Priyanka Tiwari
Share
Suspense crime, Digital Desk : Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has delivered a scathing critique of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's foreign policy towards India. Rubin accused Trudeau of treating India like a "political football" to score points with domestic constituencies, a strategy he warns is damaging to international relations.
Rubin's comments highlight the starkly different approaches to diplomacy within Canadian political circles. His criticism centers on Trudeau's handling of the diplomatic crisis that erupted after he publicly accused the Indian government of involvement in the killing of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil. Rubin suggests that Trudeau's public and confrontational stance was driven more by domestic political calculations than by a sound foreign policy strategy.
In stark contrast, Rubin praised Mark Carney, a former governor of the Bank of Canada and Bank of England and a potential successor to Trudeau, for his recent engagement with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the G7 Summit. Carney's outreach was described as "mature" and "respectful," signaling a more pragmatic and constructive way to manage the relationship with a major global power like India.
According to Rubin, Carney's approach demonstrates an understanding that a country of India's stature cannot be disrespected or used for short-term political gain without significant consequences. The core of his argument is that effective and sustainable foreign policy requires statesmanship and a long-term strategic vision, not inflammatory rhetoric aimed at a domestic audience.
This commentary underscores the deep diplomatic rift between Ottawa and New Delhi and frames a clear choice in Canadian foreign policy: Trudeau's current confrontational style versus Carney's proposed model of mature and respectful re-engagement.
Read More: Pakistan and Afghanistan Border Tensions Flare Up with Night Long Heavy Firing
