Sikh historical memory as an ideological justification for Khalistan

ABSTRACT

The Khalistan movement was an armed secessionist struggle carried out by the Sikhs of Punjab, northern India, which spanned the period between 1981 and 1993. In parallel with other such insurgencies around the world, it is evident that the Khalistan movement had a strong ideological underpinning which not only helped to fuel its rise, but also helped to sustain it throughout its tenure. In this regard, the reference point for ideological justification was very much the past experiences and episodes of the Sikh community, or, to be precise, their ‘historical memory’ of these. This article focuses its attention on identifying, describing and interrogating the strength of the ideological justifications that were extracted from Sikh historical memory in support of Khalistan.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 This is a term used to refer to Sikhs that support(ed) the Khalistan concept.

2 The view that Sikhs constitute a separate nation was by no means restricted to Khalistanis or even Akalis.

3 The 5Ks include kesa (unshorn hair), kangha (comb), kara (steel bangle), kirpan (sword), kacch (short breeches).

4 Interview with Massa Singh. Amritsar, 20 September 2010.

5 Many Khalistanis tried to project the Sikh faith as ‘diametrically opposed’ to Hinduism.

6 In 1960, a then advocate for the creation of a Punjabi suba, wrote that ‘the State [of India] must deal with [the Sikhs] as one people, and not by atomising them into individual citizens’ (Gurnam Singh 1960, 17).

7 Interview with Manmohan Singh Khalsa. London, November 11, 2010.

8 Interview with Aridaman Singh Dhillon. Amritsar, September 14, 2010.

9 According to Chauhan, ‘when they [the Sikhs] ruled there was no religious persecution of either Muslims or Hindus, there is no reason for the Punjabi Hindu to imagine that he cannot live in Khalistan. There is no question of wanting them to leave, we want them to stay’ (Quoted in Sahota and Sahota 1993, 121).

10 Interview with Ranjit Singh Srai. [Phone Interview], May 29, 2011.

11 Interview with Kanwarpal Singh. Amritsar, September 11, 2010.

12 According to a pamphlet produced by the ‘National Council of Khalistan’, dated 26 January 1984, despite claiming that in Khalistan ‘the followers of other religions will be free to protect, profess and practice their religion in a peaceful way’, other parts make less promising reading for prospective minorities: ‘[The new state] shall not be allowed to show any disrespect to Shri Guru Granth Sahib and to falsify the Sikh principles and tenets, traditions of the Khalsa Panth and other aspects related with the Sikh religion. The forces spreading idol worship, superstition, illusions, atheism etc., shall not be allowed to raise their heads at all’ [emphasis added] (Quoted in Gopal Singh 1994, 321).

13 The popular understanding of what constitutes, territorially speaking, ‘Punjab’ has not remained the same throughout time.

14 Indeed, ‘forgetting alternative possible stories and alternate possible identifications is at the heart of national self-understanding’ (Olick 1998, 377).

15 This is despite the fact that the vast majority of the population in Haryana and Himachal Pradesh have never been ‘Punjabi’ speaking, nor did most of its people ever consider themselves as Punjabi (Trevaskis 1928, 8).

16 According to one Khalistani, ‘the Sikhs never surrendered their ultimate sovereignty to any power other than their own’ (Sihra 1985, 55).

17 Interview with Ranjit Singh Srai. [Phone Interview], May 29, 2011.

18 According to the then leader of the KCF, Wassan Singh Zaffarwal: ‘Whatever government we set up in Khalistan will have to be based on the principles of Sikhism as contained in the bani. We will not create a society where one human being is poor and sleeping on the street and his neighbour is in a palace or luxurious building. We shall eliminate any remaining feudal or monopolist forces’ (Pettigrew 1995, 154). In a similar vein, militant Anup Singh remarks, ‘It will be a long struggle for Khalistan, but in Khalistan there will be no discrimination. Everyone will be equal’ (Pettigrew 1995, 173).

19 Namely the fifth Guru, Arjan Dev, and the ninth Guru, Teg Bahadur.

20 Such as ordering the killing of Guru Gobind Singh’s two young sons, Zorawar Singh (eight years old) and Fateh Singh (six years old), by way of being ‘bricked-alive’.

