The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Folks, I think I found a link between Canada's actions and some recent events.
I was listening to some Europe based English language news channels over radio the other day and heard a detailed discussion on the 2010 report of Human Rights Watch. The report was released last week.
I personally feel that the opinions of HRW have a direct influence on Canada's visa policies.
See this here:
The Indian government and militants in various parts of the country are locked in a vicious cycle of violence. Cases of arbitrary arrest, torture and forced confessions by Indian security forces are common. The use of "fake encounters"-in which people are taken into custody and shot, with officials falsely claiming that the deaths occurred during an armed exchange-are a continuing cause of serious concern. Police torture is also common, including in counterterror operations.
It is most likely that the Canadian government has found some parallel with HRW and decided to adopt its views as broad guidelines for visas.
Now add to that a silly or new Commissioner who does not think of the larger picture and denies visas?
kancha wrote:Gentlemen, a noobie question, Plz indulge me.
What is it exactly that we gain by being a member of the Commonwealth? Aussies have no love lost for us, the Brits are in a league of their own, then there is Pakistan and now Canada.
What good this company does for us is beyond me.
"I personally feel that the opinions of HRW have a direct influence on Canada's visa policies. "
Possibly, but what about the actual goings-on and ground realities in India itself? These are educated people, who should be informed, intelligent, and knowledgeable ( without necessarily being experts) about the country they are serving in. India has many insurgencies/terror movements, so of course the Indian military and para-military would be deployed against them.
Constructive criticism on how to deal with these, given in the right environment/channels, is the way to approach the problem. Not pompous, presumptuous, arrogant finger-wagging and judgementalism. To repeat, it would really be helpful if someone could point to another country experiencing what India is going through, and dealing with it or solving it, more humanely than what India is displaying. I don't think such an entity exists.
Soon after Kenney expressed regrets, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said in Bangalore that Canada had realised its "mistake" and India treats the matter a "closed chapter".
"We have received a copy of the statement made by Jason Kenny, Canadian Minister for Citizenship. He has expressed high regards for India. They have deeply regretted the recent letter drafted by low level officials on routine visa applications casting aspersions on security forces," he told reporters.
"They told us that this language in no way reflects the policy or perceptions of Canada about India. I think they have realised their mistakes. We should consider the chapter closed," Krishna said.
SMK was at pinnacle of his insipidity while talking to press 'live', looked more dead.
I am not specifically against the UPA or the Congress, but their line up of Ministers is a sight to behold -
Mamta di (and her recent performance at the railway disaster), SM Krishna. Not much leadership qualities on display. It doesn't look like they can come to a disaster and take charge of the situation and smooth out the sarkari system so that it delivers promptly.
kancha wrote:Gentlemen, a noobie question, Plz indulge me.
What is it exactly that we gain by being a member of the Commonwealth? Aussies have no love lost for us, the Brits are in a league of their own, then there is Pakistan and now Canada.
What good this company does for us is beyond me.
I think people here are refusing to see what some people in establishment could be thinking about. Its all about our future! The Commonwealth of Great Britain or simply the Commonwealth is an amalgam of 54 countries that were members of the British empire in the past, so-what gives? Why are we associated with this relic from past century? Why are we even bothered about UK?
Before we delve into usual Dilli Billi/US is the big baap/Londonistan/"Meri University Teri University se Safed hai" kind of useless and frankly counter-productive logic, I present a case for the "Commonwealth"
1) India to replace Britain as the leader of commonwealth: Believe it or not but this is one international organization that has not been infiltrated by the lizard and remains a place where India counts for a lot without hyphenation. The Secretary General of the body is an Indian and the Chairperson is a person of Indian origin. Canada and Australia have moved onto complete poodledom of USA and China respectively and we cannot expect them to be serious about commonwealth. However we have a decent chance of power projection and strengthening the group around ourselves. The key is that Commonwealth should become an exclusive preserve of Indo-UK entente!
2) Commonwealth Countries include huge concentrations of PIOs: All the Commonwealth countries host major PIO and NRI populations. These populations may not be very rich but they are politically powerful lot within the countries ie Trinidad and Tobago (the PM is an Indian origin lady), Fiji, Guyana and even UK. The "Commonwealth" platform shall serve to create an institutional paltform for Indian to connect and harness these population to further the geopolitical goals of India. These populations have often been let down by Indian state and it is high time now to remedy the situation and start building our power projection to help such populations of Indians become more potent. Think about votes in the UN and overseas power projection!
