Diplomatic tensions between India and Canada have flared anew as the U.S.-based Khalistani separatist group Sikhs for Justice (SFJ) has threatened to "siege" the Indian Consulate in Vancouver on Thursday, September 18, 2025. This latest threat comes just as both countries appeared to be taking tentative steps toward restoring normalcy in their strained relationship, following a tumultuous two years marked by accusations, denials, and diplomatic standoffs.
The SFJ, which is banned in India but operates from abroad, issued a stark warning to Indo-Canadians, urging them to avoid visiting the consulate on the targeted day and to "choose an alternative date." According to iNDICA News, the group circulated a poster featuring a photograph of the newly appointed Indian High Commissioner to Canada, Dinesh Patnaik, with a target mark placed over his face—a move that has heightened concerns about the safety of Indian diplomatic staff and the broader Indo-Canadian community.
In its statement, the SFJ referenced Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s dramatic announcement in the Canadian Parliament on September 18, 2023. At that time, Trudeau stated that his government was investigating "the alleged role of Indian agents in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar." Nijjar, a prominent Khalistani figure and NIA-designated terrorist, was shot dead outside a gurdwara in Surrey, British Columbia, on June 18, 2023, an event that sent shockwaves through both countries and set off a diplomatic crisis.
The SFJ’s statement, as reported by multiple outlets, was blunt: "Two years ago — 18 September 2023 — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Parliament that the Indian agents’ role was under investigation in the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar. Two years on, Indian Consulates continue to run spy network and surveillance targeting Khalistan Referendum campaigners." The group contends that its planned siege is a demand for "accountability for espionage and intimidation on Canadian soil."
The threat, described by the SFJ as "so grave" that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) had to place Inderjeet Singh Gosal—who took over the Khalistan Referendum campaign after Nijjar’s death—under witness protection, has rattled Indo-Canadian communities and prompted a flurry of security preparations. The group’s provocative language and explicit targeting of Indian diplomats have raised the specter of violence and further destabilization of diplomatic relations.
These events unfold against a backdrop of persistent tension between Ottawa and New Delhi. After Nijjar’s killing in 2023, Prime Minister Trudeau publicly accused Indian agents of involvement, claiming that his government had "credible allegations" linking them to the assassination. However, the Canadian government later admitted it had not provided hard evidentiary proof to support these claims. India, for its part, forcefully rejected the accusations, labeling them "absurd" and "motivated," and accused the Trudeau administration of engaging in "vote bank politics"—a charge suggesting that domestic political considerations were driving the public rhetoric more than solid intelligence.
According to The Times of India, India has consistently expressed concern over Canada’s handling of Khalistani extremism, arguing that Ottawa has allowed "extremist and anti-India activities to grow unchecked." The presence and activities of groups like SFJ, which is banned in India but operates openly in North America, have been a particular sore spot. Earlier this month, a Canadian government report acknowledged the presence of Khalistani terror groups in the country, a rare public admission that has only added fuel to the diplomatic fire.
Despite these challenges, there have been recent signs of a thaw. India and Canada recently appointed new high commissioners after Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Canadian counterpart Mark Carney reached an understanding during Modi’s visit to Canada for the G7 summit in June 2025. This diplomatic gesture was intended to signal a willingness to move past the acrimony of the previous two years and rebuild trust. Yet, the SFJ’s threat has cast a long shadow over these efforts, suggesting that the road to normalization will be anything but smooth.
The SFJ’s tactics are not new, but the explicitness of their current campaign—complete with targeted imagery and calls for a public siege—marks an escalation. The group’s focus on the Khalistan Referendum campaign, which seeks to create a separate Sikh homeland, has long been a source of friction between the two countries. India views the movement as a security threat and an affront to its sovereignty, while Canada, with its large and politically active Sikh diaspora, has struggled to balance free speech protections with concerns about extremism and foreign interference.
The threat to the Vancouver consulate has prompted serious security concerns. While Canadian authorities have not publicly detailed their response, the fact that the RCMP has placed key Khalistani campaigners under witness protection underscores the seriousness with which the threat is being taken. For Indo-Canadians, the warning to stay away from the consulate on September 18 is both unsettling and emblematic of the broader risks posed by transnational political disputes playing out on Canadian soil.
Observers note that the timing of the threat is significant. It comes exactly two years after Trudeau’s initial parliamentary statement and at a moment when both governments are trying to lower the temperature. The SFJ’s actions, therefore, risk undermining fragile diplomatic progress and reigniting public debate over the handling of extremism, diaspora politics, and the limits of free expression in Canada.
For many, the episode highlights the challenges of managing diaspora-driven activism in a globalized world. Canada’s multicultural ethos and robust protections for political speech have made it a magnet for various international movements, but they have also exposed the country to accusations of harboring extremists. India, meanwhile, continues to press for stronger action against groups it sees as threatening its national security, even as it seeks to maintain constructive ties with Ottawa.
As September 18 approaches, all eyes will be on Vancouver. Will the SFJ follow through on its threat? How will Canadian law enforcement respond, and what impact will this have on Indo-Canadian relations going forward? For now, uncertainty prevails, and the specter of renewed confrontation looms large over a relationship already tested by tragedy, mistrust, and the complex realities of transnational politics.
In the end, the fate of the Indian consulate in Vancouver may come to symbolize the broader struggle between security and civil liberties, national sovereignty and diaspora identity—a struggle that shows no sign of abating any time soon.
