CHAPTER 2: THE CASE OF THE SIKHS IN INDIA

In the territories where different religions coexist, political conflicts may occur as a result of a friction between the different faiths. This happened during the sixteenth-century in France between the Catholic and Protestant community, giving rise to the so-called Wars of Religion.  Another example of this phenomenon can be found in Ireland. With the occupation in the seventeenth century by the English of Ireland, the confrontation with the invaders soon tinged with religious meaning, opposing the Irish Catholics to the Protestant English who colonized the island. This confrontation has survived until today in the Irish county of Ulster, which still belongs to the UK, as they have a majority Protestant population, imposes its political criteria to a Catholic minority of Republicans who aspire to independence to join the independent state of Ireland.

The Sikh Religion

                  In India, where different religions have coexisted historically, religious issues have also had profound political implications, especially since the birth of India as an independent state in 1947. I will focus on the conflicts instigated by Sikhs, a religious minority (2% of the population) that has a strong presence in the rich region of Punjab, where 60% of their population is followers of this religion. The existence of this community and its political aspirations in recent decades, have influenced in a direct way the history of India today (O’Brien, Palmer, 1998). In order to develop my analysis I will start my paper with an historical view about the religion and the conflict, especially in the region of Punjab, and the process that it took to its radicalization, flowed by a conclusion analyzing and comparing its current status.

The two great religions of India are Hinduism, the majority religion, and Islam, which is spread mainly in the northern peninsula of Hindustan. The Sikh religion, seva, which appeared in the sixteenth century, is a syncretic religion, a mixture of Hindu and Muslim elements. This new belief was founded by Guru Nanak, which the Sikhs (Punjabi term means disciple) are his followers. Nanak attempted to synthesize Hinduism and Islam in a monotheistic religion of deep character, as seen in this simple prayer: "There is one God, and he is our father, so we must all be brothers" (Díez de Velasco, 1998:418).

This guru developed an egalitarian ideology that sought to overcome the caste system, a characteristic of the Hindu religion. The most important for Nanak was the will to seek the supreme divinity through personal prayer and service (seva) to the community. Therefore, in the Sikh religion there are no pictures, no myths, and no hell. The Sikh faith preserves the Hindu belief in reincarnation, but believes that human beings can free themselves from the cycle of reincarnation through virtue, which allows you to reach the abode of love of God. In contrast, Hindus believe that virtue produces only a reincarnation in better living conditions (Díez de Velasco, 1998).

Nanak advocated the natural goodness of man, who has been created by the will of God. But it has to overcome the ignorance that is where the origin of evil lies, so Nanak chose not to design a life of renunciation but a life of improvement of the material world that he believed good and perfectible. Thus, the material welfare of man is as necessary as the spiritual. Therefore the emphasis on service to the welfare of the community, the Sikhs spend a tenth of their income and many hours of their free time. The purpose of life is liberation (mukti), which is achieved by means of delivery to the One (ikk), is for the overcoming of selfishness (Díez de Velasco, 1998).

Sikhism during the leadership of Arjun, the fifth guru, consolidated its main temple, called the Golden Temple in Amritsar, built on an artificial lake at the place where tradition marked praying Nanak. His other temples are called Gurdwara. Also under the leadership of Arjun Sikh scriptures were fixed, Guru Granth Sahib or Adi Granth, compiled them in 1604, which include devotional hymns. In the early eighteenth century, the last guru stated that no successor would be human and that the community would be governed only by the holy book, and become the axis of the Sikh religion. Copies of this book are saved in the Gurdwaras, all the same and consisting of 1,430 pages that are read in communal ceremonies (weddings, funerals, etc.), and where meals are also held in common that favors the consolidation of the sangat (community) preventing any Sikh to fall in poverty (Díez de Velasco, 1998).

Fundamental to the development of Sikhism was a man of the tenth Guru, Gobind Singh (1666-1708), which established a warrior brotherhood: the Jalsa (Pure), a religious group of soldiers of faith, bound by a vow to defend the community against injustice and identified by carrying the five "k," which are: kesh, uncut hair and beard, symbolizing spirituality kattgha, a comb in their hair, which symbolizes order and discipline, kirpan, a short, curved dagger, which means dignity, courage and selflessness, kara, a steel bracelet on his right wrist, symbolizing unity with God and kachh, shorts and underwear, which implies a symbol of modesty and moral restraint (Díez de Velasco, 1998) .

