California Bill Aimed at Protecting Diaspora Communities Sparks Division Among Indian Americans
A California bill designed to counter transnational repression is generating meaningful debate within the Indian American community, with proponents arguing its a necessary safeguard and critics fearing it unfairly targets India. The legislation, currently under consideration in Sacramento, would authorize law enforcement training to recognize and respond to foreign government interference targeting individuals within the state.
The bill’s supporters, led by Democratic Assemblymember Ash Kalra, contend it’s a crucial step to protect diaspora communities from harassment, threats, and violence orchestrated by foreign governments. Harman Singh, of the Sikh Coalition, described the bill as addressing a critical need, stating, “California is becoming known as a top transnational repression government.” he further asserted, “It’s very clear that the true target of this bill is India and Indian Americans.”
Concerns have been raised regarding recent incidents of vandalism targeting Hindu temples, with pro-Khalistan slogans appearing at several sites. A key question for some is whether the bill will create a safe environment for reporting such incidents. “How can the Hindu American community feel safe and secure reporting these incidents without fear of being accused of being a foreign agent or having law enforcement downplaying the vandalisms?” a concerned individual questioned.
However, Singh refuted claims that the bill is divisive along religious lines, emphasizing a broad coalition of support. ”The coalition of groups supporting includes both Sikh and Hindu organisations as well as muslim, Kashmiri, Iranian, South asian, immigrants’ rights, human rights, and law enforcement organisations,” he explained.
Some critics express apprehension that training law enforcement to identify transnational attacks could lead to biases against specific communities.singh dismissed these concerns, stating the training “will be created by professionals within those organisations, rather than ‘a small group of activists,’ so this criticism is not based in reality.”
Rohit Chopra, a professor of interaction at Santa clara University, highlighted the broader context of foreign interference within the US. “Critics of other governments are all too routinely harassed, threatened, or even assaulted by foreign governments or thier proxies within the US,” he said.”Even if the bill has some deterrent effect, which I believe it will, it will be well worth it.” He emphasized the bill’s non-restrictive scope, applying to interference from any nation.
Stanford University’s Hansen suggested that opposition to the bill raises questions about potential motivations. ”When an organisation comes out strongly against such a bill, it almost feels like a preemptive admission – as if they see themselves as being implicated by what the bill seeks to prevent,” Hansen observed.
For individuals like Cheema, a resident of Sacramento, the bill represents a vital step towards personal security. “I could be the next victim if the law enforcement in my community is not able to recognize foreign interference,” Cheema stated. “It doesn’t matter who is indulging in it or which country, I would naturally like my police officers to be aware of the threats.” He concluded, ”If any group feels threatened, then all sections of society should make efforts to protect their people.This reassures me that my voice is being heard.”
The bill’s passage remains uncertain, but its debate underscores the growing concerns surrounding transnational repression and the challenges of protecting diaspora communities within the United States.
[Image: People gather at Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara, site of the 2023 murder of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in Surrey, british Columbia, Canada, on May 3, 2024.(Jennifer Gauthier/ Reuters)]
