The 1984 massacre of Sikhs? Why is India silent?

After watching an excellent programme by Karan Thapar on the killing of Sikhs at New Delhi in 1984, I thought I would try to answer some of the questions he raised. This is not meant to take away anything from the programme or the book, When a Tree Shook Delhi. I am only adding to the information given.

I do not want to repeat the gory details of the carnage. The facts of the Rajiv Gandhi government's connivance and the Congress party's involvement are well known. That they were not named by the two commissions appointed to look into the gamut of happenings is inexplicable. Maybe, fear or favouritism worked to keep the lid on.

Still the truth has to come out in the interest of India's fair name. I personally think that there should be another commission, this time on the lines of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which was appointed in South Africa to find out what happened during the period of apartheid. The purpose was to know why the white treated the black in the way they did and who were the people who actually took part in the beating up of blacks, torturing and evening killing them.

The South African government declared beforehand that none who admitted before the commission his or her guilt and made a clean breast of heinous crimes committed would not be punished in a law court. It was expected that the confession by the white would serve as their catharsis and might bring about reconciliation between the two communities. This has taken place there to a large extent.

The Nanawati commission was appointed in reply to my question in the Rajya Sabha. The house was discussing the Babri masjid demolition. I stood up to draw attention to the state's failure to punish the guilty of the 1984 carnage. K.R. Malkani, a BJP member, demanded a fresh judicial inquiry to go into the anti-Sikh riots. I too pressed for the appointment of a commission. But my idea was to have it on the line of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

My thinking was that after 20 years there would not be much of evidence left to bring the guilty to book and that it would be far better to know the truth. I thought the nation must know why the Hindus, who were so close to the Sikhs religion-wise, took to the streets and cut the Sikhs' hair, looted and burnt their houses and shops and killed more than 3,000.

I had heard a Hindu leader saying that the rioting was a cumulative effect of what happened in Punjab earlier. He was referring to the Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale's days when some Hindus were taken out of buses and killed. Many Hindus in Punjab were driven out of the countryside. Was all that true? Also, the impression spread that Sikhs were terrorists needed to be probed. I do not want to reopen the old wounds.

But the Truth Commission may give the offenders an opportunity to have their grievance or guilt off their chest. Why those who ordinarily abhor murder led mobs to target the Sikhs? The assassination of Indira Gandhi may be the main reason. But my belief is that the haystack of hatred was there to which her killing provided the spark. No doubt, it was a planned murder of Sikhs. But the cruelty and venom shown in the killings meant a deep-rooted animus. Why? The commission to seek truth and reconciliation may provide the answer.

The question raised on Karan Thapar's programme was while the Gujarat killings had been exposed threadbare (rightly so), the Delhi carnage had remained relatively uncovered. This was despite the fact that Gujarat was a distant state which the Centre could easily blame for the state's failure. But in the case of Delhi, it was the Centre which was directly responsible for the law and order. I think the major difference was that in 1984, there were no private television channels to carry out the story to people's homes. The only channel available at that time, the government-owned Doordarshan, was apparently under orders not to play up the happenings.

On the other hand, the print media was busy covering the assassination of the Prime Minister, its political fallout and the arrival of dignitaries from abroad for the funeral. The media was too occupied. However, it could have returned to the 1984 killings but failed to assess the gravity of the atrocities committed against the Sikhs. Probably, there was pressure or even bias.

Editors Guild of India or some working journalists' body should have done introspection. Both failed. It was a blot on their objectivity. I was in Pakistan when Ms. Gandhi was assassinated. I heard the news at Abottabad on my way to Peshawar to meet Wali Khan, the NWFP leader.

It was the BBC which confirmed the news of the killing. All India Radio was only telling about her bullet injuries, not the death. I reached Delhi the next evening. The airport was deserted. Alighting from the same flight was a famous sports commentator, a Sikh. A customs officer approached me to tell about the massacre of Sikhs. I could not imagine or believe it. It did not strike me that the sports commentator would have reached home because the mob was reportedly still out in certain localities in Delhi. I could not face him.

I felt so humiliated that I was speechless when he said he was married to a Hindu. After arranging an armed escort, I took a taxi for my house at Sunder Nagar. Outside Palam, there was a pile of ashes which the taxi driver told me were the remains of two Sikhs who had been burnt alive.

Throughout my journey, I did not come across a single policeman. Roads were empty. All the places the taxi passed through wore a deserted look. I could not get over the killing. It was late at night. There were early morning telephone calls from several friends. They had started evacuating the Sikhs from their homes. I joined the team.

There was so much to be done - finding food, milk, medicines and so many other things and then rehabilitating them. But they had to be rescued first.

(The writer is a veteran Indian journalist and former diplomat. He is also a former Rajya Sabha member)