Before independence

The Mughal Empire, established in India in the sixteenth century, was the closest thing to a unified state. Until the early eighteenth century, it suffered successive attacks by Afghan and Persian neighbors, internal revolts and the emergence of European countries. The French and British began to influence the Indian policy. One of the most important revolts which had to face the declining Mughal Empire was led by the Sikhs in Punjab.

Since the seventeenth century Sikhs had problems with the imperial governors. The implementation of a Sikh guru in 1675 increased hostility toward the Mongols, and the process was completed when the Guru Gobind Singh transformed the Sikh sect in an almost military community. In the period between 1750 and 1770, the Sikhs took over much of Punjab. Partnerships between the leaders were short-lived, but eventually the sukerchakia family managed to become dominant in the Punjab area and impose his authority to other groups. Sukerchakia Ranjit Singh transformed the heritage of his family in a powerful kingdom in the late eighteenth century. In 1792, at the age of twelve he became chief of his clan until his death in 1839, Ranjit Singh was devoted to organize an army that came to control the entire Punjab from the Indus to nearly Jumna in the East. Ranjit Singh thanked God "have been kind to your servant and have increased their power in ways that territory now reaches to the borders of China and Afghanistan" (Embree, Wilhelm, 1974:266). However, he only exercised effective power over their homeland around Lahore and Amritsar, and the rest of territories were controlled by chiefs who paid tribute. This political system was similar to many other Indian kingdoms, but the powerful modern army created by Ranjit Singh was unique. For the organization of this army they used European officers of various nationalities and had munitions factories supplying weapons and artillery (Cataluccio, 1970).

After his death in 1839, succession wars, internal conflicts and desires for independence, led to the rapid disintegration of the Sikh kingdom. The British were able to take advantage of these divisions and twenty years after the death of Ranjit Singh, the East India Company had taken over the Punjab. After two wars against the British, the first and second Anglo-Sikh wars, Punjab was annexed to the British colony of India in 1849 and Sikhs suffered the same fate as the rest of the Indians until the end of the British rule (Embree, Wilhelm, 1989).

Sikhism reborn with the independence of India

After the Second World War (1939-1945) the British were convinced that they were unable to sustain its powerful colonial empire. In India, the movement for independence began in the 20's. It was led by Mahatma Gandhi and after the war, he had reached a level of maturity that allowed him to achieve its main objective: to be an independent state without the British presence. However, one of the main problems that arose during the independence process was the existence of two powerful religious communities in the same territory: the Hindu and Muslim (Cataluccio, 1970).

It was soon observed that while Muslims and Hindus wanted the British to leave India, its political goals were different. The Indian National Congress Party, led by Mahatma Gandhi, wanted a unified integrated India to the different religious communities, while the Muslim League wanted to create a Muslim state. This definitely accelerated the events from July 1946, when the Muslim League decided to use what they called "Direct Action" and extremely violent clashes spread from Calcutta all over the region of Bengal. As argued by J. N. Dixit (2002: 457-458), former Minister of Foreign Affairs of India: "The fight came in 1946 when the Muslim League called for direct action (...). The answer that came from Hindus and Sikhs came after (…) and created the atmosphere of a civil war in India.” Finally, there were two separate states, India, with a majority of people who practiced the Hindu religion and the state of Pakistan, with a Muslim majority. In this process, most of the Sikh population came under Indian administration in the territory of Punjab, who sought refuge in the tens of thousands of Sikhs who fled the fighting between Muslims and Hindus (Dixit, 2002).

In the process leading to independence, the Sikhs of Punjab argued that specific religious community could ask for special consideration in the new India that was to be born. Even some Sikhs proposed the creation of an independent Sikh state to be called Khalistan. The Congress Party in order to prevent Sikhs to ally with the Muslim League, promised broad autonomy after independence, but the actual result was that with the independence, Punjab was divided between India and Pakistan (Gurmit, 1989).

After the British left India, the Congress party soon forgot all the promises he had made, and many Sikhs felt cheated. On November 21, 1949, in reviewing the draft of the Constitution of India, Hukam Singh, the Sikh representative in the Constituent Assembly declared: “Naturally, under these circumstances, as I have stated, the Sikhs feel utterly disappointed and frustrated (Gurmit, 1989). They feel that they have been discriminated against. Let it not be misunderstood that the Sikh community has agreed to this [Indian] Constitution. I wish to record an emphatic protest here. My community cannot subscribe its assent to this historic document”. (Gurmit, 1989: 110-111). Therefore, the Sikhs did not support the Constitution.

