Why didn't the Sikhs demand a separate state when India was partition into India and Pakistan?

A brief history on why Sikhs did not ask for an Independent nation during the partition of British India into India and Pakistan and it was the greatest mistake they did as the Sikhs were a nation by itself and were defeated and conquered as a nation by the British. Logically the Sikhs should have been given a nation without them asking if the British appreciated their sacrifice in fighting and keeping Britain safe and independent. No much to say because the Sikhs were already made spineless by the British and were an insult to the Brave Sikhs who gave their lives fighting for independence and also all the wars Sikhs fought to keep the British empire intact and safe.

Nobody and if the Sikhs do not understand their importance in the world. Very sad as to this day there is division in the Sikh Panth and are used by external forces for their own betterment. Nothing much more to say except remember the Battle of Saragarhi on how selfless were the Sikhs and brave

READ HOW THE MESS THE SIKHS CAME TO BE IN TODAY

Sikhism: What were the reasons for Sikhs joining India back in 1947 and not Pakistan, or declaring themselves or the entire Punjab region along with other religious communities independent/anti-partition of Punjab?

This question is asked with the best of intentions and not to hurt anyone's sentiments. It is just out of sheer curiosity. My grandparents who migrated from Indian Punjab died when I was little so I couldn't ask them about all such things when I grew up to think about these problems that they and other Punjabis faced. Specially I always had great curiosity about the relationship between Punjabi muslims and sikhs. I know during these days when Pakistan is having a rough streak in countering religious extremisms and what not, it seems silly to ask such a question since obviously people would simply reply that "why should any non muslim be living in Pakistan?", but up until the 80's its outlook was still moderately liberal and somewhat secular. Besides, I always felt like Pakistani government at least always tries to give a Sikh-friendly image (although possibly for various political purposes), with yatris going to Nankana sahib and Panja sahib with a nice welcome. At least in my region and families I have seen people to have great respect for Sikh gurus and their religion and even sardars themselves. Even at times more than their muslim counterparts (although same can be said about majority of Indians as well). But from what I have read (which is not very extensive), is that the Sikh community has not had a smooth run in India, at least politically either (although my view can be very wrong). So what were the reasons for the Sikhs to join India? And in general what were the reason for Punjabis in general to accept partition so easily and start killing each other?. I know that Sikhs and the Afghans/Moghal muslims have an extremely dark past with Sikhs being killed mercilessly on many occasions. But almost all the Punjabi muslims were Sikh/Hindu converts themselves. So why did they accept this decision of partition so easily (which I believe was quite sudden, people were just sitting at their homes and all of a sudden this news of partition dropped on them as a bomb and senseless murder started).Also my views can again be biased by living in the Pakistani Punjab all my life, it seems that apart from Harmindar sahib much of Punjabi culture, historical places, sikh historical and religious places are in the west Punjab for example birth place of baba guru nanak sahib and maharaja ranjit singhs monuments in Lahore etc and also the fact that Punjabis as a community are the biggest community in Pakistan hence making their voice much more powerful in the political decision making. So what was it. Was it lack of leadership among Punjabis and sikhs? religious manipulation? Indian politics at that time being dominated by other communities? the dark history between sikhs and ruling muslims?  Sikhs outrightly rejecting Pakistan as a flawed idea? Or anything else?

PS: apologies in advance if someone feels that I am mixing Sikhi with being Punjabi. It is not the intent of this question but is hard to ask such things without taking such perspective in mind.

There 2 parts of the question.

1. Why didn’t Sikhs joined Pakistan

2. Why didn’t Sikhs opt for their own separate country in 1947

Let me answer 2. first.

The Sikhs didn’t make up as majority in any of the districts in pre-partition Punjab and was spread all over from Peshawar to Ambala. This was the reason that Sikh Leaders were actually opposed to the very idea of Pakistan and partition because they knew Sikhs were to suffer to most. But when INC agreed to partition of India, Sikh leaders had no choice but to go either with Pakistan or India.

Only option of a separate country for Sikhs was available for the Sikh rulers of states of Patiala, Nabha and Faridkot. They could have declared themselves independent and then form some sort of Confediciary to make it a Sikh Country. But there were some major problems.

1.       These states had very little shared borders

2.      The states of Maler-Kotla (Muslim Ruler) and Kapurthala (Christian Ruler) were falling in-between

3.      Even if these States had declared themselves independent, the 70% of Sikh population living outside these states would had to either migrate or face brutal wipe-out

4.      The rulers of Patiala had been known for being ‘Anti-Sikh’ and actually had been supporting invaders like Ahmed Shah upto the British. Thus, they didn’t go well with other Sikh Rulers.

