The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-10022, in the name of Sandra White, on operation blue star. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with sadness the 30th anniversary of Operation Blue Star in 1984, which, it considers, led to the massacre of countless Sikhs from across India’s Punjab; notes recently released documents that acknowledge British foreknowledge of and involvement in the planning of the operation; echoes the UK Government’s statement that “These events led to a tragic loss of life and we understand the very legitimate concerns that these papers will raise”, and notes calls from the Sikh community at Glasgow’s Gurdwara and across the UK for transparency and closure for those affected by the operation through a public inquiry.
17:07
I welcome to the Parliament the Indian ambassador and all the members of the Sikh community who are in the public gallery for the debate. [Applause.]
Thirty years ago, operation blue star began with the massing of Indian army troops to be sent to the northern Indian state of Punjab, along with helicopter gunships and tanks. What happened next has had lasting repercussions. The recent release of documents that illustrate United Kingdom Government involvement in the planning of the operation served only to raise more questions than the documents answered.
From an outside perspective, it is hard to know for sure what happened next, because the authorities imposed a complete curfew on the entire state, denied entry to foreign observers, and rounded up journalists to take them out of it. We know that the army attacked with a ferocity that had not been seen before and that, tragically, many lives were lost. The temporal seat of the Sikhs—the Akal Takht—was severely damaged and the Sikh reference library, which contained many precious documents, was lost to fire. Unconfirmed reports from those who were caught up in the battles spoke of hundreds being taken with their hands tied behind their backs and shot. Many newspapers reported that atrocities had taken place across the Punjab and that the army had acted with impunity.
We also know, of course, that the Golden temple holy site was attacked. Many inside it were killed and its holy treasures were looted.
The whole story—and stories—of that bloody episode are perhaps yet to be told. The truth is still to be fully brought to light before those involved will be able to close that chapter in India’s history.
I for one do not profess to hold the right to judge those who were involved: that is for those who were affected, on all sides. It is for them to come to terms with what happened and to heal wounds in whatever way they can. However, when documents that were released under the 30-year rule revealed that the UK Government had provided, at the very least, advice on removing Sikhs from the Golden temple, I and others wanted answers.
In Scotland, we pride ourselves on having vibrant and diverse communities. I believe that the different peoples who make up those communities are as integral as one another and that they all deserve exactly the same respect and compassion. I am sure that we would all stand up for anyone in our community who we thought had been the victim of an injustice. That is no different for me. So what exactly did the UK Government know? What advice did it give? What information is it still keeping from us?
I do not believe that the inquiry that the Prime Minister set up understood the depth of feeling in the Sikh community on the issue and I do not think that it gave the community the proper respect. The inquiry stated that more than 200 files with more than 23,000 documents were examined, but it failed to release them. It is time that we knew why it did not do so.
I also note that the report to the Prime Minister states that many military files that related to the period from December 1983 until June 1984 were destroyed and that the UK High Commission reported that a revised plan had been approved, although it seemed to be unsure whether that plan was based on UK advice.
Those uncertainties only add to doubts felt by the Sikh community, rather than allaying them. They give strength to calls for an independent judge-led inquiry to be established to look into the extent of UK Government involvement in operation blue star.
As the Government said when the papers were released:
“These events led to a tragic loss of life and we understand the very legitimate concerns that these papers will raise.”
I applaud the UK Government for acknowledging that the release of the papers raises legitimate concerns. I hope that it understands that those concerns have not gone away but have grown and that, to give the Sikh community the answers that it deserves, a full public inquiry should be undertaken.
If we had lost family members, relatives or friends but had not been able to have closure as to the circumstances that led to our loss, the least that we would seek would be the opportunity to uncover all the facts surrounding what involvement our Government had in the events. That right should be fundamental to all.
17:12
At the weekend, BBC radio ran an item on the “Sunday” programme that examined the facts of operation blue star and the events in Hyde park to mark the anniversary. It included comment from the highly respected former India correspondent, Mark Tully, who reported on the 1984 military operation, from highly respected senior members of the Sikh community in Britain and in India and from some young Sikhs. It was an interesting piece and it urged public caution and careful understanding of the deep-seated concerns that have marked the legacy of operation blue star.
