Both the Barnala-Balwant and Tohra-Badal factions of the Akali Dal have rejected the D.A. Desai Commission which the Union government has been wanting to appoint to identify 70,000 acres of land in Punjab which can be transferred to Haryana in lieu of Chandigarh. This has raised the possibility of the two groups coming together. According to one report, the Prime Minister, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, has discussed this possibility and its possible consequences with his principal political adviser on Punjab, Mr. Arjun Singh. The report is silent on the outcome of the discussion, if any. So we cannot comment on it. But we can define the problem as we see it.
The factional struggle in the Akali Dal is, as it has always been in the past, a complex affair which it is not possible to discuss fully in this space. One point needs, however, to be made. Though the personal element is strong in the present split, it is not the decisive one; it is simplistic to describe it as Kissa-Kursi-Ka, as Mr. Buta Singh did recently. The most divisive issue for the Akalis is whether or not they should cooperate with the Union government. The main difference between the two groups does not relate to the demands or even to long-term aspirations. It hinges on the attitude to the Centre. The Longowal-Barnala-Balwant group favoured a measure of cooperation and therefore went in for the accord with Mr. Rajiv Gandhi. The Tohra-Badal faction was not ready even then to cooperate and therefore opposed the accord. The same divide has continued ever since.
As it must see things, the Tohra-Badal group has no reason to change its attitude of non-cooperation with the Centre. If there has to be Akali unity, the Barnala-Balwant faction will have to modify its approach. Is it likely to? The answer will depend on a number of factors – Mr. Barnala’s willingness to play second fiddle to the Tohra-Badal combination, and possibly even to step down, his appreciation of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi’s response and of the reaction in the rest of the country. It is highly doubtful that Mr. Barnala will easily give up his office or powers. It is equally doubtful that he is prepared yet to forfeit Mr. Gandhi’s goodwill and risk revival of the impression that the Akalis are ganging up in order to confront the Union government once again.
The Akalis do not need to come together to frustrate the work of the Desai Commission. The Barnala government’s rejection of it has already made it a futile exercise, even if Mr. Gandhi keeps it in existence. What then can be the purpose of unity? To prepare for a new morcha? To consolidate their hold on power in the state? The first appears to be a distant possibility, unless the Akali intention is to provide a platform for the extremists now banded together in the All-India Sikh Students’ Federation and the Damdami Taksal and unless they feel that Mr. Rajiv Gandhi will make the same mistake his mother made and allow them to entrench themselves in the Golden Temple. The Prime Minister should let them know in advance that he will not repeat the mistake. Also, last time the whole country – and not just the government – allowed itself to be paralyzed out of regard for the Sikh community which was then so deeply embedded in the Hindu psyche as to be an integral part of it. That is no longer the case. This time the demand for action will be too strong to be resisted by the Union government. The Sikh student federation goons cannot hope to prosper in the way the Bhindranwale gangsters did. All in all, plain speaking on the part of New Delhi can dampen the enthusiasm of the Akalis to return to the barricades. They should be told that the Union government is not morally disarmed.
As for the Akali hold on power, no one will grudge it if they use it to do their duty by the Hindus. This has become the litmus test. And even they must know that they cannot pass it without the fullest backing of the Centre. Since their police are thoroughly communal and corrupt, they need the Centre’s paramilitary forces even to protect themselves. If they prevaricate, they can have no title to stay in office; they will have to be dismissed regardless of whether they are united or not. Finally, while it is alright to engage in euphemisms, it is dangerous to become their prisoner and victim. We have become victims of our own talk of the threat to the unity of the country. There is no such threat. The issue is the future of the Sikh community and not of the Indian nation or the Indian state. The Akalis have been endangering the first; it is beyond their capacity to endanger the second, even with such external assistance as they may be receiving.