Library
|
The Demands Of The 'Current' Agitation
Over the last 37 Years, the intensity of the negotiations and agitations has varied Periodically; the latest upsurge being over the last 2/3 Years until it was savagely brought to an end in June 1984. Following several years of fruitless negotiations with the Indian government, the Sikh leadership initiated another peaceful civil rights movement in 1982. Most of the demands of this movement were based on economic and linguistic issues and were for the benefit Of all Punjabis (not just Sikhs). A few demands did relate specifically to the Sikhs, but these in no way harmed any other community. It was not a communal dispute between Hindus and Sikhs but a regional dispute between the people of Punjab and the central government in Delhi. The demands of the 'current' agitation were based on the so-called "Anandpur Resolution"[15]. In essence, the Resolution demanded greater autonomy for Punjab on lines similar to the provisions already applicable to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The principal demands were as follows: (a) Redrawing the boundaries of Punjab to redress the imbalance and its deviation from linguistic and cultural principles including the return of Chandigarh to Punjab. The principles underlying this demand are not new, but are totally consistent with Congress resolutions made before Independence. The failure to implement these, in the ease of Punjab, has already been mentioned. However, it is interesting to recollect that Nehru's own words comply with the sentiments of this motion:
The question of Chandigarh is a direct consequence of post-independence events: Punjab lost its historic capital Lahore in the partition with Pakistan and so Chandigarh was built to be the new state capital. However, after the second, unwarranted, partition of Punjab to form Haryana, when several thousand Punjab villages were unjustly annexed, Punjab again lost its capital city.. Sikhs strongly feel that Chandigarh, being a Punjabi area, should be returned to Punjab and that a new capital city should be built for Haryana. As things stand, Chandigarh is the only 'state-capital' which is on "Union-territory" and not part of the parent state. (b) The Judicious determination of river water and electricity disputes. Punjab is a highly productive agricultural state and is in many ways responsible for making India self-sufficient in food. For example, Punjab provides India with 70 of its grain, despite its small size. However, Punjab is a semi-arid state and depends heavily on irrigation for its agricultural success. Several canals already take water from Punjab's rivers to other states --- for example, the twin canals which go to the desert state of Rajasthan. This is fine so long as the arrangements are agreed upon mutually and Punjab's own survival is not put at stake. However, the farmers of Punjab (mainly Sikhs) were alarmed when they discovered that the central government had unilaterally made plans to divert even more of Punjab's river waters to other states. They showed remarkable restraint in their willingness to allow the Supreme Court to give its verdict on the issue considering that their whole future and Lively- hoods hung in the balance. However, the refusal of Mrs. Gandhi's government to allow the Supreme Court to settle the dispute only fuelled the suspicions of the Sikhs about the intentions of the central government. Again, it is interesting to note that Punjab is the only state whose rivers are exclusively controlled by the Indian government, all other rivers being controlled by their respective state governments. The Sikhs also see their state victimised on the question of electric power: For example, Bhakra dam was built in Punjab but now, not only is it no longer in Punjab [181 but also, Punjab gets a much smaller portion of its electricity than the neighbouring states and at a higher price! (c) Greater Autonomy for the States Punjab has experienced a great deal of interference from Delhi in its internal affairs. This has been particularly true in the ease of regional industrial development by the state government which has been almost totally thwarted. For example, the plan of the Punjab government to build the Thien dam on the river Ravi, to alleviate the increasing demand for more power and water in the state, has been frustrated by the central government withholding clearance for the scheme for the last 18 years. Even development projects which are funded wholly by the state itself are often refused permission by Delhi! The Sikhs feel that individual states should have much more control over state issues and that Delhi should only have control over national issues. Neither is this demand only applicable to Punjab, and nor is it in any way radical: In addition to Nehru's own declaration that the states Would be "autonomous units", the British "Transfer of Power Act 1947" also provided that:
(d) The religious demands The above three demands dealt with economic and political matters and were 'regional' demands, independent of Sikh issues. However, this last category related specifically with Sikh matters. Considering that these demands affected only the Sikhs, the really surprising thing is that they had to be included at all. For example, one of the demands was that permission be given for the broadcast of Kirtan (Hymns) from the Golden Temple to Sikhs living abroad, particularly in Europe and North America. The Sikhs were willing to fund the venture themselves[19] and so it should have been just a matter of allocating a suitable transmission frequency - as in other matters, permission from Delhi was not forthcoming. Another grievance concerned the fact that Sikhs had been wrongly categorised as Hindus in the Indian Constitution. To change this should have been just a technical matter from the national viewpoint but one which would have gone some way in restoring the shattered confidence of the Sikhs in the 'goodwill' of the Indian Government. Similarly, according "Sacred City" status to Amritsar[20], another of the demands, should have been just a routine matter; after all, Hindu holy cities like Benares and Kurukeshetra already had this status. But, alas, the government considered it unacceptable to concede to even these and other minor demands --- requests seemingly trivial to the non-Sikh. As we have seen, the demands of the agitation were in no way radical or extreme but, rather, they were simply a consequence of the failure of successive Indian Governments to implement pre- independence pledges. Indeed, for the Sikhs the Anandpur Resolution was not a list of 'demands' but a "Charter of Rights". However, it is worth emphasising that most of the Sikh demands weren't 'Sikh' demands at all but were regional demands. The conflict was not between Sikhs and Hindus but between Punjab (which is over 40 Hindu) and Delhi. But then the question arises that if this is true, why did it appear to be a Sikh problem and not a Punjabi problem? The glib answer is that, that is the way it was portrayed in the media --- true enough, but we must search deeper to discover a more meaningful answer. Well, the Sikhs are very active and also visually distinctive. The former is amply illustrated by their contribution in the struggle for India's Independence. The following figures were provided by the late Maulana Abul Azad, president of the Congress Party at the time of Independence, and relate Independence-related sacrifices:
The Sikhs made the overwhelming majority of the sacrifices even though they only formed just over is of the population Therefore, it is hardly surprising that Sikhs dominated the civil-rights movement in Punjab, a state where they formed just over half the population. But if we want to delve even deeper to find out why the Sikhs are so motivated on civil-rights issues, we must take a brief look at Sikhism itself. |
