Proposal for Special Helmets for Sikh Soldiers Criticized by Akal Takht, SGCP
Soon after the Indian government ordered the production of special helmets for Sikh soldiers in the Indian army, the decision is being opposed by Akal Takht and the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), calling it an “attack on the Sikh identity.”
The Ministry of Defense (MoD) issued a request for proposal (RFP) to buy 12,730 special helmets for the Sikh soldiers in the Indian army. These specially designed helmets have a central bulge and offer the same level of protection as other regular helmets. The proposal includes requests for two different sizes, 8,911 helmets in large size and 3,819 in extra-large size.
Now, according to reports, the Akal Takht and the SGPC have criticized the move and asked the government to reconsider. Akal Takht’s Jathedar Giani Harpreet Singh called the move an “attack on the Sikh identity.” He explained, “Wearing a cap or a helmet is strictly prohibited in the Sikh ‘maryada’. Turban is not just a piece of cloth, but a crown placed on the heads of the Sikhs by the Guru Sahib. It is a symbol of our identity. Replacing it with a helmet will be seen as an attempt to tarnish the Sikh identity. This cannot be tolerated at any cost.”
He also mentioned that the British government made similar efforts of imposing helmets for Sikh soldiers during World War 2, but the Sikhs rejected it. “At the time of World War 2, the Sikh soldiers fought valiantly. Similarly, in subsequent wars in 1965, 1962 and 1971, Sikh soldiers fought wearing turbans. The army and the Indian government should reconsider this issue,” Singh added. Notably, in counter-insurgency areas and on the Line of Control (LoC), Sikh soldiers wore bullet-proof ‘patka’ and helmets.
SGPC president Harjinder Singh Dhami shared his concerns through a letter to Union defense minister Rajnath Singh. He called it an attack on Sikh Maryada (code of conduct). The turban is a symbol of pride and shows adherence to the Guru’s command.
The MoD is yet to respond and as of now, it is unclear if the decision will be taken back.
Vineet Washington