In the closing stages of the G20, India reiterated its stand for expansion of the United Nations Security Council and also sought support for becoming a Permanent Member of the body, which wields tremendous powers in the governance of the UN and has an impact on world affairs. Sikh body Dal Khalsa, through a press statement, warned the five UN Security Council members from accepting Indian claims, saying, “India has a poor human rights record and its treatment of its peoples leaves much to be desired.” WSN reports.

DAL KHALSA, MAINTAINING ITS FIRM SIKH STANCE on international affairs, has urged the five UN Security Council permanent members (US, UK, France, China, Russia) “not to get carried away by Indian claims for seeking permanent membership as India is not ready to have a place at that august level.”

“We are deeply concerned by the support offered by the United States and France in this aspect and we appeal to all those who matter internationally, to defeat this move,” said Dal Khalsa leader Kanwar Pal Singh.

“Under no circumstances should India get a foothold in the UN Security Council. As it is, India cares little for the rights of the people and we fear that its treatment will take a dive for the worse. More than ever before, India is racing towards a majoritarian state with fascist tendencies and is suppressing dissent and concerns of all sections of peoples.”

The international community, the United Nations, and the permanent members must consider India’s request, only after India signs UN conventions and treaties, ratifies them, corrects its human rights record, repeals all draconian laws from its statute, and resolves conflicts with its minorities and nationalities as per their rightful aspirations. Till then, all such pleas must be outrightly rejected.

“Under no circumstances should India get a foothold in the UN Security Council. As it is, India cares little for the rights of the people and we fear that its treatment will take a dive for the worse. More than ever before, India is racing towards a majoritarian state with fascist tendencies and is suppressing dissent and concerns of all sections of peoples.”

“With the US President Joe Biden taking up the cause of respect for human rights and democratic processes with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi, our stand has been vindicated,” said Kanwar Pal Singh.
“We have been crying hoarse that all is not well in India as far as human rights, especially minority rights are concerned.”

Dal Khalsa is aghast that the Indian authorities did not allow the international media, especially the US media, to quiz the US President and Narendra Modi, after their bilateral talks and were packed into a van and taken away from the venue. This is clearly undemocratic and a huge diplomatic lapse that bespeaks the freedom of the press in India.
“It, therefore, comes as no surprise that the US President chose to speak in Vietnam and not in India.”

Thank you Canada for continuing to provide space for democratic protests and freedom of speech.

Praising the statement of Canadian PM Justin Trudeau in which he re-emphasized that freedom to hold protest, speech, and expression was part of the democratic functioning and will be maintained at all cost. The Dal Khalsa leader agreed with Trudeau that violence and hatred should not be encouraged.

Thank you USA for vindicating our stand by taking up the matter of human rights in India.

“We are grateful to governments in the West especially Canada that have rightfully given democratic space and opportunity to Sikh activists to speak for their community’s right to self-determination in a democratic manner.”

Joining issue with the Government of India for branding Sikhs and Khalistanis in particular as threats to peace in the world, the Dal Khalsa said New Delhi has become a habitual complainant.

Dal Khalsa leader Kanwar Pal Singh said, “Had there been no peaceful struggle for self-determination, the Indian establishment would not have had to plead before the US, UK, Canada, and Australia to curtain activities of Khalistani activists on their respective soils and such an issue would not have been on top of the agenda between the countries.”