The radicalization of the conflict

The conflict became radicalized in the early 70's when the cultural and political demands of the Sikhs of Punjab joined radical approaches that were religious in nature. Some scholars argued that the experience and injustice of the Green Revolution in India also contributed to provoke the terrorism in Punjab. In the words of Gurmat of the All Sikh Convention of the 13th April 1986: "If the hard-earned income of the people or the natural resources of any nation or region are looted by force; if the goods they produce are paid at set prices arbitrarily while the goods they buy are sold at higher prices and, taking this process of economic exploitation to its logical conclusion, you lose the human rights of a nation, region or people, and people will feel like Sikhs feel today, with the shackles of slavery" (Shiva, 2005). However, the main factor was that tensions were rising as a result of clashes between Sikhs and the sect of the Nirankaris who were interested in the control of Sikh temples.

In April 1978, a group of Nirankaris clashed violently with radical Sikhs, directed by Bhindranwale. Two years later, in April 1980 the leader of the Nirankaris, called Baba Gurbachan Singh was murdered and Bhindranwale was accused of the murder, however he was released after the trial.

The more moderate faction of the Sikhs, grouped in the Akali Dal, was asking the central government for Indian reforms that would help preserve the cultural identity of the Sikh community. However, most radical Sikhs wanted the independence of Punjab to make into a new state under the name of Khalistan. The fanatic leader Bhindranwale became the head of the independence movement. The religious and nationalist leader took up residence at the Golden Temple in Amritsar, believing that the police would not dare to enter this religious building (Gurmit, 1989).

Government agreed to some religious claims: it banned the sale of snuff, liquor and meat in a radius of two hundred meters around the Golden Temple, authorized the radio broadcast of sacred hymns, and Sikhs were allowed to carry on the dagger, that their religion requires them to always carry with them, in Indian Airlines. But the demands of the Akali Dal went further. They requested recognition of twenty-five holy places and the holy character of the city of Amritsar. They also wanted Chandigarh, to be the new capital of the state of Punjab and, above all, intended to prevent neighboring states to take the water from the rivers of Punjab. For a town of farmers with fertile lands, the economic demands of irrigation were essential (Gurmit, 1989).

In November 1982, the Akali Dal called to organize a series of protests in Delhi. In response, the Indian police arrested thirty thousand Sikhs. In February 1984, rejecting protests focused on Article 25 of the Constitution of India, which defined the Sikhs and Hindus. Some of the Akali leaders were arrested for burning it in protest. Defining a Sikh citizens as part of the Hindu religion generated discontent in this community, since Sikhism should be regarded as a distinct religion and not a sect of Hinduism in general. The highlight of the conflict occurred when in 1984 Bhindrawale armed insurgents and took refuge in the sacred temple. That was when the Indian army launched "Operation Blue Star" and attacked the temple in the time when many Sikhs were praying. Hundreds were killed and among them, the nationalist leader Bhindrawale. This assault on the Golden Temple marked the definitive break between the Sikh and Hindu communities. The brutal repression unleashed by Indian troops in the assault on the temple caused the struggle for a separate Khalistan happen to be supported by a majority of the Sikhs of Punjab (Gurmit, 1989).
The struggle for independence

The responsible person who ordered the assault on the Temple was Indira Gandhi, the former prime minister of India. By giving the order, she made clear that she would not consent any separatist movement in Punjab. In response to this position, on the morning of October 31, she was assassinated by two of her own security guards that belonged to the Sikh community. Her assassination sparked a wave of violence against Sikhs across India. On April 29, 1986 at a meeting of thousands of Sikhs in Akal Takht, the independent state of Khalistan was proclaimed. However, this proclamation had no real effect because the Government of India, citing the principle of territorial integrity, did not recognize that independence. Since then and for years, the Punjab was plunged into a terrifying wave of violence (Gurmit, 1989).

During that period, the Sikhs and Hindus committed all kinds of atrocities in a low intensity war that ruined the economy of the region, which led to a decreased support for independence; therefore in the early 1993 the movement for a free Khalistan was virtually dismantled. However, according to Amnesty International, the Indian state achieved during this period of the independence movement to stop violating human rights of Sikhs to foster a culture of impunity for extrajudicial killings that occurred on a large scale, and against torture Police and Indian troops exercised so indiscriminate. In fact, the clashes that took place during those years show a balance of terrifying figures. Thus, while violence in Northern Ireland between 1969 and 1976 caused 1686 casualties in Punjab, it cost 21,469 lives (Gurmit, 1989).