It is clear that, apart from capturing headlines around the world, the events of 3 to 8 June 1984 were seen by many as a defining moment in Sikh political history. The potent mix of a military attack on the Golden temple—the holiest shrine of the Sikh faith—the demand for Khalistan to be a separate state, and the mix of militants, pilgrims and other faiths all becoming involved in the dispute was toxic and, of course, the aftermath was the assassination of Indira Gandhi in October 1984.
Feelings naturally still run high, and there is debate among those who have been asked to comment about the weekend’s anniversary event as to whether it should be seen more as a commemoration or as a rally to promote future political support. Opinion on the BBC programme and in the newspaper coverage—probably in the Parliament, too—is strongly divided. That makes it even more important, as Sandra White said, that we are sensitive about the way forward.
I note that Sandra White’s motion states that there was British foreknowledge of, and involvement in, the planning of the operation, as indicated by the release of papers under the 30-year rule. Those papers rightly prompted an investigation, ordered by the Prime Minister, who was clear in recognising that the events of 1984 had
“led to a tragic loss of life”
and said that he understood
“the very legitimate concerns that these papers will raise.”
The Sikh community has welcomed that, notwithstanding the fact that demands for a full public enquiry remain. Again, opinions differ markedly between those who allege the full involvement of the UK Government and those who led operation blue star, who deny that that was the case. The facts are clearly a matter of dispute and, as Sandra White rightly said, members’ business is not the appropriate forum to debate the politics of the dispute.
What is appropriate is to move forwards towards reconciliation and to try whatever method is possible to heal the deep-seated wounds that have existed and which continue to exist in the Sikh community. I note that, over the weekend, hundreds of British Sikhs marched from Hyde Park to Trafalgar Square to protest against operation blue star. They were peaceful and were correctly exercising a democratic right. However, what concerns the vast majority of people, regardless of their political views, are the more militant acts that have persisted since 1984.
At the Golden temple on Friday morning, there were violent clashes involving all kinds of attempts to take opposition to an extreme. Six people were badly injured and media personnel were assaulted and their cameras were broken. As recently as August 2013, there were issues about military leaders being under attack.
It is important that, with regard to world events that are divisive and are reflective of difficult situations that have arisen, we should not allow extreme elements to start to incite hatred of other religious communities. I know that the Sikh community in Scotland is working hard to ensure that that does not happen. Rather, in India and the UK, religious people are working tirelessly to find ways in which people on all sides can live together and interact peacefully.
We have seen many issues of tension and violence but it is clear that, if the events of 1984 are to be remembered properly, the way forward must be one of reconciliation, not retribution. I hope that that is the guiding principle that we can all abide by as we work forward.
17:16
I am pleased that Sandra White has brought this debate to Parliament, although I wish that it had not been necessary.
Until recently, I, like many people in Scotland, did not know a lot about Sikhism. At the previous election, a Sikh chap in East Kilbride got in touch with me to say, “You don’t know enough about our religion, our culture, our heritage and our history and it’s about time you did.” He was quite right. It is terrible thing to generalise about people, but it seems to me that the Sikhs are a pretty straightforward kind of folk, who tell things like they are. I started to learn about Sikhism and visited the gurdwara in Glasgow, where I was fascinated to learn about the history of Sikhism in the Indian subcontinent, and about the related history of Sikhs in the UK, which goes back a couple of centuries; I read in the briefing from the gurdwara that the first Sikh who came to Scotland did so in 1849.
We are talking about British citizens. We are talking about English Sikhs, Welsh Sikhs, Irish Sikhs and Scottish Sikhs who deserve justice. As Sandra White’s motion points out, it does not look as though they are getting much justice at the moment from the Government of the country in which they live.
From what we have heard, I can understand why members of the Sikh community were absolutely reeling when they learned that the UK Government had been involved in planning the 1984 Indian army attack on the Golden temple in Amritsar, and had advised the army on the plan to remove Sikh extremists from the temple. I can understand why people feel that it is time that the truth was uncovered, and why they feel strongly that a public inquiry should be held to bring everything out into the open.
I was aware that when the Prime Minister, David Cameron, visited the Golden temple just over a year ago, he declined to apologise for the 1919 massacre there, but said that we must “learn lessons”. That is fair enough. Let us learn lessons. Surely, one of the lessons that must be learned is that we have to be open and transparent about the truth when people in our own country—our own citizens—call for that and feel that they are being extremely unfairly treated.
