For how long must the Sikh nation suffer one sided denigration in the major media? The article you reprinted from the Fort Worth StarTelegram, “House resolution on creating a Sikh nation rankles India” (Noy.12), is full of journalistic bias and propaganda against Sikh freedom.

First, | object to the assertion by Professor Robert Hardgrave of the University of Texas at Austin that Khalistan’s independence would be a “tragedy for the Sikhs.” What tragedy is he talking about? Isn’t it a tragedy that the Indian government attacked our holiest shrine, the Golden Temple, in June 1984? Isn’t a tragedy that more than 20,000 Sikhs were murdered during the November 1984 anti-Sikh pogroms in New Delhi alone? Isn’t it a tragedy that Amnesty International hasn’t been granted access to India since 1978? Is nitrite tragedy that Asia Watch has declared, “Virtually everyone detained in Punjab is tortured”? Isn’t it a tragedy that thousands of Sikhs are detained in Indian jails under Draconian laws that have been declared “disturbing” and “completely unacceptable” by the U.N. Human Rights Commission? Isn’t it a tragedy that the Sikh nation is forced to exist under a chief minister whose election was “orchestrated,” according to an Oct.27 New York Times article? Isn’t it a tragedy that every top Sikh leader is currently in jail for planning a peaceful protest march to New Delhi? I could go on. Suffice it to say, Mr.Hargraye’s assessment of “tragedy” for the Sikh nation is one sided. Second, Mr.Hardgrave’s notion that only a small minority of Sikhs in Punjab support Khalistan’s independence is totally wrong. Being in close contact with the Sikhs of Punjab, I can say definitely that if a plebiscite were held today, 95% of the Sikh nation would opt out of India. This year, on April 14, the Tribune in Punjab reported that all top Sikh leaders called for an “independent sovereign Sikh state,” lam clueless as to how Hardgrave, an man with no connections to Punjab, can make any such assertion, third, I take exception to the analogy made between Rep, Pete Geren’s resolution calling for self-determination for Punjab and a hypothetical Indian resolution calling for the independence of Texas, How could anyone compare Texas to the killing fields of Punjab? Are Texans tortured by the police? Did the representatives of Texas refuse to sign America’s Constitution, as the Sikh Leaders refused to sign India’s in 1947? Obviously, to the informed viewer, the analogy between Texas and Punjab is illegitimate and completely erroneous. Fourth, the nexus made in the article between Khalistan and terrorism is deeply offensive to all Sikhs. Since when does support for human rights, freedom, justice, rule of law and self-determination make one a terrorist? Are we to conclude that Mr.Geren is a terrorist for supporting these principles in his resolution? For that matter, are we also to conclude that the Founding: Fathers of this nation were terrorists? The brilliance of Mr.Geren’s House Con Current Resolution 134 is that it offers a peaceful, democratic solution to the Punjab conflict. Perhaps a fitting analogy would be between Mr, Geren’s resolution and the recent plebiscite in Puerto Rico. Justly, the premise of both is that people have the right to determine their fate. ‘This is the underlying principle of House Concurrent Resolution 134, and it is as American as apple pie Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President, Council of Khalistan Washington From :The Washington Times, Nov 20 1993.

Article extracted from this publication >>  December 24, 1993