India-uk: The evolution of post-colonial relationship
As India enters the 75th year of its Independence, my mind goes back 25 years, to its 50th anniversary and Queen Elizabeth’s visit. Inviting her to celebrate India’s Independence was a generous gesture considering Britain’s past imperial role. It also demonstrated Britain’s hope that the past could stay in the past, and a future partnership of two great democracies be established.
The visit ran into rough weather. To woo the British-sikh vote, a significant factor in several constituencies, the British high commissioner was instructed to negotiate a visit to Amritsar and the Golden Temple. IK Gujral, the then prime minister (PM), made it clear that he didn’t want the Queen to go to Amritsar unless she was willing to apologise for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.
Eventually, in an embarrassing compromise as far as Gujral was concerned, it was agreed the Queen would visit Jallianwala Bagh and lay a wreath, but she would not apologise. During the visit, the Duke of Edinburgh didn’t make things any easier by questioning the official figures of the number of people killed in the massacre when General Reginald Dyer ordered his soldiers to open fire on a peaceful crowd trapped in the garden. The Queen’s husband was reported as saying that General Dyer’s son had told him that the figure was much lower — hardly a reliable source.
Before coming to India, the Queen visited Pakistan. This did not please the external affairs ministry. During the visit, the British foreign minister, Robin Cook, offered to mediate between India and Pakistan. With the unhappiness over Amritsar and the anger over Cook’s blunder, the press coverage of the tour became extremely negative, so much so that the Palace issued a statement saying that the Queen thought the visit was going very well.
British PM, Boris Johnson, seems to have learnt the lesson from this sorry story: Don’t push too hard, don’t ride roughshod over Indian sensitivities if you want to negotiate successfully, as he does. He desperately wants a Free Trade Agreeme justify his promise that Brexit will l Britain free to negotiate far more benef trade agreements than those it was tie by its membership in the European Un
Johnson is taking it step by step. He Narendra Modi virtually two months and they agreed on an enhanced trade nership. Modi described this as a “road to a comprehensive Free Trade Agreem He also spoke of an ambitious roadma elevate India-united Kingdom (UK) tions to a “comprehensive strat partnership”.
That sounds something like alliance of two great democra Britain hoped that the Queen’s would symbolise.
India is a constitutional de racy. According to its first presi Rajendra Prasad, its democracy historic links with Britain. He “We have all derived from the ish Parliament and we still continu derive inspiration from its proceedi from its history .... (and) from its traditio Furthermore, at the recent G7 sum hosted by Johnson in June, Modi, altho only a guest, signed the open societies s ment, the joint commitment to streng democracy globally.
There are now questions being a about how democratic India is. The Un States government-funded non-gov mental organisation Freedom House’s report has demoted India from “free “partly free”, alleging discriminatory cies, rising violence and a crackdow freedom of expression. India has dropped two places in the Economist I ligence Unit’s Democracy Index. It alle crackdown on civil liberties in India.
These allegations have been furio denied, but the truth is that India’s de racy does have an international image p lem, which if it remains, will stand in the of establishing a comprehensive partner with Britain. It also makes India’s com ment to the world’s richest nations camp for democracy appear implausible.