
‘It's our responsibility to apologize to India for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre': UK MP Bob Blackman
Bob Blackman, a five-time Conservative MP from Harrow East, London says it is the responsibility of the UK government to apologize to India for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Punjab's Amritsar on April 13, 1919. In an interview with The Indian Express via web conferencing, Blackman also accepts the presence Khalistani separatists in UK, but adds that are a small minority.
Excerpts:
Time and again, you have demanded from successive governments in your country that the UK must apologize to India for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. As a Britisher, why do you feel that the apology must come?
What came as an eye-opener for me was a visit to the (Jallianwala) Bagh in Amritsar. Of course, we can talk about the massacre, about terrible events that took place, from afar but I have to confess, I was ignorant about several things before I actually visited the Bagh. And when you see the site of the massacre, where those innocent people had gathered on the auspicious day of Baisakhi, just to be with family and friends– you realize how tragic it was. They were not a threat to anyone. And then, the troops marched in, literally shooting at them till they ran out of ammunition. For us, as Britishers, to pretend that it never happened, is not right.
So why do you think that despite your repeated demand, the apology hasn't come even after more than a century.
I led a debate on the centenary of the massacre in our Parliament in 2019, urging the then government to issue an apology to India. The then PM, Theresa May, 'regretted' the massacre and called it a 'shameful scar' in British-India history but stopped short of issuing a formal apology which I think was extremely regrettable. Had we apologized then, it would have been far better. I reiterated that demand earlier this year as well on the massacre's 106th anniversary. Whatever wrong things were done in the name of the British Empire around the world, they should be apologized for. We can't be responsible for actions taken by our forebears, but what we can do is to say, look, it was wrong, and we are sorry.
So what convinces you to consistently ask your own country for an apology to India even as it hasn't happened yet? Is it some guilt as a Britisher?
No, I don't carry any guilt as I wasn't the one to order that firing. But I do not feel any hesitation in saying that what was done was wrong, absolutely wrong, it should not have been done and we should apologize. It is equally regrettable to see the length of time that it has taken to drag out an apology, given the huge number of people who lost their lives. At the Bagh, when you see that well, where so many people jumped inside to escape firing, you realize it was a terrible way to die. So for me, it's not a feeling of guilt, this is our responsibility. It was one of those incidents that if you don't apologize, it will continue to be a running sore. We can't bring those people back but can say that what happened to them was utterly wrong.
Coming to the recent developments between India and Pakistan, you met the Indian Parliamentarians' delegation post Operation Sindoor. Your views on the meeting.
We absolutely condemn the heartrending terrorist attack that took place in Pahalgam. We were given to understand that India's recent military action against terror bases in Pakistan was not just about Pahalgam, but several terrorist attacks that have taken place in the past. The sad reality however is, that no one's quite sure of who's incharge in Pakistan, whether it's their so-called elected government or their generals and military who seem to be literally calling the shots. It was made clear to us by the visiting delegation that India is, and will react proportionally to the attacks from the Pakistani side, if any.
So what do you think Pakistan can do to stop fostering terrorism on its soil?
First, Pakistan should remove the terror bases that exist along the line of control, whether for training terrorists or facilitating the entry of terrorists into sovereign India. It is pretty clear that Pakistan is, at the very least, not just tolerating the terrorist camps, but probably almost certainly encouraging them, because anything that destabilizes India seems to be good news for Pakistan, which I think is regrettable. Equally, there are reports of Pakistan linked terrorists tunneling into the Kashmir Valley. Pakistan has even attacked in the Punjab and the Indian forces had to thwart attacks on the Golden Temple, for example, which is a direct threat to religious places of worship, which is outrageous. The second thing that Pakistan can do is to withdraw their military forces from Jammu and Kashmir, end the illegal occupation and allow it to be part of India, as was always intended back in 1947.
The US President, Donald Trump, has been regularly trying to portray that he was the one who got this ceasefire done, whereas India has denied that and they said that it was Pakistan, which had requested the ceasefire. Your comments.
