It’s a sore that still festers. Now, documents apparently revealing a British role in the 1984 storming of the Golden Temple by the Indian army to flush out Sikh extremists have refocused attention on one of the most turbulent events in India’s recent history.
The UK’s visible and vibrant Sikh community is naturally outraged. “The word ‘betrayal’ has been thrown around, and I think that’s how some of us feel,” Gurinder Singh Josan, of the Sikh Council UK, told Outlook. The papers were discovered by journalist Phil Miller among a tranche of British archives papers declassified after 30 years. Miller has been researching for years British forces’ involvement in Commonwealth countries on his Stop Deportations blog,
The most explosive revelation comes in a 1984 letter from Brian Fall, private secretary to then foreign secretary Geoffrey Howe, to Hugh Taylor, his counterpart under home secretary Leon Brittan, describing the visit of an SAS officer and potential fallout among Punjabi communities in the UK (link to the actual letters: www.stopdeportations.wordpress.com).
“What that might mean is British forces were asked for their advice on how to ensure minimal loss of life,” say Gareth Price, South Asia expert at Chatham House. “The SAS are largely identified with clinical extraction operations, where they remove enemies quickly and often secretly, so perhaps their ideas were not actually followed.”
Josan echoes this. “What we are ultimately asking for is the truth. It could be that the SAS advice was not followed or that they saw the Indian army plan and told them that it was a foolish one.”
As Josan says, “Don’t forget I was born here, like my generation of British Sikhs, so talking about the ‘British government’ is talking about my government. There are obviously more of our faith here now than 30 years ago but that just reinforces our need for the truth.” Moreover, Op Blue Star was seen as a catastrophe, with innocent pilgrims caught in the crossfire and many army deaths, so British forces are keen to distance themselves further.
Lt Gen K.S. Brar, who led the 1984 assault (and faced a reprisal attack in London in 2012), told The Guardian the allegations were “fictitious” and that “the plans (for Blue Star) were laid and executed by Indian military commanders”. That statement could crumble many ways: if the SAS did provide a plan, was it ignored? If so, why? Was it too gung-ho, or too cautious? Price says: “The fact it turned into a bloodbath means people might not want to be associated with it.”
With protest events planned outside the British parliament here, Sikhs across India and the UK eagerly await further developments. As Bhai Amrik Singh of the Sikh Federation (UK) says: “Why would the UK government at that time advise on the attack on the sacred Darbar Sahib complex and risk alienating the law-abiding British Sikh community?”
By Saptarshi Ray in London
UK documents claiming to show that ex-premier Margaret Thatcher sent a British advisor to counsel the Indian army on Operation Bluestar must be investigated in detail (Who Dares Loses, Jan 27). What is clear is that Indira Gandhi had sought Brit assistance months before the assault. Was it contingency planning or had the government made up its mind so much earlier than the first week of June 1984?
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Indian government always relies on foreign government for anything they plan to do - whether building new dams or fighting wars. They have no intuition of their own.
So whats new?
The fact that 1000s were killed, however, is probably down to the soldiers who actually called the shots on the ground.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT