Canadian universities bet on international students, but global shifts present risks

Useful remider:

When the University of British Columbia announced the launch of Vantage College in 2013, the school said it envisioned the program for fee-paying international students would have enrolment of 1,000 by August 2016.

The program would target first-year students who otherwise failed to meet UBC’s English requirements, providing them with extra language lessons in addition to their degree courses.

It would house the students — whose fees are now about $60,000 per year — in a $127 million facility designed by world-renowned architecture firm Perkins&Will, some of its dorm rooms featuring sweeping ocean views.

However, Vantage’s enrolment is currently 172 students, having declined every year since reaching 498 in 2018-2019.

The struggles of Vantage College reflect the unpredictable nature of the lucrative international education sector, as Canadian universities find themselves beholden to geopolitical and economic shifts.

There have been massive changes in the sector, with study permits for Chinesestudents in Canada plunging 40 per cent since 2018. Permits for students from India — where English is far more widely spoken — have meanwhile doubled.

UBC spokesman Matthew Ramsey said in a written statement that “work is underway” to assess the Vantage model.

He said the enrolment shortfalls “come as (international) students are increasingly entering faculties directly and using faculty-specific programming to enhance their English-language skills.”

The federal government said that in 2022  international students contributed more than $22 billion to the Canadian economy, greater than the contribution of auto parts or lumber exports.

In British Columbia, statistics from the province’s Council for International Education showed the sector generated $330 million in government revenue in 2019, creating more than 53,000 jobs.

“It’s a big sector,” said BCCIE executive director Randall Martin, noting the industry covers everything from K-12 education and two-year transfer colleges to language schools and degrees at large universities.

Martin said international students have played an integral role in “keeping the light on” for Canadian universities in rural and remote areas, allowing schools to offer mandated courses they would otherwise struggle to provide.

“In many ways, the sector is a real success. It’s over $7 billion coming into the provincial economy because of international education, and that includes tuition, housing, accommodations, meals … and, yes, I think it’s fair to say that the international student numbers will follow geopolitical trends.”

The industry in Canada — as in most popular international education destinations — largely relies on the high number of students from two countries: China and India.

Statistics Canada data show that students from the world’s two most populous countries accounted for more than half of the almost 550,000 study permits issued by Canada in 2022.

But permits given to Chinese students have fallen from 85,000 in 2018 to just short of 52,000 last year.

A similar slide has been reported by the BCCIE, with the number of Chinese international students in B.C. down from 50,000 in 2015 to 29,670 last year.

Martin said the decline began after the legal saga of Meng Wanzhou, the Chinese tech executive who was arrested in late 2018 and held in Vancouver until 2021, triggering a deep decline in China-Canada relations.

“I think Canada was portrayed as not a safe place for Chinese students in the Chinese media, and our numbers did go down a bit,” he said.

Karin Fischer, who writes a weekly international education newsletter called Latitudes, said while pandemic travel restrictions made the biggest dent in student numbers, the number of Chinese students in the West has not rebounded in the way numbers from India or elsewhere have.

Fischer said higher travel costs and a reluctance among Chinese families to endure lengthy separations from children post-pandemic are contributing factors. But deteriorating economic conditions in China — reducing both students’ ability to pay and find work after graduating — may be a key reason their numbers haven’t recovered.

“Going to study in another country is an enormous investment, even for a middle-class Chinese or Indian family,” Fischer said. “What is the expectation that they have about earning that degree? What is their return on investment?

“I wonder if some (Chinese) families are thinking, ‘God, should we spend all this money up front if we’re worried about (whether) our child is going to graduate and not have a job to come back to?'”

Tuition for Vantage College in 2023-2024 costs around $60,000, while other international students at UBC pay from around $42,000 to $58,000.

Domestic students’ tuitions range from around $6,000 to $9,000 a year.

The drop in Chinese students, Fischer said, tends to disproportionately affect Vantage College and other similar “pathway” programs for students needing English-language support.

The University of South Florida shuttered a similar pathway centre for international students recently because it wasn’t profitable, Fischer said.

“If you don’t have the volume of students, they’re really challenging,” she said of pathway programs. “And they worked particularly well for Chinese students because they had that combination of students who needed the extra language but who were generally academically prepared — and who could afford to pay for that.”

Indian international students tend to be proficient in English and do not require pathway programs, Fischer said.

Ramsey said UBC originally built the 1,049-room Orchard Commons complex to house both Vantage’s students and domestic first-year students, boosting integration and helping “create a positive experience for all students.”

A recent visit to the complex’s cafeteria at lunch time showed little sign of students in need of language support, with fluent English the language of choice.

Ayumi Yamamoto, a Japanese exchange student who started attending Vantage in September, said she does not live at Orchard Commons but at nearby Fairview Crescent.

She described Orchard Commons as “not crowded” and offering ample space for her and other Vantage students.

“They always have empty seats, at least one of them,” Yamamoto said.

While the number of Chinese students have fallen across Canada, overall international student numbers are on the rise, largely due to students from India.

Statistics Canada showed study permits issued to Indian students rose from 107,000 in 2018 to almost 226,000 last year. In B.C., their number went from 12,040 in 2015 to almost 75,000 in 2022.

Martin said much of that growth stemmed from immigration policy changes that allowed students seeking a two-year diploma to stay in Canada and work here for three years, opening the door to permanent residency.

But recent strains between Canada and India over the killing of a Sikh separatist leader in Surrey, B.C., have created more uncertainty. After Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last month said New Delhi may have been involved in the killing, India issued a travel advisory that warned of violence against Indian nationals and students in Canada.