3) Trade and Business: Most commonwealth countries share the laws and business regulations therefore making for nearly seemless business and trade between the countries. Indian companies and institutions should make a grand effort at harnessing these synergies and establish Indian as the top dog when it comes to trade and business efforts within the Commonwealth.
4) Power Projection: Indian "helped" suspend Paqs in 1999 and 2007 from the Commonwealth Membership causing much and heartburn across the Ravi. The key here is that stronger the "Commonwealth" the greater is the heartburn to Paqs when they will be shoved around.
Finally I would like to say that Britains' conservatives have realized the limits of their country's power and potential. They are seeking a renewed "special" relationship with India and Indiana should take this opportunity to inherit the leadership of Commonwealth in lieu of stronger economic ties and help in making UK competitive in atleast some economic fields. UK is a country whom we can manage without being swamped off our feet, the same cannot be said about Khan. If William Hague and David Cameron can move beyond the old postures and Millibundish logic, why should not we do the same?
Its time to think and think big, Commonwealth is a network that may be old and clunky but one that can be harnessed by us to a devastating effect. I rest my case.
I don't understand the heartburn. Canada does not want people of certain type inside her borders. That is her right. What is so wrong and outrageous about it?
Sikhs and the GOI/INC have been trading slaps for more than half a century. Assuming the Sikhs are behind the Canadian decision, then what is happening is to be expected.
surinder wrote:I don't understand the heartburn. Canada does not want people of certain type inside her borders. That is her right. What is so wrong and outrageous about it?
Sikhs and the GOI/INC have been trading slaps for more than half a century. Assuming the Sikhs are behind the Canadian decision, then what is happening is to be expected.
Its not so much so about denial of visa to individuals, its about branding of Indian agencies like the IB, BSF and Punjab Police as "terror sponsoring entities" or "violators of human rights". Given the rising stature and power of India such value judgements by petty one bit officials of a tier 2 country from west is simply intolerable. The event was grave enough to warrant really interesting back channel slaps to Kanaadaa. I am glad that better sense prevailed and the Kanadians apologized like accha baccha.
Regarding the second line of your post I would really like to a draw a china wall between Khalistanis and Sikhs per se. The Khalistanis of Canada are really deluded fellows who have not moved beyond the 1980s and these people deny any cross linkages between Punjabis of all hues. If the Canadian actions were motivated by the machinations of such narrow minded ideologues and violent elements then it is doubly shameful. The Sikhs have spoken out nay entire Punjab gave a befitting reply to the troubles of 1980s and 1990s in one voice. The Khalistanis are a troubled offspring born out the unholy wedding of bad circumstances created by INC and Zia Ul Haq.
Firstly, I have no knowledge that Sikhs are behind the snub, but I will accept the BRF verdict. It does not seem unreasonable to me.
Secondly, let me say something that is not going to make me popular here. When a country/nation picks fights that in the long and short term decrease its standing, then it is a mark of of the lack of wisdom, foresight, and greatness. By that logic, this action by Canads is hardly suprising or unanticipated. The real answer is that a nation must never let its internal cohesion be wasted for so little a reward.
By the way, if I meet a police official (low level or high-level) who was posted in 1984 November in one of the Sikh localities of Delhi (e.g. Tirlokpuri), I think it is highly likely he was complicit and/or in intimate knowledge of the state-sponsored 1984 Sikh massacres. That is just common sense, not bigotry. If I don't want to socialize or want him in my country, that would be a choice based on reasonable and sensible common sense.
If India wants respect as a good benign civilized power, maybe it should get at least a few convitions for the 5000 Sikhs that were killed in Delhi, Bokaro, and Kanpur. If it wants to be feared and awed (like PRC) then it has to increase its level of human rightts violations. It cannot have both, it must decide what it wants.
surinder wrote:Firstly, I have no knowledge that Sikhs are behind the snub, but I will accept the BRF verdict. It does not seem unreasonable to me.
There is no evidence that the sikhs are behind the snub. Everyone is just speculating.
surinder wrote:When a country/nation picks fights that in the long and short term decrease its standing, then it is a mark of of the lack of wisdom, foresight, and greatness.
Who are the countries that will judge us? The commonwealth? The same nations that are responsible for rape and genocide and colonizing the lands that do not belong to them? Why? Cause there "master" has armed itself to a level where it can destroy the world several times over?