21 This included the Harmandir Sahib which ‘was blown up by the Afghan conqueror Ahmed Shah Abdali many times’ (Khushwant Singh 1992, 21).

22 Interview with Dr Gurmit Singh Aulakh. [Phone Interview], 21 February 2011.

23 For example, it is often overlooked that during the chota ghallughara in 1746, when approximately 10,000 Sikhs were on the cusp of being killed by the Mughals, the Hindu citizens of Lahore ‘offered all their wealth in exchange for sparing their lives’ – though this brave gesture ultimately proved to be in vain (Dang 1988, 46).

24 According to the Document on the Declaration of Khalistan, ‘the singular aim of Brahminism is to exterminate the Sikh religion root and branch because the Sikh religion is inimical to the Brahminical principles of caste-system’ (Quoted in Gopal Singh 1994, 208).

25 Interview with Dr Paramjit Singh Ajrawat. [E-mail Interview], October 30, 2010.

26 Attempting to describe the perilous plight of the Sikhs in India, Bhindranwale remarked that: ‘The Hindus are trying to enslave us; atrocities against the Sikhs are increasing day by day under the Hindu imperialist rulers of New Delhi; the Sikhs have never felt so humiliated, not even during the reign of the Moghul emperors and British colonialists. How long can the Sikhs tolerate injustice?’ [emphasis added] (Quoted in Nayar and Singh 1984, 73). Bhindranwale once again attempting to relativise the Mughal/Muslim rule with the present condition of the Sikhs said, ‘The rulers should keep in mind that in the past many like them did try in vain to annihilate our Gurus’ (Quoted in Pettigrew 1987, 13).

27 This was done through reviving of the ancient practice of shuddhi which permitted Hindus to reabsorb those who had earlier left the faith.

28 As such, Saraswati regarded all subsequent scriptures compiled after the Vedas as a denigration of the true Aryan religion.

29 Interview with Ranjit Singh Srai. [Phone Interview], May 29, 2011.

30 In demonstration of this point, Gandhiji sent a telegram to Baba Kharak Singh on 19 January 1922, which wrote: ‘The first decisive battle for independence won. Congratulations’ (Quoted in Pritam Singh 2008, 30).

31 Interview with Surinder Singh Grewal. Ludhiana, September 2, 2010.

32 There were exceptions to the rule, with Khalistani militant Zaffarwal claiming: ‘A distorted version of our history has been presented to us. Our troubles were always with the Hindus, not the Muslims’ (Quoted in Pettigrew 1995, 146).

33 Interview with Dr Gurmit Singh Aulakh. [Phone Interview], 21 February 2011.

34 Interview with Kuldip Nayar. Delhi, 29 August 2010.

35 It is understood that Guru Teg Bahadur travelled to Delhi as a representative for a group of Kashmiri Pandits who feared being forcibly converted to Islam. According to the Bachitar Natak, composed by his successor and son, Guru Gobind Singh: ‘He [Guru Teg Bahadur] sacrificed his life for protecting the right of the Hindus to wear the sacred thread and frontal marks; For the sake of righteousness he did this great heroic deed’ (Quoted in Gill 1999, 98).

36 Interview with Manmohan Singh Khalsa. London, 11 November 2010.

37 These include images such as Baba Deep Singh holding his own decapitated head while defending the Golden Temple and Guru Arjan Dev being boiled alive during his torture at the hands of the Mughals.

38 Interview with Ranjit Singh Srai. [Phone Interview], 29 May 2011.

39 According to Denzil Ibbetson, head of the 1881 census operations in Punjab, the Sikhs were ‘more independent, more brave, more manly than the Hindu, and no whit less industrious and thrifty, while he is less conceited than the Musalman and not devoured by that carking discontent which so often seems to oppress the latter’ (Quoted in Kapur 1986, 24).

40 Of course, the Sikhs cannot be considered a race under the strict application of the term.

41 ‘The impact of colonial rule was so far-reaching that over the years, the Muslims, Hindus and the Sikhs, all began to see themselves as the British saw them’ (Jodhka 2001, 1317).

42 Interview with Aridaman Singh Dhillon. Amritsar, 14 September 2010.

43 Interview with Manmohan Singh Khalsa. London, 11 November 2010.