Thus, the option of separate Sikh Country was never available or feasible.

Now for questions 1.

Much has already been said before by other users. Sikhs (Sikh Rulers and Sikh leaders) certainly had a better deal from Jinnah. (Offers Made By Jinnah to Sikhs) Read below in Red

Dr. Ahmed writes:

In several interviews with informed Pakistanis, I was told that Jinnah offered very generous terms to the Sikhs to dissuade them not to demand the partition of the Punjab if India was partitioned. This claim is amply corroborated by the article “I remember Jinnah’s offer of Sikh state” by the late Maharaja of Patiala published in The Tribune of 19 July 1959. Apparently Lord Mountbatten was also present as were Liaquat Ali Khan and his wife. Some of the extracts are given below:

“We had a drink and went in to dine. The talks started, and offers were made by Mr Jinnah for practically everything under the sun if I would agree to his plan. There were two aspects. One was based on the idea of a Rajasthan and the other one for separate Sikh state — Punjab minus one or two districts in the south. I had prolonged talks with Master Tara Singh, Giani Kartar Singh and other Sikh leaders, and all the negotiations on behalf of the Sikhs were within my knowledge. Indeed, in some ways I had quite a deal to do with them. I told Mr. Jinnah that I could not accept either of his two proposals, and told him a lot of what was on my mind. Liaquat Ali Khan and Begum Liaquat Ali Khan, and told him a lot of what was on my mind. Liaquat Ali and Begum Liaquat Ali were most charming to me, and went out of their way to offer, on behalf of the Muslim League, everything conceivable. I was to be Head of this new Sikh State, the same as in Patiala. The Sikhs were to have their own army and so on.

All these things sounded most attractive, but I could not accept them as being practical, and neither could I in the mood I was in, change my conviction. The talk lasted till past midnight. Lord Mountbatten was a patient listener, occasionally taking part. He eventually said that perhaps Mr Jinnah and I could meet again at some convenient date.”

There was another meeting of Jinnah with some notable Sikh leaders like Maharaja of Patiala, Hardit Singh, Master Tara Singh and Giani Kartar Singh. Hardit Sing recalls:

“Jinnah started by saying that he was very anxious to have the Sikhs agree to Pakistan and he was prepared to give them everything that they wanted, if they could accept Pakistan. I said to him, “Mr Jinnah you are being very generous, but we would like to know exactly what our position will be.” Jinnah retorted, saying “you will have a Government, you will have a Parliament and you will have Defence forces, what part will the Sikhs have in all these.” He further said, “are you familiar with what happened in Egypt? I will deal with the Sikhs as Zaghlul Pasha dealt with the Copts (the Christian minority) when Egypt became independent.” He then went on to tell us the story. According to Jinnah, the Copts when they first met Zaghlul Pasha put forward some demands. After listening to them he advised them to go back, think the whole thing over and come to see him again with a paper incorporating all their demands. They did this. Zaghlul Pasha took the paper from them and without reading it wrote on it “I agree.” Mr Jinnah added, “That is what I will do with the Sikhs.”

Hardit Singh further recalls, “this put us in an awkward position. We were determined not to accept Pakistan under any circumstances and here was the Muslim Leader offering us everything. What to do?”

Then I had an inspiration and I said, “Mr Jinnah, you are being very generous. But supposing, God forbid, you are no longer there when the time comes to implement your promise?”

“His reply was astounding”. He said, “My friend, my word in Pakistan will be like the word of God. No one will go back on it.”

Hardit recalls, “there was nothing to be said after this and the meeting ended.”

It is recorded in various sources that the permanent posts of Dy PM, Head of Army were offered to Sikhs if they join Pakistan. Also, they were offered a ‘Sikh Homeland’ (this which most people refer to as Sikh independent country) which was to have a separate Parliament and Army within the Constituion of Pakistan.

