PM criticised over failure to apologise for India atrocity
Prime Minister David Cameron's decision not to apologise for the massacre of hundreds of Indian people in 1919 by troops under the command of a senior officer in the British-Indian Army has been criticised by Leicester's Sikh community.
Ordered by Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer, the troops shot into a crowd of thousands of protesters, including women, children and elderly people until their ammunition ran out.
-
Mr Cameron visited the site of the shootings in Amritsar, northern India, yesterday, signing a book of condolence and laying a wreath at the spot of the slaughter.
The first British PM to do so, he described the atrocity as "a deeply shameful event in British history".
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Wednesday, May 22 2013
However, Mr Cameron stopped short of an official British apology, claiming it would not be right to "reach back into history and to seek out things that we should apologise for".
"I think the right thing to do is to acknowledge what happened, to recall what happened, to show respect and understanding," he said.
The decision has sparked debate as to whether he should have issued a formal apology to the people of India.
Raj Mann, of the Leicester Sikh Alliance, had two great-grandfathers who served as British officers in the British-Indian Army.
He said: "It's very positive he acknowledged the 1919 massacre as a shameful and indelible stain on Britain's colonial history, but it doesn't go far enough.
"He needs to look at compensation and reparations for the families of the victims and we're disappointed with the level of apology he's given."
Mr Cameron visited the holy Sikh city, in the state of Punjab, during a visit to India to encourage business links. Before visiting the massacre site, he toured Amritsar's Golden Temple, the holiest site in the Sikh religion.
"Some commentators have argued this was a trade visit and it would have been a cynical apology, but I don't agree – I don't think that's right," said Mr Mann. "He had the perfect opportunity."
Amandeep Rai, also a member of the Leicester Sikh Alliance, said: "It's mixed feelings, to be honest. Mr Cameron didn't have to go to Amritsar and make any kind of statement or sign the book. It was kind of a half-baked sentiment.
"I'm not saying bridge-building is required, just some acknowledgement in the form of an apology."
Rushey Mead councillor Culdipp Bhatti, a former Punjabi national, who had family in the British forces, said: "Sikh soldiers fought and died for a country they had never been to and this is the reward they get.
"I think the Sikh people deserve an apology."
Mr Cameron signed the book of condolence at a permanent plaque in the Jallianwala Bagh public gardens, where the massacre took place.
Mr Cameron wrote: "We must never forget what happened here, and in remembering we must ensure the UK stands up for the right of peaceful protest around the world."
An inquiry commissioned by the Raj colonial authorities found 379 people were killed, though this has been challenged by Indian sources, who put the death toll at 1,000 or more.
23 Comments
View all
by Ajmer
Wednesday, March 06 2013, 10:31AM
“Has Indian Government apologized for attacking the Golden Temple in 1984 and killing of thousands of Sikhs in Delhi and other large cities of India and rapes of hundreds of women during the same period?Thousands of Sikhs been killed by Indian Government since 1984 in fake police encounters?
It may be wise to focus attention on that ?”
by Red_Ned
Friday, February 22 2013, 10:29AM
“QUOTE "You have failed, Red_Ned, to read my previous post thoroughly as I mentioned TWO world wars. END OF QUOTE
This is what is called 'moving the goalposts', my friend! I answered (fairly fully I think) your main point about Germany not apologising for war. The whole idea of apologising for such things would have been alien to every politician in the period before WW2. Instead we got Germany to pay out massive reparations - and that went really well didn't it? Anyway we could have an argument (discussion) about the causes of WW1 but they were very different circumstances to WW2.
QUOTE thats why we are great britan we dont have to apologise END OF QUOTE
No, LewisC109, sorry to disappoint but we called Great Britain (origianlly Britannia major), to distinguish us from Britannia minor, which is now called Brittany (more or less). It's all to do with size, nothing else ;-)”
by aristoc
Friday, February 22 2013, 5:13AM
“Our Dave has nothing to apologise for.
In fact India should apologise for exporting chicken vindaloo to England !”
by georgeisafish
Thursday, February 21 2013, 10:34PM
“ok, its almost 100 years ago. on behalf of the PM, SORRY.”
by LewisC109
Thursday, February 21 2013, 9:21PM
“why should we apologise they get enough of our money as it is thats why we are great britan we dont have to apologise”
by karinfall1955
Thursday, February 21 2013, 6:45PM
“Sadly in the times in which we live apologies would be much more forthcoming if it were not for the fact that they are swiftly followed by compensation claims. Only one thing to blame - greed.”
by prog_rock_fan
Thursday, February 21 2013, 6:02PM
“Forget the ins and outs, and focus on the practicalities. If a few simple words would heal old wounds and improve Great Britain's standing with an important strategic and trading partner, then why not apologise?
@colarrey: "Do we apologise to the French and Spanish for Trafalgar, or Agincourt?"
The events you mention occurred in the context of warfare, not peacetime civilian massacres. Apples and oranges.
However:
@Raj Mann of the Leicester Sikh Alliance: "[Mr Cameron] needs to look at compensation and reparations for the families of the victims"
Using an historical tragedy to grub for cash, multiple generations removed from the events in question, is not just ludicrous; it's offensive.”
by ricardo32x
Thursday, February 21 2013, 5:37PM
“The only person that should apologise for this would be Brigadier General Reginal Dyer. None of us where here in 1919.”
by DBLeicester
Thursday, February 21 2013, 3:22PM
“I am still awating the apology from the Roman, Anglo Saxon and Irish over their slavery of the British. When do we get that?”
by Eastonian
Thursday, February 21 2013, 2:12PM
“You have failed, Red_Ned, to read my previous post thoroughly as I mentioned TWO world wars.
Of course, it goes without saying that Hitler wasn't in a position afterwards but he never gave a single thought right through the 1930's!!
This is not just about the Jews and Israel nor the Holocaust, umpteen million people from around the world were dragged into war in both 1914 and 1939 so let's stick to the facts and if the odd German politician decides to say sorry that's fine but remember the action in India was completely different to world war action caused by fanatical and ideological idiots.
You appear to forgotten who started the atrocious and appalling loss of life in these two conflicts.”