The Government of India is facing criticism for not permitting Sikh pilgrims to visit Pakistan for the birth anniversary celebrations of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. For Sikhs, this occasion holds immense spiritual significance, and visiting gurdwaras like Nankana Sahib and Kartarpur Sahib is seen as a sacred duty.
However, the Centre’s decision to withhold permission has led to disappointment and protests, with opponents arguing that religious rights are being curtailed. Yet, beyond political noise, a deeper examination reveals that the move is rooted not in discrimination, but in a long tradition of placing national security above sentiment.
Why India Is Right to Bar Sikh Pilgrim Jathas to Pakistan
A History of Disruptions
Pilgrimages across the border have always been vulnerable to the vagaries of geopolitics. Since Partition in 1947, when countless Sikh shrines were left in Pakistan, access to these holy sites has never been free from disruption:
1947–1965: With Partition violence and the wars of 1947–48 and 1965, pilgrim routes were destroyed and crossings shut down. Access was nearly impossible. Post-1965 War: The destruction of key bridges, such as Jassar, further sealed off religious travel. June 2019: Nearly 150 pilgrims were stopped at Attari when India refused clearance due to security concerns. March 2020 – Nov 2021: The much-celebrated Kartarpur Corridor, opened in 2019, was closed for 20 months during the COVID-19 pandemic. May 2025: In the aftermath of Operation Sindoor, the corridor was abruptly closed and 150 pilgrims were turned back. June 2025: Another jatha was denied permission to attend Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s death anniversary in Lahore.
The pattern is clear: whenever national security has been under strain, pilgrimages have been suspended — irrespective of the depth of religious sentiment.
Pakistan’s Double Game
Pakistan presents itself as the benevolent guardian of Sikh shrines, but this image conceals hard realities:
Minority Rights: Its treatment of Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and Ahmadis within its own borders has been consistently poor. Khalistani Propaganda: Visiting Sikh pilgrims have repeatedly been exposed to propaganda activities on Pakistani soil, raising concerns that religious tours are being misused to fuel separatist sentiments. Political Leverage: For Islamabad, pilgrimages often become convenient tools to needle India rather than genuine gestures of goodwill.
Thus, pilgrimages are not merely religious journeys; they are vulnerable to being turned into instruments of political manipulation.
Today’s Imperative: Safety First
The present restriction comes against the backdrop of heightened cross-border militancy, particularly following the Pahalgam terrorist attack and Operation Sindoor. In such a volatile climate, sending large, unarmed groups of pilgrims into Pakistan would be a dangerous gamble.
To compare this with cricket or cultural exchanges is misleading. Sporting events are staged under extraordinary protection, often in neutral venues, whereas pilgrims move in dispersed groups across sensitive locations — making them highly vulnerable targets.
For the Government of India, the first responsibility is clear: to protect the lives of its citizens.
The Sikh Community’s Sentiments
For Sikhs, being denied access to their holiest shrines on Guru Nanak Dev Ji’s birth anniversary is a painful blow. Many see it as an infringement upon faith. Sikh organizations argue that religion should not be held hostage to politics, and that the Kartarpur Corridor itself was established as a symbol of faith transcending borders.
Yet, the Sikh community has also stood by the Indian state in times of national crisis. Historically, it has recognized the need to prioritize security when circumstances demand it.
Conclusion
The debate around Sikh pilgrimages to Pakistan is not merely about religious freedom versus political control. It is about faith coexisting with security realities.
Partition disrupted these journeys; wars and terrorism have interrupted them again and again. Today’s decision is neither new nor targeted. It is part of a continuum where the state has had to balance devotion with duty.
The shrines across the border remain sacred, but so too is the responsibility of the Indian state to safeguard its citizens and sovereignty. Until trust between the two nations is rebuilt, every pilgrimage will carry risks that faith alone cannot mitigate.
In the end, the bar is not an affront to religion, but a reaffirmation of responsibility: Life and safety must remain supreme.
