Exit Trudeau

CANADIAN Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to step down was a foregone conclu­sion. The head of a deeply unpopular government is an obdurate politician who refuses to learn from his mis­takes. To make matters worse, he is seen as an arrogant char­acter. These accusations find substance in his actions.

The first signs of trouble for Trudeau emerged years before he decided to quit on Monday, January 7. In 2019, Jody Wilson-Raybould, Trudeau’s attorney general (AG), accused him of interfer­ence in an investigation involving the engineering company SNC-Lavalin. In August of that year, Canada’s independent ethics commis­sioner said that Trudeau had violated the provisions of the Conflict of Interest Act. The AG had alleged that she was told not to press ahead. In the next ministerial reshuffle she was booted out. That probably was a very good indicator of how personally Trudeau took any sign of challenge to his authority.

A year earlier, in 2018, he came on an official visit to India, a visit that was more in the nature of drama than that of a head of government visiting another country. Dressed as a bhangra dancer, Trudeau sought to impress his visitors—or more likely, the Sikh constituency back in Canada—but all it did was put off his hosts. The presence of a Khalistani supporter in his entourage added fuel to the fire. Since then, Canada’s relations with India begun to mirror what Trudeau thought of India.

His open encourage­ment of Khalistanis was the last straw for Delhi. Indian diplomats in Ottawa and else­where on Canadian soil were threatened openly by violent Khalistanis and Trudeau would not even condemn such actions. That took a toll on bilateral relations.

After that, the Liberal leader made it a single-point agenda to criticise and berate India at every opportunity. Ultimately, this led to India and Canada reducing their mutual diplomatic pres­ence. Allegations that India was involved in the killing of a Khalistani terrorist on Canadian soil were never proved. Far from evidence that could be tested in court, the Trudeau government could not even offer a shred of evidence to India. If that were not enough, he demanded that India waive diplomatic immunity for its represen­tatives, a step unheralded in modern international relations.

Arrogance apart, there was method in this madness. Trudeau was run­ning a minority government dependent on the support of NDP, a party led by Sikh politician Jagmeet Singh known to favour Khalistanis in Canada. Trudeau’s assess­ment that his outrageous acts against India would give him purchase with the Kha­listanis was accurate. But it was also a flawed assessment: if he gained the Khalistani vote, he lost the mainstream Canadian vote that is now thought to be firmly in the Conservative camp. Poor inflation management, when traded off with relations with India, made for poor political choice. But all this is history now.

Such cynical calculations are now the hallmark of liberal leaders across West­ern democracies and else­where. Another well-known example in this respect was New Zealand’s former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who was known for pander­ing to Islamists in her coun­try. The Democratic Party’s unwillingness to control illegal immigration across the US’ southern border ultimately led to a popular backlash. The trend is unmis­takable: illegal immigrants, troublesome minorities, and other special-interest constituencies are now the core of liberal politics while the ‘majority’ is considered unacceptable. This kind of politics, a by-product of the ‘End of History’ decades, is now ending. The original meaning of liberal politics— moderate and centrist—was lost in the excesses of identity politics. Trudeau, as a person, was wanting in many things but he was also a product of a peculiar variety of politics.

Canada Prime Ministergeopoliticsinflation managementJustin TrudeauKhalistani voteresignation