Fischer said there is a precedent in Canada’s dispute with Saudi Arabia over the kingdom’s arrest of human rights activists in 2018. Permits issued to Saudi students fell from 5,080 in 2017 to 1,185 in 2019.

But Fischer said Saudi Arabia had been paying for students to go abroad and pulled their scholarships during the dispute.

“A place like India, it is almost entirely students paying their own way,” she said. “So it’s hard to know (of India’s impact) because it’s individual students making all sorts of individual choices.”

Canadian universities have been looking to diversify their international student populations beyond India and China.

Graham Barber, assistant director of international relations at Universities Canada, a national advocacy body for universities, said recent outreach has focused on countries such as Mexico, Nigeria, Vietnam, Brazil and the Philippines — places with growing middle-class populations and young people willing and able to travel to study.

“We (have) world-class institutions that are really, really good at this,” Barber said about finding new markets. “One of the great things about being in Canada is there’s such a diverse population here. They really have those people-to-people ties to be able to pivot quickly to different areas and to work with new partnerships.”

UBC’s Ramsey said while the Vantage model may be under assessment, its supportive approach to international students isn’t going away.

“It’s too soon to say what form that may take in the years ahead,” he said. “What we can say is there is a need for this type of instructional model on our campuses now and moving forward.”

Source: Canadian universities bet on international students, but global shifts present risks

McKinnon: The India debacle should prompt Canada to rethink the naive way we engage with the world

From a former colleague of mine.

Always been a challenge with large diaspora communities and will likely remain so, to a greater or lessor cost depending on the issue and situation:

The implosion of the Canada-India relationship, only months after our Indo-Pacific Strategy described India as a “critical partner,” is stunning. Canada’s relationship with a democratic and pluralistic India was intended, at least in part, to be a counterweight to our troubled relationship with authoritarian China. But after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced last month that there were “credible allegations” that the Indian government was involved in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, B.C., the two countries engaged in a tit-for-tat expulsion of senior diplomats; now, Delhi is reportedly further demanding the removal of 41 of Canada’s 62 remaining envoys.

The immediate cause of the breakdown may rest with Delhi, but the dysfunction has deep roots. A serious rethink is needed to get the relationship back on track. This includes consciously balancing national interests – Canada’s security and prosperity – against special interests, including the diasporas, in our relationship with India.

If the allegations are true, there will be implications for India’s international standing. It would no longer be seen as a largely benign democratic counterweight to China and Russia. Instead, it would prove that it is what it has always been: a complex giant focused on taking its place in the world and advancing its interests, albeit now under a leader in Prime Minister Narendra Modi who has overtly sidelined Jawaharlal Nehru’s original vision of a secular and tolerant democratic India. Canada and its allies must grapple with the contradictions of developing closer relations with an important country with an increasingly illiberal leadership – a more difficult task if there is serious evidence India is behind extrajudicial killings abroad.

A real challenge for Canada is that our allies have enough at stake in their own relations with India that they are unlikely to countenance their own serious ruptures with Delhi, even if they accept our version of events and want to be supportive. Despite tough talk in Canada, holding Indian officials accountable will be hard, to say the least, particularly if no one is put on trial. Nonetheless, a message needs to be sent that this cannot happen again.

But while I am shocked by this turn of events, I am not surprised that the long-standing misalignment in the relationship led to a deep cleavage.

As Canada’s trade and investment relationship with a booming India grew in the 2000s, a visit to the country became a priority for politicians from all levels of government. In my experience from that time, it was clear that for the most part, their interests were at least as much in the prospect of photos from an India trip playing well with voters in Canada than in seriously engaging the country. Politicians from across the spectrum wanted to see the country and the relationship in terms they could understand easily and convey to audiences at home, especially from Indian-originating diasporas. And so official visitors routinely described the Canada-India relationship as based on shared values of democracy and human rights, as well as strong people-to-people links.

Indeed, those links were seen by most Canadians to be an undiluted positive. From the Indian perspective, though, it was much more complex – the Indian diaspora, like the country itself, is diverse. The Indian diaspora in Canada is very large, with perhaps half of it Sikh, even as Sikhs represent only 2 per cent of India’s population. I recall reminding politicians who were heading to photo-ops in the city of Amritsar that it was important to remember that Sikhs, an impressive and distinguished community, made up about the same percentage of India’s population as that of their home provinces, so they needed to appreciate how much of India they were not seeing.

Even then, though, little attention was given to the complex history of the relationship, or our more substantive and enduring interests (economic, geopolitical, etc.) in a growing country that is home to 20 per cent of humanity. Or that it is in Canada’s interest to develop a substantive relationship with India, whether or not our values are precisely aligned. Instead, we mistakenly assumed that, because the relationship was based on shared values and our large India-originating diaspora, our relationship was assured.

But whatever pleasantries the Indian hosts might have offered visiting Canadians, you can be sure that they were much more focused on the hard edge of their interests and advancing them. Our view of the relationship would inevitably conflict with those of a country located in a difficult region where national interests were seen as paramount, and where the focus of the otherwise limited relationship with Canada touched on India’s national security.

Indeed, while the Canada-India relationship has difficult elements to its history – including the discovery that a Canadian nuclear reactor provided to India for peaceful purposes in 1954 had been used to launch India’s nuclear weapons program in 1974 – the most significant continuing irritant is the support in Canada for the cause of Khalistan, the concept of a separate Sikh homeland. In the 1970s, Canada developed a reputation as a base for the Khalistani movement. While simply voicing support would clearly be protected speech under Canadian law, violence in Canada quickly became a problem, including the 1986 attempted murder of Punjab minister Malkiat Singh Sidhu, who was visiting Vancouver Island, and the 1985 bombing of an Air India flight travelling from Montreal to London in which 329 people were killed, overwhelmingly Canadian citizens. The failures of the Canadian security services to disrupt the plot and the ultimate inability of the Canadian justice system to hold the perpetrators to account are well-known in India; at the same time, memory of the bombing in Canada is shamefully weak.

