40 THE CARAVAN
model minority · reportage
terrorism.” He has been openly critical of the ex-
cesses of the Indian state, both under the Congress
and under the incumbent Bharatiya Janata Party.
But when pressed to denounce Talwinder Singh
Parmar, he did not.
To some long-time observers of Canadian
politics, Jagmeet’s difficulty in condemning Sikh
violence has troubling communal connotations.
“Identity politics is very attractive if you feel op-
pressed,” Ujjal Dosanjh, the former Liberal Party
politician who served as the premier of British
Columbia, told me. “But it’s not really a means of
dealing with that oppression. It sort of walls you
in and walls the other out, and in the end we all
suf fer.”He spoke from personal experience. Dosanjh
always identified as a politician who “happened to
be Sikh” rather than as a Sikh politician. He was
staunchly critical of Sikh separatism in Punjab,
and the logistical and moral support it received
from its backers, including a number of overseas
Sikhs. His outspokenness put him in their cross-
hairs. In February 1985, a Khalistani sympathiser
jumped Dosanjh in a parking lot outside his law
office and beat him with an iron rod.
Jagmeet has faced tough questions on his view
of the Khalistan movement beyond just Parmar.
When asked by another CBC interviewer, David
Common, whether he supports secessionism, the
NDP leader was vague, saying he supports “self-
determination” and “the right for every human be-
ing to have that ability to determine their future.”
In an interview with the Huffington Post, Jagmeet
elaborated, “So whether it is in Punjab, for the
people of Punjab, or whether it is in Catalonia, for
the people of that region, whether it is in Basque,
wherever that is, whether it is in Quebec, it’s a
basic right. I support that right.”
Balpreet, speaking of the World Sikh Organisa-
tion’s position on Khalistan, told me, “We support
the right for Sikhs within Punjab to take whatever
political positions they want so long as they do so
peacefully. That’s really the extent of our involve-
ment in this issue.”
“Where are they going to have a Sikh state? In
Canada? In Alberta?” Dosanjh asked. “If you are a
Sikh sovereignitist, you can’t be for self-determina-
tion for Punjab, because Punjab has Hindus too.”There is some evidence that Jagmeet is sym-
pathetic to those who want an independent Sikh
state. In 2016, when he was deputy leader of the
Ontario NDP, Jagmeet spoke at an event on “Sov-
ereignty and Polity” organised in London by the
British-based National Sikh Youth Federation. He
shared the stage with the NSYF’s British Sikh co-
founder, Shamsher Singh. Speaking after Jagmeet,
Shamsher advocated advancing Sikh sovereignty,
which he defined in fairly supremacist terms.
“It endorses the superiority of our culture, our
language and our ideal. It is about Sikh spaces and
Sikh institutions,” Shamsher said. “And it endorses
violence as a legitimate form of resistance and
survival.”
It was not the first time the NSYF expressed
these views. One year before Jagmeet’s visit, the
group ran a pro-separatist online series entitled
“Khalistan: Origins of a Nation.” In the videos,
NSYF leaders argue that the separatist violence in
Punjab in the 1980s had “immense support from
all sections of the Punjabi population.” They reject
peaceful human-rights protests by Sikhs in the
West as being “futile,” “not effective,” and “under-
mining Sikh sovereignty.”
I spoke to Shamsher over the phone in Janu-
ary. He animatedly laid out his vision for an
independent Khalistan that would incorporate
both Indian Punjab and parts of Pakistan. In his
telling, this “Sikh raj” would be firmly commit-
ted to uplifting oppressed communities. “It’s like
the Punjab of my dreams,” he said. I sent Jagmeet
and his staff multiple interview requests over
several months, but received no response. When
I sent specific questions to his press office on
Jagmeet’s association with the NSYF, his press
secretary responded “Jagmeet Singh denounces
violence in all its forms. Mr. Singh has spent his
entire career working towards peace and recon-
ciliation.”
When I asked Gurratan why Jagmeet would
share a stage with someone who endorses political
violence, he said his and his brother’s position
was clear. “Our record in regards to any form of
violence is that we’ve rejected any sort of vio-
lence,” he said. “I’m not really familiar with who
is within the NSYF. But if there is anyone who had
any of those comments or any of those positions ...
we don’t support that position.” Harwinder Singh
Mander, the British web editor of Naujawani.com,
who was the third speaker at the event, told me
he found Jagmeet’s event remarks guarded. When
Mander argued that the way ahead for the Sikh
movement relied on being able to see Bhindran-
wale as a “man who was actually a great humani-
tarian,” Jagmeet apparently said, “People could
have different opinions and we could still move
forward and evolve.” Although Mander himselfopposite page:
KPS Gill is widely
considered
responsible for
stamping out
Sikh militancy in
the Punjab, often
through brutal
extrajudicial means.
“Where are they going to have a Sikh state?
In Canada? In Alberta?” Ujjal Dosanjh
asked. “If you are a Sikh sovereignitist, you
can’t be for self-determination for Punjab,
because Punjab has Hindus too.”