As we know, the Americans have been strong supporters of Pakistan for quite a long time. Indeed, during the Bangladesh war of independence 1971, the Americans were on the Pakistani side. I think India takes a very strong stance on these things and quite rightly so. India has suffered at hands of terrorism and was going to make sure that the terrorists understood that they will not be allowed to gain ground, they will not be allowed to terrify the people of Kashmir and there would be grave consequences of any such act in future. I know that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has built a good relationship with the Americans, quite rightly too, that's good news for India. It's good news for world trade. And indeed, we want India to be part of the democracies of the world that encourage justice and peace. But I think we should be very clear that the initiative for a ceasefire came from Pakistan, not from India. Because basically India was saying, if you attack us, we're going to attack you back, but we are not going to be the aggressors.
The separatist Khalistani elements have been flourishing on UK soil. India has raised this several times. Your take.
Yes. And I've called them out. We've had these pro-Khalistan demonstrations outside the Indian High Commission in London. And indeed, when Prime Minister Modi or other key visitors from India have been on official visits to the UK, there have been such demonstrations.
But this is a very small minority. I think we should be very clear that in the UK, the vast majority of British Sikhs do not agree with a so-called independent Khalistan. The vast majority of Sikhs are loyal to Britain now and indeed maintain their loyalty to India and don't want to see this misguided campaign.
I've called on the police to take firm action outside the Indian High Commission when Khalistanis have demonstrated. I've called them out for what they are, thugs and potentially terrorists. And we need to ensure that the police and the security services take every action necessary to ensure they can't cause problems. There's nothing wrong with people demonstrating peacefully on what they have to say as long as they're not causing criminal damage or intimidating people.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
US denies inviting Pakistan's Army Chief Asim Munir to 250th Army anniversary parade
The White House has firmly denied that any foreign military leaders, including Pakistan's Army Chief General Asim Munir, were invited to the 250th anniversary celebrations of the US Armed Forces. "This is false. No foreign military leaders were invited," a White House official told South Asian media outlets, aiming to put an end to days of swirling speculation. The parade, set for June 14 in Washington, D.C., also coincides with former US President Donald Trump's 79th birthday. It will include tanks, musical performances, air shows, and a fireworks display, running from 11 AM to 6 PM and wrapping up with a night-time concert. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Esse novo alarme com câmera é quase gratuito em São Paulo (consulte o preço) Alarmes Undo Backlash in India over reports Before the denial, Indian political circles had reacted sharply to the rumours. Opposition figures saw the alleged invitation as a diplomatic snub to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government. RAND Corporation's senior defence analyst Derek Grossman called it a 'diplomatic setback' for India. He posted on X: 'For India, the Trump admin's invitation to Pakistani Field Marshal Asim Munir is tantamount to inviting an avowed anti-India terrorist.' Live Events Munir, a controversial figure in Indian discourse, had previously described Kashmir as Pakistan's 'jugular vein' and invoked the two-nation theory, stating, "Our religions are different, our customs are different, our traditions are different, our thoughts are different, our ambitions are different... We are two nations, we are not one nation." PTI plans protest in Washington Even before the White House statement, Pakistan's political opposition began mobilising in the US. The Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party's US chapter announced a protest in front of the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C. The rally, supported by over a dozen diaspora groups, is being held against what they called 'undeclared martial law' in Pakistan. The protest also demands free and fair elections, reflecting anger towards Munir's role in domestic repression. Kurilla praises Pakistan as 'phenomenal partner' At a Congressional hearing, US Central Command (CENTCOM) chief General Michael Kurilla praised Pakistan's role in counterterrorism efforts. He stated: 'Through a phenomenal partnership with Pakistan, they have gone after ISIS-Khorasan, killing dozens of them. Through a relationship we have with them, providing intelligence, they have captured at least five ISIS-Khorasan high-value individuals.' Kurilla gave specific credit to Munir for the arrest of Mohammad Sharifullah alias Jafar, a suspect in the 2021 Kabul airport bombing that killed 13 American soldiers and over 160 civilians. Kurilla said, 'The