Many meetings between Sikh Leaders and Rulers and Jinnah were held. But ultimately Sikhs threw there lot with India. The possible reasons could be:-

1.       Similar offer of ‘Sikh Homeland’ by Nehru and Patel. Though not fulfilled later.

2.      Historical proximity with Hindus than Muslims. In fact, many families in Punjab had members belonging to both Hindu and Sikh faiths. Inter-marriage between Hindus and Sikhs (especially Khatri) were very common

3.      Pre-parition riots especially in tribal areas of North East Frontier targetted Hindus and Sikhs alike because Muslims always treated Sikhs as Kafirs like Hindus. Christians for them were ‘Brothers of the book’ as they believed in Old Testament and thus more closer though not very likable

4.      The role of Lord Mountbatten also needs to analyzed as he was present during most of these meetings. It is a known fact that Mountbatten had a soft corner for INC leaders. There is a dialogue in movie ‘Earth 1947’ by a Muslim character played by Pawan Malhotra - “Mountbatten has asked Jinnah Saab to stay away from Sikhs as they are a pain in the ass”. Mountbatten may have played a role to create more dis-believe between Jinnah and Sikhs and could have de-railed the talks

5.       British (Lord Mountbatten) may have given a deal to Sikh Leaders to create a favorable boundaries for Sikhs if they joined India. The districts of Amritsar, Gurdaspur and Ludhiana had almost equal distribution of Muslim and Hindu-Sikh population. They could have easily been divided and given to Pakistan. The city of Amritsar had Muslim majority like Lahore and British could have very easily assigned it to Pakistan

Although not part of the question but we can also see the impacts that could have been on the geo-political situation if Sikhs had joined Pakistan.

1.       Punjab would have remained un-divided. And Punjab at that moment meant combined with Haryana and Himachal. This was the main reason of Jinnah wooing the Sikhs. He didn’t have any affinity for them otherwise. This would have meant that the border of Pakistan would have been upto Delhi with Delhi engulfed on three sides (because Haryana would have been in Pakistan). This would have meant a constant danger to India until it moved its Capital away. Also, the Kashmir would have had no choice but to go with Pakistan. Thus, the Indian territory would have been much smaller with both the countries being almost the same in size. This would have resulted in more favorable distribution of money of the Indian Reserve Bank for Pakistan

2.      Indian army would have been weaker by some more regiments as Sikhs made roughly about 15–20% of the British India Army

3.      With sizeable Muslim population living near the border (the western UP area) and an army that could have been more equally distributed, Jinnah could have hoped for making more inroads into Indian territory any day.

4.      The best of the land (whole Punjab) would have been with Pakistan and India could have continued to struggle with food scarcity (Green Revolution started from Punjab that made India Self-reliant in food). Pakistani economy may have been better than the Indian

5.       Sikhs would have had a better Population percentage in Pakistan. In the present day Pakistan, Sikhs would have made roughly 15–20% of the population as against barely 2% in India

6.      Pakistann would have been a more multi-cultural Nation (like Turkey or Egypt) and its slipping into an Islamic Nation and then to Terror Hub may have been averted

7.       Given the history and the Martial nature of both the Sikhs and Muslims, the alliance would not have stayed very sweet and cordial for a long time

But one thing is for sure that India would have been at more disadvantage had Sikhs joined Pakistan. History can’t be undone. It can only be respected as it is and then move on.

Let's look at some facts. Censuses were taken in 1941 and 1951 in undivided India and India & Pakistan, and information about the pre-partition Punjab is available. Please refer to this paper (relevant information is in Table 3): The Demographic Impact of Partition in the Punjab in 1947 .See Below

In 1941, Sikhs made up a measly 13.2% of the total population of Punjab, compared to 27.8% Hindus and 55.9% Muslims. And this is Punjab we're talking about, where the Sikhs were present in the highest numbers. Compared to the total population of undivided India, the Sikhs were a very, very small minority. Consequently, the Sikhs weren't taken too seriously by either of the major parties, at least in public.

Also, there weren't (and still aren't) too many places in the Punjab where the Sikhs were a majority, so declaring themselves "independent" would have been pointless. Being "anti-independence" at that time would have achieved nothing either: as I said before, the Sikhs just weren't that large of a force.

Other facts: the Sikh religion has a long history of armed rebellion against the Mughal rulers of Delhi and later armed opposition of the various Muslim invaders like Ahmad Shah Abdali and Nader Shah, followed by the gradual establishment of Sikh rule in the Punjab, which was under constant threat by the majority of its subjects (who were Muslim and resented a Kafir ruling over them).

It's easy to conclude by that that the collective psyche of the Sikhs, at least at the time of Independence, didn't have a positive perception of the Muslims. Although there are accounts of Sikh leaders like Master Tara Singh meeting Jinnah, they are mostly found on websites with a Sikh slant (for or against) and can't be trusted as unbiased sources. At any rate, they all agree that there was no mutual trust between the Muslim League and the Akali Party of those times.

