|
FACTORS IN MODERN SIKH HISTORY |
 |
 |
Dr. Sangat Singh
I am thankful to Dr. Ganda Singh Memorial Society for
inviting me to deliver this memorial lecture.
Before coming directly to the theme of the talk today, I would like to
highlight some basic facts about the Sikh history.
In the very first chapter of my work, THE SIKHS IN HISTORY,1 I made an
observation : "The Hindus have learnt one thing from history that
they cannot learn anything". At that time, a thought crossed my mind
: What was the position of the Sikhs vis a vis their history? Do the Sikhs
learn from their history? Have they learnt from it in the past? If not,
are the Sikhs capable of learning from history? The basic question that
ultimately boiled down was: Are the Sikhs aware of their history? These
were the musing of a mature mind.
I must confess that I am not a historian in the traditional sense of the
term. I taught history for a year in a college in the University of Delhi
during my youth, but shortly transgressed into international and strategic
studies. As such, I was deeply involved in analysing the current scene
and formulating proposition for framing of policy guidelines in the making
of contemporary history. I also kept myself abreast with the ongoing current
developments in the Sikh situation in Panjab.
In 1980s when I was commissioned by S. Hukam Singh, founder president
of Kendri Sri Guru Singh Sabha, to undertake a rewriting - mark the word
"rewriting" - of the Sikh history, I was aware that the Sikhs
had made history, or had played a dominant role in making of history.
But they had played little role in writing their history especially in
the context of the changing times and situations.2 A good General not
only plans in advance, but also changes his tactics and strategies in
view of the developing situation. He always has an alternate plan in case
of a serious set back. The Sikh history needed a new outlook in context
of the changed circumstances.
I may state here forthwith that I had a very clean objective in penning
down THE SIKHS IN HISTORY. I made that explicit in the very first sentence
in the preface that I was aiming at a rewriting of the Sikh history, and
that too from the Sikh national perspective. The process involved reinterpretation
and rewriting of the known facts of history; and giving them a consistency
and orientation, so that the facts speak themselves aloud. The higher
degree of analytical capacity that I had acquired as part of my official
work, helped me to give the facts a sharper focus. They thought that throughout
history, only individuals have propounded ideas that have moved the world,
made me to persist in pursuit of my work. Now, when the end product is
there, it is for others to sit in judgement over it.
II
This bring me to come to the fundamentals of the Sikh history.
The first thing that strikes one in the modern Sikh history is the declaration
of way by Lord Dalhousie, East India Company's Governor General of India
on eve of the 2nd Anglo-Sikh war in 1848; it talks of war against 'the
Sikh nation'. Mark these words. Never had hitherto East India company
in its various wars of aggrandisement in different parts of India confronted
a nation or even a nationality, based on religious, ethnic, territorial
or other considerations. The Sikhs were a nation, sui juris at that, when
other parts of India were a conglomerate of regional, ethnic, religious,
tribal, caste or sectional loyalties. That was an important factor that
came into-play in their history.
The other was that sikhism constituted a distinct independent faith with
a well developed religious thought and philosophy, in North Western parts
of India. This was for the first time, after the enlightenment of Lord
Buddha two thousands years back , that a faith had germinated that was
based on revelation, in this case of Guru Nanak in 1499. It made Punjab,
as against other parts of India, tri-religious state, with Islam, Sikhism,
and Hinduism as three arms of a triangle. Whereas, the mughals (of Bahadur
Shah's and later Farrukhsiyar's firmans for extermination of the Sikhs),
the Afgan invaders (Cf. Qazi Noor Mohamad's JANGNAMA) and the English
colonisers realised the distinct character of Sikhism, the general body
of Hindus, Including their religious Maths, Centres (which had ceased
to grow during the medieval period when Sikhism emerged) did not. That
created problems on the 19th century onwards, with the rise and growth
of Hindu consciousness, miscued as Indian consciousness. The Sikhs stood
much misunderstood in Hindu eyes.
As such, two basic factors in Sikh history were, or are, one Sikhism as
an independent faith, and two, Khalsa's emerging as a nation in pre-modern
times. I call them basic, because these have been constant, invariable,
and central to the Sikh make up or Sikh psyche,
III
This brings me to the modern phase of Sikh history. By common consent
it started with the annexation of Punjab by the English in 1849. The English
efforts to extend their stay in Lahore, by seeking a revision of the Treaty
of Lahore caused deep schism in Punjabi society.
This gave rise to two types of persons - I am deliberately using the word
person, instead of Chief -one owing the fealty to the English and the
other seething with resistance and revival of the Khalsa power. A pronounced
feature of the latter was revival of Khalsa spirit, though it is difficult
to accuse the former (those working to English designs) of being cool
to the Khalsa revivalism was one of degree, depending upon one's priorities,
perceptions, and situation in life. The failure of the Sikh Misls power
in latter half of 18th century, constituted a material factor in inhibiting
the forces of revival of Khalsa power.
Mention may now be made of the various main elements which at different
times, and in different circumstances, led the forces of resistance during
the 19th century. Briefly, these were Bhai Maharaj Singh, Baba Ram Singh
of Bhaini Sahib, and Maharaja Daleep Singh. The fourth element, the rise
of puritan Sikh revivalist movement the Singh Sabha, was the other facet
of the same coin.
Since adequate attention has not been paid to the contribution of Bhai
Maharaj Singh, I propose to deal with him in a bit more detail as against
the other two.
IV
A prince among patriots, Bhai Maharaj Singh spanned the transition of
the Sikh history from medieval into modern period. A saint and a religious
leader, he became a revolutionary, and laid the foundations of a Khalsa
Lehr, a people's movement, to uphold their sovereignty. Bhai Maharaj Singh's
sense of Khalsa patriotism was sharply awakened by the English designs
to extend their sway over the Lahore Darbar in suppression of the Treaty
of Lahore, 1846. Rani Jindan in desperation sought his assistance to ward
off the English machinations. Bhai Maharaj Singh, an astute man that he
was, to begin with, abdicated from the gaddi, seat of Naurangabad and
shifted to Amritsar which straightaway became the nerve centre in intense
political activity. His whirlwind tours to the villages, which took him
far and wide, exhorting the people not to let the English usurp their
freedom deeply stirred the people . This mass arousal, prelude to people's
war, was considered dangerous by the English Resident, Henry Lawrence,
who by mid 1847, firstly , wanted Bhai Maharaj Singh to wind up his Amritsar
headquarters and instead shift back to Naurangabad, and, secondly, summoned
him to Lahore to answer some charges. Bhai Maharaj Singh read through
the Resident's intentions, gave him a slip and chose to go under-ground.
In the prevailing situation, his position was like that of fish in the
water.
This was not withstanding the English efforts to marshal Dogras and Urban
Hindus, and stir up a section of Muslims including tribals against the
Sikhs.
It is not the scope of this talk to go into the details of the all- pervasive
influence and activity of Bhai Maharaj Singh in events forming the core
of the Second Anglo-Sikh war.
Briefly, he raised the standard of revolt and raised sufficient dust about
his movements to keep the English off track to avoid premature conflict;
organised his own intelligence network and showed his superiority in tactical
warfare; moved over to Multan for a week or so, to give sufficient impetus
to the forces of Dewan Mul Raj, moved back to central Punjab and sent
emissaries all over Punjab to raise a revolt; and over to Hazara by a
circuitous route via Shivalik hills to tap Raja Chattar Singh (younger
brother of Sham Singh Attariwala) now Governor of Hazara, to bring in
a Sikh Sardar/Chief to lead the popular movement ; his travels in the
countryside to raise volunteers and all the way from Rawalpindi and Jhelum
districts to eventually join Raja Sher Singh's forces. These were all
reflective of his deep sense of hurt at the Sikh predicament, and commitment
to the Sikhs ideals. It were his presence that helped the Punjabi forces
to worsen the English forces at Ramnagar. This came as a morale booster.