first person Munir called was me and said, 'I've caught him, I'm willing to extradite him back to the US. Please tell the secretary of defence and the president.'' Balanced ties with both India and Pakistan Despite warm words for Islamabad, Kurilla made clear that the US values its relationship with India as well. "We need to have a relationship with Pakistan and with India. I do not believe it is a binary switch that we can't have one with Pakistan if we have a relationship with India. We should look at the merits of the relationship for the positives that it has," Kurilla told lawmakers. This remark reflects Washington's careful approach in South Asia, where tensions between India and Pakistan often challenge American diplomacy. Diplomatic signals and strategic optics Foreign policy expert Michael Kugelman weighed in on the speculation around Munir's travel plans. He suggested that if the Pakistani Army Chief does visit, it may involve meetings at CENTCOM. 'Much is unclear about Gen. Munir's reported upcoming trip to the US. But if he comes, a CENTCOM visit is a possibility. He and Gen Kurilla have met 3 times in less than 2 years. Kurilla praised him yesterday in Hill testimony. US-Pak officer-to-officer ties are generally strong,' said Kugelman. Sources claimed Munir was set to meet senior Pentagon and State Department officials during his trip. However, with the White House ruling out his attendance at the parade, the visit—if it happens—will now likely unfold in a lower profile format. Amid the furore, US officials also reiterated their strategic partnership with India. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce confirmed that Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau recently met with a visiting Indian parliamentary delegation led by Congress MP Shashi Tharoor. According to Bruce, the two sides discussed counterterrorism cooperation and reaffirmed shared democratic values. While the storm over Munir's supposed invitation seems to have calmed, it has revealed the tightrope the United States continues to walk in balancing its vital security interests in a volatile region.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
FTA with India brings 'genuine' competitive advantage, UK Parliament told
London, The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations concluded with India places the UK at a "genuine" competitive advantage in the manufacturing sector, the House of Commons was told this week. During a debate on the bilateral FTA agreed last month, UK Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds fielded a series of questions on the advantages of the deal which has been pegged to increase bilateral trade by GBP 25.5 billion annually in the long term. Reynolds reiterated that the pact marked a huge economic win for the UK as the "best deal that India has ever offered". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like nhà container: Xu hướng nhà ở hiện đại và bền vững 2025 Visionary Echo Tìm Ngay Undo "On advanced manufacturing... a set of advantageous positions has been agreed, putting this country at a genuine competitive advantage, particularly in relation to sectors such as automotive and machinery," said Reynolds, in response to a question by British Sikh Labour MP for Smethwick, West Midlands, Gurinder Singh Josan. "India is traditionally a very protectionist economy, and it is the world's fastest growing big economy. Whether it is for goods or services... or the West Midlands as a whole, there is so much good stuff here to celebrate," added the minister. Live Events The debate this week comes ahead of UK-India Week, which begins next week as part of the annual India Global Forum (IGF) summit in London. The India-UK FTA is set to dominate the agenda, with Minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal among the speakers expected to address the forum. It will also mark the launch of the 2025 edition of the 'India Meets Britain Tracker', which analyses the investment flows by Indian companies into the UK. "Indian companies continue to play a pivotal role in the UK's growth story - from job creation to innovation. This year's tracker showcases their growing diversification, scale and resilience, and reflects the growing maturity and confidence of Indian enterprise on the global stage," said Anuj Chande, Partner and Head of South Asia Business Group at Grant Thornton, which produces the annual analysis with the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). With the UK and India ranking as the sixth and fourth largest economies respectively, the Tracker offers insights into one of the world's most strategic investment corridors following last year's report setting a new record of 971 Indian-owned companies operating in the UK - a figure that has been consistently on an upward trajectory. "Indian businesses are no longer just investing abroad - they are transforming global economies," said IGF founder Manoj Ladwa. According to the UK's Department for Business and Trade (DBT), the India-UK FTA slashes tariffs across the board and is set to increase UK GDP by GBP 4.8 billion and wages by GBP 2.2 billion each year over the next decade.


