(Sikks In) Gallipoli 1915-2015: Memorial Service - London,

[Singh, Mahan]

Source: http://sikhchic.com/history/gallipoli_19152015_national_memorial_service_london_united_kingdom

Gallipoli 1915-2015: National Memorial Service - London, United Kingdom

(ST. MARTIN-IN-THE-FIELDS in a famous Church in London)

NATIONAL MEMORIAL SERVICE- 1914 SIKHS - ST MARTIN-IN-THE-FIELDS

A SOLEMN COMMEMORATION OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE SIKH REGIMENT AT THE BATTLE OF GALLIPOLI & THROUGHOUT THE GREAT WAR

Monday, June 8, 2015 - 3 pm

The Commemoration Service of the Sikh contribution at the Battle of Gallipoli and throughout the Great War was held at St Martins-in-the-Field, Trafalgar Square, London, United Kingdom, on Monday, 8 June, 2015.

A large and appreciative congregation attended the Service conducted by Revered Dr Sam Wells, Vicar of St Martins, and by Mandeep Kaur, Sikh Chaplain to the British Armed Forces.

Members of the House of Lords, politicians, members of the Diplomatic Corps, serving Military Officers from High Commissions and UK command appointments, and many distinguished guests from Punjab, India and UK filled the Church.

Readings were carried out by:

* Major General Peter Davies CB, Patron, 1914 Sikhs Campaign and President of the Jullundur Brigade Association
* Field Marshal Lord Guthrie GCB, LVO,OBE,DL, former Chief of the Defence Staff
* James Rattray, grandson of Thomas Rattray who commanded the Rattray's Sikhs in 1916/17 and was killed in action in February 1917 and son of PH Rattray, the last Commanding Officer of the Rattray's Sikhs in 1947
* Andrew Smyth, the grandson of Brigadier Sir John Smyth VC, MC of 15th Ludhiana Sikhs who won his VC at the Battle of Festubert at the head of a party of ten Sikhs
* The Viscount Slim OBE, DL President of the Burma Star Association
* Pushpindar Singh, Vice President of the Jullundur Brigade Association and son of Major General Mohinder Singh, Founder of the Jullundur Brigade Association
* David Bellamy (representing the family of Lieutenant General Sir Reginald Savory KCIE, CB, DSO, MC who took part in the Gallipoli Campaign and was Colonel of Ist Battalion Sikh Light Infantry)
* Lieutenant General Andrew Graham CB, CBE former Director of the UK Defence Academy
* Oliver Chamberlain, grandson of Sir Joseph Chamberlain KG, Secretary of State for India 1915-17
* Lord Indarjit Singh of Wimbledon CBE, Director of the Network of Sikh Organisations (UK)
* Ian Henderson CBE, the grandson of Lieutenant George Henderson of the 15th Ludhiana Sikh Regiment and who was wounded at the First Battle of Neuve Chapelle in October 1914
* Major General Peter Currie CB CBE, a former Lieutenant Governor of the Royal Hospital Chelsea
* Mr David Lelliot OBE, Deputy British High Commissioner, India
* Suki Kaur Bassi, a volunteer for the 1914 Sikhs Campaign
* Dr Gurnam Singh PhD, Principal Lecturer in Social Work, Coventry University * Mankamal Singh, a volunteer for the 1914 Sikhs Campaign and an executive member of the Sikh Council UK.

The final words were spoken by the Honorary Director of the 1914 Sikhs Campaign, the conceiver and organiser of the Service, Harbinder Singh.

Before concluding, he called to the front Harbans Singh Thandi, the son of Udai Singh of 14th KGO Sikhs who had saved the life of Lieutenant Savory at the battle of Krithia during the Gallipoli campaign. A depiction of this gallant action was included in the Order of Service.

This was the first time that he had met the Savory descendants. Together with the Patron and the Honorary Director, and supported by his daughter, he led the congregation out of the Church and through the Guard of Honour formed by the 1914 Sikhs platoon.

