Punjab needs closure as Patiala incident is not in in isolation but part of continuing narrative

 

Patiala incident represents Punjab’s dark underbelly under composite Punjabi culture

Ground Zero

Jagtar Singh

 

What has happened in Patiala recently is not an incident in isolation. It is continuation of a narrative that reflects the dark underbelly of the syncretic Punjabi culture that this region otherwise represents. Punjab has been known as the Land of the Gurus and the Sikh Gurus preached egalitarianism and humanism, treating human being at the same level without any distinction.

This narrative underlying Punjab’s religio-political dynamics has been there all along. Of course, the Sikhs and the Punjabi Hindus share the same cultural ethos but not the religio-political narrative. During the last about 1000 years till the British annexed the Sikh Empire, the people who ruled this region were either the Muslims or the Sikhs. And this Empire had been established after long period of struggle for survival when the heads of even ordinary Sikhs carried bounty. One only has to glance through pages of history of Punjab. That historical narrative is part of the collective Sikh psyche.

The immediate focus here, however, is on Patiala and the narrative in which it is  rooted. It is rooted in the long period of radical thought and militancy that was unleashed following the clash between the Nirankaris and the Sikhs on the Baisakhi of April 13, 1978 in which 13 Sikh devotees were killed, besides five others. This incident had nothing to do so far as the relationship between the Sikhs and the Hindus as communities was concerned. However, that was not to be. That was the beginning. One has to go through the files of the Jalandhar based newspapers  for that.

Of course, this dark underbelly was there even during the pre-partition period and is traced to the advent of Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dayanand, a Gujrati who caught immediate imagination of the Punjabis, including the wealthy Sikhs in the beginning.

The demand for Khalistan was raised in 1978 by the newly formed Dal Khalsa and also by Dr Jagjit Singh Chohan although this issue is traced to 1940 in the articulation by Ludhiana-based Dr V S Bhatti to counter the Muslim League demand for Pakistan. The Hindu organisations opposed  not only Khalistan demand but also the assertion of exclusive and independent Sikh identity. The SGPC resolution adopted to this effect at its general body meeting on March 29, 1981 was opposed by the Bharatiya Janata Party on April 8. “The All India Janata Yuva Morcha, an affiliate of the Sangh Parivar, also opposed the demand for Khalistan and the SGPC resolution. This resolution was being seen by the Hindu organisations in the context of an independent Sikh State”. (Jagtar Singh, Khalistan Struggle-A Non-movement, p 44). Earlier on August 10, 1980, the Hindu leaders including  Congress MLA Yash, Lala Jagar Narain and Kali Charan at a meeting in Ludhiana announced a Punjab Public Front to oppose Khalistan demand raised by the Dal Khalsa at a meeting in Chandigarh on August 3, 1980.

However, it was the opposition by the Hindu organisations to oppose the demand to ban sale of tobacco in the walled city of Amritsar raised by the Akali Dal that queered the pitch and Punjab was never the same after May 31, 1981.

 Shiromani Akali Dal at its general house meeting on May 17, 1981 passed three resolutions, the last being the demand for holy city status for Amritsar. It may be mentioned that some cities already had that status including Kurukshetra where the sale of non-veg was banned. The AISSF associated with Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale decided to carry forward this agenda and gave a call to take out procession on May 31 demanding ban on sale of tobacco in walled city. However, the Hindu organisations, on May 29, staged pro-tobacco procession raising highly provocative anti-Sikh slogans and carrying cigarette packets on sticks. The people who organised this procession included Harbans Lal Khanna from BJP and had tacit support from the Congress.

The man who got highly provoked was octogenarian Baba Kharak Singh of Jhabal who was in the Golden Temple complex that day. He summoned Sant Bhindranwale and in his own style, told him to organise befitting reply. Earlier, Sant Bhindranwale was not to participate in the AISSF procession that was to be a routine affair. Now he headed a 30,000-strong procession through Hall Bazar of Amritsar. With this massive show, Sant Bhindranwale had arrived on the scene. He never looked back. He hit the front pages. Hence onward, he started dictating the religio-political discourse.

That was the beginning of the underbelly getting darker. Amritsar continued to witness this tension.

Next was Patiala in 1983. Hindu Suraksha Samiti had already been set up there headed by one Pawan Kumar Sharma who was otherwise associated with Congress leader Capt Amarinder Singh. It all started on Ram Nauvmi procession. The procession on April 21, 1983 was highly provocative. As a counter show, the Sikh groups organised massive procession on April 30 associated with Guru Tegh Bahadur. The tension flared up on May 2. This writer, then working with The Indian Express in Chandigarh, had  covered the situation on May 3. “The eruption of violence yesterday was sudden over an issue as insignificant as the use of loudspeaker. But once it started the violence spread immediately and swords and kirpans came out from nowhere. The stockpiling of arms and weapons had been going on for some time. Even the intelligence agencies had recently warned about communal flare-up in view of the preparations. What was shocking was that even boys of about 10 to 12 years of age were seen brandishing swords and lathis before curfew was imposed.” (Jagtar Singh, The Indian Express, May 4, 1983). Even a Sikh journalist was roughed up in front of the Kali Devi temple.

In the latest case, the call had originated with a Shiv Sena leader to organise ‘Khalistan Murdabad March’ on April 29. What was his provocation? This man has X-level security. It may be mentioned that the Panthic Committee constituted by the Sikh radicals had formalised the Khalistan demand through announcement at Akal Takht on April 29, 1986. People now even don’t remember. His call was countered by the leader of a Sikh organisation. This in brief is the present narrative.

But then this is how Punjab erupts.

The issue is not that the security agencies failed to take preventive measures.

That way, even the Sikh Nirankari clash on April 13, 1978 would not have happened in case the police had denied permission to the Nirankaris to organise their annual fuynction at Amritsar that day in the wake of ongoing confrontation with the Sikh organisations including the SGPC.

The issue is larger.

More than 40,000 people have died in Punjab since April, 13, 1978. They include both Sikhs and the Hindus.

That narrative needs closure.

Akali Dal had the opportunity to take the initiative when the party came into power and formed fovernment in February 1997 led by Parkash Singh Badal. He adopted the policies that were contrary to the closure.

These so called Hindu senas were patronised by the agencies and almost all their leaders have massive security, some of them from central agencies. Patronage to such people must be withdrawn. These people raise highly provocative slogans from time to time. Phagwara has seen repeated tension between such groups.

The saviour is the composite culture.

Punjab needs new initiative and dynamic approach, otherwise this dark underbelly would continue to fester.