Jump to content

Were Sikhs Getting Khalistan In 1947?


Panthic Updates
 Share

Recommended Posts

So its clear that this so called offer of an independent state made to the Sikhs is based on speculations.

There is no denial that Sikhs were powerful. There were three main sides (political parties) representing India in any kind of negotiations with the British - Congress, Akali Dal and Muslim League.

As you rightly pointed out, this was the reason both Congress and Muslim league were luring the Sikhs.

It was the general mistrust the Sikhs had with the Muslims which was also influenced by the history they had with the Muslim rulers that they didnt accept their proposal but in turn demanded the partition of Punjab. Even Kapur Singh accepts that decision as fair.

So the answer to the above question, "Were Sikhs Getting Khalistan in 1947?" is NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So its clear that this so called offer of an independent state made to the Sikhs is based on speculations.

How is it clear?

There is no denial that Sikhs were powerful. There were three main sides (political parties) representing India in any kind of negotiations with the British - Congress, Akali Dal and Muslim League.

You are contradicting yourself here. If Sikhs were never offered any political sovereignty then why was Akali Dal included in the meetings? Why was it involved in negotiation? There would’ve been two parties only unless you believe Akali Dal and Congress both were representing the Indian side which is not true. If the British had made up their mind to partition Punjab based on majority then involving Akali Dal makes no sense. What were Sikhs beings offered then? It is clear that involvement of the Akali Dal alone proves Sikhs had a say in the matters of Punjab. If Sikhs had demanded a separate country and put their plan correctly they would’ve got it. As Kapoor Singh says the British conveyed this message secretly not officially. British could not give a country if the Sikhs never demanded it. Dr. Kirpal Singh states that the British instigated the Muslims to cause riots but is there any evidence of it in British official records? No. Kapoor Singh was involved in the politics. Hence he knows the inside of it. Again, why is Kapoor Singh lying and why did Tara Singh and Baldev Singh regret their decision afterwards?

As you rightly pointed out, this was the reason both Congress and Muslim league were luring the Sikhs.

But why? Both had no reasons if Sikhs had no power and no say in the matters (according to you). Congress appealing to Sikhs to trust them is proof enough that Sikhs had political recognition and could carve out their country. If the majority rule was the only option then there was no reason for Congress and the League to lure the Sikhs because Punjab was going to be divided according to majority population and Sikhs were not majority on either side.

It was the general mistrust the Sikhs had with the Muslims which was also influenced by the history they had with the Muslim rulers that they didnt accept their proposal but in turn demanded the partition of Punjab. Even Kapur Singh accepts that decision as fair.

He may have accepted decision to side with India rather than Pakistan as fair but the decision itself was not fair to the Sikhs and he never agreed to it.

Sant Sipahi simply wants to wash off Tara Singh’s stains of betrayal and turn their first editor to a “great leader”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please calm down and read me correctly.

What Sikhs could or should have done is a different matter altogether and this is not the discussion of the above question. Sikh leadership could have demanded a separate state. If the Sikh leadership was not smart enough then its our bad luck...Kapur Singh was also in the same team.

But the question is were they getting Khalistan. Not even Kapur Singh accepts that to be true.

Sikhs were powerful and main party because the fate of Punjab was in their hands. If they decided to go with Pakistan, Punjab would remain undivided. Whereas going with India meant Punjab had to be divided as the Muslims wouldnt agree to an undivided Punjab from going to India.

There is no point in repeating things here. I have made my point quite clear. So if you cant read my contentions, then please dont misquote me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am calm. I do not know which part of my post made you think otherwise.

Kapoor Singh was never selected as the leader of the Sikhs otherwise he would have raised the demand for a Sikh country. He tried to convince the Akali leaders but they did not listen to him. I do not think there was anyone in the Sikh community who could outsmart him. He clearly states that the British sent messages (through him) to the Akali leaders that if they raise their demand for a separate country, the British would accept it and this will get them all the area they want to be undivided but if they wish to side with one party then Punjab will have to be divided based on population. British could not force Khalistan on the Sikhs. British wanted Sikhs to raise this demand so it would look like it came from the Sikhs. This is clear enough for me that the British did not ignore the Sikhs and their right to rule. British wanted Sikhs to have a separate country and the opportunity was given but they refused and instead sided with Congress. Dr. Kirpal Singh completely ignores this side of the events. It is foolish to think British had already carved it out and was giving it to the Sikhs. Rather the opportunity was given and British was willing to listen to Sikhs more than Hindus and Muslims in this matter. Alas, it was not meant for Khalsa to have a country given to them. Surely, one day we will have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So its clear that this so called offer of an independent state made to the Sikhs is based on speculations.