Let one thing be clear. This is the east. They drops nukes on japan cause they couldn't pacify the empire. They vacation-ed in vietnam and raped and killed hundred thousands but still lost to the gooks. There getting bled out in afghanistan. India is not there ticket to the east. The east is not australia, south africa or the americas.
surinder wrote:The real answer is that a nation must never let its internal cohesion be wasted for so little a reward.
I don't think this is for reward. It is very simple.
It's their seat. Their rope. Their tie. Their lands deeds. Their tribunals. Their human right watch dogs. Their hired guns. Their UN organizations. Their G20's.
It's their camp. Keep it to themselves.
surinder wrote:That is just common sense, not bigotry. If I don't want to socialize or want him in my country, that would be a choice based on reasonable and sensible common sense.
It is not about visa's. Even if it were about visa's, canada is still a colonized country. The caucasians do not own it. The world is yet to try them for rape and genocide.
surinder wrote:If India wants respect as a good benign civilized power, maybe it should get at least a few convitions for the 5000 Sikhs that were killed in Delhi, Bokaro, and Kanpur.
Oh please not the C word. The delay in justice to the sikhs is a political problem of india. If canada wants to have a say on the problems of sikhs in india, then why cannot india speak out against the genocide of native indians of the americas? Who the fu@k is the civilized one here?
surinder wrote:If it wants to be feared and awed (like PRC) then it has to increase its level of human rightts violations. It cannot have both, it must decide what it wants.
Lessons from a nation like canada? Give me a break man. I don't trade my history for a hollywood dvd.
Not Canada's fault? Whose fault was it? Mongolia? Did Mongolian officials deny the visas?
This was not the action of an 'average guy'. It was the action of the Government of a sovereign state, one that is wealthy, developed, and quite sophisticated. A state with professional external affairs, intelligence and military affairs civil servants.
No amount of propaganda is going to cause the Canadian Government bureaucracy to act in this manner.
This was a deliberate policy.
Agree with Gerard. According to newspaper reports this has been going on for a few months. It didn't stop because the GoI proactively found it . It stopped when an affected party went public.
If it went on for so long then surely the higher-ups knew about it.
surinder ji, I am fully with you regarding the lack of justice on the perpetrators of the killings.
however, that does not give canada the right to lecture us, much less paint the whole Indian security establishment as one that indulges in human rights violations or terrorism.
by the same token, it would not be difficult to point out instances of biases and selective support of terrorism by the canadian establishment itself, which in fact affect us unlike these purported violations by BSF or IB that doesn't affect canada in anyway.
looking at it dispassionately, we have a far stronger case for taking steps against canadian govt officials than canada does on our security establishment people.
As I said earlier, the fact that Kamal Nath was allowed into Canada inspite of protests by Sikh groups means that this latest spat was the result of an idealistic officer, acting alone or perhaps in conjunction with a section of the Canadian establishment. Canadian leadership never bought into the tarring and feathering of GoI officials attempted by the human rights advocates.
Well, I suggest we erect signs outside the Canadan Embassy that reads:
It has come to the notice that the Canadian Embassy is rejecting the visa applications of individuals who was in the government service at various departments.
If your visa gets rejected citing your service in the government as a reason, please forward a copy to The Office of the Canadian Visa Rejection Scruitiny for further action.
This is your Canadian speaking, Ravi Karumanchiri…
We have encountered some unexpected turbulence on our journey toward improved India-Canada relations.
Please remain in your seats, with your seatbacks upright and your seatbelts fastened, for your safety.
Kindly ensure that the table-trays in front of you are returned to their secured position…
Extinguish any burning torches, lower your pitchforks and sheath any knives…
And refrain from crapping all over the place, because it’s undignified.
We will return to normal operations as soon as possible.
Thank you for your patience.
_______________________________________________________________________________________ SUBTEXT:
I’ve been very, very busy lately (and the weather here in Toronto has been very, very nice); so I’ve been attending to work and play, while neglecting BRF, which is neither, really. While I wasn’t looking, this whole ‘visa affaire’ unfolded, and I was not even aware of it until late Thursday, when I noticed links to Indian newspaper articles on the main page of BR (which I had visited almost every day – though not the forums, which is why I did not know sooner). I read the articles linked from BR’s main page and I was aghast.
Please understand that there was no mention of any of this in the Canadian media to alert me any sooner; not the TV news, nor radio programs nor any newspaper – not that I noticed, anyway. I caught-up on the story by reading the posts in this thread and the links some of these posts provided, which was difficult for me on a few levels (and I’ll get to that later). Eventually, I came to that post linking to a comments section that followed an article on ‘The Globe and Mail’ newspaper website, which I normally read every day – but this particular article was never posted on the main page of the website; it was buried in a section on the upcoming ‘G8/G20’ summit, which I had never cared to follow. I subsequently found – by using the ‘search’ utility – an article on thestar.com, though it does not appear anywhere on the main webpage of that website either.
