<p>Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Sukhbir Badal met Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday to demand a proper inquiry into Operation Bluestar - the military operation carried out in 1984 to flush out heavily-armed terrorists holed up in Sikh holy shrine Golden Temple in Amritsar.</p>

<p>Thursday marks 35 years since Operation Bluestar.</p>

<p>Badal's wife and Union minister Harsimrat Kaur had earlier asked for a similiar inquiry. Speaking to some mediapersons, she said the government must investigate the conspiracy angle in storming of Sikhs' holy shrine.</p>

<p>Markets around the Golden Temple in Punjab's Amritsar remained closed for several hours amid protests by Sikh hardliners in the complex on Thursday. Later in the afternoon, the shops around the temple and in the main markets started reopening.</p>

<p>The partial bandh was observed in the city on a call given by a radical Sikh outfit.</p>

<p>The Akal Takht also organised prayers in memory of those killed in the military operation and some people raised slogans at the end.</p>

<p>Policemen in civil clothes were deployed along with the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee's (SGPC) task force to thwart any attempt to disturb law and order. The SGPC is the apex religious body of the Sikhs.</p>

<p>There was heavy barricading around the Akal Takht in the premises of the Golden Temple to prevent any untoward incident. More than 3,000 security were deployed to maintain law and order.</p>


Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Sukhbir Badal met Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday to demand a proper inquiry into Operation Bluestar - the military operation carried out in 1984 to flush out heavily-armed terrorists holed up in Sikh holy shrine Golden Temple in Amritsar.

Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Sukhbir Badal met Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday to demand a proper inquiry into Operation Bluestar - the military operation carried out in 1984 to flush out heavily-armed terrorists holed up in Sikh holy shrine Golden Temple in Amritsar. Thursday marks 35 years since Operation Bluestar. Badal's wife and Union minister Harsimrat Kaur had earlier asked for a similiar inquiry. Speaking to some mediapersons, she said the government must investigate the conspiracy angle in storming of Sikhs' holy shrine. Markets around the Golden Temple in Punjab's Amritsar remained closed for several hours amid protests by Sikh hardliners in the complex on Thursday. Later in the afternoon, the shops around the temple and in the main markets started reopening. The partial bandh was observed in the city on a call given by a radical Sikh outfit. The Akal Takht also organised prayers in memory of those killed in the military operation and some people raised slogans at the end. Policemen in civil clothes were deployed along with the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee's (SGPC) task force to thwart any attempt to disturb law and order. The SGPC is the apex religious body of the Sikhs. There was heavy barricading around the Akal Takht in the premises of the Golden Temple to prevent any untoward incident. More than 3,000 security were deployed to maintain law and order.

Sukhbir Badal meets Home Minister Amit Shah, demands proper inquiry into Operation Bluestar

<p>By Saumyajit Ray*</p>

<p>The recent visit of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to India comes right on the heels of the decision by major Canadian gurudwaras (the Sikh place of worship) banning the entry of Indian diplomats in their official capacity. In April last year, during the India visit of Canada&rsquo;s Defense Minister, Harjit Sajjan, Punjab Chief Minister Capt. Amarinder Singh accused Canadian Sikhs (including Sajjan) of being Khalistan sympathizers. This is over and above the hobnobbing that politicians of all hues in Canada indulge in with Sikh separatists in that country and the periodic yet regular glorification of dead Sikh extremist leaders during public functions in Canadian gurudwaras.</p>

<p>Though Prime Minister Trudeau is slated to meet the Punjab Chief Minister Amarinder Singh today. The no-nonsense Capt. Amarinder Singh, a scion of the Patiala royal family with impeccable nationalist credentials, has sent a strong message - Sikh leaders in India are unwilling to take their community back to a tragic and violent past that transformed the once-prosperous state into a vast killing field, snuffing out thousands of lives, and driving a wedge between Hindus and Sikhs for more than a decade.</p>

<p>If Canadian leaders do not wish to accept this truth and are bent upon flogging a dead horse, then relations between the two countries are bound to sour despite decades of strong business and cultural ties. The India of 2018 is not the India of 1985.</p>

