Sikhs and Kurds: Parallels in Stateless Nationalism
The Sikhs can certainly be identified as a distinctive cultural and religious community in South Asia, with a rich historical tradition, a territorial homeland in Punjab, and a vibrant global diaspora. Their shared history, language, faith, and cultural practices provide the foundation of a collective identity. However, whether Sikhs can be classified as a “nation” remains a contested question. In the classical sense of political theory, a nation is often defined not only by shared cultural and historical ties but also by political sovereignty and recognition through a state of its own. By this definition, Sikhs cannot currently be considered a nation, since they do not possess an independent state.
This lack of political sovereignty is reflected in everyday classifications as well. For example, in the UK, when filling out official forms, there is no separate option for Punjabi or Sikh identity, as neither Punjab nor the Sikhs are recognized as independent nations. Instead, Sikhs are typically subsumed under broader religious categories (e.g., “Sikh” under religion) or ethnic categories (e.g., “Indian” or “Pakistani” under nationality/ethnicity). This reflects the tension between the strong sense of community that Sikhs experience globally and the absence of formal nation-state recognition.
In Sikh Nationalism, Gurharpal Singh and Giorgio Shani argue that the Sikhs constitute a distinctive case in the study of identity and nationalism. While they clearly embody the characteristics of a cultural and religious community with a defined territorial homeland and an extensive diaspora, they do not easily conform to conventional theoretical frames of ethnicity or nationalism. This tension is particularly evident when considering the remarkable trajectory of the Sikh community: in the span of just over five centuries, they have transformed from a relatively small religious group into what the authors describe as a paradigmatic transnational community (Singh & Shani, 2022, p. 9).
This paradox finds echoes in other “stateless nations,” such as the Kurds and Palestinians—communities that exhibit national characteristics and aspirations but lack sovereign statehood. The Kurds, numbering over 30 million across Iraq, Turkey, Iran, and Syria, are often described as one of the world’s largest stateless nation (Kountz, 2009,Gunter, 2013 p. 161). Similarly, while over 130 states formally recognize Palestinian statehood, Palestinians largely remain without effective sovereignty and often lack citizenship — further defining their status as a stateless nation (Jensehaugen and Tank, 2022).
Taken together, these cases suggest that nationhood need not be contingent on formal statehood. The Sikh community, though politically stateless, exhibits the defining attributes of a nation: shared historical memory, territorial association, cultural and religious cohesion, and a sustained claim for self-determination. In this sense, Sikhs can be understood as a nation without a state, comparable to the Kurds and Palestinians.
From Ethnicity to Nationhood
The transition from ethnicity to nationhood has been a central concern in the study of nationalism, with scholars offering varying theoretical frameworks to explain how cultural groups transform into political communities claiming sovereignty. Benedict Anderson’s influential notion of nations as “imagined communities” rejects primordialist understandings of nations as given or natural entities. Instead, Anderson (1983) argues that nations are constructed through shared narratives, symbols, and, crucially, the rise of print capitalism, which enables geographically dispersed individuals to imagine themselves as part of a larger collective. National consciousness, then, is not reducible to blood ties or territory but emerges from cultural production, collective memory, and communication technologies that bind individuals into a perceived community.
In contrast, Anthony D. Smith provides a more historical and cultural grounding. His ethno-symbolist approach stresses that nations rarely arise in a vacuum but are built upon deeper reservoirs of cultural traditions, myths of origin, collective memories, and shared values that sustain the identity of ethnic groups over time (Smith, 1986). Whereas Anderson focuses on the “imagined” and modern dimensions of nationhood, Smith insists that pre-modern ethnic communities (ethnies) provide the symbolic and affective resources that modern nationalists draw upon when constructing the nation. In this view, the persistence of historical memory—whether through religious practices, linguistic traditions, or shared stories of past glory and suffering—serves as the cultural foundation for national mobilisation.
Ernest Gellner’s (1983) contribution adds a distinctly modernist, institutional dimension to this debate. For Gellner, nationalism is not simply about cultural identity but a response to the structural demands of modernity. Industrial societies, unlike agrarian ones, require standardised systems of communication, education, and cultural homogeneity to function effectively. In such contexts, ethnic groups that may have coexisted without political aspirations find themselves transformed into nations under the pressures of modernisation. Gellner therefore explains nationalism as an inevitable by-product of social and economic change, where cultural identity becomes politicised to meet the needs of an industrial state.
Walker Connor offers an even sharper analytical distinction between ethnicity and nationhood. According to Connor (1994), ethnicity refers to shared cultural markers, such as language, religion, or customs, whereas nations are defined by a deeper psychological bond—a powerful sense of collective destiny and self-recognition that binds people into a community distinct from others. For Connor, this emotional and existential dimension of nationhood is what often drives groups to seek self-determination, distinguishing nations from merely ethnic or cultural groups.
