What western media carefully omits while covering Canada-India spat

The western media has been unsurprisingly doubling down on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegation that Indian agencies are behind the killing of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, British Columbia, Canada. The latest in this wave of criticism of India and Narendra Modi from the anglosphere of the US, UK and Canada — nervous about its waning influence and the emergence of a multipolar world — is from the Financial Times, UK. “But allowing India to commission a murder on Canadian soil — if that is what happened — would pose a much more immediate danger to national security than a temporary setback in efforts to counter China,” writes Gideon Rachman. “If the Indian government concluded that it now has a free hand to go after its enemies — foreign and domestic — wherever they are living, that would create a really dangerous precedent for multicultural societies such as Canada, Britain and Australia.” It follows criticism from senior journalist Fareed Zakaria, who says the incident has unleashed “a spasm of jingoism” in India. He cautions that the controversy may hurt India’s ambition on the world stage. However, Zakaria rightly analyses that the western outrage is playing out very differently in India, where it is only helping Modi. It paints India as a victim of foreign forces and the prime minister as the strong leader who is willing to give it back overtly or covertly. But by and large, the western media has lapped up Trudeau’s allegations as an excuse to attack India. The Economist headlined: ‘If India ordered a murder in Canada, there must be consequences’. “The western countries have far too long acquiesced to the Indian government’s abuses,” it wrote. But in its criticism, the chiefly left-leaning western media is subverting some of the lofty journalistic ideals they vociferously preach worldwide. First, western outlets unfailingly fail to mention what Khalistani terrorists have done. From assassinating an Indian prime minister and a chief minister to aviation history’s biggest terror attack before 9/11, the Air India AI-182 bombing in 1985 which killed 329 people aboard, most of them Canadians — the list is long but never gets into western coverage of the controversy. Second, they also do not mention that Khalistani terrorists killed hundreds of Indians in the name of religion. On 21 October, 1983, for instance, more than 100 Hindus were massacred in Gobindgarh. Just in the five months preceding Operation Blue Star in 1984, 294 Hindus were killed by Khalistanis, according to official figures. On 10-11 May, 1985, 85 Hindus were killed in serial bomb blasts carried out by Khalistanis in Delhi, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. Third, the western media outlets have variously addressed Nijjar as ‘priest’, ‘plumber’, and ‘activist’, but never fleshes out the charges of terrorism, hit jobs in Punjab and conspiracy to kill a Hindu priest. They conveniently skip referring to the Interpol red corner notice against him, the fact that he had arrived in Canada on a fake passport and identity, and was put on a no-fly list. Fourth, the western media does not speak about the role of ISI in fanning and funding Khalistani terror, and how groups like Sikhs for Justice led by designated terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannu were linked to the ISI’s Houston Network. Fifth, the duplicity of the West on overseas hits and terrorism in general is appalling. It blames China, Russia, Saudi and now India for overseas assassinations while never mentioning the dozens of such killings by the US, Israel or even the UK. The West has arrogated itself the moral authority of certifying who is a terrorist and who is not. Canada, for instance, currently harbours not just dozens Khalistani terrorists, but a few war criminals convicted in Bangladesh. Sixth, Trudeau is presented as the epitome of liberalism and Canada as this wonderfully peaceful multicultural country when the truth is far from it. Besides harbouring terrorists and criminals, Trudeau’s Canada has unleashed an era of authoritarian excesses. It recently feted a former Nazi in Parliament. It hounded protesters of the truckers’ movement, meting out draconian penalties and jail terms. Lately, Canada used one of the world’s most repressive online censorship schemes to force all online streaming services that offer podcasts to formally register with the government and permit regulatory controls. And lastly and most importantly, Justin Trudeau has not produced a shred of evidence so far on India’s involvement after making his reckless, ties-burning statement. The western media does not think it is necessary. Financial Times embodies this sense of entitlement. It recently wrote about Canada presenting “evidence orally” but India rubbishing it. The Anglosphere still nurses its colonial hangover, believing that the onus is on former subjects to prove its wild, unsubstantiated allegations right, to never raise their voice, and to not embarrass it publicly. India is guilty of shattering all three expectations, and merrily so. Abhijit Majumdar is contributing editor, Firstpost. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views. Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News, India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.