Maybe in your eyes bro.

i am going to type an exerpt fro a secret letter between 2 ministers at the time of partition, both british. It is from SE Abott to GEB Abell, dated 31.3.47.

In this letter, Abott has written about the 3 communities in panjab, and what they are thinking.

Here are three lines pertaining to each community:

1. The Muslims are still intent on Pakistan, which they are unable to explain or define...

2. The Sikhs want a state of their own. The latest plans are for it to include Jalandhar and Ambala division, Gurdaspur Dist, and part of Amritsar Dist. This state would not really be a Sikh state as it would still leave Sikhs as a minority. The SIkhs may regard this plan as a stage in the acheivement of their general design.

3. The hindus would accept anything sanctioned by Congress, and/or anything likely to annoy the Muslims.

Now you can clearly see from this document that the Sikhs definitly had ideas about their own state, and had made progress in formulating a map of where this Sikh state was to be. The major stumbling block for the SIkhs was that our overall percentage of population was poor compared to muslims and hindus.

But your claim that no state was offered by the british, or desired or claimed by the Sikhs is false.

Quote"Alas, it was not meant for Khalsa to have a country given to them. Surely, one day we will have it. "

Absolutely. The sooner the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I forgot to mention in 1947 there was a claim for Sikhistan not Khalistan. The term Khalistan had not been coined then.

In 1944, english author Beverley Nichols wrote a book called 'Verdict On India'. I came across a battered first edition (printed in 1944) in a charity shop in Camden a few years ago.

http://www.archive.org/details/VerdictOnIndia

There are clear references made to "Khalistan" in this book. I will scan the relevent pages when I get home this evening...but it highlights that the terminology "Khalistan" was in use in the 1940s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1944, english author Beverley Nichols wrote a book called 'Verdict On India'. I came across a battered first edition (printed in 1944) in a charity shop in Camden a few years ago.

http://www.archive.org/details/VerdictOnIndia

There are clear references made to "Khalistan" in this book. I will scan the relevent pages when I get home this evening...but it highlights that the terminology "Khalistan" was in use in the 1940s.

Found one reference. See link below.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LqkuYUv4Ls4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=verdict+on+India&source=bl&ots=Igo841mHl1&sig=sbXiX4q1BP3SDdd9pHNkvm75ewM&hl=en&ei=b51uTOOQE4WUjAe18eH7CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Refer to Page 15, 3 paragraph down.

Quote from book 'If you grant Pakistan,' they cry, ' we shall set up a separate Sikh State of our own. We shall call it Khalistan, and we shall defend it to death.'

post-1686-128231830039_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes indeed separate sikh independent sikh state was offered by the britishers to the sikh leaders...though we may never be able to know whether it was a true offer for sikhs welfare or just to dissociate sikhs from congress and hindus or for some other british interests...it is because the offers were never put on the papers due to lack of interest by sikh leaders...Kindly have a look at the following notes---

1) In the year 1932, at the time of the second Round Table Conference, the British Government through Sardar Bahadur Shivdev Singh, then a member of the Indian Secretary of State's Council, made an informal proposal to the Sikhs that if they dissociate finally with the Congress movement, they would be given such a decisive political weightage in Punjab, as would lead to their emerging a third independent element in India and the British transfer power to inhabitants of this subcontinent. Master Tara Singh promptly rejected the tempting offer.

2) In the early winter of 1946, Cabinet Mission, while at Delhi communicated to the Sikhs through the Sardar Baldev Singh that if the Sikhs determined not to part company with India, the British Parliament, in their solicitude for the Sikh people, prepared to so frame the Independence Act of India, that in respect of the Sikh Homeland, wherever these areas might eventually go, in Pakistan or India, no Constitution shall be formed such as does not have the concurrence of the Sikhs. But Sardar Baldev Singh, in consultation with the Congress leaders, summarily rejected this offer, which went even beyond assurances given by the majority community in 1929 and in 1946 by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru in Calcutta.

3) In April 1947, Mr. Jinnah, in consultation with certain most powerful leaders of the British Cabinet in London, offered to the Sikhs, first through Master Tara Singh and then through the Maharaja of Patiala, a sovereign Sikh state comprising areas lying in the west of Panipat and east of the left bank of the Ravi river on the understanding that this State then confederates with Pakistan on very advantageous terms to the Sikhs. But Master Tara Singh summarily rejected this attractive offer. The Maharaja of Patiala declined to accept it in consultation with Sardar Patel and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru.