There are issues with the report; there are events and documents relating to the events that were pivotal to the inquiry but which were not specified. There is a view that they have to be specified so that we can get full transparency. The report said that the reason why such documentation was not permitted is the practices of the Indian Government. That is a bit of a woolly statement. Practices are not law. If those are the practices of the Indian Government, the British Government does not have to agree with them. There is surely room for much discussion on that.
What really got to me was that no question was raised about the practical UK support for military operations. It was described as “an internal matter”. We have heard that over and over again, but it is a bit of a cop-out. Some time ago, the UK Government was sending arms to Indonesia under a so-called ethical foreign policy that said that those weapons should never be used for external aggression or internal oppression. However, the Government was still selling arms, even though people were being slaughtered in East Timor and West Papua. That lesson does not seem to have been learned.
I agree with everything in Sandra White’s motion and with the call from the Sikh community in Scotland—the Scots Sikhs—for an inquiry, because it deserves the truth. I would like the UK Government to agree that it will look for the truth and declare that lessons have been learned.
17:21
I had no intention of speaking in the debate and have nothing particularly illuminating to add; I stayed to hear about the subject only out of nosiness. I vaguely remember hearing about the events at the temple in the Punjab 30 years ago, which was when I was in fourth year at school.
The events strike me as having many similarities to a number of domestic issues in the UK—issues in which I have an interest. There are similarities in terms of the role of the state, the security services and, probably, the police and the general establishment. There is a shared interest. Cases such as the Shrewsbury pickets, the blacklisted Cammell Laird ship workers, the Hillsborough victims and victimised miners all show glaring similarities with the case that we are discussing and the state’s role in it. The release of the papers and the exposure of the role of the state and, in particular, the security services, is much needed. We need to shine a light on what those people do. Many campaigners have been pursuing that for some time.
I have been working alongside the GMB trade union, and we will host a justice conference in Liverpool in the autumn, which will bring together all those campaigns. I invite members of the Sikh community to attend that conference, where there will be discussion of all the common issues that have been campaigned on, such as release of papers, evidence from the time, and bringing about justice. The aim of the conference is for all those campaigners to speak to and learn from one another. We will have legal representation at the highest level. It is an open invitation to attend, because there are many common issues that are being campaigned about here in this country.
17:24
I congratulate Sandra White for bringing this important subject to Parliament. Although it is not an issue about which I have any great knowledge, I have a great deal of respect for the Sikh community. Many Sikhs have lived in Leith over the years and have contributed a great deal to Scottish society, and I would always listen carefully to the views and concerns of the Sikh community. If it is demanding that more be told about this these terrible events, I am prepared to back its call.
The theme of reconciliation, which Liz Smith talked about, is central. Whatever happened, we do not want the issue to fester and to promote tension between communities and religions. Reconciliation has to be at the heart of the debate.
The other side of the coin of reconciliation is truth, and we can never have proper reconciliation until the truth of a situation has emerged. I certainly support Sikhs in my constituency and elsewhere Scotland who want to get to the truth of the matter. That seems to be a completely reasonable demand, which we should support.
Clearly, it is not this Parliament that can act directly on the issue, so some of us will no doubt have discussions with our colleagues in the UK Parliament, as it is in that Parliament that decisions about the matter will be made. I certainly undertake to discuss it with the MP colleague who represents my constituency in the UK Parliament, and I am sure that he, too, will be mindful of the demands of Sikhs in his community, and further afield.
Let us have reconciliation, but let us have truth as well. Let us always remember the enormous contribution that Sikhs have made, and still make, to the life of Scotland.
17:26
I offer my thanks to Sandra White for bringing this very important motion to the Parliament. I extend a warm welcome to the Indian consul general, and I say Sat Sri Akal to all the members of the Sikh community who have joined us from across the country.
I offer the Scottish Government’s deepest condolences, once again, to those who were affected by the tragic events that took place in 1984—those who were killed, injured and maimed and also those family members who, to this very day, still suffer without having had proper closure. It is right and fitting that, in the 30th anniversary year of operation blue star, the Scottish Parliament remembers all those who lost their lives, and those who continue to be affected.