Those failures are exacerbated by Canadian politicians frequently being photographed at events where violent Khalistani extremists are lauded as martyrs. By and large, this is excused as carelessness while in pursuit of votes in diaspora communities. In India, it is viewed altogether differently, and not just by the hardline Hindu nationalist supporters of Mr. Modi.

Diasporas are an important part of Canada’s diversity and dynamism, and they reinforce our links overseas. But they also complicate them. Members of diasporas from other countries often have their perspectives frozen at the time they left, without full appreciation of current realities. This is not to say the views of diasporas should not be heard; of course they should be. But politicians and policymakers need to have a broader and up-to-date understanding of a country into which they can contextualize the views of individuals or groups from whom they are hearing. That’s especially true if those groups are advocating for the breakup of their country of origin. We need to tread very carefully around separatism, particularly given our own experience.

While the Sikh population in Canada is the largest in the world outside of India, other countries that have significant Sikh populations and active groups of Khalistan supporters – notably the U.K., Australia and U.S., – still manage to have constructive strategic bilateral relationships with India. That is essentially because those countries have developed substantial political, economic and security links to New Delhi that underscore their importance to a broader set of India’s interests. They have not simply rested on the naive assumption that (supposedly) shared values and having a diaspora are a sufficient base for an enduring relationship.

Canada’s lack of broader links with India means that Delhi believes it can act in a heavy-handed way on this file. Little else is at stake for the Indian government; in fact, the domestic political benefits to taking action against Canada are potentially significant for Mr. Modi. Our long-term interests in the purely bilateral relationship are relatively greater than India’s, given its size and status as a rising global power, and so we need to find a way out. That said, the stakes for India rise considerably as this becomes a global reputational issue that has the potential to damage its broader interests, and so at the end of the day, it must realize it cannot act with impunity in Canada or other countries.

So how do Canada and India get out of this situation?

Diplomacy, supported by high-level political engagement, is crucial to limit the broader fallout as much as possible. Effective diplomacy requires a clear understanding and acknowledgment of the issue at hand, along with a thoughtful strategy to make progress. Integral to this will be a willingness to listen more, and not just to friends, but also those with whom we do not regularly see eye-to-eye.

Our team in India needs to be able to do its job. The same is true for Indian representatives here, who can help Delhi understand better the situation in Canada. Hopefully, Delhi will soon realize how counterproductive a forced, rapid and significant drawdown of our diplomatic staff in India would be.

Ottawa needs to work with friends to whom Delhi will pay attention. We also need to understand, at the highest level, what Canadian interests are at stake, and to lift these above transactional or very short-term considerations. Presumably, our allies and other potentially influential countries (beyond our Five Eyes intelligence-sharing partners) have been made aware of the evidence we have about alleged Indian complicity in the murder, and if not, they should be, because we will need support from more than just the usual “like-minded” countries. Ideally, there should be at least some cross-party understanding of the way forward too, as this will be a long game. It also goes without saying that the police investigation into the Nijjar murder and any subsequent legal process must continue unhindered here.

The credibility and reputations for both India and Canada are now at stake, but perhaps especially for us. We make a lot of assertions about our importance, but our lack of substantive commitments compared to our rhetorical flourishes on the global stage over the years has been noticed.

Our governments – both politicians and officials – need to engage with Canadians about our national interests and international priorities, not just deliver pre-scripted sound bites or limit engagement to special interest groups or particular diaspora communities. Such engagement can encourage Canadians to think about the challenges that our country faces and to be supportive of serious debate about Canada’s place in the world, including what we need to secure our future as a country. The Indo-Pacific Strategy provides a good basis for such a discussion about the region with Canadians, but there must be an openness to differing views.

Values are important, but they should guide how we pursue our interests, rather than define them. Too much focus on values rather than other common interests inevitably marginalizes Canada’s influence in the very relationships where we might want to encourage improvement in human rights or governance. We are taken less seriously because we are seen as primarily interested in broadcasting our judgments rather than engaging with other countries to find common ground.

The world has dramatically changed, and it will continue to do so. Without a serious rethink of how we engage internationally, it will be difficult to ensure Canada’s security and prosperity in an ever more uncertain world.

David McKinnon is a former Canadian diplomat who has been posted to New Delhi, Canberra, Bangkok and, most recently, Colombo, where he served as Canada’s high commissioner to Sri Lanka.

Source: The India debacle should prompt Canada to rethink the naive way we engage with the world

Aziz: The real reasons Canada’s relationship with India is broken

Classes example of diaspora politics taken to excess:

When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stood up in the House of Commons on Monday and made the unprecedented allegationthat “agents of the government of India” assassinated a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil, I cannot say I was surprised. It was a brazen and violent encroachment upon Canadian sovereignty, done in public, meant to be discovered, and over one of the issues that the Indian government of Narendra Modi takes most seriously.

I should know. In 2017, I was the Policy Advisor in the Foreign Minister’s office, working closely with the Prime Minister’s Office on India. From the first briefing, it was clear that India-Canada relations were headed in the wrong direction. There had been rumours of Indian intelligence services operating in the Canadian suburbs for years (along with others). The Indians counter-alleged that Canada was giving shelter, if not encouragement, to Khalistani extremists – supporters of an independent Sikh homeland, partitioned out of India. Sikhs in Canada, meanwhile, have likened the Indian government’s violence against them to genocide. The two sides had been talking past each other for years.