I want to offer BRF my analysis of what has happened lately with this ‘visa affaire’, because I can see that it is desperately needed, but I cannot get into all of the fine details right at this moment, because I am exhausted from a very heavy work week. Instead, I will offer the following IN BRIEF:
1. The headlines in the Indian newspapers, and the newscasters on Indian TV told the story of how “Canada denies Visas, yada, yada, yada”. This seems to have given some people the false impression that Indian visa applications were translated into referendum questions, and the entire population of Canada voted unanimously to deny each one, for racist reasons, because everyone in Canada is a colonial at heart. Then, some high level diplomat, after intimate consultations with the PMO and cabinet, worded a series of smarmy visa denial letters, expecting that would put each request to rest. I want to clarify, unequivocally, that NOTHING OF THIS SORT HAPPENED.
2. As per #1, there is no justification to disparage all Canadians and denigrate all of Canada, even if you feel that “Canada” has disparaged the entire BSF, IA and IB – because two wrongs don’t make a right. Moreover, doing so would not seem to reflect well on Indians, IMHO, but of course, I am sophisticated enough to divorce the ill advised comments of individuals from broader assignment to the group to which the individual belongs. After all, everyone speaks for themselves, and some of us are idiots – I am sure we can all agree on that.
3. Looking for a specific focus of blame, some posters in this thread have named a few possible actors who they say have apparently skewed Canadian policy against India, including; 1) Khalistanis, 2) Pakistanis, 3) the Chinese, 4) the Americans, 5) the British, 6) Human Rights Watch, and 7) the UN. (I hope I didn’t miss anyone.) My analysis clearly indicates that none of these potential third-party actors had anything at all to do with it – and I could explain that analysis to you at length, but right now I lack the stamina and I’m sleepy. For the time being, please just take my word for it that none of these actors are to blame for the ‘visa affaire’, for a number of reasons that I am confident you will agree with when/if I explain them in this thread. I will account these faulty appropriations of blame as projections of old fears onto new circumstances, which is understandable, after all – we all do this when we encounter a shock. Please just trust me when I tell you that it was not; the Khalistanis, Pakistanis, Chinese, Americans, Brits, HRW or the UN – nor anyone else that may have been mentioned as a possible culprit in this thread thus far. No, my fellow Rakshaks – the party that drew the weapon, loaded it, aimed it and pulled the trigger, is not from any one of these aforementioned groups. You might take some comfort to know that India was not even the main target of all this, in case that’s any consolation.
4. If you really want to know where the blame belongs for the ‘visa affaire’, do what the police do when solving a crime. Start by considering three basic things; motive, opportunity and means. Then also consider the timing and the context, and assess the damage that was done, and ask that classic Latin question, “Cui Bono?” (To whose benefit?). If you do this as carefully as I have, knowing what I know from having lived as a politically-astute Canadian my whole life, and taking into account all of the pertinent details in the matter, which extends back a couple of years in time, you will realize that there is only one conclusion: That a “bureaucratic torpedo” was fired by DFAIT as a means to ensure that the present minority government lead by Stephen Harper’s ‘Conservatives’ does not improve its position in the next Canadian election. That is the bottom line of my analysis. I should add that I am not a fan of Stephen Harper’s ‘Conservatives’ either, because I don’t think that his party or policies would benefit Canada, and I am of the belief that he wouldn’t do much good for India either – but that’s a whole other thing that I don’t have the stamina to explain right now.
