Quietly, US military opens up to Sikhs

[bhramos]

Let turban wearing Sikhs join US military: Lawmakers

Let turban wearing Sikhs join US military: Lawmakers

NEW YORK: Forty-one members of the US House of Representatives have written to defense secretary Robert Gates to permit Sikhs wearing their religious symbols to join the military.

Sikh organisations have been lobbying with US lawmakers after the refusal by the army to let two Sikhs with turbans join active duty a few months ago.

Captain Kamaljit Singh Kalsi, a doctor, and Second Lieutenant Tejdeep Singh Rattan, a dentist, were told to remove their turbans by the military when they were about to enter active duty after completing their preliminary programme.

In their letter to Gates, the lawmakers say: "We do not believe that any American should have to choose between his religion and service to our country, and urge you to take all necessary steps to ensure that these two officers - and other Sikhs that may wish to serve - are able to maintain their articles of faith.

"Including Sikh Americans will enrich the military's understanding of diverse cultures, languages, and religions, thereby allowing us to fully appreciate not only the rich fabric of our own country but also the lands where we send our soldiers into harm's way."

Citing the example of Canada, Sweden and other countries where Sikhs are allowed to wear their symbols in the armed forces, Sikh organisations led by Sikh Coalition have urged Secretary Gates to end this discrimination by the US army.

The coalition said they will continue their 'Sikh right to serve' campaign till the US military changes its "exclusionary policy" against Sikhs.

Let turban wearing Sikhs join US military: Lawmakers - US - World - NEWS - The Times of India

 

[IBRIS]

More than 3 million Indian soldiers were deployed in World War 3 from East Asia to all the way to FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY. BUT THE WORST ONE IS FRANCE. THEY STILL TO THIS DAY DON'T ALLOW SIKHS TO PRACTICE THERE RELIGION FREELY. FRENCH HAD FORGOTTEN SO MANY INDIANS DIED TRYING TO LIBERATE FRANCE FROM GERMANY.

Thanks for putting this up. Sikhs and Gorkhas have served in many armies. I was surprised to see WW 2 memorials for these soldiers in many european countries.

The japanese were shit scared of the sikhs in WW2 sikhs are very brave warriors, all i can say is its your loss America.

YouTube - U.S. Military Rejects The Sikh Identity

 

[IBRIS]

British fought 2 wars with Sikhs before taking over whole of india. british were so impresed with the Sikhs during anglo-sikh wars, that after british took over india, the sikh army formed a part of the british india army and when british left india in 1947, the british indian army became Indian Army.

"Queen Elizabeth Sikh Guards Get Turbans"
Sikhs in World War I

In the last two World Wars 83,005 turban-wearing Sikh soldiers were killed and 109,045 were wounded. The US Army has also recruited Sikh soldiers in the past, but has recently banned Captain Kamaljit Singh Kalsi, a New Jersey resident, and Second Lieutenant Tejdeep Singh Rattan, a New York City resident, from reporting for active duty on July 1st with their articles of faith intact.

As a nation, USA have outgrown these outdated inequalities, so lets move forward and not waste time re-living archaic notions that suggest we ban Sikh Americans from the US military only to let them participate fifty years from now. Lets get on with the business at hand.

Sikh American's turban is an article of faith that binds a Sikh to an ethical code of conduct. Part of that conduct includes protecting and serving fellow human beings. Banning a Sikh soldier's articles of faith will destroy the very spirit that will promote and contribute to the common enthusiasm, devotion and strong honor for the group within a military unit. A Sikh soldier's turban is a guarantee of that very spirit. Let Sikh Americans serve in the military with their articles of faith.

 

[bhramos]

nice collection of history of Sikh soldiers,
good work

 

[LETHALFORCE]

EU risks US-China domination with military cuts: France

Washington (AFP) Sept 24, 2010 - Growing up near the air force base in Dayton, Ohio, Tejdeep Singh Rattan knew he wanted to serve in uniform. When the military discouraged him, he persisted but again got a cold shoulder.

When he was turned away a third time, Rattan -- an observant Sikh with a turban and beard -- became suspicious.

"I was, like, I don't know what's going on," he said. "I was very introverted at the time. I never felt the need to fight back. But I said I really want to do this, and you guys are sending me out again and again."

The 31-year-old is now US Army Captain Rattan, since July the head dentist at the Fort Drum base in New York.

In what appears to be a quiet shift, the US military since last year has allowed Rattan and two other Sikhs to serve while retaining their turbans and beards, which are required by their faith.

Rattan and another Sikh who received approval last year -- Captain Kamaljeet Singh Kalsi, a doctor -- said in interviews that their superiors had welcomed them warmly.

