HVK Archives: Apologise, your majesty - And also pass along the Kohinoor
Apologise, your majesty - And also pass along the Kohinoor - The Indian Express
Editorial
()
4 August 1997
Title: Apologise, your majesty - And also pass along the Kohinoor
Author: Editorial
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: August 4, 1997
Britain's enthusiastic observance of India's fiftieth year of independence
is threatening to boomerang, with the cry going up that the Queen's visit
to Jallianwala Bagh should be accompanied by an apology for the outrage of
1919. The Queen may squirm, but she can take comfort from the fact that
she is not alone in her embarrassment. The season of apologies has been
here for quite some time, causing many a nervous twitter in the corridors
of power in mighty lands as far-flung as Japan and the United States. The
Japanese expressions of regret for the Korean comfort-women phenomenon,
China's insistent demands on apologies and compensation for Japan's
Manchurian invasion, Bill Clinton's apology for the Vietnam war, the
Australian Prime Minister's apology to the aborigines of his own country
for the bad treatment they have had to put up with ... In this age of
political correctness "apology" is a good word and the pedigree of the
Indian demand for one is impressive. It is only fitting that fate should
catch up with the power on whose empire the sun never set - in the year
when it actually did set, for all practical purposes, with Hong Kong's
transfer.
What is more, the British have sought this trouble out for themselves. Why
would the Queen visit Jallianwala Bagh if not in an implicit expression of
regret? Treating history with retrospective effect is probably not a wise
idea, and there is no limit to demands for apology that can be made for
historical wrongs worldwide. But the demand has been made, and it behoves
the Queen to oblige if she and the greatest imperial power the world has
known are not to appear ungracious and unrepentant about an undeniable
wrong: the apology is sought not for empire but for a horrific massacre.
God forbid that intransigence on one side should lead to stridency on the
other.
For that matter, Britain has a way of even better living up to the
assertion that she has been far more honourable in the relinquishing of her
empire than she ever was in acquiring it. An apology, no matter that it
can be a real salve, is only high symbolism. Britain can go one better not
only to establish that all is forgiven but also that some symbol of what
India lost to empire has been restored. So how about the Queen making a
present to India, on her fiftieth anniversary as an independent nation, of
some of her plundered treasures? Few Indians who have had to pay and queue
up at the Tower of London to catch a glimpse of the Kohinoor or the peacock
throne could have failed to feel resentful. Such a gesture would be of
real, not symbolic, value to India, an act of true decency and generosity
of spirit. It would also be a good way to reinforce happy Indo-British
ties. And if precedents must be sought here as well, they are not lacking.
They exist in the moves to restore art plundered from European countries
during the Second World War. They exist in the contrition that Swiss banks
have expressed for their cupidity at the expense of Holocaust victims. Of
course, the action had to be forced on an unwilling bunch of banks on pain
of financial disaster. But surely Britain values its good name no less
than these banks covet their riches?
Back
Top
|