<p>But is the Khalistan movement in Canada really a dead horse? Going by the glorification of dead Khalistan activists, it is not. Going by the plethora of Canada-based websites espousing Khalistan, it is not. And, going by the funds raised by Khalistan sympathizers for the election efforts of Canadian politicians cutting across party lines, it is not. But then under no stretch of imagination can such concerted Sikh activity in Canada be termed a &ldquo;movement&rdquo;.</p>

<p>The Khalistan cause does not have a widespread following in Canada, not even in areas with high Sikh populations like that of British Columbia, where Sikhs are nearly 5% as against the national percentage 1.4%. &nbsp;Nor do all gurudwaras in Canada give credence to pro-Khalistan sentiments. Many of them do not subscribe to the ban on the entry of Indian diplomatic officials in their official capacity in their precincts).&nbsp;</p>

<p>At the height of the Khalistan movement in the mid-1980s, led by Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale from India and Jagjit Singh Chauhan in Britain (both long dead), Canada was indeed a hotbed of Sikh separatism and consequent anti-Indian activity. There is no doubt that the federal government of Canada and the various provincial governments had allowed Canadian soil to be used for activities directed at weakening and undermining the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. This may have been an unintended consequence of Canada&rsquo;s official policy of multiculturalism, but it created mayhem in India, another multicultural and officially faith-neutral country.</p>

<p>Canadian Sikhs had pumped millions of dollars into the murderously violent Khalistan insurgency in Punjab and the rest of north India, before and after the tragic and ill-conceived Operation Bluestar. That had razed the Akal Takht, the highest seat of Sikh temporal and spiritual authority, and damaged the Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple), the holiest of Sikh shrines. Though the government of India, under the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, succeeded in liberating the Golden Temple premises from the clutches of Sikh militants. It had scarred the Sikh collective psyche forever, expanding and deepening the alienation that the Sikh community everywhere (including expatriate Sikhs in Canada) suffered from. Less than six months after that notorious military action in Amritsar, Indira Gandhi herself paid with her life when she was gunned won by her own Sikh bodyguards at her official residence in New Delhi. It took more than a decade after that to get things back to normal in the beleaguered state of Punjab.&nbsp;</p>

<p>But for many Sikhs in Canada, the Khalistan cause was not a lost one. Even though the stories of woe and injustice in Punjab had stopped trickling into Canadian Sikh congregations, the dream of an independent Sikh state&mdash;expressed best in the slogan Raj karega Khalsa (the Khalsa shall rule)&mdash;lived on among Sikhs in Canada and the United States. Sikhs were and continue to be major sources of voter support and election funds for both liberals and conservatives in the two countries. And party leaders there, especially in Canada, have not been averse to support Khalistan from official platforms. Quite a large number of Sikhs have entered Canadian politics and hold official positions, and it is at them that Capt. Amarinder Singh had raised his finger, accusing them of keeping alive the Khalistan issue.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It is too early to predict whether discontent with India and the unfulfilled dream of a Sikh state among Canadian Sikhs have the potential of reviving the Khalistan &ldquo;movement&rdquo;. But there is no doubt that they have carved out for themselves a distinct identity&mdash;quite separate from the greater Indian immigrant identity&mdash;in that country.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It is evident that they have taken the advantage of Canadian official multiculturalism to cultivate such an identity, but in Indian eyes, it is nothing but collective attempts at reviving separatism. In India, though Sikhism remains as strong and vibrant as ever, Khalistan is history. Punjab and the rest of India look forward to the likes of Captain Amarinder Singh to cremate it for all times to come.&nbsp;</p>

<p>*Saumyajit Ray teaches at&nbsp;Centre for Canadian, US and Latin American Studies, School of International Studies, JNU.</p>

<p>(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;</p>


It is evident Khalistanis have taken advantage of Canadian official multiculturalism to cultivate an identity, but in Indian eyes, it is nothing but collective attempts at reviving separatism.