5. It is now also crystal clear to me that a deeper backgrounder on the political realities of Canada is required in this thread on BRF, and I suppose that I should take this on as well.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE 1: ‘DFAIT’ stands for ‘Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade’. It is a large, entrenched bureaucracy without much affinity for the present minority government. It is also the central bureaucratic kernel for what has been referred to as Canada’s ‘Non-Proliferation Ayatollahs’, and the main source for much of the bureaucratic opposition to the normalization of nuclear trade between Canada and India.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE 2: This present minority government, lead by Stephen Harper’s ‘Conservative Party of Canada’, is unlike any previous ‘Conservative’ government that Canada has ever seen. First, understand that in Canada, we now have four main political parties at the Federal level. i) The Bloc Quebecois only fields candidates in the province of Quebec, and they see themselves as the protectors of Quebec (French) culture in Canada, occasionally taking things as far as a greater push for what they call ‘sovereignty’ (and the rest of Canada calls ‘separation’); but by and large, they have much affinity with the third party in Canadian federal politics. ii) This third party at the Federal level is the ‘New Democratic Party’, and it is widely regarded as ‘Socialist’ in Canada (although, that word means something different in India – but I won’t get into that here and now). iii & iv) The two ‘main’ parties in Canadian federal politics are/were known as the ‘Liberal Party of Canada’ (which still exists unchanged), and the ‘Progressive Conservatives’ (who have changed), and between the two of them, they have been at the helm of every Canadian government ever elected, usually in a majority position. THEN, IN 1987, A NEW POLITICAL PARTY SPRANG-UP in the province of Alberta, far away from the traditional power centers in industrialized, wealthy, and well-populated Ontario and Quebec, with political leanings to the right of the established ‘Progressive Conservatives’. This new, right-of-center party, drew membership from the ‘Progressive Conservatives’, and also brought new people into Canadian politics, who had never organized around their ideology in political terms, with a view toward establishing what they would describe as ‘Christian Values’ within the federal political establishment. This new political party was called the ‘Reform Party of Canada’, which then changed its name to the ‘Canadian Alliance’, making further gains along the way, until the point where it actually became more popular than the old-guard ‘Progressive Conservatives’ (who had attempted to move ‘right’ to staunch their losses to the upstart party). Then, in 2003, while the ‘Liberals’ were in power, the ‘Canadian Alliance’ merged with what remained of the ‘Progressive Conservatives’, in an attempt to ‘Unite the Right’; to form what is now the current minority government, named the ‘Conservative Party of Canada’. Two dynamics occurred during this era of transformation in right-of-center politics in Canada. First; religion entered politics more directly than ever before, as the new brand of ‘Conservatives’ sought to establish a reliable base of members, and second; many of those Canadians who identified as ‘Conservatives’ for fiscal reasons (rather than social reasons), quietly moved into the ‘Liberal’ camp. This explains why the upper echelons of DFAIT, which are comprised of senior civil service ‘veterans’ from successive ‘Liberal’ and old-guard ‘Conservative’ administrations; don’t have much affinity for the ‘Christian-inspired Conservatives’ that are presently in minority office under the leadership of Stephen Harper.
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE 3: Be prepared that this turbulent episode may get even worse (when SCoC Chief Justice John Major issues his 3100-page report into the bombing of Air India Flight 182, probably a week or two before the 25th anniversary of the attack, which is June 23rd). You can expect things to come to a full-boil shortly before the G20 conference here in Toronto (on June 26 and 27).
Phew! It’s 4AM here in Toronto now, and I’m going to bed. I need the rest -- more than you know.
PS: Please try not to hurl insults, epithets or false accusations while I’m asleep. Please remember that just because you feel justifiably indignant, doesn’t mean that you can dispense with your own dignity.
Thanks for following this thread,
Ravi Karumanchiri
Toronto
For other people who cbf reading wall of text above:
tl;dr
The Canadians are innocent onlee, a foreign embassy is not a representative of a country overseas onlee. This is all due to the Conservatives who lied, cheated and swindled their way into a minority government, they are all evil culprits onlee.
Indian media should have said 'Low level diplomat (who isn't a true representative of Canada) assigned to visas in the Canadian embassy, Delhi denies BSF man a visa', instead of 'Canada denies BSF man a visa'.
There were no outside influences in this denial, UN reports, perhaps personal bias had no effect whatsoever.
As per #1, there is no justification to disparage all Canadians and denigrate all of Canada, even if you feel that “Canada” has disparaged the entire BSF, IA and IB – because two wrongs don’t make a right. Moreover, doing so would not seem to reflect well on Indians, IMHO, but of course, I am sophisticated enough to divorce the ill advised comments of individuals from broader assignment to the group to which the individual belongs. After all, everyone speaks for themselves, and some of us are idiots – I am sure we can all agree on that
Thanks for the patronizing moralist harangue. Note that the posts were directed at "Canada" as a country and not really at individual Canadians. Point is Canada has a history of obfuscation, denial of and outright support and nurturing of anti India terror going back decades. Much that was directed by Canada's own version of "vote bank" politics .