As we all know, Muslim League's "Direct Action Day" caused violent riots to erupt in all of Punjab, and all accounts are of Muslims killing Sikhs & Hindus, and Sikhs & Hindus joining forces to kill Muslims. There's no instance of Sikhs joining the Muslims to kill Hindus, underlining the fact that the Muslims considered the Sikhs as the "Other" and clubbed them together with the Hindus.

I would say that the Sikh leadership of the time knew this, and so made the decision to throw in their lot with India.

Edit: as pointed out in the comments, Direct Action Day didn't cause riots in the Punjab, but primarily in Bengal. That sounds right, but the bigger picture doesn't change.

The foremost reason for Sikhs not having any land of their own is that they were never a majority in any province. Punjab had Muslim majority with Sikhs coming second and Hindus third. Since they didn't have majority in any state/province they couldn't ask either.

In past during early 1900s people in British Raj were very communal and often take decisions in a very non-secular way. Often there were some leaders who thought about greater good of large number of people but each community had few leaders who would speak only for them, not for state not for fellow neighbors.

Sikhs at that time had only Akalis as political party. Akalis weren't the new people but people from Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time but after fall of Sikh Civilization, Colonial British had not only plundered all of the resources of that nation but also destroyed the political system of Punjab(including Gurdwara Management System) so there was no one to speak for Sikhs. Akalis who were left had to run for their lives and could only manage to have little power. Actually if we watch these events on timescale then, Sikhs had a very less time for establishing themselves. First, the Mughals were problem, then Turks, then Afghanis, this land just asked for blood and we spilled out every time for sake of greater good.

But, in race of democracy, it's numbers what matter and we were helpless. There was a guy named Master Tara Singh. ( Read more about Tara Singh here )He was an Akali and worked for rights of Sikhs in 1900s. He had asked Nehru for equal representation of Sikhs in parliament and INC (before independence) but he was rejected and sidelined. Even British never heard about any plea of Sikhs as they know what happened to them when they last gave(allowed) power to them(Maharaja Ranjit Singh).

Muslim politicians were determined to get a 'Separate Land' for Muslims and INC was interested in 'Keeping majority of land' so, Master Tara Singh had no option to side with INC as he was offered an 'independent(sovereign) state' of Sikhs as a deal.

So Master Tara Singh had no option but to ask Sikhs to leave Western Punjab to have 'at least' eastern Punjab for them, of which British and INC had struck a deal.

And during partition the wounds which fellow Punjabis had struck to each other were far too deep to repair just because our ancestors were foolish to divide their own motherland.

Of course, that deal of sovereign land was never fulfilled. Master Tara Singh passed away while fighting for that, Nehru made a statement that such division of land can again bring horrors of 'Partition' to which most of people agreed.

Later on in 1960s, after years of struggle by Sikh activists and countless deaths due to protest, Indira Gandhi agreed but this time Punjab was again split into three.

The all India National Congress met Lahore in the year 1929 and fixed complete independence as its political goal. One day prior to the meeting of the National Congress, the Sikhs had taken out a 500,000 strong procession with veteran Baba Kharak Singh leading on elephant back. It was most impressive spectacle of human congregation that put the Congress show into shame and shade. It was on this occasion that Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Motilal Nehru and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru went to meet Baba Khark Singh at his place on the Chauburji Road and gave the Sikhs a solemn assurance that after India achieves political freedom no constitution shall be framed by the majority community unless it is freely acceptable to the Sikhs. This promise was then reduced into a formal Policy Resolution of the All India Congress Committee.

Afterwards this policy resolution was repeatedly reiterated, officially and demi-officially, throughout the period up-to August 1947, and it was never officially repudiated till 1950 when the present constitution was framed. The trusting Sikhs, who in their daily prayer, extol keeping faith as the noblest of human virtues, placing complete reliance in this solemn undertaking given to them by the majority community, resisted and refused all offers and proposals made to them by the British and the other people - the Muslims, whom we now prefer to call the Muslim League - proposing to accord the Sikhs a sovereign or autonomous status in the areas constituting their ancestral homeland between the River Ghaggar and the River Chenab.

In the year 1932, at the time of the second Round Table Conference, the British Government through Sardar Bahadur Shivdev Singh, then a member of the Indian Secretary of State's Council, made an informal proposal to the Sikhs that if they dissociate finally with the Congress movement, they would be given such a decisive political weight-age in Punjab, as would lead to their emerging a third independent element in India and the British transfer power to inhabitants of this subcontinent. Master Tara Singh promptly rejected the tempting offer.