And, finally it was his exhortation to the forces at Chillianwala, 13
January 1849, his leading the ardas, prayer before the engagement, management
of food and supplies for the troops and horses, looking after the sick
and wounded and participation in hand to hand fight, that made Chillianwala
the most hard fought battle in British conquest of Hindustan. The English
suffered the worst defeat in their history. The contemporary British chroniclers
and later expert studies all agree of the English predicament. A recent
study by Pakistan's Directorate of Military Operations of Chillianwala
Battle Opines that had Sher Singh regrouped his forces and launched a
night attack, or his father Chattar Singh joined him the next morning,
results would have been different. Even then, Bhai Maharaj Singh wanted
Raja Sher Singh to fight another battle at Rawalpindi or Hasan Abdal,
but Sher Singh lost his nerve and surrendered (14 March 1849).
Bhai Maharaj Singh, like a true patriot that he was, chose to escape,
to fight a lonely battle, and carry on the war of liberation. He now moved
over to the thick jungles in the interior of Jammu and sent his followers
to contact like-minded people in various regions to gauge their feelings.
He made an unsuccessful attempt to kidnap Maharaja Daleep Singh who was
about to leave Lahore in exile. He busied himself in making arrangements
for a general rebellion, or a people's war, and even sought assistance
of Amir Dost Mohammad of Kabul and Pathan Chiefs in the North West. He
sought assistance of cross section of people. After despatch of these
letters, he left on a secret tour of Majha and Doaba to raise resources.
He said that "There will be another National war; let all the true
Sikhs rise on the day fixed."
When all the arrangements had been made for a revolt at two cantonments
on the night of 3 January 1850, Bhai Maharaj Singh was arrested on the
information of a Muslim informer. This was on 28 December 1849. Surprisingly,
he and his companions were not armed. Even a Skirmish would have given
him a better place in history and build up folk literature around his
personality. In the words of Mr. Vansittart, Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar,
who effected the arrests, Bhai Maharaj Singh "is not and ordinary
man. He is to the natives what Jesus Christ is to the most zealous of
Christians," There was a reward of Rs. 10,000 on his head.
It was considered too dangerous to put Bhai Maharaj Singh to trial. That
would only have tended to aggravate feelings, and English were not ready
for that. He was quietly deported under Regulation III of 1818 to Singapore,
and lodged in a strong Fort with windows blocked out, in the process making
it a dark cell. He remained calm and serene, and passed in to history
on 5 July 1856, unwept, unsung, unhonoured. The people back home were
kept in the dark about the fate of this brave son of Punjab.
The English, to stamp out the Sikh inner consciousness and cravings of
their rule over Punjab, manoeuvred with new management of Sri Harmandir
Sahib in Amritsar to drop the singing of litany RAJ KAREGA KHALSA from
the maryada, code of rituals, it daily followed in the sanctum sanatorium.
The practice continues ever today.
V
Baba Ram Singh (he succeeded Bhai Balak Singh of Hazro in 1862) was another
multifaceted personality. He was conscious of the deception by which the
English had annexed Punjab, and also of the general moral, social and
religious degeneration all around. He launched a movement for religious
reform and revival. He wanted his followers to strictly follow the Khalsa
rahat, code of conduct. He administered amrit to both the sexes together,
introduced a number of social reforms, and set an elaborate missionary
work. He believed that the Adi Sri Guru Granth Sahib if the real Guru
and condemned Sodhis, Bedis, Bhallas, who claimed the status of guru,
as impostors. He wanted to consolidate the Sikh power for political ends.
He advocated Swadeshi and boycott of western goods and ideals; he was
far ahead of his times.
The opening of butchers shops sellings kine flesh in Amritsar caused deep
resentment both against the butchers and the English overlords. Under
misdirected Brahminical zeal for protection of cow. Baba Ram Singh's followers
in 1860s killed some Muslim butchers in Amritsar. The authorities at first
interned Baba Ram Singh, but later kept him under surveillance. This was
upshot of political backlash, his Namdhari of Kuka movements was taking.
In 1872, when some of his hot headed followers, against his express wishes
and advice, attacked Malaud and Malerkotla, the Deputy Commissioner Ludhiana,
in disregard of orders of his superiors, and without a fair trial, below
49 of arrested Namdharis by guns; another was cut to pieces. Baba Ram
Singh was deported to Rangoon where he died in 1884.
This caused a setback to the Namdhari movement, which politically was
an expression of pent up feelings against the English machinations in
the annexation of the Punjab. Religiously, the Namdhari movement, even
under Baba Ram Singh, had developed certain peculiarities, and despite
his protestations, in his letters from Rangoon jail that he was not a
Guru, his over-enthusiastic followers raised him to that level. Overall,
the Namdhari movement under Baba Ram Singh was like a whirlwind which
affected certain pockets only and had limited impact on the general body
of the Sikhs.
Maharaja Daleep Singh was, another character who kept alive the resistance
in Punjab. He had been converted to Christianity in 1853. But under the
influence of his mother, Rani Jindan, who joined him in another decade,
he gradually became conscious of his Sikh heritage. But it was not till
mid-1880s, his meeting with his cousin, Thakar Singh Sandhawalia, that
he decided to be rechristened a Sikh. His being baptised as a Sikh by
the Sikh troops in Aden, and his attempts to come back to India, to be
amidst his people, caused misgivings to the British. His falling fowl
of the treatment meted out to him, travels to Russia to seek assistance
for revival/ restoration of his rule over Punjab, and eventually settling
down in Paris, were ramblings of an awakened mind; these were put to rest
in 1893.
An indirect impact of the Kuka movement and Maharaja Daleep Singh's yearnings
for restoration of his rule over Punjab was that no Sikh could send his
child to London for higher studies, say, for studying Bar-at-law. During
the 19th century, Muslim community from Punjab produced half a dozen Bar-at-Laws,
who played an important role in the socio-religious movements and judicial
administration of Punjab. The Hindus too had their quota in late 1890s,
but no Sikh, not even from Malwas which had a longer interaction with
the English, could do so, may be for fear of being tainted for disloyalty,
or joining the hostiles.
The first Sikh youth to complete Bar-at-Law was not till the end of the
first decade of the present century. By the time, the socio-cultural movements
among the Sikhs had far advanced , to buttress the traditional Sikh leadership
: it did not permit the induction of people with higher education. I may
be wrong, but I have a feeling that was the main reason why the Sikh leadership
remained in the hands of semi-educated, semi-literate persons as against
that of the Hindus or the Muslims. Another possibility was that the Sikh
movement, especially in the wake of Gurdwara reform movement, had become
rural. But that did not prevent the aristocracy, the Chief Khalsa Diwan
and the Sikh National Party from playing a leading role till the death
of Sunder Singh Majithia. The rural-urban divide became operative only
in 1960s after the eclipse of Master Tara Singh. Anyhow, I am liberty
of throwing up some ideas, and it shall be open especially for the upcoming
scholars to dilate upon them.
