DNA Edit: Too little, too late - The British regret over Jallianwala is politically correct

When Colonel Reginald Dyer ordered a Gurkha contingent of the British Indian Army to fire on an unarmed assembly demanding independence on Baisakhi day in Amritsar’s Jallianwala Bagh exactly 100 years ago, little could he have imagined that the storm he created would refuse to die down.

A century later, the British Prime Minister — who already has her hands full with contemporary issues such as the Brexit — has now said in the Parliament that the massacre was a ‘shameful scar’ in British Indian history.

Nonetheless, she stopped short of a formal apology as was sought by a cross-section of Parliament in previous debates. In a statement, marking the 100th anniversary of the massacre, which claimed 379 lives, she reiterated the ‘regret’ already expressed by the British government. It is also noteworthy to remember that Queen Elizabeth II, during the course of her visit to Jallianwala Bagh in 1997, had said that the incident “was a distressing example of our past history with India”.

Nonetheless, it does credit to the British for drawing a line under an unsavoury chapter of the British-Indian history. The Conservative MP who tabled the debate, opened proceedings with a strong sentiment of ‘shame’ as he called on the British government to apologise.

“General Dyer was vigorously defended by — I say this with shame — the Conservative party, as well as most of the military establishment.” So while the British government may not have apologised formally, a significant section of the British establishment has expressed its regrets. It goes to the credit of India’s former colonial rulers to recall and regret an incident, about which memory in the country of its occurrence is relatively rare. While some have described the British action as “too little, too late”, the fact is that it is a guarantee of sound Indo-UK bilateral political and economic ties.