 |
|
|
A Geographical entity that never was, a phantasmagorical concept
that only existed in the fevered imagination of a few fringe
elements in India and their self-deluded supporters abroad, managed
nevertheless to haunt New Delhi and Washington for quite a while
this month. Hackles were raised in the Indian Parliament and
embarrassment was clearly evident both in the State Department and
the White House.
It all began when Dr Gurmit Singh Aulakh, "president" of the
so-called Council of Khalistan, wrote to Vice-President AI Gore,
drawing attention to the "ongoing civil conflict in Khalistan. "Dr
Aulakh is an inveterate letter writer, corresponding with everyone
from the US President down, in his attempt to keep the Sikh
separatist agenda on the front burner. And if, God forbid, one of
them responds, even in the most innocuous, routine fashion, Dr
Aulakh will immediately go to town with his "fax war" against
India.
Dr Aulakh would take out selective portions from the response he
had received, add his own interpretations and comments, and try to
make out that whoever wrote him the letter was expressing sympathy
for the Khalistani cause, or at least deploring the alleged
atrocities by Indian security forces. Dr Aulakh would also allege
that hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians are being
tortured, maimed and killed by security forces in Punjab, which to
him is not a State in the Indian republic, but the land of
Khalistan under India's oppressive occupation.
The offices of the President and Vice-President in the US receive
literally hundreds of letters from supplicants and serious
correspondents, from cormorants and cranks, from those who threaten
and those who warn of threats. Most of the time, the President or
the Vice-President will not even see the letter or the routine
response that goes out. The job of sending replies to
not-so-important letters usually falls on the lowest persons on the
totem pole. To aid them in drafting a response, they have access
to a number of readymade, platitudinous paragraphs which sound
profound but mean very little. The standard technique is to start
by thanking the person for his comments, add a couple of the
one-size-fits-all paragraphs, and conclude by telling the person
how important his or her views are in formulating high level
policy. And presto, a pleasing, personalised letter from the
President or Vice-President, complete with machine-reproduced
signature.
There is only one problem: Americans being insular by and large,
are not too an courant with nations and politics, especially at a
time when the membership of the United Nations has been mushrooming
with new entrants. When a letter like Dr Aulakh's ends up with an
eager but comparatively ill-informed intern in Mr Gore's office,
the results can be both ludicrous and disastrous. Taken in by the
impressive letterhead of the "Council of Khalistan," the Write
House staff member obviously assumed that Khalistan must be another
of those Central Asian republics like Uzbekistan or Tajikistan.
"Dear Dr Aulakh," began the reply sent under the Vice-President's
signature, "Thank you for writing to me regarding the ongoing civil
conflict in Khalistan. I appreciate hearing your views on this
serious situation." The letter then went on to refer to the
"inevitable hardship and bloodshed" that civil conflict inflicted
on a nation's civilian population, and referred to the need to work
together to build "a safer, more prosperous and peaceful world."
That was all that Dr Aulakh needed: he gleefully faxed Mr Gore's
letter to all and sundry, claiming that the reference to "the
serious situation of the ongoing civil conflict in Khalistan"
represented clear recognition by the US of a sovereign and
independent Khalistan.
No one should be surprised at Dr Aulakh's proclivities. He exists
on and for Khalistan and is officially registered as a lobbyist on
behalf of the Council of Khalistan. He makes a point of being
present at all India-related congressional hearings, where he
assiduously distributes his lurid, motivated and wildly inaccurate
propaganda material about India's alleged human rights
transgressions in Punjab, Kashmir and the north-east. He has found
a willing ally in Congressman Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, who
receives about half of his campaign funds from Khalistan
sympathisers in his constituency and elsewhere in the US.
At a particular congressional hearing, after Mr Burton dramatically
displayed the latest gory photographs of Sikhs in Punjab
purportedly tortured and killed by Indian forces, New York
Democratic Congressman Gary Ackerman pointed out that the selfsame
photographs had been presented at another hearing more than a year
ago. But such "minor" mishaps do not faze either Mr Burton or Dr
Aulakh. The latter can claim in his inevitable fax campaign that
Congressman Burton displayed photographic evidence of India's
atrocities. But he would be under no compulsion to include what Mr
Ackerman stated. Such a policy of "supressio veri and suggestio
falsi" is par for the course for the Council of Khalistan.
