Stirring it up

The Khalistan protagonist, Dr. Jagjit Singh Chauhan, back in Punjab now, seems to be testing the waters with contradictory statements, says Sarabjit Pandher.

THE ELECTIONS to the 117-member Punjab Assembly are due by February and speculation is rife that they may be advanced. Already, the pre-poll polarisation of political forces has begun.

Among the various factors in play, the most vital will be the machinations within the Akali conglomerate, especially the mainstream factions led by the Chief Minister, Mr. Parkash Singh Badal, and the former SGPC president, Mr. G. S. Tohra. The coming days will reveal whether Mr. Badal, while maintaining his alliance with the BJP, tries for a rapprochement with his former colleague, Mr. Tohra, or prefers some understanding with Mr. Kanshi Ram's BSP.

In the event of Mr. Badal deciding against any association with Mr. Tohra, it could revive the politics of alliances also referred to as ``bridge politics'', which during the celebrations for the Khalsa tercentennial in 1999 had provided legitimacy to the retrogressive ideology that had been relegated to the margins of contemporary politics in the post-terrorism phase.

It is this backdrop which provides significance to the return of the self-styled president of the Council of Khalistan, Dr. Jagjit Singh Chauhan. It would be both too early and simplistic to infer that the people may never again respond to the forces of secession or complete autonomy. Though such assertions have had negligible relevance in the State after the blood-letting was stopped, Dr. Chauhan, ever since he set foot on Indian soil after 20 years, has changed the discourse by stressing the need for a ``peaceful movement'' to achieve his goal of Khalistan.

Dr. Chauhan in his public pronouncements has often referred to his retirement from active politics, while explaining his return as a desire to pass the remaining days of his life on home soil. Second, though remaining steadfast on his demand, he stresses the need for a non-violent struggle for Khalistan, which according to him is an ideology and philosophy that needs to be ``understood''.

Dr. Chauhan seems to be testing the waters with contradictory statements. While condemning violence, he openly justifies the actions of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, the assassinations of Indira Gandhi and the former Punjab Chief Minister, Beant Singh. The Khalistani ideologue simultaneously seeks the release of the Sikh youth incarcerated for terrorism-related activities and advocates discontinuation of legal proceedings against police officers and personnel for alleged excesses committed while curbing violence in the State.

Dr. Chauhan's attempt to keep the Khalistan issue alive appears to be a doubly-loaded instrument of political survival. With it he can preserve his support base among NRI Sikhs as well as provide stimulus to the marginalised or dormant political activists and groups in Punjab. Both these could prove beneficial to strike a bargain with some political organisation.

How would the people of Punjab, irrespective of their community affiliations, respond to the separatist or Khalistani ideology being propagated in a peaceful manner as being suggested by Dr. Chauhan? That Dr. Chauhan appears to have made some desperate attempts to strike a political bargain is evident from his outburst when he branded the mainstream Akali factions, especially the one led by Mr. Badal, as being Jat Sikh dominated, which have utter contempt for the non-Jat Sikhs. It is being felt that such political posturing may get him some response from the non-Jat Sikhs, especially the Khatri Sikhs in the urban areas as well as the Scheduled Castes in the rural areas.

In the post-Green Revolution period when agricultural surplus brought affluence to the rural areas, the peasantry, majority of whom were Jat Sikhs, emerged as a dominant force on the political and economic scene of Punjab.

Over the years the non-Jats, especially urban Khatris, have been smarting under the feeling of being marginalised in electoral as well as gurdwara politics. With this apparently in mind, Dr, Chauhan has also raised ``pro-people'' issues such as those related to corruption, inefficiency and non-performance.

While the attitude of the political leaders, which has ranged from hostility to complete indifference, has hurt Dr. Chauhan as he himself admits, it is noteworthy to recall the dismal performance of another pro-secession ideologue, Dr. Sohan Singh, in a previous Statewide gurdwara election.

Even earlier, except for Mr. Mann, all major hardline leaders who recorded spectacular victories in the 1989 Lok Sabha polls have been relegated to political oblivion.

In view of this, Dr. Chauhan may avoid participating in electoral politics and the main Akali factions also may not like to associate him with electioneering directly.

Still, not many would dispute that absence of violence does not necessarily mean peace; the conditions that led to the eruption of the violence have not been tackled so far. Moreover, the fundamentalist ideology has a considerable reservoir.

With the prevailing mood of the public, the fringe elements may receive negligible response. However, much in the future would depend upon the choices exercised by the political leaders such as Mr. Badal and Mr. Tohra as well as those in the Congress, when they go ahead full steam wooing the electorate, particularly from the Sikh community.

Simultaneously, there is a need to watch Dr. Chauhan's persistence with the issue of Khalistan in the background of conflicting reports, particularly those which indicated that he had returned to India after reaching an ``understanding'' with the Government.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Naidu loses the modem link
Next     : Hard times