We are right in pointing out the diversity of views within the Sikh diaspora abroad, and the distinction between those who advocate for a separate Sikh state (Khalistan) and those who are focused on addressing the socio-political, religious, and economic issues affecting Sikhs in India.
Support for Khalistan:
Historical Context: The Khalistan movement, which calls for an independent Sikh state, traces its roots to the political and religious conflicts of the 1980s, particularly after Operation Blue Star (1984), and the subsequent anti-Sikh riots. This left a deep sense of grievance and injustice among many Sikhs, both in India and abroad. Many Sikhs who support Khalistan view it as a response to what they perceive as the Indian state’s mistreatment of Sikhs, especially during and after the emergency period, and the violence surrounding the Sikh community in the aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s assassination.
Global Diaspora’s Role: In countries like Canada, the UK, the US, and Australia, a sizable section of the Sikh diaspora continues to advocate for Khalistan, seeing it as a means to protect Sikh identity, culture, and autonomy. However, these views are often a result of generational disconnect, and while there is emotional investment, political realities and shifting global dynamics have made the movement less popular in India itself.
2. Sikhs Concerned with Issues in India (without Khalistan Demand):
On the other hand, there is a large segment of the Sikh diaspora that does not advocate for Khalistan, but instead focuses on pressing issues within India affecting the Sikh community:
Chandigarh Issue: The status of Chandigarh, which was originally planned to be the shared capital of Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh, has been a point of contention. Many Sikhs in Punjab view the control over Chandigarh as a matter of political and economic importance, given that it is a vital administrative and commercial hub. They argue that it should be fully under Punjab’s control, as it was intended to be the capital of Punjab at the time of its creation, and the lack of control over the city affects Punjab’s development.
Agricultural Issues and Farmers: The farm laws of 2020 sparked massive protests across India, particularly in Punjab, where the majority of farmers are Sikhs. The opposition to these laws, which many felt would harm small farmers and benefit large corporations, became a flashpoint for wider debates on agricultural reforms, land rights, and the future of farming in India. Sikhs in the diaspora, many of whom have ties to farming communities back home, were actively involved in supporting these protests and highlighting the economic and social problems faced by farmers in India.
Economic Concerns: Many Sikhs abroad express concerns over the economic struggles faced by small businesses and entrepreneurs, particularly in Punjab. Issues like unemployment, underdevelopment in rural areas, and a lack of industrial growth have created a sense of frustration. The industrialization of Punjab has been stunted due to both historical factors (like the aftermath of the insurgency in the 1980s) and more recent policy issues. These economic concerns are often compounded by political instability and a perception of mismanagement.
Religious Concerns and Sikh Identity: Many Sikhs abroad are deeply invested in ensuring that the Sikh religion and its traditions are protected and promoted in India. This includes issues like the treatment of Sikh religious sites, the recognition of Sikh cultural symbols (like the kirpan, the turban), and safeguarding the rights of Sikhs to practice their religion freely. Furthermore, issues related to the Sikh Gurdwaras and their management have also been a subject of debate, both within India and abroad. The Akal Takht’s role in political and religious matters, and the autonomy of Gurdwaras from state influence, are frequent topics of concern.
Common Ground:
While these two groups—those supporting Khalistan and those focused on resolving issues within India—seem very different in their political aims, they often share a common concern: the welfare, rights, and identity of Sikhs, both in India and abroad. Many members of the diaspora who are not in favor of Khalistan still feel a deep connection to the issues facing Sikhs in Punjab and across India, and they actively work towards addressing those concerns through peaceful means, legal advocacy, and international platforms.
Conclusion:
The Sikh diaspora is not monolithic; it is made up of a wide range of opinions and approaches, shaped by individual and collective experiences in both India and abroad. For those focused on issues within India, there is an ongoing effort to advocate for solutions to the problems of farmers, small business owners, religious freedom, and the political and economic challenges facing Sikhs in the region. In contrast, the Khalistan movement, while still active among a segment of the diaspora, has less support within India and has become more of a cultural and historical grievance rather than a feasible political objective in the current global and Indian context.
Both sets of concerns highlight the importance of Sikh identity and the desire for justice and equality, whether that takes the form of autonomy, better governance, or cultural preservation.