies a state-level actor.
Killing a Canadian Citizen that had been turned down for Canadian Citizenship but was eventually given Citizenship by upper level Liberals.
De profundis clamavi...
I realize that Katie has given very strict instructions that any article on any subject published in Canada must contain at least one picture of her boss.
But, I would implore you to risk her wrath and publish future articles without any photos of the Father of the Nation. After almost eight years with every day bringing with it a tsunami of photos, we all know what he looks like.
Or, at a minimum, a trigger warning would be most appreciated.
Thank you.
I enjoy pics of our PM.
Agreed, Vivian! I came here earlier to make a joke that half of people would see this picture of the PM and say, "Ugh, another picture of that guy I hate! This is Liberal propaganda!" and that the other half would look at this picture and say, "Why are you using such a bad picture of the PM? This is Conservative propaganda!" You truly can't win sometimes doing Paul's job.
I’ve been viewing India TV because our CBC is SO lacking in journalism. Giving Trudeau any pass this past week only demonstrates blindness.
Why does anyone want to be prime minister again? I certainly empathize with the man's life this month, as much as i can in my distinctly ''not a prime minister lifestyle', but he's burned a lot of bridges lately. I really hope we can get a leader soon who will look at our security and intelligence issues seriously. Canada is in need of a hard reset. I hope we don't have to learn the hard way.
Looks to me like Jody Thomas gave Trudeau bad advice. Did she seriously think that India was going to 'help with the investigation'? Surely foreign policy experts at Global Affairs would have advised against creating a diplomatic blow up which has resulted in visa problems for Canadians and a more challenging murder investigation.
You say that as if there was somehow a neat, clean, elegant solution that could ensure justice and that the perpetrators would be punished, and that disinclines the other murderers that Canada does business with from acting similarly, while also encouraging more business with India, and softening the borders generally. There isn't. Just the cards dealt, and the government played them the best way possible.
They played the hand horribly. We are never going to bring the killers to a trial in Canada - just not going to happen. So how do we make our displeasure known. Turkey produced lots of evidence in the murder of Jamal Koshogi, and didn’t directly accuse the Saudi government of murder while it was clear from the evidence the Saudis were guilty. They avoided this “ok prove it response” especially when it doesn’t appear we can prove it.
I am still questioning why Jody Thomas had to be travelling to India, twice, to discuss this murder investigation with Indian government officials? As a bureaucrat, and now top security adviser to the PMO, is this really her area of expertise? Further, at the time of her visits the surveillance alleging a potential link to India, captured by United States in India's Embassy in Ottawa, was not known. Why was she really in India?
Why was she really in India? Gee....what do YOU think is really going on?
Exellent, balanced, analysis of this debacle. Also worth noting is Andrew Coyne's revelation in Saturday's Globe (cribbed from "independent national security reporter Sam Cooper") that the PMO blocked a "CSIS planned major intervention in 2017" to shut down an intelligence network in Vancouver. This was reported by NSICOP in 2019. It was shut down due to "political sensitivity" likely related to the then upcoming trip by the PM to India. This is a repeat of the Liberal government's misguided policy v-à-v China.
Also worth reading is Justin Ling's deep dive into the complicated war-time situation in Ukraine, on Substack ("About the SS Officer in the Gallery"). Important context for who Mr. Hunka really is.
The most offensive part of this article was where Paul referred to Trudeau as a “hick from the sticks”. As I read this late last night while watching combines slowly grind through the fields of East Central Alberta, I found this implied affinity with my ilk extremely offensive and quite frankly upsetting. I’ll await your apology, Paul.
Ha! Yeah, "sticks" are relative. If you're from Lethbridge, maybe you feel like the elites are in Toronto; but as real elites go, Canada is to the superpowers what Gem, AB, is to Canada.
I take your point.
Modern day agriculture is truly a miraculous thing and the players, the ones who ensure that there is ever more food to feed the world, deserve only our respect.
However, I am leery of living in a society where apologies are owed to someone because that someone has been offended.
Discourse would become impossible which, of course, is why the Liberals salivate over the prospect of being able to silence people for giving offence.
I was just messing around being facetious. We tend to be the opposite of “outrage culture” around here
It's strange to me that Paul Wells, who is for my money the funniest Canadian journalist of my lifetime by leaps and bounds, attracts so many readers who are so literal that they can't recognize an obvious joke when they see one. I think some of it is that Paul's often critical of the prime minister of the day, so he picks up readers who think of him as The Guy Who's Mean To That Guy I Hate (I mean, that's how I first became a fan too), but I primarily think of him as an excellent and frequently hilarious writer.
Yeah I agree with you. Probably part of the audience is also political junkies who take every topic with dead seriousness. Those tend to be the types who fail to recognize the humour in the situation. Sort of like the HBO show Veep. They take themselves so seriously they fail to see how ridiculous they really are
But always always deeply offended nonetheless.
Some readers may recall that shortly after our Long National Nightmare began in October 2015 the PM granted an interview to the state organ of the Democratic party, also known as the New York Times.
Notably, he said the following of Canada "There is no core identity...".
Given the Canadian government's disinterest in reports regarding Pro-Khalistani extremist activities in British Columbia one has to wonder if the people fighting for the establishment of that nation are of the view that it too should have "no core identity".
For someone who is all for a country with no core identity the Father of the Nation seems to spend a great deal of time in diaspora politics, i.e. currying the votes of various groups who seem very much concerned with preserving a core ethnic or religious identity.
Whatever can it all mean?
Thanks Paul. As always, you approach these issues in an even-handed manner. I appreciate your perspective and your effort to keep us informed.