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
How the Constitution came to represent our civilisational ethos
These days it has become fashionable for political leaders to swear by the Constitution, and even flaunt a copy of it in public rallies. Yet few are fully aware of the drama and sweat that went into its making. The Constitution was a product of three years of intense and cerebral deliberations of the Constituent Assembly (CA), from August 1946 to January 26, 1950, when it was signed by each member and formally adopted. We celebrate that day as Republic Day. But there is a long history preceding the convening of the CA. The idea was first mooted by VK Krishna Menon (later the country's defence minister) as far back as 1933. In 1936, at its Lucknow session, the Congress party formally asked for it. When there was no immediate response from the British, C Rajagopalachari strongly reiterated the appeal. The British accepted it in August 1940. Finally, under the British Cabinet Mission Plan, elections to the CA were held in July 1946. Not many know that these elections were not held under universal suffrage. The nominees were elected by the Provincial Assemblies by a single transferable vote system of proportional representation. To this were added the elected nominees of 93 princely states, and one each from the chief commissionerships of Delhi, Ajmer-Merwara, Coorg and Baluchistan. The elections were completed by 16 August 1946. Congress representatives had the lion's share of 69%. The Muslim League won 73 seats. On the announcement of a separate Indian state, the League boycotted the CA, but 28 of its 73 members chose to ignore the boycott. In its final configuration, the CA consisted of 299 members. Although not directly elected, they represented an entire spectrum of views — conservatives, progressives, Marxists, and all beliefs, including Hindu revivalists and Islamic votaries. Historian Granville Austin has described the CA as 'India in microcosm'. Rajendra Prasad, later the first President of India, was elected as the chairperson. Harendra Coomar Mookherjee, a Christian and former vice-chancellor of Calcutta University, was elected vice-president. BR Ambedkar was the chairperson of the drafting committee. He was ably assisted by jurist BN Rau, who as Constitutional advisor, prepared the first draft. The CA had 114 sittings spread over two years, 11 months and 18 days. Spirited debates took place on several issues: Universal suffrage, which some thought was premature, until Jawaharlal Nehru put an end to the debate by saying, 'the voice of a peasant is as precious as that of a professor'; the integration into the Union of princely states, ably steered by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel; federalism, and the use of emergency powers by the Centre, but only in 'extraordinary circumstances'; language and linguistic states; fundamental rights versus directive principles; and reservations and social justice. Ambedkar's insistence on reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes faced some opposition, but his will prevailed when he bluntly said that if this is not done, 'those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of democracy'. There were voices wanting Hindu heritage to be especially acknowledged, but after prolonged debate, the consensus was that the Republic will treat all religions equally. On 26 November 1949, the Constitution was passed, the longest of its kind in the world, with 395 Articles, eight Schedules, and 22 Sections, a remarkable tribute to its creators. As I studied its making, two often ignored facts struck me. First, there were 17 feisty women in the CA, including G Durgabai, Sucheta Kriplani, Sarojini Naidu, Vijayalakshmi Pandit, and Kamala Chaudhri. They formed a distinctive voice, and have been referred to as the 'Mothers of the Constitution'. Second, I was surprised at how preponderant the best minds of South India were. For instance, in the six-member drafting committee chaired by Ambedkar, save KM Munshi, the others were south Indian scholars: Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer, Gopala Swamy Ayyangar, N. Madhava Rao and TT Krishnamachari. The house committee chairman was Pattabhi Sitaramayya. The second vice-president of the CA, elected later, was VT Krishnamachari. And, of course, the Constitutional advisor was BN Rau. So, next time when political leaders brandish the Constitution, they should be aware of how much pan-Indian thought went into its preparation. Its courageous Preamble represents the soul of a nation, and the entire document our civilisational ethos. Pavan K Varma is author, diplomat, and former Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha). The views expressed are personal. Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines to 100 year archives.