VI
Mention may now be made of the rise of the pure Sikh revivalist movement,
the Singh Sabha (s), in 1873. It aimed at revivalism of Khalsa spirit,
and restoring Sikhism to its pristine purity. The Singh Sabha was to shun
politics.
The Singh Sabha instantly caught the imagination of the literate sections
of the community. It, however, became a movement with the upcoming of
Prof. Gurmukh Singh of Oriental College, Lahore, as the moving spirit.
Sri Guru Singh Sabhas mushroomed all over the province. Prof. Gurmukh
Singh was a puritan and brooked no deviation from the egalitarian Khalsa
spirit. This, at times, brought him into conflict with the Amritsar wing
of Singh Sabha. A Khalsa Diwan established in 1883 to oversee the functioning
of Singh Sabhas was followed by another one at Lahore in 1886, which became
the focal point of Sikh revivalism.
The acute personal differences of the three prominent founders of Singh
Sabha played havoc with the movement. Sardar Thakar Singh Sandhawalia
dreamt of driving the English out re-establishing the Khalsa raj; Kanwer
Bikram Singh of Kapurthala was a pure revivalist, while Baba Khem Singh
Bedi was anxious to get himself recognised and worshipped as Guru. After
the death of Kanwar Bikram Singh in 1887, Baba Khem Singh Bedi ganged
up the Singh Sahibs of Akal Takht and Sri Harmandir Sahib and the other
historic shrines to issue a hukamnamah (on 18 March 1887), to excommunicate
Prof. Gurmukh Singh from Panth. Though it had no impact on the functioning
of Prof. Gurmukh Singh for rest of his life for another decade, it showed
the extent factionalism could go and fracture the Sikh corporate body.
The revocation of this hukamnamah at the World Sikh Sammellan in 1995
showed that the head of Akal Takht or for that matter, of other historic
shrines, are not infallible. They played a faux pas in 1919 and initiated
General Dyer and Capt. Briggs into Sikhism in utter violation of fundamentals
of Sikhism. Again , in 1980s the Akal Takht Jathedar played havoc with
Sikh political institutions by simulated dissolution of various Akali
Dals, and later formation of a United Akali Dal, without at first bringing
about the unity in political outlook of the various constituent units.
This strand of irresponsibility has now continued for over a century .
The present Jathedar of Akal Takht, Bhai Ranjit Singh, in his wisdom,
has, however, decided not to interfere in the political processes of the
Sikh set ups which remain divided as ever.
VII
The first quarter of 20th century saw the culmination of both the resistance
and the revivalist movements. The anouncement of Secretary of State, Edward
Montague, in August 1917, epitomised the former, while the Sikh Gurdwara
Act 1925, epitomised the later.
The resistance to British rule had many facets in various parts of India,
to wit, the agitation following partition of Bengal, the activity of trio
Bal-Pal-Lal (Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai),
the revolutionaries starting with Khudi Ram Bose overflowing to Bhagar
Singh-Sukhdev -Rajguru, the Home Rule Movements of Annie Besant and Bal
Gangadhar Tilak.
In Punjab, Sardar Ajit Singh and Ghadrite revolutionaries, who were overwhelmingly
Sikhs, played a prominent part. It were the revolutionaries who shook
the foundations of the British rule, and brought about a realisation of
the futility of British continuing their overlordship, paving way for
August 1917 declaration.
During this crucial period, M.K. Gandhi, who later was acclaimed father
of 'our nation', whatever that meant, at first by Subhash Chandra Bose
in 1944 and later by Jawaharlal Nehru in December 1946, was serving as
recruitment sergeant for First World War, and earned the title of 'Kaiser-i
Hind' for his services while Jawaharlal Nehru, in the words of his latest
biographer, American Professor Wolpert, was busy in his post adolescent
cravings and mischief mongering.
The Sikh revivalist phase matured into the movement for reform of Gurdwara
administration, and their liberation from the Hinduised practices and
management. During this period, the Sikh movement attained a rare degree
of unity and oneness, as was demonstrated by the failure of British administration
to find even one, a single, Sikh to Side with them over the Sri Harmandir
Sahib keys issue. The Sikhs had attained their objectives by 1922, but
their lack of application and lack of ability to analyse and take hard
decision, made them to unnecessarily prolong the movement. The subsequent
Guru Ka Bagh Morcha, Nabha abdication and Jaito Morcha, agitation, were
unnecessary and proved injurious.
Right from day one of Gandhi's intervention in Nankana Sahib tragedy down
to his being shot dead, he emitted total hostility to Sikhism and Sikh
ideals. It is surprising, the Sikh leaders never paid attention to his
numerous utterances, much less read his inner mind. This resulted in the
Sikh leadership's totally atrophying their movement.
Gandhi was told on the day one itself that his references to the Sikhs
as Hindus was offensive to the Tat Khalsa and the whole Sikh movement,
but he never desisted hurting the Sikh sentiments, much less atone for
his action of omission and commission. His telegram to Baba Kharak Singh
on victory over keys Affair, 'First battle of India's freedom won, Congratulations",
was fraudulent in character, and did not make a dent in his outlandish
assessment of the Akali movement, or Sikhism as part of Hinduism. He sowed
the seeds of schism in the Gurdwara reform movement; later, Punjab Governor,
Hailey, worked upon that lead. The Sikh leadership's deference to him
after he fired his salvos on Nabha affair only showed their lack of discernment,
what was good or bad for them. Similarly, Baba Kharak Singh's claiming
on the one hand the position equivalent to that of president of USA, Germany
or France in his capacity as head of SGPC, and, on the other hand, accepting
the position of President of Punjab Congress, was anomalous, to say the
least, and tended to atomise the Sikh position.
By the time the Gurdwara Act was adopted in 1925, the Sikh movement had
splintered, causing untold mischief and hardship. It needed a Herculean
effort and Socratian wisdom to push it out of the morass. The Sikhs lacked
both. With Master Tara Singh's coming on the top in 1930s with Congress
leadership's blessings, the leadership passed on to mediocre hands. Even
Baba Kharak Singh who had sought to give the events a constructive turn
on the eve of Lahore Congress in 1929, became crazy, peevish and negative
in outlook and behaviour.
The Sikhs were in a soup , and one wonders whether they have come out
of it even today.
VIII
Some thoughts on the Sikhs and Gandhi in the context of India's struggle
for independence.
With the August 1917 announcement there was really no movement for India's
independence. It was all for placements.
The Muslim League had gained its position at the Lucknow Congress in 1916,
and thoughtfully ran no anti-imperialist struggle. No one suffered a scratch,
much less going to goals. The Congress under Gandhi's leadership ran three
movements by fits and starts. The first one, non-cooperation movement
1920-22 was for placement of Gandhi's at the centre stage in the Congress
and saw its seizure by him; the second, Civil Disobedience Movement 1930-32
was more with a view to erode the popularity gained by the revolutionaries
than against the British : Bhagat Singh, at the time, had gained an advantage
over Gandhi in popular estimation and third, the Quit India Movement 1942,
was upshot of Gandhi's misreading of Hindu religious literature, especially
Gita, to stab the British in the back when in trouble at the height of
the War. Lord Krishna had ran away with the clothes of naked Gopis bathing
in the pool of water, and dictated terms to them from an unequal position.
Gandhi's move boomeranged, in the process strengthening Jinnah and the
Muslim League.
