Pulling Down Of Indian Flag In London

Ishtiaq Ahmed

The supporters of the Punjab separate movement pulled down the Indian flag last week at the Indian High Commission in London. Following this humiliating international incident, Indian Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra demanded that the perpetrators be arrested, describing it as an act of vandalism.

The fact remains that this was not an incidental act of hot-headed violence but a preplanned action by the supporters of the separatist Khalistan Movement waving the separatist Khalistani flag.

The current Punjab Independence Movement can be traced back to 1920, when the Akali Dal was founded to seek an independent state of Punjab on December 14, 1920.Following the independence of India from the British Raj in 1947 and the creation of Pakistan, the demands for the independence of Punjab had two important aspects: the creation of Punjab Suba (a province) for the Punjabi on the route to the autonomous Punjab.

Therefore, Akali Dal’s maximal position was a sovereign state of Khalistan, while the minimal position was an automatous state within India. Obviously, neither of these positions sat well with the Indian government which was already weary of Pakistan being created and did not want to lose Punjab. However, the demands for an independent Punjab or a more autonomous Punjab continued to simmer.

However, the demands for an independent Punjab or a more autonomous Punjab continued to simmer.

The resentments of Indian Punjabis heightened when, on September 7, 1966, the Punjab Reorganization Act was passed, which effectively divided Punjab into the states of Punjab and Haryana, with certain areas transferred to Himachal Pradesh to be centrally administered from Delhi.

The Indra Gandhi-led government, despite agreeing with the state of Punjab, refused to give it the autonomy that it demanded. To add salt to the wounds, a canal system was built that diverted the water of the Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej rivers to Haryana and Rajasthan, leaving Punjab with only 23 per cent of the water from the rivers that flowed through it.

Following the electoral defeat in the Punjab elections of 1972 and in order to regain the public’s support, Akal Dal put forward the Anandpur Resolution in 1973 which called for radical devolution of power and further autonomy to Punjab.

The resolution touched upon both outstanding religious and political issues by asking for the recognition of Sikhism as separate from Hinduism as well as Chandigarh and certain other areas of Punjab.

The Anandpur resolution was practically left dormant until 1982, when the Akal Dal joined forces with Jurnail Singh Bhindrawala to create the Dharam Yudh Morcha. The key demands of the new alliance included a greater share of the water for irrigation and the return of Chandigarh to Punjab.

The key demands of the new alliance included a greater share of the water for irrigation and the return of Chandigarh to Punjab.

During the 1980s, Khalistan’s territorial ambitions included Chandigarh, sections of India’s north and western states, and the entire Indian Punjab.

The call for a separate Sikh state began in the wake of British plans to exit India. The first explicit call for Khalistan was made in a pamphlet titled ‘Khalistan’ in 1940. The movement continued to stutter through the 1970s and 1980s, peaking in the late 1980s but fading in the 1990s for a variety of reasons, including a heavy police crackdown on separatists, factional infighting and disillusionment among the Sikh population. However, with support from the Sikh diaspora in India and overseas, intermittent protests have continued to happen, with India often blaming Pakistan for backing the separatist elements.

According to Sikh historian Hariot Singh Oberoi, despite historical ties between Sikhs and Punjab, there has never been a significant element of Sikh self-definition. He argues that linking Punjab with Sikhism is a recent phenomenon. He backs up his claims with references to the Guru Granth Sahib (the main scripture of Sikhism) which he claims was inspired by saints from both North and South India.

Pakistan was founded on religious identity as well as political, cultural and social identity. Religious identity is incomplete without reference to the other three interlinked elements.

This may be true but Oberoi’s arguments are somewhat flawed. The religious identity is not far from the political, cultural and social identities. They are intertwined and not mutually exclusive. Given the prevalent religious, political, cultural, and social scenarios; different components always come to the fore, each reinforcing the others. Pakistan was founded on religious identity as well as political, cultural and social identity. Religious identity is incomplete without reference to the other three interlinked elements.

It is true that the Sikh communities in Canada, America and the United Kingdom have done much to keep the Khalistan Movement alive despite pressure from India to ban and punish these elements. According to Sikh friends, the Sikh community has not forgiven the Indian government for the frequent raids on the Golden Temple during the 1980s which resulted in the invasion of Amritsar’s Sikh holiest shrine.

This alone is more than sufficient to keep the worldwide Sikh community totally incensed. Despite the Indian government’s policies and military crackdowns, it has not been able to totally wipe out the Sikh insurgency for independence.

Despite the Indian government’s policies and military crackdowns, it has not been able to totally wipe out the Sikh insurgency for independence.

The Sikhs also look at the treatment of Indian and Kashmiri Muslims, and see the fact that in Modi’s India there is no space for anyone who is not Hindu. India has gone so far to the right that its recovery from it would take decades. Sikhs and other minorities are not oblivious to all this. The London incident has to be seen in this broader context.

The author is a British citizen of Pakistani origin with a keen interest in Pakistani and international affairs.