Alleged Indian Role in Transnational Assassination Plots
INSIGHTi
Alleged Indian Role in Transnational
Assassination Plots
December 22, 2023
The U.S. and Canadian governments have alleged an official Indian role in assassination plots in North
America. These developments could affect the tenor and trajectory of the U.S.-India partnership and have
attracted congressional attention.
Canadian Allegations, September 2023
On September 18, 2023, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly stated that his government had
“credible allegations” that “agents of the Indian government” were involved in a successful plot to
assassinate a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil the previous June. The victim, Sikh separatist activist
Hardeep Singh Nijjar, had emigrated to Canada from India’s Punjab state in 1997. He was ambushed in
his car in a Vancouver suburb and shot dead by multiple gunmen.
Punjab, India’s only Sikh-majority state, was the site of extensive communal and separatist violence
during the 1980s and the early 1990s. Today, many analysts say there is little support in Punjab for efforts
to create an independent “Khalistan.” According to a 2021 survey, a vast majority of India’s roughly 25
million Sikhs are proud to be Indian (95%) and say a person who disrespects India cannot be a Sikh
(70%). Still, the Indian government had sought Nijjar’s arrest since 2018 for his alleged planning of
multiple terrorist attacks inside India, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had in September
conveyed to Trudeau India’s “strong concerns about continuing anti-India activities of extremist elements
in Canada.” The largest Sikh diaspora community—roughly 800,000—lives in Canada. Some Indian
officials sought to link violent Sikh separatist forces and large-scale “farmer protests” in 2020-2021.
New Delhi rejected the Trudeau government’s “unsubstantiated” claims as “absurd” and criticized it for
insufficient action against “Khalistani terrorists” inside Canada. An Indian government spokesman later
insisted that “no specific information has been shared by Canada on this case” and bemoaned Canada’s
“growing reputation as a safe haven for terrorists, for extremists, and for organized crime.” The two
governments engaged in tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions, and New Delhi temporarily halted visa
issuances for Canadian citizens.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed deep concern about the allegations and said it was “critical”
that India cooperate with the ongoing Canadian investigation. Although U.S. officials offered support for
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12292
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Canada and played down the potential for greater diplomatic damage, some observers speculated that the
India-Canada rift could strain the U.S.-India partnership. Such speculation was compounded by
indications that Trudeau’s claims were at least partly based on information gathered by the Five Eyes
intelligence-sharing alliance, which includes the United States and Canada.
U.S. Allegations, November 2023
On November 22, London’s Financial Times reported that U.S. law enforcement officials had thwarted
another assassination conspiracy, this time on U.S. soil. One week later, the Justice Department unsealed
an indictment alleging that an unnamed Indian government employee had directed a plot to murder a
U.S.-based leader of the Sikh separatist movement, later revealed to be joint U.S-Canadian citizen
Gurpatwant Pannun. The Indian government had listed Pannun, an immigration lawyer and social media
activist, as a “terrorist” in 2020. The foiled plot involved multiple co-conspirators, as well as several other
potential targets in the United States and Canada.
The Biden Administration reportedly became aware of the alleged plot in July, prompting U.S.
intelligence officials to visit India to ensure New Delhi’s cooperation with the investigation. In early
August, the U.S. National Security Advisor conveyed U.S. concerns to his Indian counterpart. In India for
a September G20 summit, President Joe Biden met with Modi, reportedly emphasizing “the potential
repercussions for the bilateral relationship were similar threats to persist.” A U.S. National Security
Council spokesman later said, “India remains a strategic partner…. At the same time, we take [these
allegations] very seriously.”
India’s official response to the U.S. allegations has been notably more measured than that following the
Canadian claims, purportedly because the United States had provided substantive evidence, whereas
Canada had not. An Indian government spokesman made clear that the alleged actions are contrary to
Indian policy. New Delhi acknowledged previous discussion of the issue with U.S. officials and promised
that it “takes such inputs seriously.” It stated that a “high-level Enquiry Committee” was formed to
investigate. Modi later vowed that New Delhi will “definitely look into” the matter, adding that his
government remains “deeply concerned” about the activities of “extremist groups based overseas.”
Analysis and Congressional Interest
Some observers maintain that these developments should not and/or will not derail a U.S.-India
partnership rooted in key shared values and interests. Some Indian commentators contend that the United
States maintains double standards when it comes to extrajudicial, transnational assassinations. Others,
including India’s foreign minister, focus on an ongoing threat to India posed by Sikh diaspora separatists
along with a perception that Western governments have not acted against them with sufficient urgency.
The alleged assassination plots may reflect the Hindu nationalism of India’s ruling party. Meanwhile, the
U.S. indictment appears to bolster Canada’s earlier accusations, and numerous analysts variously contend
that India was known to conduct lethal overseas intelligence operations, that New Delhi’s denials appear
weak and its credibility is being damaged, and/or that mutual trust and confidence in the U.S.-India
partnership is indeed under threat.
Some Members of Congress have taken interest in these developments, with several expressing worries
that U.S.-India relations could be negatively affected. Upon the U.S. indictment’s unsealing, the chairman
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) issued a statement on the “alarming rise in
transnational repression globally” and called news of the foiled assassination plot “disturbing.” At a
subsequent SFRC hearing on “Authoritarians Targeting Dissenters Abroad,” another Senator said of
India’s alleged involvement, “This is not the behavior of a respectable democracy.” On December 15,
after a classified briefing from the Biden Administration on the U.S. indictment, five Indian-American
House Members issued a statement warning that the actions outlined in the indictment could, if not
Congressional Research Service
3
appropriately addressed by India’s government, “cause significant damage to this very consequential
partnership.”
Congress has supported successive Administrations’ efforts to deepen the U.S.-India partnership. In light
of growing concerns about India’s democracy and human rights, Members may consider whether or not to
pursue legislative and oversight options to shape U.S. policy.
Author Information
K. Alan Kronstadt
Specialist in South Asian Affairs
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN12292 · VERSION 1 · NEW