By Saumyajit Ray* The recent visit of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to India comes right on the heels of the decision by major Canadian gurudwaras (the Sikh place of worship) banning the entry of Indian diplomats in their official capacity. In April last year, during the India visit of Canada’s Defense Minister, Harjit Sajjan, Punjab Chief Minister Capt. Amarinder Singh accused Canadian Sikhs (including Sajjan) of being Khalistan sympathizers. This is over and above the hobnobbing that politicians of all hues in Canada indulge in with Sikh separatists in that country and the periodic yet regular glorification of dead Sikh extremist leaders during public functions in Canadian gurudwaras. Though Prime Minister Trudeau is slated to meet the Punjab Chief Minister Amarinder Singh today. The no-nonsense Capt. Amarinder Singh, a scion of the Patiala royal family with impeccable nationalist credentials, has sent a strong message - Sikh leaders in India are unwilling to take their community back to a tragic and violent past that transformed the once-prosperous state into a vast killing field, snuffing out thousands of lives, and driving a wedge between Hindus and Sikhs for more than a decade. If Canadian leaders do not wish to accept this truth and are bent upon flogging a dead horse, then relations between the two countries are bound to sour despite decades of strong business and cultural ties. The India of 2018 is not the India of 1985. But is the Khalistan movement in Canada really a dead horse? Going by the glorification of dead Khalistan activists, it is not. Going by the plethora of Canada-based websites espousing Khalistan, it is not. And, going by the funds raised by Khalistan sympathizers for the election efforts of Canadian politicians cutting across party lines, it is not. But then under no stretch of imagination can such concerted Sikh activity in Canada be termed a “movement”. The Khalistan cause does not have a widespread following in Canada, not even in areas with high Sikh populations like that of British Columbia, where Sikhs are nearly 5% as against the national percentage 1.4%. Nor do all gurudwaras in Canada give credence to pro-Khalistan sentiments. Many of them do not subscribe to the ban on the entry of Indian diplomatic officials in their official capacity in their precincts). At the height of the Khalistan movement in the mid-1980s, led by Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale from India and Jagjit Singh Chauhan in Britain (both long dead), Canada was indeed a hotbed of Sikh separatism and consequent anti-Indian activity. There is no doubt that the federal government of Canada and the various provincial governments had allowed Canadian soil to be used for activities directed at weakening and undermining the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. This may have been an unintended consequence of Canada’s official policy of multiculturalism, but it created mayhem in India, another multicultural and officially faith-neutral country. Canadian Sikhs had pumped millions of dollars into the murderously violent Khalistan insurgency in Punjab and the rest of north India, before and after the tragic and ill-conceived Operation Bluestar. That had razed the Akal Takht, the highest seat of Sikh temporal and spiritual authority, and damaged the Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple), the holiest of Sikh shrines. Though the government of India, under the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, succeeded in liberating the Golden Temple premises from the clutches of Sikh militants. It had scarred the Sikh collective psyche forever, expanding and deepening the alienation that the Sikh community everywhere (including expatriate Sikhs in Canada) suffered from. Less than six months after that notorious military action in Amritsar, Indira Gandhi herself paid with her life when she was gunned won by her own Sikh bodyguards at her official residence in New Delhi. It took more than a decade after that to get things back to normal in the beleaguered state of Punjab. But for many Sikhs in Canada, the Khalistan cause was not a lost one. Even though the stories of woe and injustice in Punjab had stopped trickling into Canadian Sikh congregations, the dream of an independent Sikh state—expressed best in the slogan Raj karega Khalsa (the Khalsa shall rule)—lived on among Sikhs in Canada and the United States. Sikhs were and continue to be major sources of voter support and election funds for both liberals and conservatives in the two countries. And party leaders there, especially in Canada, have not been averse to support Khalistan from official platforms. Quite a large number of Sikhs have entered Canadian politics and hold official positions, and it is at them that Capt. Amarinder Singh had raised his finger, accusing them of keeping alive the Khalistan issue. It is too early to predict whether discontent with India and the unfulfilled dream of a Sikh state among Canadian Sikhs have the potential of reviving the Khalistan “movement”. But there is no doubt that they have carved out for themselves a distinct identity—quite separate from the greater Indian immigrant identity—in that country. It is evident that they have taken the advantage of Canadian official multiculturalism to cultivate such an identity, but in Indian eyes, it is nothing but collective attempts at reviving separatism. In India, though Sikhism remains as strong and vibrant as ever, Khalistan is history. Punjab and the rest of India look forward to the likes of Captain Amarinder Singh to cremate it for all times to come. *Saumyajit Ray teaches at Centre for Canadian, US and Latin American Studies, School of International Studies, JNU. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Khalistan is history, Amarinder Singh should state to Trudeau