Music was performed by: Gursevak Jatha who are all students of the Gurmat Sangeet Academy; Acapella Jatha -- three sisters who have been singing together for nearly 25 years; and Oliver Nelson, a renowned British violinist.

A formal guard was provided by members of the 1914 Sikhs Platoon.

The Last Post was played by Drummer Liliequist of the Scots Guards.

******************************************

A JOINT ACT OF COMMEMORATION

Rev. Dr Sam Wells, Vicar of St Martin-in-the-Fields

St. Martin-in-the-Fields is sometimes described as the church with the ever-open door. It is a description which reflects not only its status as an iconic landmark in London but also its tradition of serving the multinational community to which the capital plays host.

By virtue of its position amongst the prominent churches of London, St Martin’s has also been at the confluence of history and acts of worship. Our archives testify to the long tradition of the church as a venue to significant historic events.

The memorial service for HH Prince Victor Albert Duleep Singh of Lahore, the eldest son of the last Maharajah of the Punjab, took place here in June 1918.

However it was in June 1915 that well-wishers of the Sikh regiment assembled here in solemn commemoration of its heroism at the Battle of Gallipoli: heroism that had been mentioned in the Houses of Parliament.

It is therefore fitting that almost a hundred years later to the day we are assembled here to once again honour that bravery, in a joint act of commemoration.

The Sikh and Christian faiths share a recognition of the virtues of Mercy, Truth, Righteousness and Peace. In this sense they both reach beyond their faithful to a vision of a better world. It is for the vision of that world, and in commemoration of those who have died seeking it, that we are gathered today.

June 10, 2015

.

.

[Singh, Mahan]

I apologize for the typing error in the heading of the thread. I tried to change it but could not do that once it was posted.

.

.

[eduardo]

"Music was performed by: Gursevak Jatha who are all students of the Gurmat Sangeet Academy; Acapella Jatha -- three sisters who have been singing together for nearly 25 years; and Oliver Nelson, a renowned British violinist..

******************************************

The Sikh and Christian faiths share a recognition of the virtues of Mercy, Truth, Righteousness and Peace. In this sense they both reach beyond their faithful to a vision of a better world. It is for the vision of that world, and in commemoration of those who have died seeking it, that we are gathered today."

I am starting to feel exonerated now.

[eduardo]

Acapella Jatha:

How amazing this would sound in a big Cathedral echoing off the timeless walls:

[Singh, Mahan]

Source: http://sikhchic.com/current_events/breathtaking_inspiring_ww1_national_memorial_service

Above: Detail from painting by Lawson Wood (1878-1957), of Manta Singh rescuing Captain Henderson (WW1). Courtesy: Avtar Singh Bahra Collection.

Breathtaking & Inspiring: WW1 National Memorial Service

PRIYA KAUR ATWAL

{The author (Priya Kaur Atwal) is a PhD student researching Anglo-Sikh history at the University of Oxford. }

“You are no longer an invisible face amongst the alphabetically dead, another body draped out to dry on the blood-stained barbed wire. Now at last we can honour the selfless courage of our beloved Sikh soldier.”

These stirring words were read out by Mankamal Singh, a volunteer for the ‘1914 Sikhs’ Project, during the special National Memorial Service held to commemorate the sacrifices of Sikh soldiers during the First World War, on Monday, June 8, 2015.

Mankamal’s words were derived from a moving letter written by fellow volunteers working for the 1914 Sikhs initiative: a project established by The Anglo-Sikh Heritage Trail to highlight Sikh history in connection with the now century-old global conflict.

Addressing the Unknown Soldier (whose statue stands at Paddington Station) as an imagined long-lost son of an ordinary Punjabi family, the letter was a beautifully creative tribute, which brought home to the assembled guests the conflicting emotions of pride and grief that naturally arise on remembering both the bravery and loss of those young soldiers sucked into one of the most brutal wars in recent history.

Indeed, it is difficult, even painful, to reflect upon the circumstances in which Sikh soldiers were recruited to fight in the First World War - a conflict precipitated and fought solely to pursue the interests of rival European colonial powers.

Of the millions who enlisted, willingly or unwillingly, a disproportionately high number of Sikhs featured in the ranks. Like the Unknown Soldier, 130,000 such Sikhs were tragically never able to return home to their families.

The memorial service held in honour of these Sikh soldiers was a dignified, yet touching affair. It took place at the St. Martins-in-the-Field’s Church in central London.

Despite being a rather solemn occasion, the varieties of turbans, chunniyan and British regimental uniforms, with added adornments of commemorative medals and ceremonial weapons, brought together a pleasant array of colours inside the hall. In fact, the entire event was positively marked by the friendliness and warmth displayed by the guests towards each other, despite their hailing from a variety of backgrounds: Sikhs and non-Sikhs, and veterans and representatives of the armed forces, mixed with those who simply came out of a desire to learn more about an overlooked aspect of their history, as well as to pay their respects to past generations.

From a personal perspective, two features of the memorial struck a deep emotional chord.

The first was the musical aspect of the service, particularly the manner in which Sikh young women from the Acapella Jatha took turns in singing with the youth choir from St. Martin-in-the-Fields. It was a special opportunity to be able to see such talented young people from two different faiths coming together to sing about themes of peace and sacrifice.

Their performances were breathtaking and inspiring.

On the other hand, the readings of war poetry and memoirs by Sikh and British descendants of WW1 soldiers and officers were incredibly humbling to listen to.

One section of the poem ‘Birdsong‘, by Sebastian Faulks (1918), was especially poignant when read out by Major General Peter Currie:

‘,,, I do not know what I have done to live in this existence.
I do not know what any of us did to tilt the world into
this unnatural orbit. We came here only for a few months.

No child or future generation will ever know what this was
like. They will never understand ...’

Faulks’ words were certainly correct. Even as a History student, I will never fully understand what the soldiers went through, when one hundred years ago, they became caught up in a style of warfare more devastating than had hitherto been known to mankind.

This is its own way is a marker of the good fortune in which many members of my generation now live, safely removed from the threat of such horrors.

What we cannot afford to forget though is the nature and origins of this conflict, as well as the devastating impact it had on countless lives. Yet even amongst the atrocities committed in the blood-soaked crucible of an imperial war, lies a glimmer of hope, in the way that certain British and Sikh soldiers were able to forge close friendships through the sense of humanity and compassion they displayed on the battlefield: no better evidence of which exists in the tale of Manta Singh’s rescue of his friend, Captain Henderson.

Such relationships, based on a spirit of equality and simple goodwill continue to be nurtured by their descendants to this day. Members of these families stood together at the end of Monday’s service and made a touching plea for the stories of their fathers and grandfathers to be ever remembered; not only to remove the risk of the sufferings of war being again inflicted on mankind, but also, so that people of different walks of life could live side by side with dignity and respect in modern Britain.

Their message could not have been more timely.

.

.

[Singh, Mahan]

.

Source: http://sikhchic.com/current_events/sikhism_the_just_war_theory

Sikhism & The Just War Theory

Dr GURNAM SINGH

(Dr Gurnam Singh is Principal Lecturer in Social Work, Coventry University, and Visiting Professor of Social Work, University of Chester. )

The text of an address delivered at The National Memorial Service held in St Martins-in-the-Fields, London, UK, on Monday, June 8, 2015, to commemorate the contributions of the Sikh Regiment at the Battle of Gallipoli and through the course of the Great War of 1914-18.

Human history can be understood in many ways, but one way is to see it as products of a dialectics of war and peace.

However much we might be committed to peaceful co-existence, the evidence so far is that this remains a utopian dream rather than practical reality.

