US provided Canada intelligence following murder of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar

The US gave intelligence to Canada following the murder of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, but conversations intercepted by Ottawa were more conclusive, leading it to accuse India of organising the plan, according to The New York Times, citing sources. The claim emerged on the same day that the senior US ambassador in Canada stated that Five Eyes allies exchanged intelligence that caused Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s provocative charge against India in the assassination of a Khalistani fanatic on Canadian territory. The claims enraged India, which dismissed them as “absurd” and “motivated” and removed a senior Canadian ambassador in retaliation for Ottawa’s removal of an Indian official over the matter. In addition, India accused Canada of providing a safe haven for terrorists. On June 18, Nijjar, the leader of the proscribed Khalistan Tiger Force (KTF), was assassinated in Surrey, British Columbia. Nijjar was labelled a terrorist by India in 2020. The US has encouraged India to help with Canada’s probes. “In the aftermath of the killing, US intelligence agencies offered their Canadian counterparts context that helped Canada conclude that India had been involved,” the NYT reported, quoting unnamed allied officials as saying. Yet what appears to be the smoking gun, intercepted communications of Indian diplomats in Canada indicating involvement in the plot, was gathered by Canadian officials, allied officials said. David Cohen, US Ambassador to Canada, in an interview with CTV News said that “shared intelligence among Five Eyes partners” had informed Trudeau of the possible involvement of Indian agents in the murder of a Canadian citizen in June. “I will say this was a matter of shared intelligence information. There was a lot of communication between Canada and the United States about this, and I think that’s as far as I’m comfortable going,” Cohen told CTV News. According to two allied officials, after Nijjar’s death, American officials told their Canadian counterparts that Washington had no advance knowledge of the plot and that if they had, they would have immediately informed Ottawa under the intelligence agencies’ duty to warn doctrine. According to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss what has become a diplomatic firestorm, Canadian authorities sent a generic warning to Nijjar but did not inform him that he was the target of an Indian government operation. Cohen told CTV that said that the US takes very seriously these allegations. And, you know, if they prove to be true, it is a potentially very serious breach of the rules-based international order in which we like to function," he said in response to a question. While Secretary of State Antony Blinken has called on India to cooperate with the Canadian investigation, American officials have largely tried to avoid triggering any diplomatic blowback from India, the paper said. But the disclosure of the involvement of US intelligence risks ensnaring Washington in the diplomatic battle between Canada and India at a time when it is keen to develop New Delhi as a closer partner, it said. Blinken said the US is deeply concerned about the allegations raised by Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau against India and Washington was closely coordinating with Ottawa on the issue and wants to see accountability in the case. Speaking at a press conference in New York on Friday, Blinken said the US has engaged directly with the Indian government on the issue and the most productive thing would be the completion of this investigation. Trudeau on Friday said that Canada shared with India “many weeks ago” evidence on the killing of Nijjar and wants New Delhi to commit constructively with Ottawa to establish the facts in the “very serious matter.” When asked about Canada sharing any information in the case with India, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in New Delhi said: “No specific information has been shared by Canada on this case, either then or before or after. We have, you know, as we have said, or I think we have made very clear, we are willing to look at any specific information.”