Episodes like RCMP "accidentally" deleting Kanishka tapes (which is simply unbelievable by the way, they deliberately deleted the tapes to destroy evidence of their connivance and involvement) and hosting known terrorists like the guy who hijacked the Indian Airlines airliner to Lahore and who the Pakistanis later sent under a "false identity" (ha ..ha.. it must be a total joke, false identity indeed, he goes and lives with his brother in Canada, who has a very real identity), refuge and shelter to known terrorists who killed people in India in cold blood (Parmar, groups like Babbar Khalsa, KCF .. an entire alphabet soup of names) and finally federal, state and city supported and financed events where perpetrators of grave instances of terrorism are glorified.
All that makes Canada in my book a state sponsor of terrorism, just like Pakistan. India should treat Canada just like it treats Pakistan, a enemy state sponsor of terror. I think , just like Pakistan, India too should have stringent visa requirements for Canadian citizens visiting India, including fingerprinting requirements, anti terrorism checks, and city specific visa and daily Police reporting requirements.
“Cui Bono?” (To whose benefit?). If you do this as carefully as I have, knowing what I know from having lived as a politically-astute Canadian my whole life, and taking into account all of the pertinent details in the matter, which extends back a couple of years in time, you will realize that there is only one conclusion: That a “bureaucratic torpedo” was fired by DFAIT as a means to ensure that the present minority government lead by Stephen Harper’s ‘Conservatives’ does not improve its position in the next Canadian election.
This takes the cake. I would be absolutely spot on when I said that Canada is more like Pakistan than anything else , if the average Canadian had the exact same thought process.
This "Cui Bono?" or "Who Benefits " have been used by Pakis with brilliant effect to shine the "true light" on incidents which are otherwise subject to confusion. Let me illustrate a few.
1) Who is responsible for 9/11 ?
Osama Bin Laden you say ?. Wrong! Who benefits from driving wedge between US and the rest of the world and the larger Muslim and Arab world thus hurting the Palestinian and other causes ?. It is the JEWS who benefit!. So who was responsible for 9/11? JEWS AND ISRAEL. Didn't you know that 3000 Jews were specifically instructed not to come to work that morning?
2) Chittisingpura Massacre .
Was it the Kashmir terrorists /groups ?. Wrong!. It is the Indian intelligence. Who benefits from showing the Kashmir groups in bad light when Clinton is visiting?. The INDIANS. So who did it ? Indian intelligence. Didn't you know that there were gunmen wearing Indian Security forces fatigues and who were smelling of rum ?.
Anyways. Sleep well. When you wake up and smell the coffee, I really hope that for you and Canada it is a new day and a new start literally and metaphorically.
Going into a damage control mode, an embarrassed Stephen Harper government apologised and pledged to review immigration rules in an effort to repair relations, the Globe and the Mail said.
Canada's immigration law bars anyone who has committed war crimes or has engaged in terrorism, systematic or gross human rights violations, or genocide. . (Some morons must have concluded that indian security forces indulged in all or any of the above act, did they do it without their govt's knowledge. Or did canada conclude that)
"The Government of Canada therefore deeply regrets the recent incident in which letters drafted by public service officials during routine visa refusals to Indian nationals cast false aspersions on the legitimacy of work carried out by Indian defence and security institutions, which operate under the framework of democratic processes and the rule of law," he said.
....
Last edited by chaanakya on 29 May 2010 22:00, edited 3 times in total.
The Harper government vowed to review its immigration rules after Canadian visa officers in India touched off a furor by barring dozens of people on the grounds that their service in army, police and intelligence units made them complicit in human-rights violations.
Immigration Minister Jason Kenney issued an apology on Friday, saying Canadian immigration officials should never have cast aspersions on India’s institutions. The incidents, he said, showed visa officers have too much latitude.
For a deeply embarrassed Harper government, the pledge and apology were an effort to repair relations with a country it has been assiduously courting: India’s booming economy makes it a major target for attempts to build trade ties to the East.
And at home, the visa flap won’t help Conservative efforts to woo a diaspora of more than one million Indo-Canadians; some were offended by the insult, others by the apology.
Canada and India now chalk up the incidents to overworked immigration officers in the New Delhi embassy, where about half of the 360 staff members work on immigration matters. Canada and India, Mr. Kenney said in a statement, work closely together on security.
“The Government of Canada therefore deeply regrets the recent incident in which letters drafted by public service officials during routine visa refusals to Indian nationals cast false aspersions on the legitimacy of work carried out by Indian defence and security institutions, which operate under the framework of democratic processes and the rule of law,” he said.
The apology didn’t end there: It came with a pledge that Canada will review its policy on declaring foreigners inadmissible. The incident, he added, “has demonstrated that the deliberately broad legislation may create instances when the net is cast too widely by officials, creating irritants with our trusted and valued international allies.”