The Satyagraha against the Rowlatt Bills in March-April 1919 had helped
to launch Gandhi into the Indian polity. The Punjab administration was
aghast at the turn the events had taken at Amritsar, and wanted to teach
the people a lesson. Baisakhi, 13 April, was at hand. The Administration
hired one Hans Raj, a caste Hindu, to lure the people to Jallianwala Bagh,
a closed square with a narrow entrance. It was all a contrived affair.
When General Dyer arrived there, Hans Raj was seen talking to the Inspectors
of CID (Central Intelligence Department), and disappeared. M.K Gandhi
who was entrusted by the Congress to conduct an enquiry came upon the
evidence, but he chose to put a veil over it, as, meanwhile he had built
up his leadership on the blood of martyrs of Jallianwala Bagh. For Gandhi,
to expose Hans Raj's role meant giving away the mileage he had gained.
To Gandhi, this type of method was not unjustified, as in his reading
of Hindhu Shastras, the Devas (gods) had defeated the Asuras (titans)
by dubious means, and so had Pandavas defeated Kaurvas in Mahabharta war.
Gandhi was a scheming and brainy bania, trying to act as a Brahmin. The
mantle of Hindu revivalism of Bengal, Maharashtra and Punjab brands, had
fallen on his shoulders. He personified atavistic nationalism of the Hindus.
If the British by granting separate electorate had taken religion into
politics into religion. The Sikhs had already won separate electorate
in Punjab. Gandhi felt aghast, especially at the Sikh assertion of being
an independent faith. Even after the adoption of Gurdwara Bill in 1925,
he wrote a scurrilous piece terming Guru Gobind Singh as "a misguided
patriot", and casting aspersions on the originality of the mission
of Guru Nanak. (He repeated these writings after a lapse of 17 years in
1942.) But with what results? There was widespread condemnation of Gandhi's
views but the Sikh leadership did nothing to cut umbilical chord that
bound it to the Congress or Gandhi.
At the All Party Conferences in 1927-28, the Sikhs did not do their home
work. Their advocacy of joint electorate was based on a wrong premise,
of their constituting 25 per cent of the voters in the then restricted
franchise. It never occurred to them that their advantage would disappear
into thin air, once adult franchise was introduced.
At the Lahore Congress 1929, Gandhi hoodwinked Tara Singh with a lollipop.
The Congress leaders had promised to adopt a resolution not to accept
a constitution that was not acceptable to the Sikhs. Instead, Gandhi used
all his wile to draft an omnibus type one, that Congress would not accept
a constitution that was not acceptable to the minorities - the Sikhs,
the Muslims, and others. Tara Singh, an ordinary Graduate, without any
analytical capacity, was in for such lollipops (till he subjected the
Sikhs bound hand and foot in 1947). He was subjected to double talk with
impunity. The 1929 assurances were not worth the paper written on, as
Tara Singh learnt in post - 1947 era.
The plea of the Sikh leadership to the Congress about the quantum of Sikh
sacrifices in the freedom struggle - of the people who were sent to the
gallows, sentenced to transportation for life, or otherwise imprisoned
since Gandhi's assumption of leadership (they quoted figures churned out
by Lala Duni Chand, Punjab Congress President in support of their assertions)
were all in vain. They were talking to the wrong people; these facts and
figures were simply not relevant. The Sikh leadership hardly had fingers
on the pulse, and was completely off the track.
Gandhi was dead set against the backward classes conversion to Sikhism.
He said, he did not mind their conversion to Islam or Christianity, but
never to Sikhism. Why? If not that he was rabidly anti-Sikh?
Tara Singh was right in breaking with the Congress in 1940 over War efforts.
He should have accepted Gandhi's correct advice to turn completely communal
and safeguard the Sikh interests, but chose to continue to be tied to
Congress's apron strings. A complete break would have made them to charter
an independent course, and fend for themselves. His parameters were not
clear.
The Sikh leadership showed lack of comprehension of even basic issues
both during the Cripps Mission's visit in 1942 and later that of Cabinet
Mission in 1946. Baldev Singh (who had once joined a College) was another
mediocre, not worth of his job; he sold the Sikh interests in return for
his family's business interests in Bihar, Giani Kartar Singh was the only
one who could have hoodwinked Congress leadership to yield iron clad guarantees
but was checkmated by Tara Singh and Baldev Singh . Baldev Singh had pangs
of conscience only after his ouster from the Union Cabinet in 1952, and
wanted to write his Memories as to how the Sikhs were betrayed, but lacked
the capability to even do that. Swaran Singh who replaced him at Lahore,
and later emerged as Bara Babu at Delhi, had no mind to do so, even with
best of persuasion. He said, he did not want to betray the confidence
reposed in him by Nehruvian dynasty. He was more loyal than the King,
or in Maoist metaphor, was running dog of Hindu Chauvinism.
When the Muslim league adopted the Lahore Resolution, March 1940, Gandhi
was quick to analyse that the Muslims would by committing suicide of they
do so. In his analysis, Muslims, who constituted a solid phalanx in undivided
India, would be divided into a number of segments, if not splintered.
He saw in it a rare opportunity to liberate Hindus from the thousand years
of thralldom of Muslims. After the mis-adventure of Quit India movement
in 1942, Gandhi saw to it that Jinnah keeps alive Muslims' fledgling hope.
Gandhi's holding parleys with jinnah in 1944 when the latter's position
was precarious, and conferring on him the title of Quaid-i-Azam (The Great
Leader), is to be seen in that light.
After the Muslim League accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan, Gandhi at
first brusquely told Maulana Azad, Congress President of six years standing
not to talk about, what he termed, "My Hindus". He then made
Jawahar Lal Nahru to say openly that Congress believed in majoritarian
democracy, and would in the Constituent Assembly, upturn all the commitments
now being made. That put wisdom in Jinnah, but not in the Sikh leadership.
Eventually, Jinnah, but had to, against his best judgment, accept the
truncated Pakistan offered to him by Lord Mountbatten. In the process,
with Indian Islam being fractured, Gandhi, assisted by Nehru and Patel,
liberated Hinduism from a Millennium of slavery, Here was a rare case
of double liberation. Not surprisingly, Nehru acclaimed Gandhi in December
1946, while inaugurating the Constituent Assembly, as father of "our
nation" - whether he meant 'Hindu Nation', or Congress Party as nation,
does not know. Without partition of India, Gandhi could not have emerged
as 'father of our nation'. In three-fourths of India, Hinduism had triumphed,
to resume its onward march, after a hiatus of a 1000 years.
The Sikh leadership, during the last phase 1945-47, as stated earlier,
was a confused lot, fractured and not sure of itself. It tried to conceal
its weakness by convening All Party Sikh Conferences. These in turn, enabled
the quislings, turncoats, and infiltrates to occupy key positions. The
appointment of Babu Labh Singh as President of Akali Dal in 1945 and of
Col. Niranjan Singh Gill of INA, a Trojan horse of Congress, or a power
broker, as' dictator' of Panthic Board, is to be seen in that light. The
intelligence Bureau in June 1946 pointed to the "Perennial jealousies"
among the Sikh leaders, as the main stumbling block. There has been no
end to them and characterises the Sikh leadership even today.
Tara Singh had spelled out the Sikh objectives, "to avoid perpetual
slavery of Hindus or Muslims". But he drew no contingency plan, much
less alternative ones. The leadership instead of facing the issues squarely,
was indulging in self-deception. The Sikh leadership was fumbling before
the Cabinet Mission on 5 April 1946, when the same day, Jawahar Lal Nahru
said at a Press Conference, "The brave Sikhs of Punjab are entitled
to special consideration. I see nothing wrong in area and a set up in
the North where in the Sikhs can experience the glow of freedom."