Dr Aulakh also regularly attends all think tank seminars on South
Asia, human rights or whatever subject that can be linked even
remotely to his agenda. He would then rise to ask loaded questions
about America's "sad negect" of India's atrocities against
"Khalistan". Unfortunately for him, over the years, most
institutions have developed varying degrees of "Khalistan
weariness." Dr Aulakh is now just about tolerated at these
functions as a gadfly and allowed his two-minute arangue before
being politely asked to resume his seat. In Congress too, the
number of anti-India votes that Burton and company can rustle up
has fallen steadily. It is no wonder that Dr Aulakh is now reduced
to trapping the unwarry into inadvertent comments that he can
exploit through his fax campaign.
As long as funds keep fuelling activities, the Council of Khalistan
will continue, whatever the level of its effectiveness, and the
funds come from varied sources. Some of the regular contributors
are the gurdwaras in this country that have been taken over by
young hotheads who feed their own macho image by pretending to play
the Khalistan game. Money also comes in from some of the extremely
affluent Sikh orchard owners in California. There was a time when
the fruit barons hired hundreds of Sikhs who came over from India
and promptly applied for political asylum. They could afford to pay
below minimum age and get an undue advantage over the competition.
Obviously, they did not mind passing on some of the profits to the
council of Khalistan. (The State Department has reportedly caught
on to the ruse and advised immigration offices around the country
that the Khalistan cause cannot be a basis for asylum requests).
Meanwhile, it is now well-known that Pakistan runs training camps
for Khalistan activists and Kashmir separatists, and provides them
with arms and sustenance. As an offshoot of the subversionary
largesse, there are persistent rumours here of the Pakistan embassy
providing more than psychological support to Khalistan elements.
After all, paying lobbyists is no crime in this country.
With Indo-US relations getting pegged on to steadily increasing
economic interaction and with Punjab now ruled by a duly elected
State Government, the Khalistan issue has lost steam. If Dr Aulakh
is pursuing his agenda as a paid lobbyist, his efforts are getting
sadly marginalised. If on the other hand, he sincerely believes in
his dream of Khalistan, it is even sadder: he is likely to end up
as an increasingly embittered individual, whose waning years are
likely to be marked by woeful frustration.
To make matters worse for him, his bid to be too clever by half
with Vice-President Gore's letter has recoiled on him: after an
unprecedented furore in India's Parliament, the US came out with
well-publicised apologies at the State Department, at the White
House and from Ambassador Frank Wisner in New Delhi. In the
process, the US administration made it officially, firmly and
publicly clear that "it does not, and never did support the
establishment of an independent state of Khalistan." The State
Department also categorically affirmed that "the United States does
recognise Punjab as an integral part of India: always has and
always will." That hardly leaves any leeway for Dr Aulakh,
whichever way he makes up his faxes.
"And after the negative publicity he has received over the
Vice-Presidential letter, Dr Aulakh is likely to find that the only
persons of any standing who are willing even to give him the time
of the day are old faithful, Mr Burton, and his fellow travellers
on the anti-India caravan-California Congressmen Gary Condit
(Democrat) and Dana Rohrabacher (Republican) who, incidentally,
have just sponsored a non-binding pro-Khalistan resolution in the
House of Representatives. All the others will either avoid Dr
Aulakh like the plague, or tend to shy away from him - or "take a
side road when they see him coming," as one official put it,
All that raises the question of why the US administration should
allow a motivated meddler masquerading as a lobbyist to muddy the
diplomatic waters by indulging in the vilest propaganda against a
friendly democracy with which America is avowedly seeking to
improve and deepen its relations. The right to freedom of
expression is often cited as something that ties the hands of the
administration in dealing with such situations. That is all very
well, but it must also be recognised that much that is totally
reprehensible goes on under the undeserving protection of the First
Amendment freedoms. These enshrined liberties do promise
untrammelled privileges, but they do at times betray their
votaries.
Such aberrations call for unique solutions. Dr Aulakh is an
American citizen, and getting him out of the US is not a feasible
option. But keeping the US administration out of Dr Aulakh's
unjustified reach is by no means an impossible goal.
Another way to tackle the shenanigans of Khalistan elements in
America may be under the provisions of the Terrorist Act. The. US
has always maintained an uncompromising stand against terrorism and
any activity likely to lend it support. It is no secret that
Khalistani elements have been resorting to terrorism in India. It
is worth considering whether Dr Aulakh's fund-raising activities in
the US in support of "Khalistan" constitute a violation of the US
Terrorism Act which has strict stipulations against raising money
in the US in support of those indulging in terrorist activities
abroad.
|
|
|