On August 17, 2025, the National Mall in Washington DC became a stage for a story that India has tried to suppress for decades. Under the summer sun, thousands of Sikh families, students, and elders lined up in long queues, not for a parade, not for a protest, but for a ballot. The Khalistan Referendum, organized by Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), saw an overwhelming diaspora turnout, transforming one of the most symbolic spaces of American democracy into a platform for Sikh self-determination. For many participants, it was not just about a vote, it was about dignity, memory, and defiance curbed by India for decades and centuries.
Since 2021, similar Khalistan referendums have already taken place in the UK, Canada, Italy, Australia, Switzerland, and New Zealand, all conducted peacefully and in line with Article 1 of the UN Charter and the ICCPR, which guarantee the right of peoples to self-determination. While India has tried to dismiss the movement as extremist, no UN member state has banned these votes. Instead, democratic nations have treated them as legitimate expressions of political freedom.
A Movement India Cannot Erase
Despite years of Indian pressure, misinformation campaigns, and covert intelligence operations, the referendum proceeded unhindered under US government. The US government permitted the vote, citing constitutional guarantees of free speech and assembly, while security agencies ensured participants’ protection amid fears of Indian interference. This was not just a symbolic act of democratic rights, it was a direct challenge to New Delhi’s narrative that the Khalistan movement is “dead.” The sheer scale of participation revealed a different reality that Khalistan is not going away.
The Shadow of Violence
This peaceful act of political assertion came against a backdrop of violence that has shaken Sikh communities worldwide. The 2023 assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada, the suspicious death of UK activist Avtar Singh Khanda in 2023, and U.S. prosecutors’ charges against Indian-linked operatives in a foiled plot to kill Gurpatwant Singh Pannun all pointed to a disturbing pattern of transnational repression. For many in Washington, casting a ballot was also an act of remembrance for those silenced by violence, a way to turn grief into resistance.
A Struggle Rooted in History
To understand why Sikhs risk pressure, surveillance, and even assassination to demand Khalistan, one must return to history. Sikhs once enjoyed sovereignty under Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s empire in the early 1800s, only to be annexed by the British in 1849. At Partition in 1947, their homeland Punjab was split between India and Pakistan. Despite promises of minority rights, Sikhs in India found their culture, language, and political influence steadily eroded.
The Anandpur Sahib Resolution of 1978 demanded federal autonomy and cultural protections, but India dismissed it. When Sikh preacher Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale rose as a voice against repression, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi ordered Operation Blue Star, a military assault on the Golden Temple in 1984. Thousands of pilgrims were killed, Bhindranwale among them. The retaliation, Indira Gandhi’s assassination by her Sikh bodyguards, was followed by state-backed pogroms in Delhi and beyond, where thousands of Sikhs were massacred. The cycle of violence entrenched the call for Khalistan as a matter of survival.
From the mid-1980s through the 1990s, Punjab endured mass human rights abuses. Researchers estimate 25,000 extra-judicial killings, with police secretly cremating bodies to erase evidence. Human rights defender Jaswant Singh Khalra, who exposed these crimes, was himself abducted and killed by Punjab Police in 1995. Even today, there has been no justice, no accountability, and no reparations.
Modi’s India and the New Phase of Repression
Under Prime Minister Modi, repression has taken a new, globalized form. Sikhs leading protests or organizing politically abroad are branded “terrorists” or “anti-nationals.” During the 2020–22 farmers’ protests, Sikh farmers were smeared as “Khalistanis.” The crackdown on Sikh leader Amritpal Singh in Punjab echoed the old playbook, mass arrests, internet blackouts, and the branding of dissent as a national security threat.
Now, Modi’s India is accused of crossing a dangerous threshold: engaging in assassination plots on foreign soil. Western governments have taken notice. Canada publicly accused India of involvement in Nijjar’s killing. The U.S. Department of Justice revealed an Indian-linked plot in New York. Australia, the US, and Canada have dismantled alleged Indian intelligence networks. Western courts including US federal prosecutor have repeatedly rejected Indian extradition attempts against Sikh leaders, citing political motivations.
Technology and Media Resilience
India’s pressure has also extended to Silicon Valley. New Delhi lobbied tech giants like Google, YouTube, and X to censor referendum-related content. Yet, these companies refused, defending free speech and ensuring that livestreams and videos from Washington reached millions worldwide. In doing so, they amplified Sikh voices which effectively countered India’s narrative control.
Toward the United Nations
SFJ has announced that the cumulative referendum results from the U.S., Canada, UK, and Europe will be presented to the United Nations in 2026. While the UN has historically been cautious, the referendums are being framed as falling within Article 1 of the UN Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which enshrine the right of peoples to self-determination. The global Sikh diaspora is building not just a political campaign but a legal one.