4) In the month of May, 1947, precisely on the 17th May, Lord Mountbatten, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, Nawab Liaqat Ali Khan and Sardar Baldev Singh, flew to London on the invitation of the British Cabinet, in search of final solution of the Indian communal problem. When the Congress and the Muslim League failed to strike any mutual understanding and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru decided to return to India, the British Cabinet leaders conveyed to Sardar Baldev Singh that if he stays behind, arrangements might be made: "So as to enable the Sikhs to have political feet of their own on which they may walk into the current of World History." Sardar Baldev Singh promtly divulged the contents of this confidential offer to Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru and in compliance with the latter's wishes, declined to stay back and flew back to India after giving the following brave message to the Press: "The Sikhs have no demands to make on the British except the demand that they should quit India. Whatever political rights and aspirations the Sikhs have, they shall have them satisfied through the goodwil of the Congress and the majority community."

The British leaders had asked Sardar Baldev Singh to stay behind because the wanted to propose to him that if Sikhs were not ready to enter into the agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs could be given an independent state which extended from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib with extended excess upto the seashore. The Britishers were ready to station 25,000 British troops and war equipment for ten years and provide help in the administration provided the Sikhs agreed to provide 50,000 soldiers be stationed at Singapore and other colonies to help the Britishers for the next ten years. After ten years the agreement could be reconsidered. Through this agreement the administration and defence of independent Khalistan would have been ensured and there would have been no need to enter into an agreement with either India or Pakistan for the purposes of their administration and defence. Even Muslim League had agreed this proposal because it would give then strong buffer state between Pakistan and India. It was also in the interest British empire as they would still have their feet in this sub-continent. But was unfortunate that there was no leader among the Sikhs with political vision foresight who could see the benefits such an arrangement and demand independent Homeland for the Sikhs.

Sirdar Kapur Singh has also mentioned the same points in his speech in indian parliament on 6th september 1966...coupled with the betrayl of the congress leadership...hence it is totally a wrong thing to rule out the possibility of a separate sikh state being offered to the sikhs...however as i said earlier it is not possible to find how much substane these offers carried as sikh leaders rejected these at the very first stage and were never put on the papers...!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes indeed separate sikh independent sikh state was offered by the britishers to the sikh leaders...though we may never be able to know whether it was a true offer for sikhs welfare or just to dissociate sikhs from congress and hindus or for some other british interests...it is because the offers were never put on the papers due to lack of interest by sikh leaders...Kindly have a look at the following notes---

1) In the year 1932, at the time of the second Round Table Conference, the British Government through Sardar Bahadur Shivdev Singh, then a member of the Indian Secretary of State's Council, made an informal proposal to the Sikhs that if they dissociate finally with the Congress movement, they would be given such a decisive political weightage in Punjab, as would lead to their emerging a third independent element in India and the British transfer power to inhabitants of this subcontinent. Master Tara Singh promptly rejected the tempting offer.

2) In the early winter of 1946, Cabinet Mission, while at Delhi communicated to the Sikhs through the Sardar Baldev Singh that if the Sikhs determined not to part company with India, the British Parliament, in their solicitude for the Sikh people, prepared to so frame the Independence Act of India, that in respect of the Sikh Homeland, wherever these areas might eventually go, in Pakistan or India, no Constitution shall be formed such as does not have the concurrence of the Sikhs. But Sardar Baldev Singh, in consultation with the Congress leaders, summarily rejected this offer, which went even beyond assurances given by the majority community in 1929 and in 1946 by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru in Calcutta.

3) In April 1947, Mr. Jinnah, in consultation with certain most powerful leaders of the British Cabinet in London, offered to the Sikhs, first through Master Tara Singh and then through the Maharaja of Patiala, a sovereign Sikh state comprising areas lying in the west of Panipat and east of the left bank of the Ravi river on the understanding that this State then confederates with Pakistan on very advantageous terms to the Sikhs. But Master Tara Singh summarily rejected this attractive offer. The Maharaja of Patiala declined to accept it in consultation with Sardar Patel and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru.

4) In the month of May, 1947, precisely on the 17th May, Lord Mountbatten, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, Nawab Liaqat Ali Khan and Sardar Baldev Singh, flew to London on the invitation of the British Cabinet, in search of final solution of the Indian communal problem. When the Congress and the Muslim League failed to strike any mutual understanding and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru decided to return to India, the British Cabinet leaders conveyed to Sardar Baldev Singh that if he stays behind, arrangements might be made: "So as to enable the Sikhs to have political feet of their own on which they may walk into the current of World History." Sardar Baldev Singh promtly divulged the contents of this confidential offer to Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru and in compliance with the latter's wishes, declined to stay back and flew back to India after giving the following brave message to the Press: "The Sikhs have no demands to make on the British except the demand that they should quit India. Whatever political rights and aspirations the Sikhs have, they shall have them satisfied through the goodwil of the Congress and the majority community."