This could have been interpreted by the Sikh leadership as a challenge
to carve out such an area in the talks with the Cabinet Mission. The Cabinet
Mission threw a lot of suggestions at them, of an autonomous unit on the
Soviet model (with membership of U.N. on the pattern of three of the Soviet
republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia) but the Sikh leadership, lacking
any knowledge of international affairs and world polity, simply failed
to comprehend it. The British found them not worthy of confidence because
of their pedestrian leadership, which instead chose to treat whatever
Nehru had said at a press conference as a lollipop, which it was not.
The 3 June 1947 announcement of Baldev Singh on behalf of the Sikhs to
throw in their lot with the Hindus without getting iron clad guarantees,
not even the implementation of 3-way division of Punjab talked about in
Sachar-Swaran Singh statement of 21 April 1947, marked the total failure
of the Sikh leadership. The Sikhs could have insisted on division of Punjab
between Muslims and non-Muslims on the one hand, and between the Hindus
and non-Hindus separating a couple of Haryana districts on the other,
with, preferably, their joining the Hindus as an autonomous unit. But
the Sikh leadership lacked clarity. Penderel Moon at the last moment tried
to bring that about, but since Mountbatten himself was angling for Governor
Generalship in post-independent India, nothing came out of the move.
Till the end, Akali Dal was fighting for maintenance of India's unity,
when both the Congress and Muslims League were fighting for placements
and power. There were two people who till the end fought for India's unity
- Pathans and the Sikhs. Badshah Khan in the background of Congress treachery
and sell out, spoke of his people being thrown to the wolves ; the Sikhs
lacked a man of that clarity to realise the damage they had caused in
subjecting the Sikhs to "perpetual slavery of the Hindus" and
their majoritarian democracy. To sugar coat the hurt, the Congress straightaway
served the Akalis lollipops in the form of participating the East Punjab
Government. That was not unwelcome as the only wise decision taken by
the Sikhs during the entire episode of decolonisation of the subcontinent,
mass migration from West Pakistan and their denuding the East Punjab of
its Muslim content, was still in the process of being implemented. The
Sikh settlement in Cis-Ghaggar area, and their trumping up a majoring
in a compact area, for the first time in their history, was direct offset
of that.
This brings us to the recent phase, the last 50 years of the Sikhs as
part of decolonised India, when the Sikhs for the first time in their
history came under the tutelage of a reviving Hinduism.
The Hindus right from the day one were very clear about the import of
the change that had taken place. The Punjabi Hindu was especially emotive
at their, for the first time after a millennium, becoming a majority in
Punjab. They had now become the ruling race. They were also clear about
their intentions as to the treatment to be meted to the non-conforming
faiths. As against that , the Sikh leadership was bewildered, helpless,
and vulnerable.
The pathetic Sikh situation was discernible right form the beginning.
Maharaja Yadvendra Singh of Patiala's observations (letter of 5 Sept
1948 to Patel) about "the sense of frustration and despair"
of the Sikh leadership, and the "fear of total extinction" by
the youth and their readiness "to make any sacrifices" to ward
off the threatening evil, falls in place. He pleaded that "An immediate
declaration of the Government of India assuring the community of their
rightful place in the body politic, seems to be most essential."
This was asking for the moon.
Gandhi right from 3 June had adopted most supercilious attitude towards
the Sikhs. He resumed his attack on the Sikhs and Sikhism. This, at first,
culminated in Punjab Government circular to all Deputy Commissioners and
District Superintendents of Police in October 1947 branding the Sikhs
as 'criminals and vagabonds', a lawless people, and "a menace to
peaceful Hindus". This circular could have been issued by the Governor
only at the instance of the Government of India. Then followed Gandhi's
daily diatribes against the Sikhs in his evening meetings. This culminated
in Gandhi's final pronouncement on 21 Jan. 1948 to a Sikh delegation :
precisely, he wanted the Sikhs to disown Guru Gobind Singh, cast off kirpan
and other symbols of Khalsa, and merge into the ocean of Hinduism Earlier,
in December 1947, Gandhi had observed, "Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism
and Jainism, and their offshoots are one. Hinduism is the ocean to which
all rivers run. It can absorb Islam and Christianity and all other religions
and only then can it become the ocean". This will rank him as the
foremost Hindu fundamentalist.
Shortly after Gandhi was shot dead, Lord Mountbatten wrote in February
1948 :
The Sikhs as part of Pakistan would have retained a measure of political
identity. But as part of Hindustan, they fear conomic absorption by the
Hindus, also religious absorption. In short, they feared, probably correctly,
virtual extinction as a political force, and survival only as a rapidly
dwindling sect of Hindus.
The Sikh predicament since 1947 is to be seen in this light.
In the wake of Gandhi's murder, the simulated violence that was in store
for the Sikhs, were the murderer a Sikh, as was originally feared, made
the Sikhs to distance themselves from Hinduism in their manslaughter of
the Muslims that went on in the name of communal riots all over India.
The Muslims too respected the Sikh neutrality or non-involvement in the
Communal quagmire all over India. The Punjabi Hindus too distanced themselves
from the Sikhs by disowning their mother tongue, Punjabi language. The
Union Government took a malicious note of the Sikhs clobbering a majority
in a compact area from Attari to Ghaghar, and also the Sikh preponderance,
especially in the senior echelons, in the Army. That made it to take some
decisions, never to make a Sikh the head of Army.
Soon the goings on in the Constituent Assembly (CA) took a turn for the
worse for the Sikhs. They were offered inclusion of four of their backward
sections in the Scheduled Castes, as ultimate reward for their contribution
in the freedom struggle. Tara Singh compared his position to that of a
person in a forest, who was disrobed by the Thugs to absolute nakedness;
he was offered a loin cloth in return for an assurance that the person
would not narrate to others what was done to him.
Sardar Patel declared in mid-1948, PEPSU (a conglomeration of the states
in East Punjab as a political unit) as the Sikh Homeland. This caused
furore among the Punjabi Hindus of all shades and Hindus press all over
India. The concept was soon revered. In order to show the Sikhs their
place. Akalis were not permitted to hold a religious conference to commemorate
Nankana Sahib Martyrs anniversary in February 1949 inside Gurdwara Rakab
Ganj in Delhi, and Tara Singh was arrested . A general arrest of the Sikhs
followed. It was in this atmosphere that, amidst Hindu resurgence, the
CA reopened the agreed provisions of the Constitution and adopted the
final draft. The Sikh representatives, finding the goings on hostile,
announced their refusal to accept the Constitution , and refused to put
their signatures to the final document. They were to be kept outside the
national mainstream.
The Sikhs saw their salvation in a reorganisation of Punjab on linguistic
basis. Since this would meet their aspirations. Nehru, who was gangotri,
source of Hindu revivalism or anti-Sikhism, chose to misrepresent it as
a demand for a Sikh State. Nehru was explicit. If partition had not taken
place, they could have done something for the Sikhs. In his words, 'Time
has changed!' Now all the earlier pledges could be seen only as a stratagem;
these had lost their relevance. Sikhism was in the grips of a boa constrictor,
and he would rather do something to strengthen that hold. The Akali morchas
for Punjabi Suba were in vain, and did not influence the ruling elite.
Twice during the first decade, in 1948 and then in 1956, Akalis decided
to shun political activity, to same Hindu leadership to adopt secular
attitude, out in vain.