Thanks for following this thread,
Ravi Karumanchiri
Toronto
Your conversational style reminded me of the below:
Mr. Hutchinson: There is a documentary on BBC2 this evening about "Squawking Bird", the leader of the Blackfoot Indians in the late 1860s. Now this starts at 8.45 and goes on for approximately three-quarters of an hour.
Basil Fawlty: I'm sorry, are you talking to me?
Mr. Hutchinson: Indeed I am. Yes, now, is it possible for me to reserve the BBC2 channel for the duration of this televisual feast?
Basil Fawlty: Why don't you talk properly?
Since you were so tired, it would have been nice if you had just gone to sleep instead of effing up the thread formatting for the rest of us, who of course don't do any work and are never tired.
It doesn't really matter how many Canadians pissed in our punch-bowl and why they did it and whether they were left wing right wing or eating chicken wings. The Punch is ruined and Canada has to fix it.
Yes there can be a political angle and political skullduggery. But it would have been more natural for such an argument to work, if the attitudes were reflected directly from non-foriegn-affairs/immigration sectors of the Canadian bureaucracy. Visa or immigration officers posted overseas will be under more direct scrutiny and control of key departments of the government involved in diplomacy, national and international security, and of course with handles from the current political regime. Therefore, as a general rule, attitudes of immigration officers reflect underlying instantaneous government policy as formed by the political regime in power to a much greater degree than normal bureaucrats operating inside the country. Bureaucrats everywhere are blamed but those that rise in the hierarchy do so by compromising and fulfilling the innermost desires of the political fat cats.
Outside the country, the political regime can have a freer hand in dealing with foreign entities because it usually does not affect domestic politics. So, where domestic scrutiny keeps certain aspects of political "racism" towards "perceived other/alien" under the wraps for fear of backlash, such poltical "racism" can be given a freer reign away from the domestic public gaze.
If we apply the "who benefits" logic in reverse, such a signal kick in the butt of Indian security forces can also win votes from Kahlistani supporting community sections (not necessarily just among the Sikhs and all of the Sikhs), the LTTE supporting community section (not necessarily the entire Tamil community), the Jihad-e-Hind supporting community section (not just among the Pakistanis and all of Pakistanis), the patriotic Chinese (meaning those who support the CPC and PLA designs on India - and there can be non-patriotic Chinese in that sense too), perhaps even those BD expats holding resentment for the IA march on Dhaka.
It does not have to be that these groups have put pressure on these immigration officers, but simply that undisclosed policy of the political regime had been to use such incidents as leverage for domestic electoral considerations. Now "who benefits" can equally be used in this way - can't it?
there is only one conclusion: That a “bureaucratic torpedo” was fired by DFAIT as a means to ensure that the present minority government lead by Stephen Harper’s ‘Conservatives’ does not improve its position in the next Canadian election.
So a cabal in the Canadian bureaucracy is partisan enough to run an endgame around established policy and do something contrary to it, with the sole view of discrediting the party in power. Is that really what you are saying?
If so, Canada seems to be even more of a banana republic than we thought
there is only one conclusion: That a “bureaucratic torpedo” was fired by DFAIT as a means to ensure that the present minority government lead by Stephen Harper’s ‘Conservatives’ does not improve its position in the next Canadian election.
This "theory" sounds plausible.However the questions still remains unanswered.
Why do Indian Defense forces have a red flag associated with them?
Who flagged BSF and IB "Red"?
What other institutions in India are flagged similarly?
Is India an isolated country in this matter or Did any other nation apart from India had similar disgrace in the past few months? If so Who?
Unless we have answers to these questions it is unreasonable to judge any one theory correct or wrong.
I typed up some annotation to the piece by Ravi, then lost interest in midway. Instead, let me summarize what I thought:
1. It is very kind of your excellency to take the 90 seconds at the fag end of a heavy work/play week to show us savages our place in the big affaires, and to explain the Royal Canadian political system. We savages thank you for the kind gesture, though we aren't worthy of the kindness.
2. We savages realizes that anything that is not published in the Royal Canadian Media isn't worthy for your excellency's consideration, and are ashamed that your valuable time at the fag end of a heavy work/play week is wasted.
3. We savages realizes that some people are idiots. We were originally pretty convinced that those who made those rejection decisions were indeed, and now we realize there are more.
