The inevitable failure of the Union government to implement the basically flawed Punjab accord has been overtaken by a renewed struggle for leadership of the Sikh community. This is a momentous development comparable in recent years only with the installation of Bhindranwale and his gang of assassins in the Akal Takht. Once again the struggle is centred on the Golden Temple complex and once again the extremists are challenging the claims of the official Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) and the Akali Dal leaders to speak and act in the name of the panth. The extremists won the first round last week when they seized control of the Akal Takht in the face of a lukewarm resistance by the youth wing of the Akali Dal and an equally half-hearted intervention by the Punjab police. For reasons best known to them the SGPC chief, Mr. Tohra, and the Punjab chief minister, Mr. Barnala, decided to appease the extremists by leaving them in control of the symbolically important Akal Takht and shifting the date for the start of Kar Seva there from January 27 as decided upon earlier by the SGPC to January 26 as insisted upon by the pro-Bhindranwale Damdami Taksal, the All India Sikh Students’ Federation and the so-called United Akali Dal headed by Bhindranwale’s father, Baba Joginder Singh. The extremists have used this victory to convene a Sarbat Khalsa (a general congregation) and to mount an all-out attack on the SGPC and the Akali Dal in the name of the Sarbat Khalsa. Thus they have got resolutions adopted dissolving the SGPC, the Akali Dal, the management of all gurdwaras, excommunicating and sacking Kripal Singh as jathedar of the Akal Takht, naming Bakshish Singh as the new chief of the Golden Temple in place of Giani Sahib Singh and authorizing Thakar Singh of the Damdami Taksal to supervise Kar Seva which is a euphemism for the demolition and the reconstruction of the Akal Takht.
This is a most blatant declaration of war by the extremists on the SGPC and the Akali leadership. Even Bhindranwale had not gone that far. The SGPC chief, Mr. Tohra, has made a rather feeble response. He has said that the gathering in Amritsar on Sunday cannot be regarded as Sarbat Khalsa because only the jathedar of the Akal Takht can convene a Sarbat Khalsa. But the question of power in a turbulent situation like the one which now prevails in Punjab cannot be settled in terms of conventions. So the key issue now is whether or not the Punjab government will use its police force to eject the extremists from the Golden Temple complex. On the face of it, such a decisive action on the part of Mr. Barnala looks unlikely. But we would not wish to anticipate the likely course of events. All we would wish to say at this stage is that this is the moment of truth for the SGPC and the Akali leaders. If they duck the challenge, as they did when Bhindranwale pushed them into a corner and as they did last week, the extremists will be able to consolidate their initial victory. The consequences of such a consolidation will be extremely grave. There can beno doubt about that.
The SGPC, the Akali Dal and the management of various gurdwaras will, of course, not disappear just because a gathering in Amritsar has said they stand dissolved. But to argue in those terms is to miss the central problem. Which is that if the extremists stay in control of the Golden Temple complex and continue Kar Seva on the Akal Takht which they can prolong, they will be in a position to continue to poison the atmosphere in Punjab. This can persuade the SGPC and the Akali Dal to fall in line, as they did when Bhindranwale was around, and to step up their demands. This possibility will almost certainly be used by those who favour the policy of appeasement whether inside the government or outside of it to argue that the Union government should strengthen Mr. Barnala’s position by giving him whatever he wants. But this will be fallacious argument on two counts. First, there is no necessary connection between the extremist challenge to Mr. Barnala and the non-transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab on January 26. Mr. Barnala has to fight the extremists on his own; indeed, it is his obligation to do so as the chief minister of Punjab. Secondly, the opportunity to favour Punjab has passed. The inability of the Mathew Commission to identify territories which could be transferred to Haryana “in lieu of Chandigarh” has in effect reopened the whole issue.
The accord, as we have pointed out from the time it was signed, is badly flawed. If contiguity and language were to be the decisive criteria, Chandigarh itself could not be awarded to Punjab. The decision to transfer it to Punjab for political reasons should have been accompanied by another political decision to transfer the Hindi-speaking areas of Abohar and Fazilka to Haryana. Which is precisely what Mrs. Indira Gandhi had done and Mr. Gurnam Singh had accepted as the Akali chief minister of Punjab. To please the Akalis, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi accepted the village as the unitand in the process ensured that the Hindi-speaking areas in question could not be transferred to Haryana because the connecting Khandu Khera is Punjabi-speaking. But since he could not totally disregard Haryana’s claims and interests lest that produce a backlash in the entire Hindi-speaking region, he provided for transfer of some Hindi-speaking areas now in Punjab to Haryana “in lieu of Chandigarh”. But which areas? Perhaps he and the Akalis believed that Haryana could be fobbed off with some villages in the Patiala district. They should have known that even Mr. Bhajan Lal could not barter away Haryana’s interests in so flagrant a manner. In any case that is out of the question now. Mr. Rajiv Gandhi has to work out a new basis for a possible agreement between Punjab and Haryana. His accord with Sant Longowal has served a purpose. It has bought the country some respite in Punjab making it possible for the Centre to hold elections in the state and install an elected government there. The future of Punjab now turns on the performance of this government in Chandigarh.