The sore point in this, which young Canadians have no memory of, is the tragic Air India bombing of 1985. Until 9/11, this was the worst act of terrorism in the sky, whereby Sikh extremists planted a bomb on an Air India flight, resulting in the deaths of 329 passengers and crew.

By the time I served in government in 2017, two things had recently – and radically – changed. First was the election of Mr. Modi in 2014, and his Hindutva politics. Mr. Modi’s ideology sees India as a primarily Hindu nation, and it stokes ethnic chauvinism and grievance against anyone who dares criticize it. Mr. Modi was a strongman, and would no longer take lecturing from Canada.

The second factor was the election of Donald Trump, which moved everyone’s attention and focus to Washington dramas. India, meanwhile, had gone fully nationalist by this point. Since coming into office, Mr. Modi has silenced critics, targeted Muslimslocked up political opponents, and rewritten the Indian curriculum to blot out India’s syncretic history. Mr. Modi has rolled back India’s democracy, and remains an ally of India’s far-right.When I met with India’s greatest economist, Amartya Sen, last fall, he warned me that the regime was getting worse. There can be no doubt that Mr. Modi has used state violence against minorities in frightening and authoritarian ways.

Over the years, the politics of this issue in Canada had also grown more difficult. There are some 770,000 Sikhs in Canada, one of the most politically organized communities in the country. Canadian Sikhs have kept the issue of Sikh justice on the agenda by continually advocating and pressuring politicians. Because foreign policy in a democracy is ultimately informed by domestic public opinion, the Sikh issue has an enlarged influence on our bilateral relations with India. It came up in every meeting, in every talking point, in every pull-aside. Unfortunately, Canadian politicians then didn’t care enough about either Sikhs or India to give this the policy attention it deserved.

By 2017, when I worked in government, India did not take Mr. Trudeau or Canada seriously. They viewed Canada as a bit player in world affairs, America’s loud-mouthed neighbour. In Ottawa, at least in my experience, officials did not respect India, either – to our peril. Canada’s political establishment is old and white, and infused with an ignorant Eurocentrism that still affects foreign policy priorities. Western Europe and the United States were our focus, and some ministers could hardly see beyond London or Berlin. There’s a reason why, along with India, relations with China, with Latin American countries, with much of Africa have deteriorated. It was a great abdication of our long-term priorities, given where we have ended up.

When Mr. Trudeau went to India in 2018, the trip became a debacle for Canada. Mr. Modi did not greet him on the tarmac, Mr. Trudeau got a chilly reception in general, and the PMO was put on its heels after it was reported that Jaspal Atwal, a Khalistan supporter once convicted of trying to kill an Indian cabinet minister, had been invited to two receptions during Mr. Trudeau’s visit.

Canada should have at least begun to take steps to ensure our land was not used for terrorist financing – a reasonable demand, given that the overwhelming number of Canadian Sikhs are peaceful and uninterested in using violence to create a separate Sikh homeland. (Coincidentally, Khalistan is almost entirely a diaspora issue; there is little organized support, even among Sikhs in India, for a separate homeland.) By taking goodwill measures, it would have at least been possible to keep talking and find workable policy solutions. The only problem was, Mr. Trudeau did not want to lose the Sikh vote to Jagmeet Singh. So we dug in our heels.

What I saw in government was how Canada’s ethnic domestic battles were distorting our long-term foreign policy priorities, and politicians, who never understood South Asia or India anyway, were pandering in lowest-common-denominator ways in B.C. and Ontario suburbs, and playing up ethnic grievances to win votes. This was especially true within internal Liberal Party politics, meaning that we could hardly focus on foreign policy and strategy without factoring in which ridings might be lost because a certain group might be upset. Canada, as a country, has suffered greatreputational damage by such thinking – and none of our allies are going to come to our help on this issue.

Not that Mr. Modi would have necessarily been a great friend to Canada. In my research on right-wing nationalist regimes, it is apparent that governments pursuing state violence internally – against minorities, against critics – will ultimately pursue such aggression externally. It is why the rise of the new authoritarians is so destabilizing for the world order. But Canada ultimately got the worst of all possible deals – nearly ruptured relations with India, and now a potential split in the Western alliance.

The global chessboard is shifting. The United States is strengthening its Asia alliances, something we could and should have been doing six years ago. The new influential club is the Quad – the U.S., Japan, Australia, and India. Canada is not part of it. At the G20, Canada is demeaned. The world powers will eventually face the contradiction between Mr. Modi’s Hindu nationalist regime and his foreign policy influence. What’s worrying is that Canada isn’t even at the table where those decisions are being made.

We have entered a critical period in world affairs. Major realignments are taking place – and now the murder of a Canadian citizen, allegedly carried out with the knowledge if not support of another country, could go many different ways. It is imperative the investigation continues, that its findings are made public, and that Canada seeks de-escalation with India. Canada may never be a major power in international affairs. But it can still be a serious one.

Omer Aziz is a former foreign policy adviser in the government of Justin Trudeau and the author of Brown Boy: A Memoir.

Source: The real reasons Canada’s relationship with India is broken

Tensions with India raise concerns fewer international students will choose to study in Canada

Could be a good thing given the stories of fraud and exploitation and failed expectations. But not good for the institutions that rely on the revenues:

Diplomatic tensions between New Delhi and Ottawa threaten to curtail a relationship that funds a significant portion of Canada’s postsecondary education system.

The government of India issued a statement Wednesday warning Indian students in Canada about “growing anti-India activities and politically-condoned hate crimes and criminal violence.”

