The Rediff Special

'If the Akalis come to power, it will give an incentive for the rise of terrorism'

The Akalis, for their part, are defensive about the one question many, many people are asking: Will terrorism return if the Akalis come to power?

"Whenever there is an election, people start asking this question," says Surjit Singh Barnala, a little tiredly. "Before the 1984 general election, the Congress party put out advertisements portraying all Sikhs as terrorists. Our alliance with the BJP has at least washed off that image. The Congress was the cause of terrorism. The Congress was responsible for terrorism. Now with our alliance we can say it boldly, we can take a bold stand. Our coming together has created a good impression."

K P S Gill agrees. "The Akalis," he says, "are changing from talking about Sikh interest to articulating the wishes of Punjabis." Professor Randhawa thinks it to be a turning point: Pramod Kumar, the Chandigarh-based political scientist, reckons the Akalis to be no more anti-Centre as before. And, Balram Tandon, the BJP's Punjab president anticipates," giving a very good government that will restore perfect peace in the state."

Only Satpal Dang remains unconvinced. "If the Akalis come to power, it will give an incentive for the rise of terrorism," he says. "The main reason for this is the vote bank politics of both the Congress and the Akali Dal. One feeds on the other. Bhindranwale, for instance, was brought by the Congress to divide the Akalis. The Akalis, not to be found wanting, claimed him for themselves, and put him up in the Akal Takht, where no Sikh Guru has ever stayed overnight.

"Then during kar seva arms were being taken into the Golden Temple where only the kirpan is allowed. And then, when even a child could see guns atop the Golden Temple, Gurcharan Singh Tohra (longtime president of the rich, all powerful Shiromani Gurdwara Pabandhak Committee, and a rival power centre to Badal in the Akali Dal) said there were no guns. Both sides made equal contribution to terrorism. We in Amritsar know it.

"Beant Singh came and changed things," Dang continues. 'But the Akalis remained with the terrorists. Even today, Badal has not condemned terrorism. The Akalis have also not given up the Anandpur Sahib resolution which, to my mind, seeks the creation of a Khalistan within India. And, I am not at all certain that the alliance with the BJP will really change their mindsets.

"For instance, for the Gidderbaha elections, we supported the Akalis against the Congress," Dang goes on. "But less than two weeks later, at an international Sikh Conference, Badal spoke in very communal terms. He speaks according to circumstances and the audience. Now he says he will have a secular state. But one is never sure with him. We do not want a Akali-BJP government. Two communal forces do not make a secular force."

Not everyone is as despairing. Nor is Badal seen universally in such black and white terms, though he has had enough of those faults of moderates. Even so, the Akali-BJP alliance is not without its strains. The two parties differ on Article 370. (While the Akali Dal would want one like that for Punjab, the BJP wants it scrapped). On the issue of autonomy to the state, the BJP rejects the Anandpur Sahib resolution while it remains the centre-piece of all Akali politics.

And, even while the BJP's Tandon says that only the excess river waters of Punjab will be given to Haryana and Rajasthan, the party's units in these two states are already agitated. The situation in Gujarat and Rajasthan is messy as such without the Punjab unit having to make compromises to the Akalis, which may prove terribly embarrassing later on.

Beyond agreeing to give a 'good government' in common with the BJP, the Akalis are chary of committing anything else to paper, and the BJP is not without its reservations about this. "We will not accept any softness in dealing with terrorists," concedes Tandon.

The Akalis realise this too. The Punjab of 1997 is not the Punjab of 1983 or 1984. Nor is India frozen in time. There is no Congress government at the Centre now which wants its own government in as many states by hook or by crook. The Congress party, itself is much diminished in strength, and going by the number of its MPs in Parliament, even less of a national party than the BJP. Indian politics also is not as Uttar Pradesh/Hindi belt-centric as before.

Besides, the state has shown a will and a capacity to combat and overcome terrorism. And, the people of the state have seen that which began as a separatist and idealistic movement in the aftermath of Operation Bluestar and the 1984 anti-Sikh riots degenerate into one dominated by instances of extortion, rapes and worse.

None of this means that terrorism is over, or that it may not return in another form, or that the competitive policies of the Congress and the Akalis Dal in Punjab may not once again provide encouragement to it. There is a good chance too that the Hindu-Sikh bon homie brought about the BJP-Akali alliance may end in more bitterness than before if it breaks up over power-sharing, say, or ideology or containment of terrorism.

And yet, you hoped -- looking at those men and boys, Sikhs and monas, patiently walking the many miles to the Maghi Mala from where they had gotten off from buses and tempos and jeeps, appearing fairly unbeatable in their quest for an afternoon of happiness --- that it wouldn't happen thus. You felt, coming away, too, that if only for them, peace ought to have a good, long, stake-out chance in Punjab.

Only, there seemed no certainty about it at all.

Anant Gaundalkar on the Punjab poll