The decade of 1980s was a critical period in contemporary Indian history. It was not only Punjab that witnessed a powerful ethnic movement, other parts of the subcontinent too saw the rise of a variety of ‘new social movements’. The questions of gender, human rights, environment and ecology became politically significant during the decade. It was during the 1980s that autonomous dalit movements too came to acquire visibility.

The ‘new’ mobilizations by women, farmers, dalits, tribals and ethnicities not only raised different kinds of demands but questioned the policies and programmes of state-directed development that were being pursued with much enthusiasm in the name of welfare and progress. Coupled with other changes at the global and national levels, the decade of the ’80s saw an overall erosion of the ‘Nehruvian agenda’. As Das puts it: ‘The goals of rational organization of life, the scientific management of society, modernization and development, to which great energies had been devoted in the sixties and early seventies, now seem like signposts to cities that are abandoned and empty’ (Das 1994:1).

While the 1980s were, in a sense, a creative period for Indian society with many fundamental assumptions around which the post-colonial Indian nation was built being questioned, for the Punjab and for the Sikhs it was a traumatic phase. Fifteen long years of militancy and the manner in which the Indian state handled the ‘Punjab crisis’ not only caused bloodshed and suffering, it fundamentally altered the popular image of the region (Jodhka 1997). From a region known for its economic vibrancy and progress, Punjab came to be seen as a ‘crisis ridden state’, a region with serious problems of law and order and political unrest and therefore unsuitable for safe investments.

Nevertheless, despite myriad problems, even during the 1980s, the agrarian economy of Punjab continued to progress. The income of the primary sector of the state economy grew at an average of 5% per annum while the corresponding figure for India as a whole was around 3%.3 The real implications of the crisis were to be felt in the following decade when a new economic philosophy was adopted.

Though, in comparative terms, it continues to be prosperous, in the post-liberalization era Punjab is no longer counted among ‘the happening states’ of India. It is not just that Punjab is not a favoured destination for foreign capital or a centre of the ‘new economy’ currently, it did not receive much investment from the central government for its industrial development during the days of ‘mixed economy’ either. During 1970-71 to 1983-84 Punjab received only 0.92% of investments in the central government’s non-departmental undertakings and the per capita investment in central non-departmental undertakings for Punjab (until 1985) was only Rs 414 (as against Rs 1508 for Maharashtra).4 Similarly, the state was not favoured by the big industrial houses of the country. On the contrary, having accumulated sufficient surplus, the local industrialists opted to go out of the state, particularly during the 1980s.5