The statement urged students and other Indian nationals to exercise caution, but did not recommend against travel to Canada entirely. Instead it warned students of a “deteriorating security environment” and advised against visiting regions or venues targeted by those with what it called an “anti-India agenda.”

It’s the latest salvo in a growing diplomatic crisis between the two countries. On Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in the House of Commons that Canadian security agencies had been pursuing credible allegations of links between agents of the government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Najjar, who supported the movement for an independent Khalistan.

Canada expelled an Indian diplomat earlier this week and India responded by doing the same to a member of Canada’s High Commission in New Delhi.

There is some concern that the Indian government could continue to stir fears about conditions in Canada, which might diminish demand for Canadian postsecondary education.

India issued a similar warning for students in Canada last year, however, and it had little, if any, impact. At the time Canadian police services could not point to any rise in anti-Indian violence.

Students from India make up about 40 per cent of the more than 800,000 international students in Canada, according to the Canadian Bureau for International Education. They are by far the largest single group at Canadian schools, followed by China at about 12 per cent and the Philippines at 4 per cent. At least six Ontario colleges have more students from India than from Canada.

International student tuition, which is several times higher than for Canadian students, has become essential to the finances of many postsecondary schools.

Roopa Desai Trilokekar, a professor of education at York University, said there is some risk that if this diplomatic fight escalates, the government of India could use its platform to discourage Indian students from applying to Canada. Something similar occurred more than 10 years ago with respect to Australia, after incidents that targeted Indian students in that country, she said. Study applications to Australia subsequently dropped.

Canada was already getting negative press in India because of difficulties with housing and work conditions that many students face when they arrive, she said. The diplomatic feud will only heighten the publicity around some of these issues, she said.

“I would imagine that we’re going to see a dip. But I don’t know how large the dip will be. And it will depend whether any official stances will be taken by either of the governments,” Prof. Trilokekar said.

She said the Canadian government, which is reviewing its international education policies, should reconsider the role of education in its geopolitical strategy.

“It’s going to require rethinking. There’s a lot of dependence on students from India.”

Gautham Kolluri, an international student recruiter based in Ontario, said he has already heard from students concerned that supporters of an independent Khalistan would attack Indian students in Canada.

But Mr. Kolluri said he doesn’t believe this diplomatic dispute will seriously reduce the number of students interested in coming to Canada. Demand from India is very high, he said. And unlike Saudi Arabia, which recalled students on government-funded scholarships during a diplomatic dispute with Canada in 2018, India does not have a ready mechanism to alter student migration, he said.

Jaspreet Singh, founder of the International Sikh Students Association, said he doesn’t think the political tensions will affect Sikh international students in Canada. He said India is unlikely to shut off a migration path that offers opportunity to young people who might otherwise have difficulty finding work or a spot in a university.

“If they tried to do something like this, there would be a huge backlash,” he said.

Source: Tensions with India raise concerns fewer international students will choose to study in Canada

Douglas Todd: Trudeau’s defiance of India ‘killing two birds with one stone’

Some interesting insights regarding the different positions within the Sikh and South Asian communities:

The callers lined up like almost never before on Harjit Singh Gill’s radio talk show this week after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared there were “credible allegations” that Indian agents were involved in the June murder of a Sikh activist outside a Surrey gurdwara.

“Things are very hot in the community,” said Gill, who has a morning talk show on Sher E Punjab, 600 AM. Trudeau took a chance on going public about the bloody end of the Khalistan independence fighter, Gill said, and many of B.C.’s 300,000 Sikhs felt affirmed by it.

Sikhs, who make up B.C.’s second-largest religious group after Christianity, have complained to Ottawa for months that India’s government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who many call a Hindu nationalist, must have had a hand in the slaying of Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

A plumber whom Indian authorities have accused of murdering a Hindu priest and killing six in a Punjabi cinema bombing, Nijjar was shot in his truck in the parking lot of the giant Guru Nanak gurdwara, of which he was president.

Since Gill believes no politician makes such a big move without considering its electoral implications, he said Trudeau “killed two birds with one stone” in his high-impact claim, which Indian government officials have angrily denounced as “absurd and motivated.” They are now asking Indian nationals to be cautious about visiting Canada because of its “growing anti-India activities and politically condoned hate-crimes.”

Trudeau’s thunderbolt declaration, Gill said, was satisfying to many Canadian Sikhs, particularly advocates of a separate Sikh homeland called Khalistan, in the way it protected Canadians’ sovereignty and right of free expression.

The prime minister, Gill said, also brilliantly distracted voters from issues that were killing him in the polls.

They include the housing affordability crisis, China’s subversion of Canadian elections and Trudeau’s poorly rated performance at this month’s G20 summit in India, where Modi accused Trudeau of protecting Sikh militants who employ violence in their battle for the ethno-religious vision of Khalistan.

Trudeau’s attack on possible interference by India’s government will resonate not only among Sikhs, but among immigrants from all sorts of countries, says Andres Machalski, president of Mirems, which monitors more than 800 foreign-language media outlets in Canada.

Since millions of immigrants have come to Canada to escape discrimination and persecution in their homelands, Machalski said, “Trudeau’s unassailable message to all immigrants is, ‘We will stand up for you.’”

That message can hit home for people who have left behind all sorts of conflict-ridden nations, whether China, Ukraine or Sri Lanka, said Machalski. It reverberates for Machalski himself, since he came to Canada as a refugee from Argentina in 1976, when elected leaders were replaced in a ruthless military coup.

Specifically, Machalski said Trudeau’s declaration on the opening day of parliament, which “gained maximum attention” and divert from issues working against his popularity, was mostly aimed at garnering support from the roughly 800,000 Sikhs in Canada.