<p>How do you remember a person who passed away when you were nine-year-old? How do you evaluate a person of contemporary importance when all the relevant material has not been declassified? Lastly, how do you evaluate a former prime minister when you have never been friends with the friends of friends of Indira Gandhi?</p>

<p>The tool I will adopt will be that of an impression. The impressions which have stayed with me for the past 32 years or so. 30th October 1984 was my 9th birthday; the very next day Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was killed. My childhood memory is marred by the grotesque images of deadly riots that followed her death. For one whole year, post her assassination, Delhi turned into a volatile city.</p>

<p>Impression, for the sake of clarity, is a collective body of knowledge formed out of whatever has been read, heard and compared. A good majority of Indians would recall Indira by comparing the present with what they think Indira did. Even people who never met her or read her, however, have an impression of her. I have read her and met people who worked with her but I would restrict myself to the impression which you get by talking to a large number of people who have neither read her nor met anybody who worked with Indira Gandhi.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Indira was powerful, enigmatic, secretive, strong decision maker, nationalist, dictatorial, patriarchal and also a mother blinded by her love for sons.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Indira was powerful, enigmatic, secretive, strong decision maker, nationalist, dictatorial, patriarchal and also a mother blinded by her love for sons." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>This article is neither an appraisal or evaluation of her tenure. It is about keywords used for remembering Indira Gandhi.</p>

<p>The crux of my impression, borne out of multiple conversations on Indira Gandhi as a child, student, journalist and as a reader, is that she was unapologetic about her politics. She was decisive and couldn&#39;t care less if a decision had to be taken.</p>

<p>Indira was powerful, enigmatic, secretive, strong decision-maker, nationalist, dictatorial, patriarchal and also a mother blinded by her love for sons. All these words never escaped any conversation on Indira.</p>

<p>&nbsp;A leader who dismembered Pakistan but blundered by sending tanks to the Golden temple. A person who robbed Indians of democracy but, despite pressure from her party, still went on to rescind the decision of Emergency. She decided to fight the election to be wiped out by the anti-Congress wave.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Indira&rsquo;s legacy, on one hand, is burdened by Operation Bluestar, dynastic politics and imposition of the Emergency.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Indira?s legacy, on one hand, is burdened by Operation Bluestar, dynastic politics and imposition of the Emergency." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>If Indira&rsquo;s legacy, on one hand, is burdened by Operation Bluestar, dynastic politics and imposition of the Emergency, it is also counterbalanced by wiping away of the privy purses of the maharajas who were colonial remnants in modern India.</p>

<p>Though abolishment of the privy purse of India&#39;s royal families is not remembered as much as India&rsquo;s victory over Pakistan, the act helped to alter the political map of India. A plethora of former rulers turned against her.</p>

<p>If Indira&#39;s Opposition was tough then she was tougher. If the political enemy was vindictive then she was wicked. If her adversary was wicked and viscerally hated her, Indira responded by being dictatorial with them. We have to remember, Indira was a woman who survived entrenched patriarchy. She was the man in the Cabinet of men.</p>

<p>She didn&rsquo;t care for the consequence. Indira only cared for the result of her action. She did neither desire nor wanted to recreate altruistic element of her father&rsquo;s politics. Probably, she had seen him being cheated and then publically humiliated in Parliament. She wanted to make sure that she is never cheated and if cheated, consequences must follow.</p>

