The dubious bogey of Khalistan

first part of series by Kanwar Sandhu, Resident Editor of Hindustan Times' Chandigarh edition on so called Khalistanis

The current controversy over Sikh separatist leader Jagjit Singh Chohan and others asserting their demand for Khalistan in a television programme on Zee is reminiscent of the late 1970s when the demand was first voiced by them much to the delight of the select media, which consisted mainly of newspapers, as television was finding its feet. In 1979, this writer, then cutting teeth into journalism, has vivid recollections of how some newspapers would play up the activities of such elements even though they lacked popular support. Chohan was among those who were extremely active; he reiterated the demand for a Sikh homeland at Tanda on August 7, 1978 and announced in Amritsar on November 4, 1979 that a transmitter would be installed in the premises of the Golden Temple to propagate their activities. Incidentally, like at present, while he hobnobbed with different political groups, the government then also dithered on the line of action against the likes of them. For example, while the Punjab Government has arrested Chohan and others within hours of the Zee programme last week where he made the demand for Khalistan, it chose to ignore similar demands during the past four years, including the one on June 11, 2003 in Chandigarh. The reason was apparent; Chohan had in the same conference charged the former Chief Minister, Parkash Singh Badal of "individualising" Punjab politics and appreciated the talk of his arrest on charges of corruption by the Congress Government. Incidentally, Chohan was allowed to return to India on June 27, 2001 by the NDA government led by Atal Behari Vajpayee (when Badal was in power in Punjab). And it was the Janata Dal Government in 1979 (Badal was the Chief Minister then too) that had earlier allowed Chohan to return to India after the previous government had impounded his passport. Within a day of his arrival in 2001 following a High Court order, he held a press conference in SAS Nagar where he reiterated his demand for Khalistan, of which he said the first step was to change the name of Punjab to Khalistan. Although the Union Government frowned on his statement, which it said was a breach of the understanding reached with Chohan, no action was taken. However, the furore over the telecast of the television programme, which had no immediate provocation, made the government react this time and ordered his and others' arrest. However, the demand of Punjab DGP S.S. Virk, that television programmes should be screened is rife with danger for tomorrow he may demand similar screening of newspaper reports too, just because they bring out police wrongs. Besides, the Punjab Government's stand on the programme is unclear: while on one hand it has criticised it, on the other hand it has acted upon it and police have arrested those who made statements in support of Khalistan (something which was ignored all this while). Sikh separatists like Chohan are not the only ones who have been bitten by the Khalistan bogey. This writer remembers how in 1985 when there was a fair amount of confusion in the Punjab administration, a group of senior Punjab Police officers (now retired) prepared a highly controversial paper titled "Destination Khalistan" (to which this writer is privy) and put it up to the then Governor, Arjun Singh for perusal. Though the paper touched briefly on the background of the demand for Khalistan, it explained at great length how certain civil and police officers had been "abetting and supporting" it. The paper in one broad brush painted almost all Sikh police officers in Punjab pro-Khalistanis. However, the Governor did not play ball with those who had prepared the paper to start a witch-hunt and returned it with his signatures without any comment. Of course in some places in Canada, USA and UK, the Khalistan objective is taken seriously by a section of the Sikhs. This rant could be due to emotional release or the result of an identity crisis. This is often exploited by the local Khalistanis whose occasional outbursts (resulting in a few days in lock-up) pay off handsomely in remittances abroad. Whether or not the Zee programme is a part of a conspiracy is difficult to say but one thing is clear that it failed to put things in perspective (like the newspapers in the 70s). That the thrust of the television programme was pre-decided is apparent from the fact that many of those who had rubbished Chohan and their ilk during their interviews (conducted nearly two months earlier) did not find mention in the programme when it was telecast. Some of them, including this writer, had stated that there was never any mass support for a separate state and that for a lot of people the demand for Khalistan was a synonym for alienation due to one reason or another. As far as media reports are concerned, in the final analysis it is not the government action but the viewership or readership response that determines their success or otherwise. In this case, the public reaction has already forced the television channel to issue regret to the Sikh community for presenting a distorted picture.