Even though the number of Hindus in Canada is about the same, and many will be upset by Trudeau’s attack on the Hindu-majority country of India, Machalski said Punjabi Sikhs in Canada have a stronger group identity and are more politically organized and influential than Hindus, particularly in crucial federal and provincial ridings in Greater Toronto, Metro Vancouver and Calgary.

That’s the case, Machalski said, despite Punjabi Canadians disagreeing on just how much support there is for a separate Khalistan in this country.

“Many Sikhs kind of just tolerate the Khalistanis and their vociferous rallies,” he said.

Despite the wide distribution of vivid photos of Canadian Sikh protesters outraged at India, Gill agrees the Sikh population is “not monolithic.”

It’s hard to get numbers on how many Canadian Sikhs share the vision of Khalistan, said Gill, who looks forward to the results of the non-binding referendum that a secessionist group, Sikhs for Justice, has organized.

Last week vote organizers claimed 135,000 India-born Canadians in the Lower Mainland showed up to vote in the referendum that Nijjar, whom India accused of terrorism, had helped organize.

Earlier referenda were held among the large Sikh populations in Britain and suburban Toronto, which has contributed to Modi’s accusation that offshore agitators are stirring up division in his nation.

Prominent Punjabi Canadian Barj Dhahan, who has spent the past 30 years conducting business and philanthropy between B.C. and India, doesn’t trust the Metro Vancouver referendum. He says it’s not clear, for instance, who is eligible to vote in it.

And since Dhahan frequently travels to northern India, he says he knows the idea of Khalistan is virtually dead there. Sikhs in India “are much more worried about getting jobs and having a future.”

Gill, the talk-show host, also acknowledges the Khalistan movement is weak in India, in part because of changing demographics. In Canada, Gill said, views on Khalistan can differ sharply between Sikh fundamentalists and Sikh moderates, who often end up fighting for control of the province’s many gurdwaras.

Machalski, who monitors the discourse in dozens of Punjabi print and broadcast outlets across Canada, said there is no more uniformity among Canadian Sikhs on Khalistan than there is among Canadian Catholics on the pope.

Despite their wide range of views, Machalski said Sikhs in Canada are a powerful political force in electoral politics, including as MPs and MLAs, in part because of their ability to get assistance from the leadership of gurdwaras, which fill the role of community centres even for non-religious Punjabis.

Shinder Purewal, a Kwantlen Polytechnic University political scientist, and Dhahan have described how the Sikh population “punches above its weight” in politics for many reasons, particularly because of its ability to impact partisan nomination battles, including that of lawyer and NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who was an early critic of India and defender of Khalistan supporters.

Source: Douglas Todd: Trudeau’s defiance of India ‘killing two birds with one stone’

Clark: Canada once more forced to reckon with era of foreign intimidation

One of many articles on the intelligence revelations that the Indian may have been behind the Canadian Sikh activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar:

It was a jolt for Canada when China retaliated for the arrest of a Huawei executive in Vancouver by locking up two Canadian bystanders, the two Michaels, five years ago. Now a second shock shows us foreign governments are continuing to reach into Canada to intimidate.

This time, agents of a supposedly friendly country, India, are alleged to be linked to the death of a Canadian, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh community leader who in June was shot in his truck in the parking lot of the Guru Nanak Gurdwara in Surrey, B.C.

There has never been anything like this before: an explosive public allegation that a foreign government’s agents targeted and killed a Canadian citizen, in Canada.

Certainly, there has never been a moment like the one on Monday afternoon when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stood up in the House of Commons to tell the country that Canada’s security agencies are pursuing “credible allegations” of a potential link to the Indian government.

India is not supposed to be an enemy, or even an adversary. There are tensions, because the Indian government has for decades accused Canada of being soft on Khalistani terrorists, who seek to carve an independent Sikh state out of what is now northern India. But India has often conflated non-violent Sikh separatist advocates with terrorists and extremists. Mr. Nijjar was organizing an unofficial referendum on the creation of a Sikh state when he was killed.

The idea that New Delhi might send agents to kill a Canadian in Canada is stunning.

Mr. Trudeau said on Monday that he had spoken to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi about the allegation “in no uncertain terms” at last week’s G20 summit in New Delhi, but there was no word from the Canadian government on Mr. Modi’s response. There’s no sense Mr. Trudeau was given a satisfactory answer, or that he was promised Indian co-operation on an investigation.

Canada has already expelled an Indian diplomat who was the chief of the Indian foreign intelligence agency in Canada, but it’s not clear what, if anything, will happen next.

Again, Canada is jolted into recognizing a new world in which foreign governments reach out to influence, intimidate and coerce Canadians in Canada. Again, there is new reason to believe foreign interference might be a bigger, broader danger than this country is prepared to counter. This time, the allegation is assassination, which underlines the direct threat to the security of Canadians – especially those who belong to diaspora communities here.

Already, many in Canada’s Sikh community believed that the Indian government had been involved in Mr. Nijjar’s killing, and his death had sparked anger and protests. Indian diplomats had complained to Mr. Trudeau’s government that those protests were becoming threatening. The killing brought tension to Canadian streets.

It wasn’t quite the same thing in 2018, when China arrested Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor in retaliation for Canada’s arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou on U.S. charges. But that was an attempt to intimidate Canada for exercising its own laws. It showed Canadians can’t expect sovereignty without foreign coercion.

And there have been more examples of China and other countries feeling they can reach inside Canada. The RCMP said earlier this summer that they had shut down illegal Chinese police activity in several Canadian locations. The Globe and Mail has reported on a series of attempts by Beijing to influence Canadian elections. Canadian relatives of victims of the 2020 downing of Ukrainian Airlines Flight 752 by Iranian armed forces reported that people close to the Iranian regime had approached them in Canada, in an attempt to intimidate them into silence.