For some, war is utterly unacceptable and any use of violence simply makes things worse. M K Gandhi, famously noted, ‘an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth will make the whole world blind’. Though one cannot deny the moral appeal of such proclamations on the sanctity of human life, in reality, moral choices in conflict situations are much more difficult to resolve.

This is especially so for leaders of nations that claim to uphold the rule of law and higher principles, be they derived from non-secular (human rights discourse) or secular (divine sanction) sources, or both.

We can see many examples in human history, but perhaps the most significant one was the Second World War and the need to confront the Nazis. But more recently, we have many controversies about when war might be a justified option.

Should the U.S. and other nations have intervened when Saddam Hussein seized Kuwait in 1990? Was NATO right to bomb the Serbians who were carrying out ethnic cleansing against Muslims in Kosovo? When Hutus started slaughtering Tutsis in Rwanda, why did NATO or the UN not intervene?

The list is endless, but the key question is, when, if ever, is non-violence less moral than violence?

And it is this somewhat paradoxical problem that that just-war theory purports to answer.

Just-war theory has a troubling history; one of its originators, the fourth century cleric Saint Augustine, for instance, was keen on holy wars waged by Christians against infidels. He argued that killing sinners and non-believers is righteous because it stops them from sinning.

We see similar justifications being proffered today by ISIS in their quest to re-establish an Islamic Caliphate.

Just war theorists have also argued that war should be waged ruthlessly to end it as quickly as possible. It could be argued that the decision by Truman to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki or Churchill’s decision to bomb civilian populations in Germany, come under such a rationale.

If we turn to Sikhism and its position on just war, the first point to make is that as an ideology, though peace is always the preferred option, there is a recognition, as a last resort, that violence cannot be discounted.

This central principle is captured in a couplet by Guru Gobind Singh, in his letter to the Moghul Emperor Aurangzeb:

“When all efforts to restore peace prove futile and no words avail, Lawful is the flash of steel, it is right to draw the sword.” [Zafarnama]

Along with accepting the principle of ‘last resort’, Sikh teachings also affirm the principles of ‘Just Cause’, ‘Right Intention’ and ‘Proportionality.’

Indeed, the martyrdoms of the Fifth Master, Guru Arjan, and the Ninth Master, Guru Tegh Bahadar, and the subsequent decisions by Sikhs to adopt armed struggle against tyranny further confirms the primacy given to these principles.

The principle of proportionality is captured in a poem by Guru Nanak, which is enshrined in the Sikh scripture, Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Sahib is scathing of the war tactics of the invading Mogul emperor Babar who had adopted something of a scorched earth policy as he invaded Khorasan, the ancient name for the region we now know as Afghanistan.

‘If one powerful man strikes out against another man, then no one feels any grief in their mind. But if a powerful tiger attacks a flock of sheep and kills them, then its master must answer for it.” [GGS:360]

There is a concept of dharam yuddh within Sikhism, which literally means ‘defense of righteousness.’

Under these rubrics, one would identify such things as protection of non-combatants, women, children and rights of prisoners. Guru Gobind Singh created the Khalsa or the ‘brotherhood of the pure’ to establish the concept of the ‘saint/soldier’ or the ethical warrior.

S/he is required to operate under a very strict code of conduct (Maryada) that disallows them to violate the human rights of the enemy. In other words, a Sikh must always act with the intention of self-defense and proportionality.

Moreover, in accepting the essence of equality of all human beings, one has a very strong basis for the rejection of using war for imperial gain, but rather to challenge those that may seek to do so. Hence, whilst fighting the Moguls the Sikh Gurus never sought to establish their own kingdoms, but to oppose oppression.

Indeed, these sentiments are captured in a poem attributed to Guru Gobind Singh, which seeks God’s blessing to die for the sake of righteous deeds.