In the month of July, 1946, the India Congress Working Committee met Calcutta, which reaffirmed the assurance already given to the Sikhs, and in Press Conference held on the 6th Jult there, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru split the concrete content of this solemn under-taking in the following flowery words "The brave Sikhs of the Punjab entitled to special consideration. I nothing wrong in an area and a set up in the North wherein the Sikhs can experience the glow of freedom." In these words, an autonomous state to the Sikhs, within India, was promised.

In the early winter of 1946, Cabinet Mission, while at Delhi communicated to the Sikhs through the Sardar Baldev Singh that if the Sikhs determined not to part company with India, the British Parliament, in their solicitude for the Sikh people, prepared to so frame the Independence Act of India, that in respect of the Sikh Homeland, wherever these areas might eventually go, in Pakistan or India, no Constitution shall be formed such as does not have the concurrence of the Sikhs. But Sardar Baldev Singh, in consultation with the Congress leaders, summarily rejected this offer, which went even beyond assurances given by the majority community in 1929 and in 1946 by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru in Calcutta.

In April 1947, Mr. Jinnah, in consultation with certain most powerful leaders of the British Cabinet in London, offered to the Sikhs, first through Master Tara Singh and then through the Maharaja of Patiala, a sovereign Sikh state comprising areas lying in the west of Panipat and east of the left bank of the Ravi river on the understanding that this State then confederates with Pakistan on very advantageous terms to the Sikhs. But Master Tara Singh summarily rejected this attractive offer. The Maharaja of Patiala declined to accept it in consultation with Sardar Patel and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru.

In the month of May, 1947, precisely on the 17th May, Lord Mountbatten, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, Nawab Liaqat Ali Khan and Sardar Baldev Singh, flew to London on the invitation of the British Cabinet, in search of final solution of the Indian communal problem. When the Congress and the Muslim League failed to strike any mutual understanding and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru decided to return to India, the British Cabinet leaders conveyed to Sardar Baldev Singh that if he stays behind, arrangements might be made: "So as to enable the Sikhs to have political feet of their own on which they may walk into the current of World History." Sardar Baldev Singh promtly divulged the contents of this confidential offer to Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru and in compliance with the latter's wishes, declined to stay back and flew back to India after giving the following brave message to the Press: "The Sikhs have no demands to make on the British except the demand that they should quit India. Whatever political rights and aspirations the Sikhs have, they shall have them satisfied through the goodwill of the Congress and the majority community."

The British leaders had asked Sardar Baldev Singh to stay behind because the wanted to propose to him that if Sikhs were not ready to enter into the agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs could be given an independent state which extended from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib with extended excess up-to the seashore. The Britishers were ready to station 25,000 British troops and war equipment for ten years and provide help in the administration provided the Sikhs agreed to provide 50,000 soldiers be stationed at Singapore and other colonies to help the Britishers for the next ten years. After ten years the agreement could be reconsidered. Through this agreement the administration and defense of independent Sikhland would have been ensured and there would have been no need to enter into an agreement with either India or Pakistan for the purposes of their administration and defense. Even Muslim League had agreed this proposal because it would give then strong buffer state between Pakistan and India. It was also in the interest British empire as they would still have their feet in this sub-continent. But was unfortunate that there was no leader among the Sikhs with political vision foresight who could see the benefits such an arrangement and demand independent Homeland for the Sikhs.

But after Independence, the Congress leaders forgot their promises given to Sikh people. These very Congress lead adopted every conceivable posture and shrank from no stratagem to keep Sikhs permanently under their political heel, first, by refusing to form a Punjabi speaking state in which the Sikhs might acquire political effectiveness, and second, by not giving Sikhs and Punjab a special status in the Constitution Act of India.

The main reason for the formation of the independent democratic region for the muslim was Jinnah. Reason Jinnah believed and some muslims too, that they will loose their identity or will be forced to follow hindu culture and and will not be able to prosper as swiftly as Hindus will be able to. The embroy of the thinking comes from the difference in the lifestyle of both the cultures and this fact is true to the core that beachse muslims eat meat and all thet they were treated even below than SC ST OBC. So naturally they wanted something of their own.

But this was not the case with Sikhs. Sikh Religion was formed initially for the safegaurd of Hindus. And as far as I can say Muslims were there arch rival when it all started. 
Plus Hindus never disrespected Sikhs they always befriends with them repect them, praise their culture, their lifestyle. So these were the primary reasons for Sikhs never thought of getting a new State. Another reason which I believ was absientism of a prominent leader representing Sikhs.

