In a recent development, New Zealand’s Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters, has raised significant doubts regarding the alleged Indian link to the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canada-based Khalistan separatist. This questioning comes as a blow to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who had earlier suggested such a connection without substantial evidence.
Peters, a seasoned lawyer, has demanded concrete evidence to support the claims made by Trudeau and his administration. He pointedly asked, “Where’s the case? Where’s the evidence? Where’s the finding right here, right now? Well, there isn’t one.” This skepticism from a member of the Five-Eyes intelligence alliance, which includes the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, marks a significant departure from the previous stance taken by these allied nations.
Trudeau had previously asserted that Canadian security agencies were investigating “credible allegations” of a potential link between Indian government agents and Nijjar’s killing. However, Peters’ questioning highlights a lack of substantiation for such claims, raising doubts about the validity of the allegations put forth by the Canadian government.
This skepticism has not been taken lightly by some Khalistani extremists, notably Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a figure associated with the ‘Sikhs for Justice’ group. Pannun, known for his pro-Khalistan activities, has expressed discontent over Peters’ stance and has resorted to threats against New Zealand’s diplomatic community. Last week, he issued a poster suggesting violent actions against India’s top diplomat in Canada, indicating the extent to which these extremists are willing to go to protect their narrative.
#BreakingNews :Gurpatwant Singh Pannun threatens New Zealand Dy PM Winston Peters over doubts on Indian link In Hardeep Singh Nijjar killing
— News18 (@CNNnews18) March 13, 2024
Exclusive inputs:@manojkumargupta @abhishekjha157 gives details #HardeepSinghNijjar #GurpatwantSinghPannun #Khalistan pic.twitter.com/8kuLUDsxrC
It’s essential to highlight that such threats and violent rhetoric are not uncommon among Khalistani extremists when their false narratives are challenged or debunked. They often resort to intimidation tactics and cry foul to maintain their agenda, regardless of the lack of evidence supporting their claims.