“Grant me such a boon, O Almighty,
I may never deter from righteous deeds.
And when fight I must, I fight for sure to win.”
[Dasam Granth]

In terms of Ethics in the Battlefield, there are very clear injunctions, which are captured and verified by the Muslim Qazi Nur Muhammad of Gunjaba who accompanied Ahmad Shah Durrani on his seventh expedition against the Sikhs in the winter of 1764. He has given full detail of Sikh ethics adopted during the battle between Sikhs and Shah Durrani. He says:

“Do not call the Sikhs ‘dogs’ because they are lions and are courageous like lions in the field of battle. In no case would they slay a coward nor would they put an obstacle in the way of a fugitive. They do not plunder the wealth or ornaments of a woman, be she a well-to-do lady or a humble servant. There is no adultery among them nor are these people given to thieving nor are there house-breakers among them.”

As we gather here today in the serene splendour of St Martins-in-the-Fields to pay homage to the 14th King George's Own Ferozepore Sikhs we are once again reminded of the breathtaking amalgam of extreme courage underpinned by an unwavering commitment to noble virtues.

As General Sir Ian Hamilton who led the battle of Krithia in Gallipoli notes:

“The history of the Sikhs affords many instances of their value as soldiers, but it may he safely asserted that nothing finer than the grim valour and steady discipline displayed by them on the 4th of June has ever been done by soldiers of the Khalsa. Their devotion to duty and their splendid loyalty to their orders and to their leaders make a record their nation should look back upon with pride for many generations."

To conclude, for some people the idea of just-war is an oxymoron. How can ‘war’ ever be justified? For Sikhs, war is an unfortunate necessity where one is left with no alternative, where any possibility of dialogue and peaceful resolution has
become impossible.

Under such circumstances, Sikhs are required to engage in proportionate armed struggle, and it is with this moral imperative in mind that we saw the hundreds of thousands of Sikh soldiers fight for the Allies in Europe during the two wars.

Today we have gathered to pay homage to their sacrifice of their futures so that we could have ours.

.

.

[proactive]

It is good to commemorate those brave Sikhs who died in the wars that the British fought. My own grandfather's younger brother died in France in 1915. But we need to look now at how the British awarded the Sikhs. The Sikhs who saved the British rule in India in 1857 and fought in hundreds of the empire's wars. The British who have in fact brought about the greatest disaster that the Sikhs had suffered. The Sikhs had suffered many massacres like chotta and wadda ghallughara but we had always survived and after these events we had created a Sikh empire and smaller Sikh states in Punjab. If one looks at the trajectory of Sikh history, the end result of all the struggles was going be the creation of Khalsa Raj. This is when the British did their worst and changed the whole course of Sikh history. They destroyed the Khalsa Raj and from this the Sikhs have never truly recovered. The partition, 1984 and the events after are the direct result of the action taken by the British in 1849. Even though my grandfather's brother gave his life for the British as countless Sikhs did in countless British wars, the British left the Sikhs at the mercy of both the Muslims and the Hindus. Had the British wanted they could easily have awarded the Sikhs their own state and in some way make up for the injustice of their action in 1849. The British did nothing for the Sikhs and denied them a Sikh state and used the justification of the Sikhs not being a majority in any district of Punjab. Just a year after partition the UN divided Palestine and gave the Jews who were only 31% of the population over 50% of the land, The British had also in the 1920s kept Catholic majority areas in the Protestant state of Northern Ireland. So had the British wanted they could have helped the Sikhs for all the aid that the Sikhs had given them for over 100 years. Not only did the British not give the Sikhs a state, they also gave large areas of Sikh owned land and the Sikh Gurdwaras over to Pakistan. Had the British wanted they could have given the Sikhs the Lahore, Sheikupura, and Gujranwala districts as well as one of the colony districts based on the Sikh ownership of land there. In Lahore district the Sikhs owned 56% ( 936,349 of 1,662,456 acres) of the land in the district. The Muslims who eventually got the district only owned 32% of the total land.