Nehru's talks with Sant Fateh Singh in 1961 showed how illogical and mean
he was. It was Nehru who laid down the outline for annihilation of Sikhs,
if they were to resort to such type of agitation again. The contours of
this outline are discernible from three mindless accusations hurled at
the height of Punjabi Suba agitation, to wit, (1) Pakistan agrees to train
Sikhs in guerilla warfare, (2) otherwise support and encouragement of
Pakistan, and (3) training of the Sikh Youth in the use of explosives.
This outline was utilised by his daughter Indira in post-1978 era to organise
state sponsored militancy in Punjab.
X
Mention may now be made of the communists as a factor in Sikh polity.
Right from the beginning, there was a section of Communist party of India
(CPI) or its earlier segments that was interested in Gurdwara politics.
Communists in Punjab had certain pockets in the Sikh constituencies for
Punjab legislature. But they were kept at bay by both the Akalis and Congress,
who some times, as in 1937 elections, joined together to defeat them.
After 1947, with the Hindus denying their mother tongue, and the Congress
playing to the Hindu Gallery in opposing on Punjabi Suba, Communist support
to Akalis tended to give them bi-partisan support. That made Akalis to
give communists a sizeable number of seats in Gurdwara election in 1955.
They were called Red Akalis. They worked under an overall strategy chartered
by General Secretary of Punjab CPI, Harkishan Singh Surjeet who later,
was master craftsman of communist infiltration into Akali Dal. The Communists,
however, played a dubious role in ousting Tara Singh from Presidency of
SGPC in 1958. In the ensuing elections to SGPC in 1960, Communist were
aligned with the congressite Sikhs, and both were routed.
Meanwhile, because of the merger of Akali Dal with Congress in 1956, in
the 1957 elections to Punjab Assembly, the Communists got about 18 per
cent of votes polled in Punjabi region. The CPI came to the conclusion
that it can become a mass movement only at the cost of destruction of
Akali Dal. (Gurharpal Singh Communism in Punjab, Delhi, 1992)
Consequently, when Tara Singh, out of pique, chose to part company with
the Congress over candidates fielded in 1957 elections, some members of
the CPI joined Akali Dal on individual basis. Later, when Fateh Singh
split with Tara Singh who lacked manpower to organise his faction of Akali
Dal, the leadership to them was provided by Jathedar Gurcharan Singh Tohra.
(For his bio-sketch see, Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, Oxford,1991,
Vol. II)
On the victory of the Sant Fateh Singh in SGPC elections in 1965, Sarup
Singh and Satbir Singh, both former Presidents of AISSF (All India Sikh
Students Federation) stated that the communists had gained a backdoor
entry into Sikh politics. Both Sant Sipahi, Amritsar and Spokesman (Chandigarh)
have surmised that with the election of Sant Fateh Singh in 1965, Gurdwara
elections, or the major infiltration of communists and congressites there
has been a sharp deterioration in Gurdwara administration.
Tohra with the support of solid communist phalanx and the Congressites
(to whom the leadership) was shortly provided by Balwant Singh), had the
potentiality to play an upsetting role. To begin with, he, through the
medium of Panthic Unity, in 1970, placed people like Gurnam Singh and
Dr. Jagjit Singh Chauhan, then both in league with the Congress into important
posts in Akali Dal. Chauhan who had been inducted as one of the General
Secretaries was let loose on international arena, with the blessings of
Indira Gandhi. He floated the idea of Khalistan and raised sloganeering
at the U.N Under media management of the Government of India, this was
utilised to malign Akali Dal which, however, suspended him from primary
membership.
The Akalis were worsted in 1972 Punjab Assembly elections and shortly
afterwards. Tohra asked for Fateh Singh's resignation. He seized Presidentship
of SGPC in January 1973. At the suggestion of Harkishan Singh Surjeet,
Tohra, according to Amarjit Kaur (The Punjab Story, Delhi, 1984) placed
Marxists and Naxalites at a large scale in Gurdwara administration. Since
Indira was working in alignment with the Communists at National Level,
the elections due for SGPC were not held till 1979 (Indira had by then
been overthrown), when Akalis were working in alignment with the Janta
Government. Again, the House elected in 1979 was kept i n office for another
17 years thanks to Congress-Communists combination working in alignment
during the period, to prevent the rise of new leadership among the Sikhs.
The new SGPC house chosen in 1996 reflects a different alignment in the
Sikh polity.
To resume the story. With the induction of solid phalanx of Communists
in Akali Dal is mid 1960s, the Panthic leadership now could never be unitary
as was under Tara Singh, or Fateh Singh. This paved the way for group
leadership, with Sant Harchand Singh Longowal, Parkash Singh Badal, Gurcharan
Singh Tohra and Jagdev Singh Talwandi being multiple centres of power.
This proved centrifugal.
Another fall out of the collaboration of Communists with the Congress
was that the two Universities at Amritsar and Patiala that came up became
the centres for Sikh-looking Communists, who, keeping Sikh forms, played
havoc with Sikh institutions and in exposition of Sikh religion and philosophy
at international conferences. Dr. Harjinder Singh Dilgeer in his monumental
work, THE SIKH REFERENCE BOOK mentions of a host of them : those who have
propounded the viewpoint advocated by Hew McLeod, who has been in league
with pan-Hindus/Arya Samajists in denigrating Sikhism.
To what extent the Akali leadership has been aware of the Communists/
Congressite infiltration and its playing havoc in the Sikh institutions,
it is difficult to say. Similarly, to what extent the Marxists and Naxalites
who infiltrated Akali Dal have shed Maxism and become oriented to the
Sikh philosophy, I would not venture to go into. It would be for some
one to conduct a specialised study and make his deductions.
In my humble view, so far Harkishan Singh Surjeet who has been main beneficiary,
at first in getting Nakodar seat to Punjab Assembly with Akali support
in 1950s and then getting in to Rajya Sabha in 1978 with Akali support,
is alive and kicking, the umbilical chord that binds the Comrades cannot
be completely severed. The case of Balwant Singh Ramoowalia, who was President
of Communist Students Union in 1964, infiltrated Akali Dal and was twice
elected to Lok Sabha on Akali ticket, and later ran for offices of profit
in post-1984 era, and then became a Cabinet Minister in Janta Government
as nominee of Surjeet, is a case on point. He mentioned his communist
ancestry - that his father was also a communist, but not his Sikh ancestry,
that for how many generations his family has been a votary of the Sikh
faith.
It is a paradox that though Communism has been losing at international
level, by an adroit manipulation it is still keeping its stranglehold
over a number of states/parts in India. The CPM which had affiliations
with Red Akalis is a dying party, with a bulk of its Polit Bureau Members
being over 70. In Punjab it is not much of a force, unless one considers
Marxists/Naxalites functioning within Akali Dal who may be at its beck
and call.
XI
The formation of Punjabi speaking state in 1966 was result of the Indo-Pakistan
war of 1965 when the Sikhs rose to a man to defend the country, and provide
the armed forces the necessary support. At the time, Sant Fateh Singh
who was on verge of going on a fast unto death postponed it, and the President,
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, intervened decisively to concede the demand. But
the "For Eyes Only" note left by Jawaharlal Nehru for his successors,
quoted by Shastri in his talks with Sant Fateh Singh earlier, proved a
roadblock, as it unnecessarily complicated the situation. Then followed
Shastri's death at Tashkent. Indira who took over proceeded to complicate
the situation so that the formation of Punjabi Subha was not a smooth
affairs, but riven with reeds. Hence, the Shah Commission, and its topsy
turvey recommendations, including keeping Hydel and Power resources outside
the purview of Punjab Administration, a number of joint institutions with
Haryana, and eventually keeping Chandigarh as Union territory. Indira's
objective was embroil Haryana as much as possible in Punjab tangle, so
that the Jats of Haryana don't think of Jat unity, impinging upon jat
areas of western Uttar Pradesh.
