The Indian state has historically opposed the Sikh community’s aspiration to form an independent nation called Khalistan. In support of such sentiments, long-lasting protest movements have emerged, particularly within the larger Sikh diasporas. These movements have often intensified the friction between Sikh nationalists and the Indian government, creating tensions that transcend India’s borders. This was recently exemplified by the sustained diplomatic disputes between India and the U.S. and the UK, showing a growing intersection of domestic grievances and international relations, raising questions about the future trajectory of India’s partnerships with its Western counterparts.

The Khalistan Movement

India’s staunch opposition to the creation of Khalistan serves as a crucial factor in assessing its recent diplomatic dynamic with the U.S. and the UK. The fundamental tensions between Sikhs and the Indian government primarily derive from Sikh demands for political autonomy and independence, a contentious issue that continues to challenge India’s domestic politics and its international relations.

The Khalistan movement emerged after the 1947 partition of India, which established Pakistan as an independent state for the Muslim minority. Denied a separate state, discontent significantly grew within the Indian Sikh minority, due to their unfulfilled aspirations for independence in the Punjab region. This discontent culminated in a series of insurgencies against the national government throughout the 1970s and 1980s. The Indian government responded accordingly and launched counterinsurgencies, leading to a cycle of violence and bloodshed on both sides.

The Indian government perceives the Khalistan movement as a direct threat to its territorial sovereignty. This growth of bilateral tensions, frequently marked by episodes of violence and confrontations, has strengthened this dynamic.

As a significant part of the Indian Sikh population migrates to Western countries, the conflict becomes increasingly complicated. Today, the Khalistan movement maintains a presence in countries such as the U.S. and the UK, each state home to a sizable Sikh community of approximately 500,000 individuals. This new reality has made it harder for the Indian government to intervene in the movement’s action without overstepping diplomatic boundaries. Recent accusations of Indian interference in Western Sikh movements by the U.S. and the UK point towards this fact.

Diplomatic Consequences: Strains in UK and U.S. Relations

The United States, an important Indian ally, has presented allegations pointing toward Indian-led interference on U.S. soil. In a significant development, Washington formally filed charges against New Delhi, accusing Indian officials of plotting to kill Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a separatist Sikh American citizen. This unprecedented accusation has significantly strained U.S.-India relations. 

The UK, despite its historically close diplomatic ties with India, has joined the U.S.-led pressure on Indian officials to cooperate with investigations into alleged interference with Sikh activists. As the UK has a large and well-established Sikh community – among which are vocal supporters of the Khalistan movement – the country sees great interest in following developments in the Canadian investigation on Indian interference. Moreover, the suspicious death of Avtar Singh Khanda, a pro-Khalistan British-Sikh, three days prior to the assassination of Ardeep Singh Nijjar—the focal point of Canada-Indian tensions—has heightened questions. The UK may see fit to probe deeper into these incidents to ensure national security interests, potentially further severing its diplomatic ties with India. The escalation of diplomatic tensions has culminated in symbolic acts of discord, such as the U.S. President Joe Biden turning down Indian Prime Minister Modi’s invitation to attend India’s Republic Day celebrations.

 While both situations point to heightened tensions between India and Western states, the diplomatic approaches and the immediate political developments in the U.S. and the UK indicate a high likelihood of bilateral reconciliation with India.

Nevertheless, while these allegations have undoubtedly strained ties, the future of U.S. and UK-Indian diplomatic relations appear more promising than that of Canada. At face value, the U.S. is a highly valuable ally for India, mainly due to its sizable economy. Additionally, India, because of its role in the Indo-Pacific region, acts as an indispensable counterweight to China, a role the U.S. likely want to capitalize on. This strategic alignment likely explains why Washington and New Delhi have managed to limit the diplomatic fallout following the Pannun controversy. Similarly, the UK, because of its desire to form a free trade agreement with India, has strong economic incentives to maintain amicable relations. Its ambition to strengthen its post-Brexit trade network aligns with India’s value as a major economic partner. 

Therefore, while recent U.S. and UK accusations of Indian interference depict weakening diplomatic relations, their strategic, political, and economic interests suggest otherwise as likely to drive efforts toward restoring ties. Unlike its Western counterparts, Canada remains at the centre of more intense diplomatic confrontations.

A Leader’s Influence

The international Khalistan movement therefore poses a persistent challenge for India, as it continually strains its diplomatic relations with Western nations. With India’s status as a rising power, it is unlikely to seek isolation and has thus been receptive to Washington’s cooperation. Furthermore, regardless of the upcoming political leadership changes in Washington, the strategic imperatives of U.S.-India relations, particularly regarding technology and defence, suggest that a continued bilateral engagement will remain a priority. This enduring partnership reflects mutual recognition of shared interests that transcend partisan politics. The UK, which is pushing for closer economic ties with India, also presents valuable incentives to cooperate diplomatically and, in turn, to prioritize reconciliation. In essence, though India may not rekindle with Canada any time soon, it still seems to shine positively in Western diplomacy, especially in the U.S. and the UK.

Edited by Samrawit Terrefe

The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and they do not reflect the position of the McGill Journal of Political Science or the Political Science Students’ Association.

Featured Image by MEA