Today, the situation in Punjab is quite calm and the free movement for Khalistan is very weak, although it has adherents among Sikhs living abroad, mostly in the United Kingdom and Canada.

Conclusion

The first conclusion that we could get to analyze the past and present of the Sikh religion is that in his case, as with other religions, different beliefs are closely linked with various political and social realities.

Another conclusion we can come when we know the recent history of the Sikh community in the Indian Punjab is that many modern communities do not identify themselves with belongings to that country and aspire to get independent from it. This political aspiration is usually based on cultural differences, language, history or otherwise, and also occasionally in religious differences, although it is true that the latter need not be present in the nationalist aspirations. For example, in my country, Spain, two communities, the Basques and the Catalans, have a portion of its population that wants independence. Each has its own characteristics. Have languages ​​other than Spanish, peculiar customs and their own historical trajectories, but they are mostly Catholic communities, like the rest of the Spanish State.

In the case of the Sikh religion it is a crucial differentiating factor, but they also have other features that could feed their aspirations for independence, such as the Punjabi language, its history as an independent state before the British , its natural wealth, based on the rivers flowing through the Punjab, and its economy that is richer and more prosperous than the neighboring regions.

 The third conclusion we can draw is that the desire for independence of these communities can be made either peacefully or through violence, depending on various factors. In countries with high income per capita, with modernized societies and democratic political systems, the independence movements are generally formulated in a peaceful manner (Quebec, Canada, Wales, United Kingdom, Flemish in Belgium etc ...), but sometimes this assumption is not met as evidenced by the existence of the IRA in Northern Ireland and ETA in the Basque Country in Spain, two organizations that have resorted to violence.

Another factor that influences how to raise the claims is the welcome of their demands by the state government. If the central government serves part of their aspirations, there will be less eco-violent approaches, while if not responding to any of their demands, radical nationalism can become violent. Finally, if the answer to the demands is repressive, (persecution, imprisonment, etc.) radicals may find more support in society, as happened with the Sikhs when the Golden Temple was assaulted.

In any case, when the differences between communities of different types are added to those of a religious nature, the conflict is often radical. In the case of Sikhs, we find different approaches and responses throughout its recent history. In general, we can say that the aspirations of the Sikhs in the last 60 years were almost always made by peaceful and political means. Immediately after independence of India, the Sikh community felt cheated, but its frustration did not led them to resort to violence. Their demands were moving in the field of politics and the struggle to preserve their cultural identity merely by institutional manners. However, in the decade of the 70s in the twentieth century religious claims were in the foreground. That made it easier for fanatics like Bhindrawale to link political demands for an independent state with its desire that the State should have a theocratic nature, feeding violence to achieve it. Moreover, the act of the Indian State to brutally suppress the independence movement, assaulting a sanctuary and turning all the Sikhs on terrorism suspects helped trigger the violence.

Finally, we could say that since a few decades ago, the old political conflicts of nationalist nature in many cases aggravated by religious formulations, acquired an international dimension that could not be imagined in earlier times. This gravity and internationalization have been seen in the terrorist attacks perpetrated by Islamic jihads in the recent years.

In the case of the Sikhs, there are currently about 18 million followers concentrated both in India and spread throughout the Anglo world. They are a thriving community that has a major migration in the United Kingdom (70% of the population of India which currently is set in Britain are Sikhs, which are about the amount of 230,000). Also present in the U.S. where they have opened more than 50 temples, and Canada, where integration policies have altered the rules of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, for example by allowing Sikhs to wear his turban instead of the work hat "stetson" for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The best way to avoid conflict is by generating long integration policies within the limits established by law in the host countries. However, I believe that these problems of nationalist and religious roots are complex and have no easy solutions. The movements of this nature can go for long periods of dormancy and then appear, after many years with new impetus. The case that might be more familiar to us is that of Irish Catholics whose movement for total independence of Ireland began in the mid nineteenth century and has gone through many different periods, for example during the 1930's, 40 and 50, IRA remained largely inactive but, in the mid 60's, it emerged with force. The same can happen with the Sikhs of Punjab.