<p>Indira enjoyed real politics. She wrote letters and confided to her friends but never wrote for the public. She was not Jawaharlal Nehru. She turned her loneliness into her weapon. She was feared for her remoteness and she was appreciated for the same quality. She was appreciated for her strength and decisiveness but loathed when it became dictatorial. She was appreciated for her sartorial sense but rebuked when looked frigid in a beautiful saree. Indira&rsquo;s appraisal or evaluation is an exercise of involving minute details.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>She bullied people and in turn also got paranoid and harassed by Opponents. She often crossed the line of political and personal.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=She bullied people and in turn also got paranoid and harassed by Opponents. She often crossed the line of political and personal." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>The importance lies in the memories she evokes today and here lies a lesson for future leaders and parties. It is not without reason that her residence is still one of the most visited memorials in India. It is not without reason that battered Congress remembers her fondly for subsuming Hindu symbols rendering RSS politics facile. Indira unified and divided India at the same time. India loved and hated her at the same time. She was considered Durga and a demon at the same time. She was a woman who was used to doing her own things. She didn&rsquo;t give a damn. That&rsquo;s how people remembered her today. She was effective both when she was right or wrong.</p>

<p>I think all these exist today because she must have been unapologetic about her politics. It is for this reason India remembers Indira Gandhi. Great leaders are remembered for the decision they take. Indira Gandhi for good or bad took decisions. She forced decisions. She bullied people and in turn also got paranoid and harassed by opponents. She often crossed the line of political and personal.</p>

<p>I didn&rsquo;t know Indira personally nor can claim to have read every word written by her or on her. I know her decisions and impact it made on the Indian politics and economy. I know the impressions. I share her memories, true or false. This is how I remember. This how rest of unconnected India remember Indira. Unapologetic and gutsy.</p>


Indira Gandhi will be remembered for her decisions and impact of her decisions on the Indian politics and economy

