Context
Citing a breach of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Canada has accused India of unilaterally withdrawing the diplomatic immunity of its diplomats stationed in India (VCDR).

Misconceptions and Accusations  
·         Misinterpretation of Diplomatic Actions: India wanted reduction based on parity, whereas Canada claims India lost diplomatic immunity. Not a single diplomat issued a persona non grata.
·         Article 9 of VCDR: Under Article 9 of the Vienna Convention, India is entitled to declare diplomats persona non grata.
·         Subjective Determination of Reasonable Mission Size: The receiving state (India) is permitted to determine what constitutes a "reasonable and normal" mission size under Article 11(1) of the VCDR.

Global History and Lawful Foundations  
·         UK's Action Against Soviet Union: The UK invoked Article 11 of the VCDR to place a cap on the Soviet Union mission because of improper actions.
·         US Diplomats in Iran: The US exercised its power to restrict Iranian diplomats stationed in Washington.
·         Comparable Steps Taken by Moldova and Estonia: Citing Article 11 of the VCDR, Moldova and Estonia requested that Russia reduce its mission in accordance with the principle of parity.
 
The Law's Structure and the Need to Restore Trust 
·         Article 41(1) of the VCDR states that it may be a violation of the treaty for Canadian diplomats to meddle in domestic matters in India.
·         Diplomatic Relations Act of 1972: The Indian legal system gives the government the authority to revoke privileges in the event that VCDR responsibilities are not met.
·         Measures to Build Trust: Both Canada and India must work to close their trust deficit. Accusations damage relationships and need to be resolved diplomatically.

LTX Mains Question: 
Q. "The only way to protect the interests of both countries is through the recent diplomatic relations between India and Canada and the international legal framework that governs diplomatic missions." Comment.