This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/05/world/asia/britain-says-india-did-not-follow-its-advice-in-1984-attack.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Britain Says India Did Not Follow Its Advice in 1984 Attack Britain Says India Did Not Follow Its Advice in 1984 Army Raid
(35 minutes later)
LONDON — Britain sent a military officer to advise India before Indian forces stormed the Golden Temple in Amritsar in 1984, leaving hundreds dead, but the advice was largely ignored and had little impact on the bloody outcome, the British government said on Tuesday.LONDON — Britain sent a military officer to advise India before Indian forces stormed the Golden Temple in Amritsar in 1984, leaving hundreds dead, but the advice was largely ignored and had little impact on the bloody outcome, the British government said on Tuesday.
In publishing an inquiry into Britain’s involvement in the attack on the temple, the holiest shrine for Sikhs, Foreign Secretary William Hague said the tactics India used were so different from those suggested by the British officer that London bore no responsibility for what followed.In publishing an inquiry into Britain’s involvement in the attack on the temple, the holiest shrine for Sikhs, Foreign Secretary William Hague said the tactics India used were so different from those suggested by the British officer that London bore no responsibility for what followed.
The raid on the Golden Temple was designed to flush out separatists. Mr. Hague said on Tuesday that official figures put the death toll at 575, but that other reports suggested “as many as 3,000 people were killed, including pilgrims caught in the crossfire.” The raid on the Golden Temple, in the northern Indian state of Punjab, was designed to flush out separatists. Estimates of the number of victims vary, but Mr. Hague said on Tuesday that official figures put the death toll at 575, while other reports suggested “as many as 3,000 people were killed, including pilgrims caught in the crossfire.”
Britain’s role in the episode came to light last month when internal government documents were released under rules allowing for the publication of official records after 30 years. On Tuesday, Mr. Hague rejected requests from some lawmakers for an apology for Britain’s role. He said an apology was not justified by the investigation done by the nation’s top civil servant, Jeremy Heywood, the cabinet secretary.Britain’s role in the episode came to light last month when internal government documents were released under rules allowing for the publication of official records after 30 years. On Tuesday, Mr. Hague rejected requests from some lawmakers for an apology for Britain’s role. He said an apology was not justified by the investigation done by the nation’s top civil servant, Jeremy Heywood, the cabinet secretary.
“If any of us thought that any British assistance had contributed to unnecessary loss of life and to suffering in this or any other case,” Mr. Hague said in Parliament, “then we would all want to say that this was a mistake and, for the country, to make an apology. But that is not what is established by the cabinet secretary’s report.”“If any of us thought that any British assistance had contributed to unnecessary loss of life and to suffering in this or any other case,” Mr. Hague said in Parliament, “then we would all want to say that this was a mistake and, for the country, to make an apology. But that is not what is established by the cabinet secretary’s report.”
Britain’s assistance was, Mr. Hague said, “purely advisory, limited and provided to the Indian government at an early stage in their planning.”Britain’s assistance was, Mr. Hague said, “purely advisory, limited and provided to the Indian government at an early stage in their planning.”
Mr. Heywood’s inquiry confirmed that a British military officer visited India from Feb. 8 to Feb. 17, 1984, conducted reconnaissance of the temple site and advised India’s intelligence services. But the report emphasized that there were significant differences between the advice offered and the operation that took place in June 1984. By that time, dissident forces in Amritsar, in northwestern India near the border with Pakistan, had increased, as had their fortifications.Mr. Heywood’s inquiry confirmed that a British military officer visited India from Feb. 8 to Feb. 17, 1984, conducted reconnaissance of the temple site and advised India’s intelligence services. But the report emphasized that there were significant differences between the advice offered and the operation that took place in June 1984. By that time, dissident forces in Amritsar, in northwestern India near the border with Pakistan, had increased, as had their fortifications.
“In particular, the element of surprise was not at the heart of the operation,” the report said. “Nor was simultaneous helicopter insertion of assault forces to dominate critical areas.”“In particular, the element of surprise was not at the heart of the operation,” the report said. “Nor was simultaneous helicopter insertion of assault forces to dominate critical areas.”
The report said that India had requested the advice from Britain, but Mr. Heywood described it as “a one-off” and said that the government “did not link the provision of this military advice to defense sales.”The report said that India had requested the advice from Britain, but Mr. Heywood described it as “a one-off” and said that the government “did not link the provision of this military advice to defense sales.”
Mr. Hague said that British officials had searched 200 files and more than 23,000 documents in the inquiry, but that “some military files covering various operations were destroyed in November 2009, as part of a routine process undertaken by the Ministry of Defense.”Mr. Hague said that British officials had searched 200 files and more than 23,000 documents in the inquiry, but that “some military files covering various operations were destroyed in November 2009, as part of a routine process undertaken by the Ministry of Defense.”
Last month, the BBC reported that the Indian general who led the operation to take the Golden Temple, Kuldip Singh Brar, had denied using British help.Last month, the BBC reported that the Indian general who led the operation to take the Golden Temple, Kuldip Singh Brar, had denied using British help.