The formation of Akali Governments in wake of the division of Punjab
in 1966, at first, under Gurnam Singh who later was over by Congress,
and later under Parkash Singh Badal, could not achieve much, as Akalis
were either riven by dissensions/defections or the Akali coalition was
thrown out by the Centre under the draconian Article 356. Akalis move
to rope in BJP was a clever move to reassure the Urban Punjabi Hindus,
an insatiable class. The formation of Badal government in 1997 is to be
seen in that light. Badal has chosen to say that he would like to use
Ranjit Singh's role as a model, in coopting Hindus and others into the
extent of Badal's reading of Ranjit Singh's administration, especially
my comments on his rule. These are brief and pithy. I think, it will be
more appropriate for Badal to draw inspiration from Unionist Government
in pre-partition Punjab. The Unionists had the necessary majority on their
own, but they always had a Minister from Hindu National Party and one
from one or other Sikh parties - the Sikh National Party or Akali Dal.
And, the Unionist Government in Punjab was much more secular and had smooth
sailing than Congress governments formed in 1937, or the coalitions that
have come into power in Independent India.
Coalition with BJP in Punjab also serves Badal well in letting sleeping
dogs lie sleeping, though one wishes that BJP leaders too would reciprocate.
Laxmi Kanta Chawla is a typical Urban Punjabi Hindu representative, forthright
and honest in her views. But Balram Ji Das Tandon and other BJP leaders
have been in the forefront in taking Ajit Singh Sandhu to the top BJP
leadership - Atal Behari Vajpayee, Lal Krishan Advani, Jaswant Singh,
Murli Manohar Joshi and others for a sympathetic hearing at his predicament
born out of his killings of innocent Sikhs, and indictment by the Supreme
Court. It would have been appropriate for some of them to instead pay
a pilgrimage to Jaswant Singh Khalra's wife. Possibly, none of them feels
that the Sikhs too have human rights.
After Sandhu's suicide, a dozen or so Police personnel indicted in various
cases, were on verge of making confessional statements spilling the beans
about state-sponsored militancy against the Sikhs as a people. The hue
and cry raised by K.P.S Gill with the full support of the Hindu (there
is no national) press and Hindu (where is the secular?) leaders, and the
mild, compromising approach of Punjab police, has thwarted that.
XII
The drafting of Anandpur Sahib resolution in 1973 was the cumulative
upshot of Sikh frustration and maladroitness on the part of union government
in treating the Sikh people. It was handiwork of S. Kapur Singh of I.C.S.,
who had suffered the Hindu vendetta because of his Sikh spirit. He was
an eminent scholar and a philosopher, with deep grounding in Sikh history.
The draft he put forth is a brief, compact document. It is important,
not for what it says, but also for what it conceals. There are certain
things which are not said or spelt out.
Kapur Singh represented the Sikh spirit. It was this spirit that stood
out against Indira Gandhi's emergency. It were only the Akali Dal which
ran a morcha against this almighty engine of tyranny, with even the Supreme
Court giving way. The RSS stood for some time and then gave way. This
Sikh opposition incensed Indira Gandhi to inflict economic hardships on
the Sikhs and Punjab. The Hydel Power Award was one such instrument, which
should have been among the first to be scrapped after 1977, as part of
emergency excesses. Morarji Desai, the Prime Minister, was a hard core
Gandhite and Anti-Sikh fanatic. Akalis should have threatened to pull
out of the coalition , right in the beginning. Their failure to do so,
proved very costly. Was it lack of consciousness of direction or comprehension,
one does not know. This was the first time that Akali were offered participation
in the Union Government after ouster of Baldev Singh in 1952. Baldev Singh
was a fiasco. Was Akali participation in 1977 any better so far as Sikh
interests are concerned? I have my doubts.
Akali Dal's redrafting the Anandpur Sahib Resolution at its Conference
at Luhiana in 1978 was inept. The leadership should not have felt chary
at the resolution being the work of one man. Then, the leadership lacked
drafting skill to put down its own mind. It sought the assistance of Harkishan
Singh Surjeet, that clever fox, then termed 'guruji' by some Akali stalwarts;
he in turn involved Jyoti Basu. It was a sad commentary on intellectual
content of the Sikh leadership. Early in 1940s, when the Sikhs needed
to draft a resolution on Azad Punjab, they had sought the assistance of
Rajaji. A political party or a group that cannot draft its policy, comes
to grief. And that happened to the Sikhs in 1947. Similarly by going by
this draft prepared under the advice of Marxists, who were collaborators
of the Indira Congress, Akali did neither enhance their prestige or prospects,
nor chose to advance their viewpoint; they unnecessarily put therein phrases,
they should have held back. Nothing prevented Akali Dal from adopting
fresh resolutions spelling out some of their socio-religio-economic objective
without tampering with the Anandpur Sahib Resolution of 1973, and without
disclosing their full hand.
Possibly, the group leadership was at the root of the problem.
Indira Gandhi singularly pursued her policy of Vendetta against the Sikhs.
She and her cronies organised clash between the Sikhs and schismatic Sant
Nirankaris in 1978, and sowed the seeds of violence in Sikh polity. These
sprouted forth after Indira's coming to power in 1980. What followed before
and after 1984 was state terrorism, organised by intelligence organisations
and sets ups. One organisation did not know that the other was doing.
This led to criss cross movements, all at the cost of the Sikhs. Bhindranwala
phenomenon is to be seen in that light; so is with the Operation Bluestar
and its aftermath. Indira's use of Sikh revivalism (of Bhindranwala brand)
to shatter the Sikh mainstream, had devastating effect. The Akalis regarded
Indira as a politically hostile element, while she regarded the Sikhs
as an enemy to be defeated in detail. It was this difference in perception
that lay at the root of the Sikhs inadequate response. The apogee was
Armed forces circular, baat cheet, talking points, in 1984, terming Guru
Gobind Singh as the fountain head of terrorist. Every one upholding Sikh
values was a terrorist, a potential terrorsit or the one looking like
a terrorist. November 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom was aimed at annihilating
the Sikhs all over India.
Then there was the introduction of drugs in Punjab with connivance of
security agencies. This affected the Sikh youth in multiple ways; an Army
Officer told me that really speaking the Sikh youth of requisite qualities
was not available for recruitment. May be that was so. But that was no
justification for putting quotas from provinces into the recruitment for
armed forces. Why not the quota for backward classes and other minorities?
For instance, the content of Muslims even in para military forces, which
serve as vehicle of oppression in communal conflicts, in negligible.
I have given in a greater detail in THE SIKH IN HISTORY (New York, 1995,
2nd edn. Delhi, 1996), the role of para-military forces and intelligence
set ups in organising terrorism and executing terroristic acts, and indulging
in activity affecting honour and dignity of our people. A Director BSF
justified the para military force's acts of rape and rapine to cause change
of gene of the Sikh people; he little realised that the Mughals under
Babur, Humayun, Akbar were not fanatics; the degrees of fanaticism increased
with the induction of Hindu blood in Jahangir, Shahjahan and reached its
apogee under Aurangzeb.
The Sikhs have been subjected to violation of Human Rights, with impunity.