How do you remember a person who passed away when you were nine-year-old? How do you evaluate a person of contemporary importance when all the relevant material has not been declassified? Lastly, how do you evaluate a former prime minister when you have never been friends with the friends of friends of Indira Gandhi? The tool I will adopt will be that of an impression. The impressions which have stayed with me for the past 32 years or so. 30th October 1984 was my 9th birthday; the very next day Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was killed. My childhood memory is marred by the grotesque images of deadly riots that followed her death. For one whole year, post her assassination, Delhi turned into a volatile city. Impression, for the sake of clarity, is a collective body of knowledge formed out of whatever has been read, heard and compared. A good majority of Indians would recall Indira by comparing the present with what they think Indira did. Even people who never met her or read her, however, have an impression of her. I have read her and met people who worked with her but I would restrict myself to the impression which you get by talking to a large number of people who have neither read her nor met anybody who worked with Indira Gandhi. Indira was powerful, enigmatic, secretive, strong decision maker, nationalist, dictatorial, patriarchal and also a mother blinded by her love for sons. × This article is neither an appraisal or evaluation of her tenure. It is about keywords used for remembering Indira Gandhi. The crux of my impression, borne out of multiple conversations on Indira Gandhi as a child, student, journalist and as a reader, is that she was unapologetic about her politics. She was decisive and couldn't care less if a decision had to be taken. Indira was powerful, enigmatic, secretive, strong decision-maker, nationalist, dictatorial, patriarchal and also a mother blinded by her love for sons. All these words never escaped any conversation on Indira. A leader who dismembered Pakistan but blundered by sending tanks to the Golden temple. A person who robbed Indians of democracy but, despite pressure from her party, still went on to rescind the decision of Emergency. She decided to fight the election to be wiped out by the anti-Congress wave. Indira’s legacy, on one hand, is burdened by Operation Bluestar, dynastic politics and imposition of the Emergency. × If Indira’s legacy, on one hand, is burdened by Operation Bluestar, dynastic politics and imposition of the Emergency, it is also counterbalanced by wiping away of the privy purses of the maharajas who were colonial remnants in modern India. Though abolishment of the privy purse of India's royal families is not remembered as much as India’s victory over Pakistan, the act helped to alter the political map of India. A plethora of former rulers turned against her. If Indira's Opposition was tough then she was tougher. If the political enemy was vindictive then she was wicked. If her adversary was wicked and viscerally hated her, Indira responded by being dictatorial with them. We have to remember, Indira was a woman who survived entrenched patriarchy. She was the man in the Cabinet of men. She didn’t care for the consequence. Indira only cared for the result of her action. She did neither desire nor wanted to recreate altruistic element of her father’s politics. Probably, she had seen him being cheated and then publically humiliated in Parliament. She wanted to make sure that she is never cheated and if cheated, consequences must follow. Indira enjoyed real politics. She wrote letters and confided to her friends but never wrote for the public. She was not Jawaharlal Nehru. She turned her loneliness into her weapon. She was feared for her remoteness and she was appreciated for the same quality. She was appreciated for her strength and decisiveness but loathed when it became dictatorial. She was appreciated for her sartorial sense but rebuked when looked frigid in a beautiful saree. Indira’s appraisal or evaluation is an exercise of involving minute details. She bullied people and in turn also got paranoid and harassed by Opponents. She often crossed the line of political and personal. × The importance lies in the memories she evokes today and here lies a lesson for future leaders and parties. It is not without reason that her residence is still one of the most visited memorials in India. It is not without reason that battered Congress remembers her fondly for subsuming Hindu symbols rendering RSS politics facile. Indira unified and divided India at the same time. India loved and hated her at the same time. She was considered Durga and a demon at the same time. She was a woman who was used to doing her own things. She didn’t give a damn. That’s how people remembered her today. She was effective both when she was right or wrong. I think all these exist today because she must have been unapologetic about her politics. It is for this reason India remembers Indira Gandhi. Great leaders are remembered for the decision they take. Indira Gandhi for good or bad took decisions. She forced decisions. She bullied people and in turn also got paranoid and harassed by opponents. She often crossed the line of political and personal. I didn’t know Indira personally nor can claim to have read every word written by her or on her. I know her decisions and impact it made on the Indian politics and economy. I know the impressions. I share her memories, true or false. This is how I remember. This how rest of unconnected India remember Indira. Unapologetic and gutsy.

Remembering Indira: Unapologetic and gutsy

<p>A bandh was observed in Amritsar today on the call given by radical Sikh outfit Dal Khalsa on the 33rd anniversary of Operation Bluestar.</p>

<p>Commercial establishments and educational institutions remained closed, while the Dal Khalsa thanked people for responding positively to the shutdown.</p>

<p>The outfit&#39;s leader Kanwar Pal Singh in a statement said that the shutdown was peaceful due to the support from people of all religions.</p>

<p>Operation Bluestar was carried out in in 1984 to flush out heavily-armed terrorists holed up in the Golden Temple here.</p>

<p>Singh slammed the Akali Dal (Amritsar) and Amrik Singh Ajnala jatha for propagating against the bandh call.</p>

<p>(PTI)</p>


Operation Bluestar was carried out in in 1984 to flush out heavily-armed terrorists holed up in the Golden Temple here

A bandh was observed in Amritsar today on the call given by radical Sikh outfit Dal Khalsa on the 33rd anniversary of Operation Bluestar. Commercial establishments and educational institutions remained closed, while the Dal Khalsa thanked people for responding positively to the shutdown. The outfit's leader Kanwar Pal Singh in a statement said that the shutdown was peaceful due to the support from people of all religions. Operation Bluestar was carried out in in 1984 to flush out heavily-armed terrorists holed up in the Golden Temple here. Singh slammed the Akali Dal (Amritsar) and Amrik Singh Ajnala jatha for propagating against the bandh call. (PTI)

Shutdown in Amritsar on anniversary of Operation Bluestar