Applied to the Sikh case, these theoretical perspectives illuminate both tensions and possibilities. Sikh identity exemplifies the ethno-symbolist criteria outlined by Smith: it is deeply rooted in the myths, memories, and traditions of the Gurus, the centrality of sacred spaces such as Amritsar, and the Punjabi linguistic and cultural heritage that sustains collective belonging. Moreover, the traumatic memory of partition in 1947 and the events of 1984 serve as historical anchors around which collective identity continues to be mobilised, demonstrating the enduring role of collective memory in shaping national consciousness.
Anderson’s framework is equally relevant for understanding how Sikhs, particularly in the diaspora, sustain an “imagined” community that transcends territorial boundaries. Diasporic networks, media outlets, and digital platforms enable Sikhs across continents to share narratives, articulate grievances, and mobilise for political causes, thereby producing a transnational Sikh identity that is experienced as national in scope (Axel, 2001).
Connor’s insights shed light on the political aspirations of the Sikh community, particularly during and after the Khalistan movement. While Sikh identity is undeniably cultural and religious, the demand for a sovereign homeland reflects a collective recognition of Sikhs as a nation with its own destiny, distinct from the Indian polity. The strength of this sentiment demonstrates that Sikh self-understanding extends beyond ethnicity into the realm of nationhood, even if such aspirations remain unrealised in state form.
Finally, the role of the diaspora, as explored by Tatla (1999), highlights how Sikh nationalism is sustained and globalised outside the territorial homeland. Diasporic Sikhs have not only preserved cultural and religious traditions but also mobilised political campaigns, funded nationalist movements, and articulated claims of nationhood in international arenas. This reinforces Gellner’s point about the institutional dimensions of nationalism, as Sikh diasporic organisations function as alternative structures that sustain national identity even without the support of a state.
Taken together, these frameworks suggest that Sikh identity embodies many of the features of nationhood as theorised in nationalism studies. While politically stateless, Sikhs exhibit a shared historical memory, cultural distinctiveness, diasporic cohesion, and political aspiration for self-determination. Their case, therefore, exemplifies how ethnicity can evolve into nationhood, positioning the Sikhs alongside other “nations without states,” such as the Kurds and Palestinians, in global debates on nationalism.
Parallels Between the Kurdish Struggle and Sikh Nationalism
The experiences of the Kurds and the Sikhs offer compelling insights into the dynamics of stateless nationalism. Both communities exemplify what scholars describe as “nations without states,” characterised by a strong collective identity, historical memories of marginalisation, cultural cohesion, and ongoing struggles for political recognition (Connor, 1994; Jensehaugen and Tank, 2022). Despite differences in historical context, geography, and religious orientation, the Kurdish and Sikh cases share notable similarities that illuminate broader patterns in ethno-nationalist movements.
Historically, both the Kurds and the Sikhs have developed distinct identities in multi-ethnic and multi-religious environments. The Kurds, estimated at over 30 million across Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria, have long maintained a sense of ethnolinguistic distinctiveness despite centuries of rule by dominant empires and modern nation-states (Gunter, 2013). Similarly, the Sikhs emerged in the Punjab region of South Asia over five centuries ago, crystallising a religious, cultural, and political identity in response to Mughal rule and the broader socio-political environment of medieval India (Singh and Shani, 2021). In both cases, historical memory plays a central role: Kurdish collective memory is marked by repeated suppression and massacres, such as the Anfal campaign in Iraq, while Sikh collective memory is sustained through narratives of martyrdom, persecution under Mughal authority, and the trauma of the 1984 anti-Sikh pogroms (Axel, 2001; Pandey, 2001). These shared experiences of historical violence have reinforced communal solidarity and underpinned claims for self-determination.
Cultural and linguistic distinctiveness further anchors both Kurdish and Sikh identities. Kurds speak a range of Kurdish dialects and maintain unique traditions, music, and oral histories that differentiate them from surrounding populations (Kountz, 2009). For Sikhs, the Punjabi language, codified in the Gurmukhi script, religious rituals, and symbols such as the Khanda and the Nishan Sahib serve as markers of identity that unify followers across regional and diasporic boundaries (Tatla, 1999). In both communities, culture and language are intertwined with the imagination of a nation, consistent with Anderson’s (1983) argument that national consciousness relies on shared symbols and narratives, even in the absence of a sovereign state.
