Khushboo Verma, Jadetimes Contributor
Khushboo Verma is a Jadetimes news reporter covering Political News
Ethnic nationalism, often referred to as ethnonationalism, represents a specific strain of nationalism where the defining elements of nationhood and national identity are fundamentally rooted in ethnic characteristics. This ideology places a premium on an ethnocentric or occasionally, an ethnocratic perspective, which emphasises the importance of a particular ethnic group's cultural, linguistic, and historical attributes in determining political and national legitimacy.
At the heart of ethnic nationalism lies the belief that nations are intrinsically linked to a shared heritage. This heritage typically includes common linguistic traits, religious practices, and ancestral lineage. As a result, ethnic nationalists assert that national identity should be exclusively associated with the particular ethnic group that embodies these characteristics. Such an ideology often leads to the marginalization or subordination of individuals who do not belong to the dominant ethnic group, thus fostering a sense of division and exclusivity within the nation.
A poignant illustration of ethnic nationalism can be observed in the context of Punjab, where the Sikh diaspora had expressed a strong desire for a separate state. The Sikh diaspora, which often feels less connected to the broader Indian national identity, has vocally advocated for the creation of Khalistan, a distinct homeland for Sikhs. This movement underscores a significant aspect of ethnic nationalism: the elevation of regional or ethnic identity above the national framework. While the diaspora celebrates and glorifies Punjabi culture and identity, it simultaneously distances itself from the Indian nation-state, demonstrating a profound divergence from the broader national sentiment.
In the case of Punjab, the Sikh diaspora's call for Khalistan is not merely a demand for political autonomy but also a manifestation of deep-seated ethno nationalist ideals. The emphasis on “Punjabiat”, the cultural essence of being Punjabi, reveals an intrinsic valorization of ethnic identity over the national identity of India. This phenomenon highlights the complex interplay between ethnic pride and political aspiration, illustrating how ethnic nationalism can influence and reshape political landscapes.
Ethnic nationalism, with its focus on ethnic identity as the cornerstone of national unity, often poses significant challenges to multiculturalism and inclusive national integration. By prioritising the characteristics of a specific ethnic group, it risks fostering division and discord within diverse societies. The Sikh diaspora’s quest for Khalistan serves as a compelling example of how ethnic nationalism can both galvanise and fragment communities, emphasising the need for a nuanced understanding of national identity in an increasingly globalised world. Sikh history spans over 550 years and began as a movement aimed at addressing and correcting the unethical practices prevalent in society at that time. It is important to note that Guru Nanak Sahib's intention was not to establish a separate sect but rather to reform the existing social order. This vision was carried forward by several esteemed individuals, whose selflessness earned them the title of "Guru." All nine Gurus dedicated their lives to the betterment of humanity while celebrating the principles of Sanatan Dharma. Their aim was never to create a distinct identity or sect. The tenth Guru, Guru Gobind Singh Maharaj, formed a military force from among the Hindu community to resist the oppressive Mughal regime. Guru Gobind Singh Maharaj established a set of rules for his followers, primarily to create a formidable defence against the Mughal incursions. The Sikh community's origins can be traced back to the contributions of the elder sons of Hindu families, who supported and furthered the work of the Gurus.
The Sikh identity became particularly pronounced during the colonial era when the British invaded India. The British military instructed Sikh soldiers to maintain their distinct identity by wearing turbans and carrying daggers. Recognizing the valour of Sikhs as a martial community, the British leveraged their unique appearance to solidify the canon of Sikh identity within the army. This distinctiveness, along with certain allowances and reserved benefits for Sikhs, helped the British secure the trust and loyalty of the Sikh community.
The British also observed and appreciated the Sikhs' advanced farming techniques. Consequently, they employed Sikh agricultural expertise to cultivate barren lands in the UK, Britain, and Canada.
Just as Vedic history was altered by colonial powers, Sikh history was similarly manipulated by the British. Lepel Griffin, a British diplomat and accomplished writer, played a significant role in this manipulation. Griffin’s efforts were aimed at undermining the cultural unity between Sikhs and Hindus, which posed a threat to British colonial control. Another figure involved in distorting Sikh history was Max Arthur MacAuliffe, a senior British administrator and author known for translating Sikh history into English.
When the British left India, they ensured that the subcontinent would be left with a devastating partition. Amidst the demands of the Muslim League for a separate state, there were murmurs within the Sikh community for their own separate land. However, in the wake of the horrific massacres in Rawalpindi and surrounding areas during the partition, the idea of a separate Sikh state failed to gain widespread support and was ultimately abandoned.
The idea of Khalistan, a separate Sikh state, gained momentum when former Finance Minister Jagjit Singh Chauhan sought to establish it by setting aside the memory of the Sikhs and Hindus who were brutally killed during the partition. Chauhan visited Pakistan to seek support for the creation of Khalistan.
In response, Pakistan sought to exploit the situation by using the Sikh cause as a means to create instability in the border state of Punjab. Consequently, Punjab endured over two years of severe insurgency and turmoil.
In conclusion, Sikhs, who make up only 2% of India’s population, contribute approximately 1% of the Indian Army's total personnel, underscoring their enduring commitment and service to the nation. This figure highlights the significant historical and ongoing contributions of the Sikh community to the Indian armed forces. However, it is a tragic irony that those who sought to fragment this unity, advocating for external interference and inciting insurgency, are celebrated, while the moderate Sikh and Hindu leaders who championed communal harmony face violence and persecution. This stark contrast reveals a profound and unsettling divergence between the true spirit of the Sikh community, marked by its service and unity and the discord sown by a few individuals driven by self-serving agendas. To honor their legacy and contributions, it is imperative to reaffirm and support the values of unity, peace, and national integration, ensuring that the voices advocating for harmony are upheld rather than silenced.
