A diplomatic humiliation for Canada by India at UN

Canada suffered major diplomatic humiliation in decades after its so-called friendly countries, including India, ditched it to vote for Portugal for the Security Council seat.
The million-strong, powerful Indo-Canadian community expressed unease about India voting against Canada but they don't expect it to impact burgeoning relationship between the two countries.
Since Ottawa has invested heavily in its relationship with India in the past two years, it banked on New Delhi to vote for it. But since Portugal supports India's bid for a permanent seat at the UN Council and Canada doesn't, India opted for the former.
Not pleased with the possibility of new irritants in India-Canada relations, entrepreneur Ajit Someshwar, founder of Canada India Foundation, said: "Canada is making a concerted effort to build a strong relationship with India. With the recent visits of the prime minister (Stephen Harper) and almost every Canadian cabinet minister to India, it is clear that Canada is very serious about building a strong alliance with India."
He added: "India, therefore, needs to be strategic about its relationship with Canada. India's every move vis-a-vis its new strategic ally is being watched. Given that the population of the Indian diaspora is burgeoning in Canada, India needs to think of Canada's interests as it affects almost a million people of Indian origin here."
Another Indo-Canadian entrepreneur, who requested anonymity, said: "I feel India can probably win Canada over to its side (for support for its bid for the permanent seat). At the same time, New Delhi has to appreciate what the current Canadian government has done to end its nuclear isolation and signed a nuclear deal with it.
"In the long term, I feel Canada is much too important for India in terms of resources, trade and even in terms of its huge Indian diaspora."
Kam Rathee, former chairman of the influential Canada-India Business Council, told IANS: "Our bilateral relationship is too solid to be impacted by one or two issues on the international stage. Canada is a mature country and Mr Stephen Harper is a smart prime minister who understands all this (India's ambition)."
Former Canadian health minister and top Indo-Canadian leader Ujjal Dosanjh refused to comment on the issue. "It is a little too complicated, and I don't want to comment on it," Dosanjh said.
India came in for sharp criticism shortly after reports India voted for Portugal because it supports its bid for a permanent seat in the Security Council whereas Canada is opposed to inclusion of more permanent members. Instead Ottawa wants more non-permanent membership on a regional basis. China and the UAE also reportedly backed Portugal.
Though there was no reaction from the government which backed India at the Nuclear Suppliers' Group to end its nuclear isolation and later inked a nuclear deal with it this June, the media slammed India for its 'betrayal' of a friendly nation.
"When the time came for Canada to count its friends in its bid for a seat at the United Nations Security Council, India wasn't there," wrote the Globe and Mail under the headline 'India turned its back on Canada during bid for Security Council seat.'
"Those with a close knowledge of how nations voted in the General Assembly say India supported Portugal over Canada in the contest for a temporary seat on the council this week. That vote stings: Prime Minister Stephen Harper has invested a great deal of political capital in improving Indo-Canadian ties. In this instance, at least, his efforts were for naught," the newspaper said.
The paper said there were good reasons for Canada to hope for India's support as "the subcontinent is the second largest source of immigrants to Canada, which has a large Indian diaspora.
"Mr. Harper visited India last November, and the two nations signed a nuclear energy co-operation agreement earlier this year. The Conservatives (ruling party) have identified its fellow Commonwealth member as a key market, as Canada seeks to pivot from the Atlantic to the Pacific in search of new, emerging markets for its resources and manufactured goods. "But India supported Portugal nonetheless."
Indian High Commissioner Shashishekhar Gavai tried to make light of the issue, saying India's too lost a similar contest in 1996. "One has to move on. It's not really the end of the world. Canada's position does not stand diminished in any way," Gavai said.
Parliamentary secretary Deepak Obhrai, who is the highest-ranking Indo-Canadian in the government, told IANS, "We understand India's position. They have their own priorities...which is fine. Every country votes according to its priorities. We congratulate Indians on winning their seat at the Council."
The Globe and Mail later said Canada should not feel aggrieved by India's support for Portugal in an editorial.
"Temporary membership of the Security Council is not a prize for virtuous behaviour, and Canadians should not take offence at being passed over, this time around," the editorial in the Globe and Mail said.
"It was not a comment of any kind about Canadian foreign policy, but rather part of India's pursuit of its national interest - more particularly, its quest for a permanent seat of its own on the Security Council, which Portugal supports," it added.
The editorial also highlighted that India's foreign-policy priority is to be a permanent member of the Security Council.
"That status is a mark of being a great power, a rank that was granted to China at the end of the Second World War. Now that both China and India are both emerging as major economic powers, India is naturally eager for equality with its rival in Asia," the editorial said, according to ANI.
It further said that the Canadian government should not take sides in the long-term tension between India and Pakistan.
"Canada contains large diasporas from both India and Pakistan - perhaps one million and a quarter of a million Canadians, respectively. Both countries are Canada's allies. In general, we should not show a preference for either, though some situations may call for our taking sides," it said.

Leave a comment
FACEBOOK TWITTER