All Hindu parties, whether Congress, BJP, Communists, Janta Dals of various
brands, and other were unanimous that Human Rights are not available to
the Sikhs, including the cronies. Even Giani Zial Singh, as President,
could not get the body of a relative killed during November 1984 riots
in Delhi. He entrusted Madan Lal Khurana to intercede on his behalf or
that of the family, to no effect. A Sikh lady, a UK national, and a personal
guest of Butta Singh, then union Home Minister on a visit, was implicated
as a terrorist, and was released only after British Prime Minister, Margaret
Thatcher, interceded with Rajiv Gandhi on her behalf Buta Singh was helpless.
But these cronies, Zail Singh Buta Singh have been men of straw who cannot
learn anything from history.
There was involuntary disappearance of Sikh youth for almost a decade.
People have been shot dead in cold blood, without questions being asked.
According to my analysis of 1991. Census figures, there has been a shortfall
of 10 to 12 lakh Sikh youth between 1984-1991. The process went on for
atleast another three years. There has been increase in number of women
available in Punjab as against men in a number of districts, for the first
time since the introduction of census process. Jaswant Singh Khalra's
figures of 25,000 unclaimed bodies cremated in a couple of cremation grounds
in Amritsar and Taran Taran points to that. Since both the Punjab Government,
and the SGPC which has the resources, are not interested to pursue the
line of enquiry as to the loss of manpower during the decade 1984-94,
the next decennial census due in 2001 shall show the impact of this large
scale elimination of Sikh youth. Already, in urban areas, Sikh girls are
increasingly marrying Hindu boys, as Sikh youth of comparable age group
is not available . Then there was large scale encouragement of apostasy
under the regime of Beant Singh who acted more like a robot. The Gurmat
Chetna Lehr launched in 1996 seeks to stem that rot. How far that would
succeed would depend upon various factors.
The question starting at us is, what is the position of Akalis, who represent
the Sikh populace, and in whom the Sikh people have reposed their confidence.
Writing about Maharaja Ranjit Singh's rule, I had opined that "so
far as Sikhism was concerned, it gave a big stink" and that "Ranjit
Singh's lopsided appraisal of the fundamentals of his state which constituted
of the nodes of his power" was one of the factors for that.
In this context I am not constrained to pass value judgement on the administration
of Badal. Since early this year. At the Institute of Sikh Studies Conference
a month back, he himself opined that his administration is like a vehicle
whose engine is on, but the wheels do not move. Was he showing consciousness
of what the people's expectations are? I think he was.
XIII
The special session of Parliament in August 1997 provided an ideal opportunity
for the Sikh representatives in Parliament to record their perception
of the maltreatment meted out to the Sikh community in decolonised India,
and the economic discrimination to which Punjab was subjected. Akalis
had 8 representative in Lok Sabha. Of them only 3 chose to speak and expect
one according to Sikh press, they did not make an impact.
Why this indifference and lackdaisical performance. They had the facts;
almost all of them had access to my work, THE SIKHS IN HISTORY. To highlight
political aspect at least, They need not have quoted from the book, If
they were allergic to some part of it. It gave all the sources; they could
have had access to those sources to present their case.
They could have chosen to divide the fields on which each one of them,
atleast five-six of them could have presented their viewpoint. But they
did not. Why? I don't want to speculate on the reasons.
Thanks to Akalis boycotting the 1992 elections they did not have a representative
in Rajya Sabha. Now in April 1998, seven seats all won by Congressites
in default, shall be falling vacant. If the coalition - Akalis and BJP
can assure that is no cross voting of their members, they can annex all
the seats themselves, or send an acceptable one from opposition to Rajya
Sabha. The opposition can win one seat. If all the four groups join together
or there is cross voting by Akali-BJP members. Congress with 14 members
can be thwarted, while Akali Dal (Mann) with one member can be made to
send its nominee to Rajya Sabha. It is for Badal to think of combinations
and permutations, and for appropriate candidates for Rajya Sabha.
Akalis have taken membership of Rajya Sabha too casually. They have sent
Tohra, Talwandi and the likes, who were not equipped for that, or they
have gifted seats to men like Surjeet the evil genius of CPM. And sometime
to Congress as in early 1984.
Now they can send atleast 5 members with one going to BJP. Badal should
not shy away from drafting professionals. Two things essentials for them
would be ideological purity, and lack of ambition. Besides, all of them
should be vocal and volatile. These could be specialists in international
law, international relations world polity, services, economics with grounding
in international aid and development. Sikh philosophy and history. I am
told it would be foolhardy on my part of tender such an advice, as Sikh
leaders are normally not amenable to unsolicited advice.
XIV
To conclude one can say that history has treated the Sikh people very
harshly. This is especially with the recent history the last 50 years
of decolonised India. The failure of the Sikh leadership in 1945-47 was
followed by era of Brahminical chicanery, which is still a continuing
process, of which they have been victims. They have not yet found a counter
to that. The Sikhs have lost their self- image, of their being the lions
to safeguard the underdog. If themselves not underdogs, their position
in social set up has deteriorated. Persecuted and deprived, the youth,
with easy availability of drugs is astray. It lacks positive thinking,
and is losing cultural moorings. The leadership continues to function
as if nothing has happened. It is as fractured as ever. It seems to have
so easily and so early forgotten what happened to the Sikh people for
a decade from 1984. A people who do not learn from history are condemned
to repeat it. The Jews passed through an horrendous era. But they have
preserved their heritage. The Sikhs are obliterating even their old memorials
which presented to the succeeding generations their hoary past. Jallianwala
Bagh still has bullet marks; but not the Golden Temple. You can awaken
the asleep, but not those who are already awake. The kar seva sants, lacking
sufficient enlightenment about the importance of their heritage, have
also been obliterating Sikh memorials. The so called Sant Samaj has made
big strides in the Punjab villages they are out inflict mortal blows to
the mainstream Sikhism.
In the last chapter 'Future of the Sikhs' in THE SIKHISM HISTORY. I had
surmised that in 1999, the Sikhs would be entering a new phase of hope
and fulfilment. I wrote that in 1992, though the work was published only
in 1995. I shall go by my that assessment. Let us hope for a better tomorrow.
1. Sangat Singh, THE SIKH IN HISTORY (NEW YORK, 1995) 2nd edition, Delhi,
1996, Pp xviii 564
2. This was notwithstanding Rattan Singh Bhangoo's laudable contribution,
and that of Giani Gian Singh, and earlier of Bhai Santokh Singh in the
last century, and that of Karam Singh Historian during the current one.
Karam Singh has the potentiality to write history in the modern sense.
It was his efforts that the Sikhs, after over three centuries became aware
of Jahangir's role in the martyrdom of Guru Arjan Dev. He also unearthed
Qazi Noor Mohammad's Jangnamah which delineates the Sikh character during
the 18th Century, and throws light on the Sikh mode of warfare. After
Karam Singh's early death in 1930s, his mantle (and material) fell on
Dr. Ganda Singh, who in his post-retirement period, especially after laying
foundations of PANJAB PAST AND PRESENT, a bi-annual journal, under the
auspices of Punjabi University Patiala, did a commendable job in reinterpreting
some parts of the Sikh history, and inspiring a host of scholars to do
their bits on others, His setting up of Punjab History Conference, an
annual get together of established and young fluttering historians was
a laudable effort. It is now a dwindling institution, and needs to be
revamped if the ideals that inspired Dr. Ganda Singh are to be kept alive.
|