4. We savages realize that, being shown our place, we must sit quietly, preferrably binding ourselves down, and conforming to the rules. We thank your excellency for the kind consideration shown by not giving the verdict to throw us from the plane.
5. We savages realize that the officials in the embassy issue visas to their own homes, in their personal capacity, the the Royal Canadian government have nothing to do with that. We thank your excellency for that clarification.
One thing Canada needs to learn is that certain people can only be ruled by the stick. Just look at Africa, India, China, Middle East. That's how they run their countries. Because for their culture, that is the only method that works.
Canada and India now chalk up the incidents to overworked immigration officers in the New Delhi embassy, where about half of the 360 staff members work on immigration matters. Canada and India, Mr. Kenney said in a statement, work closely together on security.
No overworked immigration officer could come up with this nugget:
“You were at the very least willfully blind to the crimes against humanity committed by Punjab police in Amritsar,” the letter said, claiming government forces killed 6,000 Sikhs in Amritsar from 1984 to 1994.
These people have far too much time on their hands. That visa section needs to be cut by about 75%.
Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
That explains a few things. It is hard for me to believe that the khalistanis can influence a country's foreign policy. Now, if this DFAIT is in some way responsible for the nuke snub, then the current profiling of the BSF is not a hard thing for them to do.
Distinguishing the DFAIT diktats from canada's foreign policy is simply an act of dissuasion. I think the khalistani angle no longer fits. We need to accept the fact that the genuine authority hidden somewhere in canada does not view india as a favourable country. To the liberals, all communists are socialists and all socialists are nationalists. And all nationalists are Y_ _DO_S (fill the blanks)
Tanaji wrote:If so, Canada seems to be even more of a banana republic than we thought :
Tanaji, "Kaneda" is not a republic but a dominion with still H.M on the postage stamps like that other fellow poodle, Australia. UK Stan, Australia and Canada are constitutional monarchies with the same Monarch / Head of State and all of them poodles of Unkil.
So when these poodles go yip, yip, what you do is kick 'em.
This chief sitting bull quote almost brings a tear to the eye.
"What treaty that the whites have kept has the red man broken? Not one. What treaty that the white man ever made with us have they kept? Not one. When I was a boy the Sioux owned the world; the sun rose and set on their land; they sent ten thousand men to battle. Where are the warriors now? Who slew them? Where are our lands? Who owns them? What white man can say I stole his land or a penny of his money? Yet they say I am a thief. What white women, however lonely, was ever captive or insulted by me? Yet they say I am a bad Indian. What white man has ever seen me drunk? Who has ever come to me hungry and unfed? Who has ever seen me beat my wives or abuse my children? What laws have I broken? Is it wrong for me to love my own? Is it wicked for me because my skin is red? Because I am a Sioux; because I was born where my father lived: because I would die for my people and my country?"
Canada and India now chalk up the incidents to overworked immigration officers in the New Delhi embassy, where about half of the 360 staff members work on immigration matters.
Are the Canadians taking "how to give weird reasons to get out of a soup -101" from Isloo Bob, the hon. Mr.Rehman Malik?
The reasons being thrown out sounds eerily Paki like!!!
Then you may want to skip the youtube link I posted earlier. Written and performed by Robbie Robbertson, A half Mohawk, originally from Canada. Played guitar with the Band (Bob Dylan's backing band).
Soon after Kenney expressed regrets, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said in Bangalore that Canada had realised its "mistake" and India treats the matter a "closed chapter".
"We have received a copy of the statement made by Jason Kenny, Canadian Minister for Citizenship. He has expressed high regards for India. They have deeply regretted the recent letter drafted by low level officials on routine visa applications casting aspersions on security forces," he told reporters.
"They told us that this language in no way reflects the policy or perceptions of Canada about India. I think they have realised their mistakes. We should consider the chapter closed," Krishna said.
SMK was at pinnacle of his insipidity while talking to press 'live', looked more dead.
How is this chapter "closed"? This chapter is closed only *after* the following conditions are met:
a) Visas are issued for all the ex-BSF applicants who were denied. An apology to be tendered to each of them
b) Implementation of the "promised" revised visa policy by Canada & an acknowledgement from India that this new policy is acceptable to us
c) Ongoing monitoring by the Indian MEA that no such transgressions happen in the future
Till then, India needs to retaliate in kind by denying visas and diplomatic snubs.
Seems like S M Krishna is all too eager to accept a half-assed apology and a "promise" by Canada to look into it. Too scared to offend the goras, I suppose.
suspend Paqs in 1999 and 2007 from the Commonwealth Membership causing much 