The denial of these districts ensured that the Sikhs rather than 20% of the Sikh population becoming refugees, about 50% of the Sikh population became refugees. This denial also ensured that there was no city in Punjab where the formerly wealthy urban Sikhs of western Punjab could settle. So they went to Delhi and outside Punjab and this ensured that the Sikh population again became split.

So we Sikhs now need to reassess just what was the cost and benefit of relationship that we had with the British. It seems to be that the British used the Sikhs and when the time came to award the Sikhs they forgot about all the aid that the Sikhs had given them.

[eduardo]

The one question I have is can you blame partition solely and 100% on the British?

Surely there were other players involved, the British were a spent force after WW2 and didn't really have any gobal power left and partition was in 1947.

I mean if honesty is the word here then what other parties were guilty of this crime?

Why would the British be interested in dividing the Sikhs if we were no longer a part of India?

What possible benefit could it be to us?

Something doesn't add up here.

[proactive]

The British in their dealing with the Sikhs have always been duplicitous. The treaty after the First Anglo-Sikh war stripped parts of the Sikh empire but still left the major part intact. The British then used the excuse of a minor uprising which then became the 2nd Anglo-Sikh war in order to annex and destroy the rest of the Sikh empire. In that war a part of the Khalsa amy and the administration supported the British as they believed that the British were acting as the protectors of the minor Maharaja. The British annexation of Punjab was both illegal and immoral, the ruler of state which the British were bound by treaty to protect had not rebelled or made war on them.

The British also during the early 1820s whilst officially being allies of the Sikh empire encouraged and allowed Jihadis to travel from their territories into the western areas of the Sikh empire and start a rebellion there.

There is no doubt the chief architects of the demands for a Muslim state that led to partition was the Muslim league leadership but what I have blamed the British for is the way the Sikhs were left in a position where they lost over 50% of the land which they owned and countless Gurdwaras. The British were the ones that devised the rules of the boundary commission and they allowed the chairman of the commission to base the partition line solely on population rather than on land ownership and location of shrines. The British rather than upset one of Muslims were prepared to sacrifice the Sikhs even though the Sikhs had always stood by the British.

Lastly karma will always come back and bite. After all the British have done around the world they now have a population of over 3 million Muslims who are slowly but surely aiming to either take over the whole country or at least create enclaves where the British will have no control. The next few decades will see this take effect. Maybe in the end the British will also have their own country partitioned into Muslim and non-Muslims areas!

[eduardo]

Lastly karma will always come back and bite. After all the British have done around the world they now have a population of over 3 million Muslims who are slowly but surely aiming to either take over the whole country or at least create enclaves where the British will have no control. The next few decades will see this take effect. Maybe in the end the British will also have their own country partitioned into Muslim and non-Muslims areas!

Maybe not just Britain but the whole of Europe, how would you explain this in terms of Karma?

And in terms of Karma, what have the Sikhs done to deserve the treatment they get in India, I mean if Karma is what it's all about

what could the Sikhs have possibly done in the past to deserve the treatment they are getting today?

And in terms of Karma why did the Sikhs have to suffer partition in the first place?

What bad Karma was responsible for bringing this outcome?

I mean if Karma is a way of explaining why bad things happen to you in this life and the explanation being that you somehow deserve these things happening to you

because of past life transgressions then surely by this rationale partition was a result of previous past life trangressions by Sikhs themselves and ultimately what occured to the Sikhs was a result of their own bad Karma?

It's quite a nice system because it lets the British off Scots free, I mean all we were doing was what needed to be done to set the balance of Karma back to equilibrium right?

And the ultimate definition of Karma is that you brought it all upon yourselves and the British were mere agents in this cosmic Karmic soup.

Where do you draw the line between bad things happening to you as a result of your own bad Karma (and ultimately being your own fault) and bad things happening to you as a result of pure evil?

I mean do you believe evil exists or do you believe everything that happens to you is a result of past Karma?