The British leaders had asked Sardar Baldev Singh to stay behind because the wanted to propose to him that if Sikhs were not ready to enter into the agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs could be given an independent state which extended from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib with extended excess upto the seashore. The Britishers were ready to station 25,000 British troops and war equipment for ten years and provide help in the administration provided the Sikhs agreed to provide 50,000 soldiers be stationed at Singapore and other colonies to help the Britishers for the next ten years. After ten years the agreement could be reconsidered. Through this agreement the administration and defence of independent Khalistan would have been ensured and there would have been no need to enter into an agreement with either India or Pakistan for the purposes of their administration and defence. Even Muslim League had agreed this proposal because it would give then strong buffer state between Pakistan and India. It was also in the interest British empire as they would still have their feet in this sub-continent. But was unfortunate that there was no leader among the Sikhs with political vision foresight who could see the benefits such an arrangement and demand independent Homeland for the Sikhs.

Sirdar Kapur Singh has also mentioned the same points in his speech in indian parliament on 6th september 1966...coupled with the betrayl of the congress leadership...hence it is totally a wrong thing to rule out the possibility of a separate sikh state being offered to the sikhs...however as i said earlier it is not possible to find how much substane these offers carried as sikh leaders rejected these at the very first stage and were never put on the papers...!

Also Winston Churchill sent Stafford Cripps to India in 1942 to get continued Indian support for the war and in return give definite plans for Independence. Winston Churchill admired the Sikhs having served with them on the North West frontier when he was young, he and Leo Amery the Minister for India new the Sikhs were needed for the war and gave them a plan for a seperate homeland. Churchill disliked Nehru and Gandhi who he thought were devious and troublemakers (shame our leaders did not see it). But Baldev Singh told Nehru who talked him out of it , giving vague assurances that they could have their state when joining India. The rest is history as they say, India does not even recognise the Sikhs as the 3rd party at the talks now . The term Khalistan was raised by Dr Bhatti in 1940.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • City Sikhs, Project Naad, British Sikh Association (lord Rami ranger)- Complete jokers. 
    • Does anyone know from historical written sources, if it is specified whether Singhs were allowed to keep their head covered when persecuted by the Mughals, during torture/execution?  Was it just on a case by case basis? For Guru Arjan Dev Ji, it seems head was allowed to be kept covered with Dastaar.   most of the photos I’ve seen Banda Singh Bahadur with head uncovered   @dallysingh101 ?
    • Proper Bezhti.... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64496456 Jasvir Singh: 'I'm a devout Sikh - and married to a man' Published 8 hours ago Share   Image caption, Jasvir and Nick on their wedding day By Aleem Maqbool Religion editor, BBC News   Jasvir Singh is one of the most prominent Sikh voices in British public life. He is also gay - a fact that he has kept mostly private until now. It's put him at odds with some members of his own community, but he says he now wants to speak up about his sexuality. Jasvir Singh lays out some photographs on the table in front of him and takes a deep breath. They are pictures of joyful moments from the day last summer when he married his husband, Nick. "I know that speaking about this is going to be highly controversial," he says. "I'm sure there will be lots of people out there who will be upset, annoyed, even angry at me. "But I've got nothing to hide and I know that I have got Waheguru [God] with me, as I have had Waheguru with me all the way." Jasvir is a family law barrister and the main Sikh contributor to Radio 4's Thought For The Day. He has just been awarded a CBE for his work bringing faith communities together and advocating for vulnerable groups. But through it all, he has lived with a swirl of speculation about his private life - often spilling over into attempts at intimidation - that he now wants to address head-on. "There is a very small element of the British Sikh community that makes itself loudly heard. From them I have received death threats for being gay, I have been accused on a TV station of being an infidel and I have even had individuals call me up and threaten to expose me." Though Jasvir says he has not tried to hide his sexual orientation, it is not something he has talked about publicly. Recently, however, Jasvir says he has been confronted by an unsurmountable obstacle that meant he could not live out his faith in the way in which he wanted and in the way others can. "My husband is white, British, and was not born into a Sikh family. But he understands my Sikhi (Sikhism) and he has respected and embraced that part of my life. We have said we want to have a family and want to bring our children up Sikh. "We spoke about the kind of wedding we wanted in great detail, but sadly there was no way of getting married in a gurdwara, even though in my interpretation of the Anand Karaj (the Sikh marriage ceremony), there is no reason for this." .... Jasvir and Nick have just returned from their honeymoon, during which they visited gurdwaras in Punjab and in other parts of India.  
    • https://www.sikhawareness.com/topic/13602-destruction-of-panjabi-education-system-post-annexation/
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use