Kalsi, 34, said that on his first day of training at Fort Sam Houston in Texas, a first sergeant pulled him out of the crowd and told the soldiers about the Sikh's long ordeal to enlist.

"These were his words: 'The Army is made up of different shades of green, and if you have any objection to him being here, you need to tell me now,'" Kalsi said. "It was great; everybody clapped."

The US Sikh community -- estimated at more than half a million -- suffered hate crimes after the September 11, 2001 attacks by assailants who falsely associated the religion founded in India with Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

"I think the only way for that perception to be eliminated is when young Sikhs come up and say: I want to serve in the military," Rattan said.

"For me, I said whatever it takes, I'm going to fight this thing -- I'm going to serve. Maybe if nothing else comes out of it, people will know who Sikhs are," he said.

Sikhs have a historic military culture and have long kept their articles of faith in the militaries of Britain, Canada and India.

Small numbers of Sikhs for years served in the US armed forces without incident. But in the 1980s, the post-Vietnam War military moved to increase conformity and banned displays of religious identity for new recruits.

The Supreme Court in 1986 upheld the military's right to prohibit a Jewish officer from wearing a yarmulke. In response, Congress approved a law requiring the military to approve soldiers' religious apparel if it is "neat and conservative."

Army spokesman George Wright said that it evaluated each Sikh soldier's request based on "unique facts and individual circumstances."

"It is the Army's policy to accommodate religious practices as long as the practice will not have an adverse impact on military necessity," Wright said.

But lawyers for the men believe the US military has developed guidance -- a general guideline, but short of an official policy -- to accommodate Sikhs.

Most recently, the Army on August 30 accommodated a new recruit, Simran Preet Singh Lamba, after initially denying him. Lawyers closely watched his case as he will undergo rank-and-file training and is not in the medical field.

"I think the Army, and Defense Department more broadly, took nine months to take this decision because it was a big decision," said Amandeep Sidhu, a Sikh American lawyer whose firm McDermott Will & Emery represents the men pro bono.

Sidhu voiced hope that eventually the army would "go that one step further and amend the uniform regulation in a way that would allow Sikhs to serve without having to automatically go through the extraordinary hoops."

Critics have in the past argued that the military needs to ensure conformity and that easing rules could be a slippery slope with precedent for other issues. President Barack Obama's administration is cautiously moving to allow gays to serve openly in the military, a hot-button political issue.

Sikh activists have enlisted the help of the US Congress. Forty-one House members and six senators wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates last year to voice concern after Kalsi and Rattan initially heard they could not be accommodated.

"No one should have to choose between his religion and service to our country," said Representative Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat of New York.

Harsimran Kaur, legal director of The Sikh Coalition, a rights advocacy group, hoped that pressure from Congress and closed-door talks with the military would bring an official change in policy.

"A lawsuit is always a means of last resort as it automatically puts both sides in an adversarial posture," she said. "We would very much hope that the Army makes this change on its own, because we want them to understand it's in their best interest as well."

"It shows folks abroad that the United States and the US Army practice what they preach, that we not only tolerate religious diversity and freedom of religious, but we celebrate it," she said.

Captain Kalsi, who recently graduated from training and will soon start serving as an emergency doctor at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, said that religious tolerance "goes to the core of being an American."

And for Sikhs, the military "is in our blood," said Kalsi, whose father, grandfather and great-grandfather served in the Indian or British militaries.

"I want to be able to pass this on," Kalsi said. "I want my son who's now a year-and-a-half old to someday say -- yeah, I'm fifth-generation military."

 

[pmaitra]

Encouraging news.

This clearly goes on to show that when there is will, there is a way.

Best wishes to the new recruits.

 

[sesha_maruthi27]

They are INDIANS. Our government should encourage them to join INDIAN Defence Forces.

 

[Tshering22]

Can a Sikh member clarify this situation here? I have heard that there are non-Keshdhari Sikhs as well who don't grow hair as is common norm in Sikh tradition. How come this non-Keshdhari is allowed to have short hair and others are not allowed? Is this some sort of sub-sect belief or is it allowed?

 

[Tshering22]

They are INDIANS. Our government should encourage them to join INDIAN Defence Forces.

Dude, they might be Indians but they have been born there. Now an NRI's son who's born there will be a US citizen after some years as required and therefore his loyalties will lie to the US constitution right? Why would he be loyal to India when India has not offered him anything? Born in US, the American system gave him education, gave him an identity, gave him all the constitutional freedom and the national facilities that Indians still don't get in India; why do you think he would be choosing to serve our country in any way especially with a******* ruling the country?

To expect them to serve in India is unfair of us just because they are racially the same as us. They are true to their Dharma; they have eaten the salt of that country and they owe it to that land.