The Bhartiya Kisan Union headed by Ajmer Singh Lakhowal, last week, staged a demonstration in Chandigarh to highlight some of the economic problems facing Punjab. The main issue brought out was the S.Y.L. construction for Haryana which is. ‘boing opposed by Punjab farmers, Punjab’s minister for food and Supplies, Lal Singh, came out to address the farmers = evidently at the insistence of chief minister Beant Singh who was not in Chandigarh on that day, Lal Singh said that the Beant Singh government came into power in February 1992 and since then not a single brick on the S.Y.L, canal had been laid. “Nor would it be said during the remaining 18months of the government’s tenure,” the minister declared. Lal Singh further claimed that the stand of the Beant Singh government on the issue was clear. “Not a drop of river water belonging to Punjab would be allowed to flow out of Punjab.” The Chief Minister was very firm on the IC, Nobody could cajole or browbeat him on the S.Y.L. issue. Whatever deals had been struck on the issue between the center and the Akali leaders like Parkash Singh Badal and Surjit Singh Barnala.
If Lal Singh’s stand, stated above, represents the views of the present Congress (I) government in Punjab, it has to be seen as satisfactory. But the trouble is that the chief minister is notorious for shifting his stand too often. It is, however, comforting that he has not repudiated Lal Singh’s statement. More important perhaps is the claim that the Beant Singh government did not lay a single brick to complete the half-finished SYL canal nor would it do so in the remaining 18 months. The central Indian government conceived the S.Y.L. canal idea about 28 years ago when a group of Haryana surveyors had been sent to Ropar district to survey the area but the then Akali chief minister Gumam Singh not only opposed the proposal but also ordered eviction of the team from Punjab, But the Haryana ‘government had been doggedly pursuing the idea, until in the emergency period in 1976, the prime minister issued a notification unilaterally distributing Punjab’ river water among Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi. The then Haryana government quietly sent a check of Rs 1 crore to Punjab and then Giani Zail Singh accepted the money to finance the S.Y.L. construction. Another installment of Rs 2 crore was accepted by the government headed by Parkash Singh Badal, The latter at one stage even went to the extent of announcing a ceremony to lay the foundation stone of the S.Y.L, at the insistence of Devi Lal. Better counsel prevailed with Badal who abandoned the ceremony and launched a case in the Indian Supreme Court seeking its order on some of the controversy. But the case was neither principled enough to cover all aspects of Punjab’s rights (Badal was not enthusiastic about revoking the transfer of water to Rajasthan through the Rajasthan canal or the supplies to Haryana through the Bhakra mainline canal) nor was it pursued relentlessly. As soon as Badal went out of office in 1980, his successor, Darbara Singh, agreed to withdraw the case from the court and, instead, went in for a Delhi dictated interstate agreement which provided for the S.Y.L. again. Akalis launched a halfhearted agitation to oppose the S.Y.L. and not only abandoned it but also agreed through the RajivLongowal accord, to continue work on the project until disposal of the case by a tribunal to be set up under the accord. Thus, the bulk of work on the S.Y.L. canal was carried out by the Akali government headed by Barmala, Haryana chief minister Bhajan Lal may not be wrong when he estimates that “75% of work on the canal was done by the Bamala government While communist groups of Punjab still remain dubious in their stand regarding the S.Y.L., all other major parties, including the Congress (I) headed by Beant Singh, are publicly ranged against resuming work on the S.Y.L. project. Thankfully, communists in Punjab are virtually rootless and do not account for much. Beant Singh was transplanted on Punjab by the Indian government in the face of boycott of the 1992 poll by the Sikhs. That he was scrupulous enough not to lay a brick on the S.Y.L. canal for about 42 months speaks well of the man who may have been aware of the historical stigma, otherwise. Lakhowal and Congress (Tiwari) leader Jagmeet Singh Brar had been carrying on a campaign against the S.Y.L. for a few years. Akalishave been keeping quiet or raising a mute voice against the canal project. The difficulty with Akalis is that they are committed to the S.Y.L. project through the Rajiy Longowal accord. So long as this accord stays, the S.Y.L, issue will remain alive. If Akalis want to remove the stigma of betraying Punjab’s and Sikh’s interests in respect of water, the first and foremost they must do is to condemn and disown the contents of the RajivLongowal accord as well as its signatories including the late Harchand Singh Longowal. This condemnation has to be categorical and clear, Besides, the Akalis must understand that any compromise on the rights of Sikhs and Punjab on the water issue would never be tolerated by future generations. As such, the Akalis must effectively stop the supply of river water already being made to Rajasthan and Haryana and divert this water for use by Punjab farmers.
Article extracted from this publication >> July 7, 1995
