The Guardian view on the Amritsar massacre centenary: time to see ourselves as others see us | Editorial

Britain is too cautious about facing its complex past. The result is that Britain fails to understand its future

Theresa May did two significant things this week. The first, her decision to postpone Brexit, is the dominant story of the times. The second has received less attention. At prime minister’s questions, Mrs May prefaced her answers by talking about the “shameful scar on British Indian history” of the killings at Jallianwala Bagh in 1919. “We deeply regret what happened and the suffering caused,” said Mrs May. When Jeremy Corbyn replied, he went further, calling for a “full, clear and unequivocal apology for what took place”.

These brief exchanges were a reminder of the long shadow cast by what is better known in Britain as the Amritsar massacre, whose centenary falls on Saturday. It is rare for a Conservative prime minister to express regrets for any aspect of British imperial history. So the fact that Mrs May said anything at all was noteworthy: first, as a sign of continuing official unease at the highest level about the events of 1919 and, second, as a recognition of the effect the massacre still exerts on the British-Indian relationship to this day.

Mr Corbyn’s response was significant too. By using the word “apology” he went further than any British leader has yet been willing to go. When the Queen laid a wreath at Amritsar in 1997, she called the massacre “distressing”. When David Cameron visited Jallianwala Bagh in 2013, he wrote in the visitors’ book that the events were “deeply shameful”. The difference between Mrs May’s and Mr Corbyn’s words was important, for this is a long and an unquiet argument that is not yet resolved.

The events of 13 April 1919 were terrible and, to this day, are insufficiently known in Britain. Imperial troops (made up of Gurkhas, Baluchis and probably some Sikhs) fired without prior warning into a peaceful crowd of more than 15,000 for 10 minutes. An official commission put the total of dead at 379, with more than a thousand injured, but the true figures may be higher. The shootings caused outrage and anti-British radicalisation in India. The effects on Gandhi were decisive. What took place at Jallianwala Bagh was never forgotten. The lieutenant-governor of Punjab at the time of the killings was assassinated in London in belated revenge as late as 1940. The 1919 killings do not stand alone. Others preceded and followed them. But Amritsar remains to this day the most potent embodiment of the violence on which British rule partly rested for nearly two centuries.

Liberal Britain was scandalised by Amritsar too. Winston Churchill (then a Liberal) said it was “a monstrous event” and “a slaughter”. The India secretary Edwin Montagu called it simply “terrorism”. But there were widespread and lasting efforts to whitewash and ignore what happened. Many in the Raj and in Britain, not least within the most reactionary wing of the Conservative party, approved of it wholeheartedly. When General Reginald Dyer, who ordered the shootings, died in 1927 he was given a military funeral in Somerset, followed by a second, ceremonial funeral in which his coffin, draped in the union jack, was wheeled through central London on a gun carriage as if he was a national hero. Dyer still has his defenders today.

The reluctance to apologise has many strands. They include concerns about precedent, legal consequences and claims for reparations. But the reluctance to look back dispassionately, understandable in some respects, is a national burden. It means Britain can fail to face historical facts, question ourselves as a modern nation and think about complexity. It can mean we fail to see ourselves as others see us. These are enduring issues, which cannot be brushed aside just because they are sometimes exploited opportunistically.

Some other countries are better at this self-examination. Germany is one. Belgium, which is trying to rethink its own imperial past, is another. Britain can learn from them. Britain lacks a shared or a sufficiently capacious version of its own history. Too many are not taught enough of it to make this possible. Outside the academy walls, and sometimes within them, the treatment of history can be too politicised, nationalistic and manichean. The result is that we don’t think properly or even know about events like Amritsar. But the result is also Brexit.

• This article was amended on 23 April 2019 to add clarifying detail of the ethnicities and religions represented among the Imperial troops who opened fire at Jallianwala Bagh.

Contributor

Editorial

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Article image
Delving deeper into the Amritsar massacre | Letters
Letters: Dr Zareer Masani takes issue with an article by Mihir Bose, Judy Stober says it is a delusion that Britain has been a world leader in establishing a just and tolerant society, but Randhir Singh Bains thinks there is little point in apologising for the 1919 massacre

Letters

15, Apr, 2019 @4:31 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on bombing Syria: a decision for parliament | Editorial
Editorial: Theresa May has decided to break with parliamentary convention and not seek approval from MPs for military action. This is a mistake

Editorial

15, Apr, 2018 @5:37 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on parliament’s Brexit debate: time to choose | Editorial
Editorial: As MPs begin their week-long debate on the Brexit deal, there are four options: May’s deal, a softer deal, no deal or a second referendum

Editorial

02, Dec, 2018 @6:05 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Brexit radicalisation: take time, lower the temperature | Editorial
Editorial: Brexiters may well be frustrated but their rhetoric of betrayal, sabotage and treason is fuelling a dangerously febrile atmosphere

Editorial

03, Apr, 2019 @5:30 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Brexit: now is the time to change course | Editorial
Editorial: Only a year is now left until the UK’s official moment of departure from the European Union on terms almost certainly decided by a rightwing clique of Tories

Editorial

28, Mar, 2018 @5:31 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on MPs and Brexit: this is no time to disengage | Editorial
Editorial: Britain must decide within five weeks whether to hold EU elections. There are big decisions to face before then, even though parliament is in recess

Editorial

14, Apr, 2019 @5:35 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on the Brexit backstop: getting Ireland wrong again | Editorial
Editorial: History is repeating itself as English Conservatives once again fail to understand the Irish dimension of their doctrinaire political obsessions

Editorial

06, Dec, 2018 @6:54 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Labour’s custom union plan: realistic and smart | Editorial
Editorial: Jeremy Corbyn leads his party on Brexit. Theresa May is led by anti-European MPs who will not let her capitulate to reason

Editorial

26, Feb, 2018 @6:32 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Jeremy Corbyn and Ireland: all about the border | Editorial
Editorial: Questions about the Labour leader’s republican views dominated his trip to Belfast. But Brexit is the key question for Northern Irish politics now

Editorial

24, May, 2018 @5:29 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Britain’s political parties: Brexit is breaking the mould | Editorial
Editorial: It would be ironic if, as Britain prepares to leave the EU, the country’s fragmentary politics became more characteristically European

Editorial

22, Feb, 2019 @6:30 PM