A Symbolic Blow to India
For the Modi government, the Washington DC referendum was a humiliation. Despite years of diplomatic pressure, espionage, and intelligence operations, a peaceful ballot in the heart of the US capital exposed India’s inability to silence dissent abroad. It contradicted India’s claim of being the “world’s largest democracy,” instead highlighting its intolerance toward minority self-determination.
Conclusion
The images from Washington DC, families queuing with flags, elderly Sikhs casting ballots with trembling hands, young activists sharing livestreams online, offered a sharp contrast to India’s record of silencing Sikh voices through violence. It was democracy in action, outside the borders of a state that claims it but denies it to minorities.
The referendum did not create Khalistan, but it did something equally powerful, it globalized the Sikh struggle, forced uncomfortable questions about India’s conduct, and underscored the diaspora’s resilience. As the movement builds toward the UN in 2026, the Washington vote stands as both a symbolic blow to India’s global narrative and a milestone in the Sikh community’s decades-long quest for justice, dignity, and self-determination.
Khalistan Referendum in Washington: A Blow to India’s Transnational Repression
On August 17, 2025, the National Mall in Washington DC became a stage for a story that India has tried to suppress for decades. Under the summer sun, thousands of Sikh families, students, and elders lined up in long queues, not for a parade, not for a protest, but for a ballot. The Khalistan Referendum, organized by Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), saw an overwhelming diaspora turnout, transforming one of the most symbolic spaces of American democracy into a platform for Sikh self-determination. For many participants, it was not just about a vote, it was about dignity, memory, and defiance curbed by India for decades and centuries.
Since 2021, similar Khalistan referendums have already taken place in the UK, Canada, Italy, Australia, Switzerland, and New Zealand, all conducted peacefully and in line with Article 1 of the UN Charter and the ICCPR, which guarantee the right of peoples to self-determination. While India has tried to dismiss the movement as extremist, no UN member state has banned these votes. Instead, democratic nations have treated them as legitimate expressions of political freedom.
A Movement India Cannot Erase
Despite years of Indian pressure, misinformation campaigns, and covert intelligence operations, the referendum proceeded unhindered under US government. The US government permitted the vote, citing constitutional guarantees of free speech and assembly, while security agencies ensured participants’ protection amid fears of Indian interference. This was not just a symbolic act of democratic rights, it was a direct challenge to New Delhi’s narrative that the Khalistan movement is “dead.” The sheer scale of participation revealed a different reality that Khalistan is not going away.
The Shadow of Violence
This peaceful act of political assertion came against a backdrop of violence that has shaken Sikh communities worldwide. The 2023 assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada, the suspicious death of UK activist Avtar Singh Khanda in 2023, and U.S. prosecutors’ charges against Indian-linked operatives in a foiled plot to kill Gurpatwant Singh Pannun all pointed to a disturbing pattern of transnational repression. For many in Washington, casting a ballot was also an act of remembrance for those silenced by violence, a way to turn grief into resistance.
A Struggle Rooted in History
To understand why Sikhs risk pressure, surveillance, and even assassination to demand Khalistan, one must return to history. Sikhs once enjoyed sovereignty under Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s empire in the early 1800s, only to be annexed by the British in 1849. At Partition in 1947, their homeland Punjab was split between India and Pakistan. Despite promises of minority rights, Sikhs in India found their culture, language, and political influence steadily eroded.
The Anandpur Sahib Resolution of 1978 demanded federal autonomy and cultural protections, but India dismissed it. When Sikh preacher Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale rose as a voice against repression, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi ordered Operation Blue Star, a military assault on the Golden Temple in 1984. Thousands of pilgrims were killed, Bhindranwale among them. The retaliation, Indira Gandhi’s assassination by her Sikh bodyguards, was followed by state-backed pogroms in Delhi and beyond, where thousands of Sikhs were massacred. The cycle of violence entrenched the call for Khalistan as a matter of survival.
From the mid-1980s through the 1990s, Punjab endured mass human rights abuses. Researchers estimate 25,000 extra-judicial killings, with police secretly cremating bodies to erase evidence. Human rights defender Jaswant Singh Khalra, who exposed these crimes, was himself abducted and killed by Punjab Police in 1995. Even today, there has been no justice, no accountability, and no reparations.
Modi’s India and the New Phase of Repression
Under Prime Minister Modi, repression has taken a new, globalized form. Sikhs leading protests or organizing politically abroad are branded “terrorists” or “anti-nationals.” During the 2020–22 farmers’ protests, Sikh farmers were smeared as “Khalistanis.” The crackdown on Sikh leader Amritpal Singh in Punjab echoed the old playbook, mass arrests, internet blackouts, and the branding of dissent as a national security threat.
Now, Modi’s India is accused of crossing a dangerous threshold: engaging in assassination plots on foreign soil. Western governments have taken notice. Canada publicly accused India of involvement in Nijjar’s killing. The U.S. Department of Justice revealed an Indian-linked plot in New York. Australia, the US, and Canada have dismantled alleged Indian intelligence networks. Western courts including US federal prosecutor have repeatedly rejected Indian extradition attempts against Sikh leaders, citing political motivations.
Technology and Media Resilience
India’s pressure has also extended to Silicon Valley. New Delhi lobbied tech giants like Google, YouTube, and X to censor referendum-related content. Yet, these companies refused, defending free speech and ensuring that livestreams and videos from Washington reached millions worldwide. In doing so, they amplified Sikh voices which effectively countered India’s narrative control.
Toward the United Nations
SFJ has announced that the cumulative referendum results from the U.S., Canada, UK, and Europe will be presented to the United Nations in 2026. While the UN has historically been cautious, the referendums are being framed as falling within Article 1 of the UN Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which enshrine the right of peoples to self-determination. The global Sikh diaspora is building not just a political campaign but a legal one.
A Symbolic Blow to India
For the Modi government, the Washington DC referendum was a humiliation. Despite years of diplomatic pressure, espionage, and intelligence operations, a peaceful ballot in the heart of the US capital exposed India’s inability to silence dissent abroad. It contradicted India’s claim of being the “world’s largest democracy,” instead highlighting its intolerance toward minority self-determination.
Conclusion
The images from Washington DC, families queuing with flags, elderly Sikhs casting ballots with trembling hands, young activists sharing livestreams online, offered a sharp contrast to India’s record of silencing Sikh voices through violence. It was democracy in action, outside the borders of a state that claims it but denies it to minorities.
The referendum did not create Khalistan, but it did something equally powerful, it globalized the Sikh struggle, forced uncomfortable questions about India’s conduct, and underscored the diaspora’s resilience. As the movement builds toward the UN in 2026, the Washington vote stands as both a symbolic blow to India’s global narrative and a milestone in the Sikh community’s decades-long quest for justice, dignity, and self-determination.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Recent
Qatar’s Dubious Neutrality and the Narrative Campaign Against Pakistan
Qatar’s role in South Asia illustrates how mediation and media narratives can quietly converge into instruments of influence. Through Al Jazeera’s selective framing of Pakistan’s security challenges and Doha’s unbalanced facilitation with the Taliban, neutrality risks becoming a performative posture rather than a principled practice. Mediation that avoids accountability does not resolve conflict, it entrenches it.
From Dialogue to Patronage: How Qatar Mainstreamed Radical Movements Under the Banner of Mediation
Qatar’s diplomacy has long been framed as pragmatic engagement, but its mediation model has increasingly blurred into political patronage. By hosting and legitimizing groups such as the Taliban and Hamas without enforceable conditions, Doha has helped normalize armed movements in international politics, weakening counterterrorism norms and reshaping regional stability.
AI, Extremism, and the Weaponization of Hate: Islamophobia in India
AI is no longer a neutral tool in India’s digital space. A growing body of research shows how artificial intelligence is being deliberately weaponized to mass-produce Islamophobic narratives, normalize harassment, and amplify Hindutva extremism. As online hate increasingly spills into real-world violence, India’s AI-driven propaganda ecosystem raises urgent questions about accountability, democracy, and the future of pluralism.
AQAP’s Threat to China: Pathways Through Al-Qaeda’s Global Network
AQAP’s threat against China marks a shift from rhetoric to execution, rooted in Al-Qaeda’s decentralized global architecture. By using Afghanistan as a coordination hub and relying on AQIS, TTP, and Uyghur militants of the Turkistan Islamic Party as local enablers, the threat is designed to be carried out far beyond Yemen. From CPEC projects in Pakistan to Chinese interests in Central Asia and Africa, the networked nature of Al-Qaeda allows a geographically dispersed yet strategically aligned campaign against Beijing.
The Enduring Consequences of America’s Exit from Afghanistan
The 2021 US withdrawal from Afghanistan was more than the end of a long war, it was a poorly executed exit that triggered the rapid collapse of the Afghan state. The fall of Kabul, the Abbey Gate attack, and the return of militant groups exposed serious gaps in planning and coordination.