Once mohamad Ali Jinah asked a question from Sikh student in near 1940s

Why Sikh support congress more in stead of Muslims league ( as they are also a minority like Sikh)

The students ( later became first Sikh IAS officer:)answered, "reasons are historical not logicals"

Jinah smile and replied Your are right boy

My most Indian friends answer this question whithot know history of thid questions

§  Actually Muhammad Ali Jinah had given an offer to Sikhs about joining the Pakistan and promised Sikhs with very incentive and rereservations( post of depty pm of Pakistan and post of military head reserved for forever ) and many more but Sikh leader refused it

§  Today in Many Pakistan literature and some Sikh political literature this is considered as mistake by Sikh leader during 1947

I think question is about that situation

there are several reasons for refuse of this perposal ( and Sikh leader was right)

First - Sikh leader was not wanting partition they know Sikh will suffer in both case either they Join India or Pakistan ( in both case they have to sacrifice some area and some fallower they either have to give nankana Sahib or hazzor Sahib and patna

So they politicaly agingst creation of Pakistan and reject every negotiations with Jinah

Second - jawahar Lal nehru and sardar walab bhai patel also know about this propose of Jinah to Sikh so they also made many promises with Sikh leadership about allotment of autonomous region for them ( however later nehru not fulfill his promise and this was matter of dispute between Sikh leaders and Indian government post-partition

Third - when Sikh leader meet with Jinah they also show lack of trust on Muslim ( due to historical background)

One Sikh leader said to jinah- sir I have trust in you but I am fear after your death your promise was not fulfill by your followers

Today I think

Sikh leaders were right at this prediction as Muhammad Ali Jinah was in favor of creating secular Pakistan ( means not finatic Pakistan) but later his followers change Pakistan constitution in 1962 to Islamic and again in changed in 1973

And according to the political observers of Pakistan " today what is Pakistan that have nothing according to dreams of its founder mahamod Ali Jinah "

Today what are most constitutional problems of Pakistan and rise of finatisim have origin in these Islamic changes not because of Jinah but due to action of Pakistani leadership after Jinah

However what happened if Sikh join Pakistan is a question answer of which is only perdition

It can be better situation

( if everything happened according to promise of Jinah)

Or it can be worse

( if Jinah also reject promise as done by Congress with Sikh after 1947 and as what happened with bangali in Pakistan before creation of Bangladesh

Who knows.,..,

Factor 1:- Sikhs have had a long standing enmity with muslim rulers.

Factor 2:- Nehru promised some pretty good deals like religious and political recognition(which he didn't fulfil.

Factor 3:- Punjab was ruled by 3 rulers back then and they all decided to stay with India.

Due to these factors the Sikhs decided to join India rather than Pakistan.

As far as creating an independent nation is concerned Sikhs at that time knew that a separate region between India and Pakistan could never be peaceful. Both the neighbours would try to annexe and the sikhs didn't have the strength in numbers or the weapons to survive attacks from both the neighbouring nations.

First question:- Why didn't Sikhs join Pakistan?

Answer:- Pakistan was created for Muslims. It is an Islamic republic, not a secular nation.

Second question:-Why didn't they declare themselves independent?

Answer:- Among all the districts if British Punjab, Sikhs weren't in a majority in any district. Their highest percentage was in Ludhiana district(42%).

Among all the 105 tehsils,Sikhs were in a majority in only two tehsils:-Tarn Taran(51%) and Moga(65%). These are non-contiguous to each other.

Among all the 42 princley states, Sikhs were in a majority only in Faridkot(58%). And Faridkot was also non-contiguous to Moga and Tarn Taran.

Conclusion:- It was best for Sikhs to join India(a secular nation)

The reason are straightfoward.

1.       Pakistan was formed as a “Religious state” and the reason for partition was their refusal to stay united in a country where Muslims were not a majority. How would it make sense for Sikhs to join a Country that wanted to portray itself as an Islamic Country vis-a-vis a Country that called for co-existence among all Religions? Minorities would always be safe in a secular democracy rather than a country based on religion. Sikhs knew this very well.

2.      They could not have asked for independence because they were never in majority. You seem to believe that Punjab is the private property of Sikhs. It is not. It belongs to Punjabis who can be Hindu and Muslims as well. Punjabi is a culture, not a religion. The problem with India (barring a few northern states) is that they believe a Punjabi means a Sardar/Sikh. No, it is not!

I hope this clarifies how the question in itself is a contradiction.