Political marginalisation and the struggle for autonomy or recognition constitute another parallel. The Kurds have faced systematic denial of political rights in the countries they inhabit, prompting periodic uprisings, autonomous experiments (e.g., Iraqi Kurdistan), and ongoing efforts to secure international recognition (Gunter, 2013; Jensehaugen and Tank, 2022). Sikhs, while initially mobilised within the framework of a religious polity, similarly experienced political marginalisation in post-independence India, culminating in demands for a Sikh-majority state, manifested in the Khalistan movement of the late 20th century (Singh and Shani, 2021). Both communities demonstrate how stateless nations often navigate a delicate balance between cultural preservation and political assertion, sometimes within the constraints imposed by dominant nation-states.
The role of the diaspora is a particularly striking similarity. Kurdish and Sikh diasporas have both become instrumental in sustaining national consciousness beyond territorial borders. Kurdish communities in Europe and North America actively participate in cultural preservation, political lobbying, and media production to advance awareness of Kurdish rights (Jensehaugen and Tank, 2022). Similarly, the Sikh diaspora has developed transnational networks through gurdwaras, digital media, and advocacy organisations that reinforce national identity and mobilise political support for Sikh causes (Axel, 2001; Tatla, 1999). In both cases, diasporic activity amplifies the nation-building project, compensating for the lack of formal state structures.
Religion and ideology also play complementary but distinct roles in shaping national identity. Kurdish nationalism is largely ethno-linguistic and secular, although regional variations include religiously informed movements, particularly among Sunni Kurds. Sikh identity, by contrast, is inseparable from religion, which functions as a unifying political and cultural framework. Nevertheless, in both contexts, belief systems and ideological frameworks provide cohesion and legitimacy to nationalist aspirations (Connor, 1994).
Finally, both communities illustrate the broader theoretical principle that nationhood is not contingent on statehood. Despite lacking formal sovereignty, Kurds and Sikhs meet the primary criteria of a nation: shared historical memory, cultural and linguistic cohesion, and collective aspirations for self-determination. Their struggles underscore how nationalism can be lived, imagined, and institutionalised in diasporic networks, educational institutions, and cultural practices, confirming the applicability of Anderson’s (1983) concept of imagined communities and Smith’s (1986) ethno-symbolist model.
In conclusion, the parallels between Kurdish and Sikh experiences highlight key dimensions of stateless nationalism. Both demonstrate how a community can maintain national consciousness without a sovereign state, relying on historical memory, cultural distinctiveness, political mobilisation, and transnational networks. Examining these similarities deepens our understanding of how nations emerge, survive, and assert themselves in contexts of political marginalisation, offering valuable lessons for the study of contemporary ethno-nationalist movements.
Examining the Sikh and Kurdish experiences demonstrates the importance of diasporic communities in sustaining national identity. Diasporas not only preserve cultural and religious traditions but also act as transnational political actors, mobilising resources, influencing public opinion, and lobbying for international support. This transnational dimension reinforces the argument that nationhood can exist independently of a contiguous territorial state, challenging conventional assumptions in political theory and international relations about the relationship between sovereignty and identity.
Finally, the comparison between these two communities provides valuable insights into the dynamics of ethno-nationalist movements in the modern world. Both cases show that historical trauma, collective memory, and a sense of destiny are as central to the formation of nations as political institutions. By highlighting the resilience and adaptability of stateless nations, this analysis not only enriches our understanding of Sikh and Kurdish nationalism but also contributes to broader debates on identity, self-determination, and the evolution of nationhood in contexts of marginalisation and globalisation. Such comparative perspectives underscore the need for scholars and policymakers to recognise the legitimacy and complexity of national aspirations beyond the narrow framework of formal statehood, acknowledging the enduring power of culture, memory, and imagination in shaping collective political life.
References
Kountz, C. (2009) The Kurds: Nation Without a State. Harvard Political Review, 2 April. Available at: https://harvardpolitics.com/the-kurds-nation-without-a-state/ (Accessed: 18 August 2025).
Singh, G. and Shani, G. (2021) Sikh Nationalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316479940
Jensehaugen, J. and Tank, P. (2022) ‘Palestinian and Kurdish nationalism: Understanding the “politics of the possible”’, Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 22(3), pp. 219–234. doi:10.1111/sena.12377
Gunter, M.M. (2013) ‘Unrecognized de facto states in world politics: The Kurds’, The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 20(2), pp. 161–178.
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
Axel, B.K. (2001). The Nation’s Tortured Body: Violence, Representation, and the Formation of a Sikh “Diaspora”. Durham: Duke University Press.
Connor, W. (1994). Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell.
Smith, A.D. (1986). The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tatla, D.S. (1999). The Sikh Diaspora: The Search for Statehood. London: UCL Press.
Pandey, G. (2001) Remembering Partition: Violence, Nationalism and History in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