Now, Mr. Trudeau has made an explosive, albeit unproven, allegation of an extreme example – an alleged assassination in Canada – and promised to work closely with allies “on this very serious matter.” In the Commons, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh called on allies to “condemn this violence … in the harshest terms possible.”

But it is far from certain that the U.S. and other Canadian allies will rush to hold India to account.

For one thing, credible allegations in the hands of intelligence agencies aren’t the same as evidence gathered by police for a trial. And in a world where Western allies have imposed extensive economic sanctions against Russia and are increasingly seeking to counter China’s influence, the U.S. and European nations won’t relish the prospect of conflict with another major power.

But if the allegation is true, it will be fuel for the coming public inquiry into foreign interference. Foreign governments apparently feel as though they can reach into Canada with impunity. Countering that is now a pressing national priority.

Source: Canada once more forced to reckon with era of foreign intimidation

Chinese, Vietnamese students caught up in college-admission scam, Ottawa says

Some useful data:

Students from China and Vietnam have been caught up in an immigration scam affecting Indian students involving fake acceptance letters to Canadian colleges, the federal immigration department told MPs.

Immigration Minister Sean Fraser told the Commons committee on citizenship and immigration that eight Indian students ensnared in the fraud have already been deported. But they could return to Canada “if they demonstrate that their intention to come to Canada was genuine and that they were not complicit in fraud.”

Mr. Fraser this week granted a reprieve from deportation to students who were unknowingly involved in the scam. They will be granted temporary residency permits while a task force investigates their cases to see if they were innocently duped or complicit in the immigration fraud.

The task force will look into the cases of 57 Indian students with bogus admission letters to Canadian colleges and universities who have been issued with removal orders, and 25 are going through the deportation process, deputy minister Christiane Fox told MPs on the immigration committee last Wednesday.

Ten Indian students found to have fake admission letters to colleges have left Canada voluntarily.

Ottawa launched a probe into 2,000 suspicious cases involving students from India, China and Vietnam earlier this year. It found that around 1,485 had been issued bogus documents to come to Canada by immigration consultants abroad, she said.

Although 85 per cent of the students affected by scams were from India, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada had also uncovered evidence of fraud affecting Chinese and Vietnamese students.

Ms. Fox said 976 of the students had been refused entry to Canada after their letters of acceptance from colleges were found to be fake, while 448 had their applications to come to Canada approved.

The deputy minister told the committee of MPs that around 300 of these students would have their cases individually investigated by the new task force. Others of the 448 who had their applications approved have been found to have been linked to “criminality.”

In the Commons last Friday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said the students had been “defrauded by shady consultants who gave them fake admission letters.” He said the newcomers should be given work permits while they wait for their applications for permanent residence to be processed.

Also on Friday, Conservative MPs called for overseas immigration consultants who duped the students to be blacklisted and all their files, including those in the past, to be reviewed.

“Every consultant or agent who scammed these international students should have the files they worked on reviewed to protect the victims and proactively inform them,” said Tom Kmiec, Conservative immigration critic. “Any consultant or agent who committed fraud should be barred and their names should be logged with IRCC to prevent future fraud.”

Saskatoon Conservative Brad Redekopp, who also sits on the immigration committee, urged the federal government to immediately start checking the files of overseas consultants found to have issued bogus documents. He told The Globe and Mail it was a problem that, while Canadian immigration consultants had to register and were subject to standards, overseas consultants did not face similar checks.

Ms. Fox said the department was already looking into the files of consultants found to have issued fake letters of acceptance to Canadian universities.

Mr. Fraser said the department had found that multiple consultants had been involved in the scam involving fake admission letters as part of study permit applications. He said the government was conducting hundreds of investigations to “bust fraudsters.”

In 2018, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada introduced a new program to verify letters of acceptance to colleges, he said. But he added the department deals with hundreds thousands of applications a year and it would be hard to manually verify every admission letter. He hoped that new efforts to clamp down on overseas scams could be aided by technology, but it also required the co-operation of foreign authorities.

He said he understood the situation was extremely distressing for students facing deportation, after being duped by “bad actors,” and their well-being was paramount.

The task force will look at whether they finished their studies or started work in Canada soon after they arrived.

Source: Chinese, Vietnamese students caught up in college-admission scam, Ottawa says

Ottawa pausing deportations of international students affected by acceptance letter scam

Not really a surprise. Hard to see, however, given current pressures on IRCC that it will be able to review each case specifically. CIMM is starting a study on exploitation of Indian students but unlikely that will examine the complicity of governments and education institutions in a system that almost incentivizes such exploitation:

The federal government says it’s hitting pause on planned deportations of international students who may have been caught up in a foreign acceptance letter scam.

The announcement from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) comes after dozens of international students received deportation orders which accuse them of using forged post-secondary school acceptance documents to get into Canada.

Immigration Minister Sean Fraser warned that “potentially a few hundred people” could find themselves affected by the scam and removal orders.

Source: Ottawa pausing deportations of international students affected by acceptance letter scam

‘The students are victims’: Stop deporting Indian students caught in fake admission letter scandal, parliamentary committee urges CBSA

An alternative approach, given the corruption among recruiting agencies and the complicity of governments and educational institutions, would be to deport them as a high profile example to highlight risks.

A more serious alternative would be for to undertake a fundamental review of our international student policies with a focus on ensuring that their focus is on quality education, not just funding, and their contribution to increasing per capita GDP and productivity should they apply for permanent residency.

