Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site uiucdcs Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!reddy From: reddy@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU Newsgroups: net.nlang.india Subject: Re: Response by a Sikh Message-ID: <101800005@uiucdcs> Date: Sun, 6-Oct-85 18:19:00 EDT Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.101800005 Posted: Sun Oct 6 18:19:00 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 8-Oct-85 03:37:25 EDT References: <643@decwrl.UUCP> Lines: 147 Nf-ID: #R:decwrl.UUCP:-64300:uiucdcs:101800005:000:7746 Nf-From: uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU!reddy Oct 6 17:19:00 1985 Response by a non-Sikh: Dear Mr. Bajwa, I could make this response as long as your yours, and counter almost every point you make. But, I won't. Of important concern are two aspects that come out of your statement: 1. Your perception that there is a systematic and organized attempt to persecute Sikhs. 2. Your support for Bhindranwale and his gang. All states which have opposition parties in power or at least have strong opposition parties were discriminated against by the Congress administration at the center. There are no exceptions to this. The Punjab case is just an instance. I am not justifying Congress in this, but the Sikhs' reading of "persecution" in this is quite farfetched. Most linguistic states were not automatically formed. They all had to fight for them. My own state (Andhra Pradesh) had to loose a freedom fighter who died of hunger strike. While the division of Punjab was painfully late in the coming, remember that the division of Assam was even later. As you can clearly see, the call for division both in Punjab and Assam came from outside the Congress party, whereas in the other states it came from within it. Thus, this was a political struggle and not a religious one. The blurring of the distinction between the two is Punjab's misfortune. Akali Dal exists for and because of Sikhs. For its own survival, it has to paint Congress as a "Hindu" party, which Congress, in its turn, resents. Whenever Haryana gets something at the cost of Punjab, because of the special influence of one of its Congress leaders, Akali Dal reads into it "Hindu imperialism". Disputes always exist between states and between various communities within a state. Perceiving religious persection whenever you loose a dispute is crying wolf. Imagine Andhra people becoming terrorists because they did'nt get their well-deserved steel factory! There were 40% Sikhs in the armed forces at the time of independence for a definite historical reason. The British bestowed a special favour on the Sikhs for their not participating in the Mutiny (So much for the Sikhs' love of freedom). Much of the prosperity of Sikhs before the independence and even after it, owes to this. To expect independent India to maintain the same state of affairs with regard to Sikhs' position in the armed forces is ridiculous. Now to the attack on Golden Temple. Most of us non-Sikhs fail to fathom what you consider to be "desecration of our holy shrine" or how any temple can be out of bounds for the law. Suppose Rajneesh started raging a holy war from inside his ashram, and the American forces had to attack it. Do you think all the Hindus are going to cry that our holy shrine was desecrated? >> -- The Indian govt would have you believe that the assault on the >> Golden Temple was necessary and justified. The facts, however, do >> not back up the rhetoric. Consider the following; I happen to have been in India before and during the assault. I can tell you that the Indian govt did not have to make anybody believe that the assault was necessary. On the contrary, everybody thought it was necessary and that it would happen. The question on our minds was not why the govt had to attack it, but why it attacked so late. The ready answer was that Sikhs were touchy about their temple being attacked. The reports were coming in everyday about bombings and killings by the terrorists and everybody felt hopeless. What you call media blitz! If there is one thing about India that I feel proud of, it is its free press. It won't do you any good if you characterize it as media blitz, rather than face up to the facts. >> . No charges were filed and warrants issued against >> Bhindranwale and his men. There had been a media blitz against him >> with implications that he was involved in the killings in Punjab >> (which may or may not be true; but the proper process is very >> essential). This is some ridiculous propaganda misinformation. The very reason Bhindranwale went into hiding was that he was to be arrested. If you still believe that he was innocent, you are living in an imaginary world. He may have been killed, but many of his followers are being charged and convicted even today. There is a mass of evidence about his activities from the statements of his followers alone. >> . Bhindranwale was a smalltime religous leader before the govt >> (Sanjay Gandhi and Congress people in Punjab, in particular) built >> him up (with money, publicity, political backing etc.) in order to >> divide the Sikh votes and ensure Congress rule in Punjab. True. >> . Bhindranwale had been arrested on at least two occassions and >> released by orders from some 'highups' in the govt. Plausible. He is said to have been released for lack of evidence, which is equally plausible, given the efficiency of the police. >> . Bhindranwale went into the Golden Temple when he realised >> that the govt had decided that he was then expendible.( It may be >> interesting to note that Indira's father, Nehru, had also taken >> shelter in the same temple to avoid arrest during British rule). Do you mean to say that Nehru never got arresed? I find this hard to believe, but even if it were true, Nehru never operated a hit squad from inside the temple. The facts are, Mr. Bajwa, Bhindranwale was a criminal, an outlaw and a continuing threat to the society. What do you expect the Govt to do under the conditions? >> . The Indian army had been rehearsing an attack on the Golden >> Temple almost a year prior to the actual assault. This was being >> done at Chakratta (in UP) where a mockup model of the temple had >> been constructed. It is certainly reasonable for the army to rehearse the attack. It is incredible that they did it a year in advance. I would like to know where you get your facts from? >> . It wasn't only the Golden Temple in Amritsar that was >> attacked by the army. All major Sikh temples in Punjab were >> simultaneously attacked. At some of these several hundred pilgrims >> were indiscrimately killed. Yes, it wasn't only the Golden Temple where the terrorists operated from. There was Emergency declared in Punjab for two days. Pilgrims should have (and would have) known. There were warnings, there was curfew, and people were asked to come out of the temples and surrender. I did not see any reports that hundreds of pilgrims were killed, except for the Associated Press report, which did not stand up to investigation later. Knowing how hearsay and rumours spread in India, nobody would indiscriminately believe statements like these. I am aware of Citizens for Democracy having reportedly alleged that "nearly 10,000 pilgrims were inside the temple and most of them were killed during the operation". I find it hard to believe. I find it hard because I have read about the operation in detail and there is no chance for such a thing to have happened. In the first place, the army surrounded the temple for several days before attacking it. In the second place, ample opportunity was given for the pilgrims to come out before the attack. In the third place, the temple was attacked for several hours from outside before the army really entered it. If there was no opportunity for anybody to escape, how did the Akalis escape? I am not saying that I know that such killings did not happen. If they did happen, it is certainly deplorable. But the Sikh propaganda machinery that operates in this country and in Britain is equally deplorable. What all of us are of afraid of is that the Sikh community seems to have gotten lost to this propaganda.