Follow Us
Jaspal Sidhu
DIASPORA commentator
THE new war memorial in Birmingham, dedicated to Sikh soldiers of the Great War, was recently vandalised. At first, it was unclear who had defaced it. Neo-Nazi markings have been seen defacing another Sikh statue at Thetford. But photographs of the marked memorial, which quickly emerged on social media, made it clear that it had most likely been vandalised by a Sikh or group of Sikhs.
‘Sepoys No More’ was found sprayed over the monument, a slogan and a Twitter hashtag commonly used by a few Sikh groups online. It is no surprise that leading members of these groups spent much of the night after news of the vandalism broke criticising the memorial itself instead of condemning the action.
The graffiti was removed shortly after the authorities had been alerted, and though most Sikhs appeared to be outraged by the incident, a small but vocal minority questioned the memorial's legitimacy. It seems some young British Sikhs are becoming increasingly polarised on issues relating to British identity and the history of our nation's armed forces. As recently as June, a prominent YouTuber and Instagramer, with over 5,000 followers, uploaded an image of a Royal Sikh guardsman captioning him as a ‘murderer’. There is little doubt that this debate will continue over the years and more so when the National Sikh War Memorial is unveiled in London in 2020.
The anti-memorial arguments
Critics of British Sikh war memorials commonly trot out the following arguments: Britain occupied our ancestral homeland, the Punjab, for nearly a hundred years; Sikh soldiers who died in the Great War died not for a Sikh or an Indian nationalist cause, but as expendable mercenaries for the British Empire; we should take no pride participating in a war between rival European colonial powers; Britain continues to take part in illegal wars to this day, and has a foreign policy which is inconsistent with Sikh values.
I have no wish to make the case that World War I was a morally just war or not. That is a matter of opinion. Rather, like others, I regard such memorials simply as monuments which honour the many millions who tragically fought and died in human conflicts. There are, for example, Vietnamese War veterans in America who remain highly critical of America’s war in Vietnam, yet attend commemorations and memorials honouring their fallen friends. Likewise, British Sikhs can appreciate a memorial dedicated to the Sikhs who fought and died in the Great War, in spite of British imperial rule over India.
I am no apologist of the Empire, nor am I under the impression that the British Raj was, as some historians argue, a benevolent autocracy or perhaps a civilising force. Nonetheless, it is unfair to neglect or discredit the Sikh soldiers who had enlisted in the British Indian army at the time of the Raj by labelling them as traitors or British puppets who betrayed the cause of Sikh or Indian independence.
Did soldiers have an option?
Many soldiers joined the army simply as a means of escaping poverty and sustaining their families. Sikh leaders of the day also saw the community’s involvement in the British armed forces as a way of furthering Sikh political influence within British India, while others participated with the expectation of achieving self-rule once the war had come to an end.
If they were ‘cannon fodder’, as the Anglo-Sikh Heritage Trail Organisation recently explained, “then let us not use them as political fodder now. It is their individual service and sacrifice we are remembering. To interpret this as endorsement of colonial rule is simply wrong.”
It is understandable that some British Sikhs remain suspicious of the British government’s intentions in the 21st century, especially when Britain still remains largely unapologetic of her colonial past. Opinion polls confirm the country has not overcome her imperial nostalgia. In 2016, 44 per cent respondents to a YouGov poll on colonialism had the belief that the Empire was something to be proud of. Even so, societal attitudes within Britain are changing as the century progresses, and citizens also have an important voice in debating Britain’s history too.
Play a constructive role
Britain’s current role on the world stage has been a subject of debate ever since the end of the Iraq war. News of SAS (Special Air Service) involvement in Operation Bluestar in 1984 further upset a large number of Sikhs living in the UK. Though Britain's foreign policy is far from benign, we should not make the mistake of not acknowledging the good that Britain has done over the past 20 years. The British armed forces helped end the genocide of Bosnian Muslims in the late 1990s and also fought against the Taliban (who incidentally heavily persecuted the Sikhs of Afghanistan). It is unwise for British Sikhs to completely distance themselves from the armed forces as an institution. Nor should the liberal internationalism of the 21st century be confused with the imperialism of the 19th century.
Ultimately, we should no longer see ourselves as colonial subjects. The Sikh community should be influencing public opinion, through open dialogue, debate and political lobbying. Defacing the memorials which honour our war dead is neither constructive nor serves any purpose in either the short or the long run.
8