But unlikely to happen given the various interests behind international student recruitment and enrolment and am sceptical that the planned hearings will amount to much:

A parliamentary committee is calling on the Canada Border Services Agency to immediately stop deporting a group of Indian international students who have been deemed inadmissible after using fake college admission letters to enter the country.

On Wednesday, the all-party immigration committee voted unanimously to ask the border agency to waive inadmissibility of the affected students and to provide them with an alternative pathway to permanent residence on humanitarian grounds or through a “regularization” program.

“These students, I’ve met with many of them, now are just in such a terrible state. They’ve lost money and they are stuck in a terrible situation. And some of them have deportation orders. Others have pending meetings with CBSA,” said MP Jenny Kwan, the NDP immigration critic, who tabled the motions.

“So as a first step, this is absolutely essential and necessary. The students are victims of fraud and should not be penalized.”

The international students, a group estimated to be in the hundreds, claim they were duped by unscrupulous education consultants in India and were unaware that the admission letters given to them were doctored. The students only became aware of the issue, they say, when the issue was flagged by border agents after the students had finished their courses and applied for postgraduate work permits. Some cases were flagged during the students’ permanent residence application process.

The committee does not have the power to halt deportations. Its gesture Wednesday is largely a symbolic one.

The students all share similar stories: being told upon arrival in Canada that the program they’d been enrolled in was no longer available and advised to delay their studies or go to another school; some receiving their postgraduate work permits and trying to pursue permanent residence, only to find out there was a problem with their original documentation.

On Wednesday, the committee also passed Kwan’s motion to issue a news release to condemn the actions of these fraudulent “ghost consultants” and to ask Immigration Minister Sean Fraser, Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino and their staff to appear before the committee to provide a briefing on the situation.

Members of the committee also voted to undertake a study over two meetings into the targeted exploitation scheme faced by the Punjabi international students.

The study is set to examine:

  • How this situation was allowed to happen;
  • Why fraudulent documents were not detected until years later, when the students began to apply for permanent status;
  • The significant harm experienced by students, including financial loss and distress;
  • Measures necessary to help the students have their deportation stayed, inadmissibility on the basis of misrepresentation waived, and provide a pathway to permanent status; and
  • How to prevent similar situations from occurring in the future.

“I’ve spoken with the students, and they were very frustrated that no actions were happening at this committee. And I think they’ll be very pleased to see that things are happening now,” said Brad Redekopp, the Conservative MP for Saskatoon West.

Liberal MP Shafqat Ali agreed.

“We need to have empathy for those students and we should not exploit the situation and play politics on this issue of those innocent students,” said the MP for Brampton centre, where many of the affected students now reside. “They have gone through and are going through a lot.”

During the meeting Wednesday, the committee also approved the amendments to Bill S-245 to amend the Citizenship Act to allow Canadians to pass citizenship birthrights to their foreign-born children if they can pass a connection test to establish the family ties to Canada.

Source: ‘The students are victims’: Stop deporting Indian students caught in fake admission letter scandal, parliamentary committee urges CBSA

In a growing India, some struggle to prove they are Indians

Of note:

Krishna Biswas is scared. Unable to prove his Indian citizenship, he is at risk of being sent to a detention center, far away from his modest hut built of bamboo wood that looks down on fields lush with corn.

Biswas says he was born in India’s northeastern Assam state. So was his father, almost 65 years ago. But the government says that to prove he is an Indian, he should furnish documents that date back to 1971.

For the 37-year-old vegetable seller, that means searching for a decades-old property deed or a birth certificate with an ancestor’s name on it.

Biswas has none, and he is not alone. There are nearly 2 million people like him — over 5% of Assam’s population — staring at a future where they could be stripped of their citizenship if they are unable to prove they are Indian.

Questions over who is an Indian have long lingered over Assam, which many believe is overrun with immigrants from neighboring Bangladesh.

At a time when India is about to overtake China as the most populous country, these concerns are expected to heighten as Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government seeks to use illegal immigration and fears of demographic shift for electoral gains in a nation where nationalist sentiments run deep.

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party has promised to roll out a similar citizenship verification program nationwide even though the process in Assam has been put on hold after a federal audit found it flawed and full of errors.

Nonetheless, hundreds of suspected immigrants with voting rights in Assam have been arrested and sent to detention centers the government calls “transit camps.” Fearing arrest, thousands have fled to other Indian states. Some have died of suicide.

Millions of people like Biswas, whose citizenship status is unclear, were born in India to parents who immigrated many decades ago. Many of them have voting cards and other identification, but the state’s citizenship registry counts only those who can prove, with documentary evidence, that they or their ancestors were Indian citizens before 1971, the year Bangladesh was born.

Modi’s party, which also rules Assam, argues the registry is essential to identify people who entered the country illegally in a state where ethnic passions run deep and anti-immigrant protests in the 1980s culminated in the massacre of more than 2,000 immigrant Muslims.

“My father and his brother were born here. We were born here. Our kids were also born here. We will die here but not leave this place,” Biswas, said on a recent afternoon at his home in Assam’s Murkata village, near the banks of the Brahmaputra River.

The Biswas family has 11 members, of whom the citizenship of nine is in dispute. His wife and mother have been declared Indian by a foreigners’ tribunal that decides on citizenship claims. Others, including his three children, his father and his brother’s family, have been declared “foreigners.”

It makes no sense to Biswas, who wonders why would some be considered to have settled in the country illegally and others not, even though they all were born in the same place.

The family, like many others, has not pleaded their case before the tribunal or higher courts due to a lack of money and the arduous paperwork required in the process.

“If we cannot be Indian then just kill us. Let them (the government) kill my whole family,” he said.

Source: In a growing India, some struggle to prove they are Indians