(Publish from Houston Texas USA)
(By: Mian Iftikhar Ahmad)
India is a diverse country with a multitude of languages, cultures, and religions. The majority of its population is Hindu, while Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Dalits, and Adivasis constitute minority communities. The Indian Constitution, one of the largest constitutions in the world, guarantees every citizen the principles of religious freedom, equality, cultural rights, and personal liberty. India is defined as a secular state, meaning the state does not officially endorse any religion, and every citizen has the right to choose, practice, and live according to their religion.
Each citizen is legally protected under the principle of equal rights, yet in practice, historical, social, and political factors have made the experiences of minorities varied and often complex. Muslims have played a significant role in India’s history, but over the decades, they have faced obstacles in education, economy, and politics, along with instances of violence and inflammatory rhetoric in certain regions.
The Christian community, which constitutes a small percentage of the population, has faced attacks, interference in churches, and difficulties during religious celebrations such as Christmas, creating fear and insecurity. The Sikh community, mainly concentrated in Punjab, witnessed armed and political struggle during the 1980s and 1990s Khalistan movement, resulting in strict security measures at both local and federal levels. Dalits and Adivasis have also struggled against social discrimination, economic challenges, and a lack of educational opportunities, fighting for their identity and rights over a long period. India has enacted several laws and policies concerning the rights and protection of minorities.
The Citizenship Amendment Act provides preference for citizenship to certain non-Muslim refugees, resulting in political debate, public protests, and controversies. The National Register of Citizens introduced a process for citizen registration aimed at identifying illegal immigrants, leaving millions struggling to prove their citizenship, with many Muslims excluded from the list. CAA and NRC combined created elements of fear and uncertainty among Muslims. Anti-Conversion laws regulate religious conversion, requiring government permission and creating potential legal actions against religious workers and individuals, raising concerns over the fundamental principle of religious freedom.
Incidents of violence and intolerance against minorities have occurred at different times and in different regions. The Christian community has faced attacks on churches, interference during gatherings, and difficulties during religious festivals. Muslims have also been targeted in multiple incidents, including property damage, hate speech, and local societal pressure. Sikhs experienced armed struggle and federal crackdown during the Khalistan movement, and Dalit and Adivasi communities have faced social discrimination and limited opportunities. These incidents have drawn concern from international human rights organizations, NGOs, and local social activists.
While the Indian constitutional system guarantees equal rights to every citizen, social and religious attitudes, local laws, and political rhetoric have complicated minority experiences, resulting in local and state-level protests, debates, and public discourse. The Trump Land demand by Sikhs for Justice seeks a safe region in the northeastern Indian states for a Christian majority to achieve religious freedom and security. This demand is primarily ideological and internationally oriented, requesting intervention from the US president and the global community.
In reality, India’s constitutional, legal, and political framework requires public consent, state assembly approval, federal parliamentary approval, and judicial review for the creation of any new state. Without these steps, establishing a new state is practically impossible. The Khalistan movement of the 1980s and 1990s gained local public support, involved political parties, and at times, armed struggle, strengthening the call for a separate Sikh state. The fundamental difference between the Trump Land demand and Khalistan is that Khalistan had substantial local support, whereas Trump Land is largely an international appeal with limited local backing, and the federal government would respond firmly.
Legally, India’s federal integrity is robust, and changing state boundaries requires completing judicial, legal, and constitutional processes. Therefore, the Trump Land appeal cannot practically lead to a separate state. If the Trump Land appeal gains international attention, other minorities may also raise their specific demands. Dalits, Adivasis, Buddhists, and Sikhs may advocate for the protection of their rights, security, and cultural identity. However, practically, creating any new state or administrative region requires local public support, state and federal government approval, legal scrutiny, and judicial compliance.
The central and state governments, along with security institutions, would strictly challenge any attempt at secession. Muslims, as the largest religious minority, have historically faced economic, educational, and political barriers. Christians, Sikhs, Dalits, and Adivasis also continue to raise their voices for limited rights, social, economic, and political opportunities. Appeals like Trump Land are largely symbolic or ideological protests and do not translate into local mass movements. The future success of Trump Land depends on local support, legal and security measures by the federal government, and international pressure.
Local support is limited, federal response would be strict, and international pressure would have a limited effect. Thus, the practical chances of establishing Trump Land are extremely low. Different states in India have witnessed decades-long incidents of violence and oppression against minorities. Reported incidents have created concern both locally and internationally. Kerala, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, and northeastern states have reported violence, harassment, and interference against Christians, Muslims, and other minorities. These incidents occurred at different times and were often driven by local political, social, religious, and economic conflicts
Religious celebrations, places of worship, schools, churches, and mosques have frequently been targeted, creating fear and insecurity. In Odisha during 2007–2008, Christians faced multiple violent incidents, including church burnings and interference in gatherings, with local authorities failing to provide adequate protection, increasing fear among the community. In Uttar Pradesh, a long history of attacks against Muslims has been observed, including spillover effects from the 2013 Delhi riots, where Muslim communities faced educational, economic, and political pressure along with local violence and hate speech.
In Maharashtra, Christians and Dalits frequently reported interference during religious gatherings and educational events, including attacks on churches and schools, impacting religious freedom. Punjab witnessed armed struggle during the Khalistan movement, resulting in hundreds of deaths and thousands of arrests, leaving long-term effects on relationships between Sikh communities and other religious groups.
In northeastern India, Christians faced violence and persecution, with local governments and police often failing to provide adequate protection, reinforcing the insecurity that contextualizes the Trump Land demand. The implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act provided preferential citizenship to non-Muslim refugees in northeastern India, creating fear and uncertainty among Muslims.
The NRC process left millions struggling to prove citizenship, increasing social pressure and political insecurity. Anti-Conversion laws sought to regulate religious conversion at the state level, requiring official permission and creating legal threats, potentially affecting religious freedom and creating fear among minorities. International human rights organizations have repeatedly expressed concern over minority rights in India, highlighting discrimination, violence, and limited economic and educational opportunities faced by Muslims, Christians, and other minorities.
The Indian Human Rights Commission has emphasized the necessity of providing equal opportunities, protection, and freedom to all minorities. Should the Trump Land appeal gain traction, other minorities may also raise their specific demands. Dalits, Adivasis, Sikhs, and Buddhists may advocate for cultural, social, and political rights, but the practical possibility of establishing a new state remains extremely limited within India’s constitutional and political framework. Central and state governments, along with security institutions, would firmly counter any secession attempts, and international attention would primarily serve as a symbolic acknowledgment rather than a practical change.