Operation blue star was ordered by the then Prime Minister of India, Indira Ghandi, to remove Sikh separatist insurgents from the Golden temple in Amritsar. They were accused of amassing weapons in the temple. As Liz Smith and other members have said, we are not here to debate the politics or the rights and wrongs of that operation, or indeed the politics that continue to this day. We know about the human tragedy that resulted from that operation and from what followed thereafter. Official figures put the death toll at 575, but other reports suggested that many more hundreds, even thousands, were killed, including pilgrims who were caught up in the crossfire.
I understand, and many MSPs have expressed, the deep pain that continues to be felt by the Sikh community as a result of that operation. That feeling was most recently echoed by the First Minister, when he met representatives of the Glasgow gurdwara on a visit there.
As members have commented, on 13 January 2014, following the release of two letters in the National Archives, concerns were quite rightly raised about the UK Government’s involvement in operation blue star, and that Special Air Service officials had been dispatched to help India in the planning of the raid on the Golden temple. No such suggestion had ever been made before or had been known about.
On 15 January 2014, the UK Prime Minister stated that an urgent inquiry into the matter—led by the Cabinet secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood—was under way. The inquiry was completed on 4 February and was followed by a statement to the UK Parliament by the Foreign Secretary that same day. We welcome the speed with which the UK Government acted.
I will read some of the summary conclusion of that report from Sir Jeremy Heywood:
“that the nature of the UK’s assistance was purely advisory, limited and provided to the Indian government at an early stage; that it had limited impact on the tragic events that unfolded at the temple three months later; that there was no link between the provision of this advice and defence sales and there is no record of the government receiving advance notice of the operation.”
As regards the Scottish Government’s response to that report and conclusion, I wrote a letter to the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, on 10 March this year. I raised the real concerns of the Sikh community here in Scotland about the very narrow scope of the review. I got a letter from the president of the Glasgow gurdwara, who believed that the report’s remit was too narrow. It was an internal inquiry, whereas he was asking for an independent public inquiry. I wrote to the Foreign Secretary very much on that premise.
We welcome the fact that the UK Government conducted a swift review, but we believe fundamentally that the Sikh community has the right to an independent inquiry that is transparent and fair. It deserves assurance that the UK Government was in no way linked to the tragic events that happened at the Golden temple in Amritsar in 1984. We believe that that is fair and right. Such an inquiry has not happened yet, so we will continue to listen to those calls and pursue the UK Government for full transparency.
I grew up in and among the Sikh community from a very young age, and my father and mother are from the Punjab region in Pakistan and have a very close affinity and relationship with the Sikh community there. Many members spoke eloquently about the importance of the Sikh community in their constituencies here in Scotland.
Some of the values of Sikhism are worth exploration, as Linda Fabiani said. When we explore the religion, we notice that its values include devotion to God, honest living and equality of all. One of my favourites is the idea of community service and active caring for others. If any members have a gurdwara in their constituency—the Deputy First Minister has the largest in the country in her constituency—they will see that every Sunday it is open to anybody to come and get free food, which is a fantastic service for those who live locally. Gurdwaras reach out specifically to the homeless—those who do not get a meal—to try to get them in. Given that we have had many a debate about food banks and people having to choose between heating and eating, that service is particularly relevant in this day and age. I commend the Sikh community very much for that. The community is part of the rich tapestry that we have here in Scotland.
On a lighter note, I was looking at the diaspora tapestry in Prestonpans recently. It had a tapestry from the Punjab of the Laird of Lesmahagow, Sirdar Iqbal Singh, who is a colourful and flamboyant character indeed.
Whether it is through small business, through religion, through devotion to God or through politics, the Sikh community has made a great contribution.
The relationship with the state is a two-way thing that has to be built on trust. We and the UK Government owe the Sikh community, which we talk so highly about, the sense of closure that has been denied to it thus far. One way in which we can achieve a truly just and fair society is by fully understanding how the tragedies of the past happened. My discussions with the Sikh community have made it clear to me that it does not have a sense of closure about what happened at Amritsar 30 years ago, and it will not have that without a full understanding of the facts, which includes the role of the UK Government then.
I continue to express the Scottish Government’s deepest condolences to the relatives of those who died and to those who were affected by the tragic events in 1984. I give an absolute commitment to the Sikh community that we will continue—and I, personally, will continue—to repeat its calls for the UK Government to conduct an independent, fair and transparent inquiry.
Meeting closed at 17:33.Previous
Decision Time