India-UK relations

Indian Migrants Now Third Largest Group Crossing the English Channel: UK Home Office

In January, about 250 Indian migrants entered the UK by this means, outnumbering the 233 who arrived via small boats in the first nine months of last year, according to a report.

London: Indians are the third-largest group of migrants crossing into the UK over the English Channel on risky small boats so far this year, according to the UK Home Office. Officials are scrambling to find out what is driving the surge, which has prompted fears that “thousands more will follow” given the country’s population of 1.4 billion, The Times newspaper has reported.

In January, about 250 Indian migrants entered the UK by this means, outnumbering the 233 who arrived via small boats in the first nine months of last year. Indians now account for about a fifth of 1,180 migrants who have attempted the perilous crossing this year. Afghans were the most numerous, followed by Syrians.

One of the major reasons could be Serbia’s visa-free travel rules for Indians. This, according to the Home Office, is providing a getaway for them into Europe. Until December last year, all Indian passport holders could enter Serbia without a visa for up to thirty days.

The arrangement of permitting Indians to enter Serbia without a visa ended on January 1 as part of Serbia’s efforts to comply with EU visa requirements, resulting in some Indians travelling in small boats into the EU and then to the UK, as per the Home Office Officials.

“We have seen a spike of Indian nationals coming across in small boats over the last few months,” a Home Office source told The Times.

“It is a bit of a mystery but there’s some work showing that it could be an issue of Indians gaining visa travel into Serbia. The worry is that this is a longer-term trend with all the implications that hold of illegal migration from a country of more than 1 billion people.”

However, it is noteworthy that most Indians migrate to the EU – and cross the English Channel – for reasons of a better life, usually termed economic migration.

Furthermore, as per the Home Office, Indian students are taking advantage of a gap in asylum legislation that allows asylum seekers to study in the UK while paying domestic rather than international tuition fees. While their asylum application is under process, they can study for a degree and pay domestic fees, which are currently capped at £9,250.

Despite the University and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) guidance specifying that asylum seekers are not entitled to the “home rate” of tuition costs, few colleges and universities continue to charge them international fees.

There are also smugglers across the long journey, who help migrants cross the Channel in a small boat, costing around £3,500.

“It is cheaper to do this than the student visa route and it is probably more guaranteed,” a Border Force source told The Times.

A Border Force source said: “It’s cheaper to do this than the student visa route and it’s probably more guaranteed.”

However, as only 4% of Indian asylum claims are successful, students who choose this route are likely to risk deportation after their asylum claim is denied.

In 2015 and 2016, hundreds of thousands of refugees and migrants, mostly fleeing conflict in the Middle East, passed via Greece, an EU member state, and carried on to nations such as Germany. It soon became known as the “Balkan route.”

Also Read: Blue Borders, Dark Bodies: The Mediterranean as a Site of Racist Murder

More migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan have attempted to enter the European Union without proper documentation through the Balkans since 2017. Serbia is the only country in Europe that allowed Indians without any entry permits.

In the past, some Indian migrants have attempted to stay in Greece as well. The authorities in North Macedonia have often detained migrants trying to cross the border into the EU at the Greek border.

Other Indian migrants attempt to enter Croatia from Bosnia and Herzegovina, claiming that crossing the border between Serbia and Bosnia is rather straightforward. Dozens of Indians dwell at the Lipa migrant camp in Bihac, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Indian citizens make up the majority of migrants who overstay their visas in the UK. According to UK Immigration Statistics, 20,706 Indians overstayed their permit visas in 2020, more than any other nationality, however, other nations had a higher proportion.

“Our migration deal with India aims to enhance and accelerate the removal of Indian nationals with no right to stay in the UK and secure greater cooperation around organised immigration crime,” remarked one government official to The Times.

Now that the UK Home Office has identified an increase in Indian migrants crossing the Channel in tiny boats, it is likely that home secretary Suella Braverman’s determination not to offer Indians any further visa concessions will have a significant impact on the landmark trade deal between the two countries.

British home secretary Suella Braverman. Photo: Facebook/SuellaBravermanOfficial

She has directed Home Office staff to investigate what motivates Indians to sail to the UK on small boats, with initial hypotheses blaming Serbia’s visa-free travel offer to Indians, which they believe provided a “gateway” into Europe from which they would travel onward to Britain. A Border Force insider added, “If we understood why they were coming, we’d know how to stop it.”

This development has come at a delicate moment for the UK-India relationship.

Delhi has demanded more visas for students and business executives as part of the now-delayed trade deal expected to be signed between the two countries. Therefore, any clampdown on Indian migrants might not go down well and is likely to rekindle tensions with the Indian government. Rishi Sunak, the child of migrants from Africa and of South Asian origins, taking over as prime minister had unleashed euphoria in India as UK’s “first Hindu PM”, but it was always a stretch to imagine that by itself would improve ties and in fact could lead to its own complications. Braverman, the home secretary, is incidentally also of Indian origin but remains staunchly anti-immigration.

Kalrav Joshi is a multimedia journalist based in London. He writes on politics, culture, technology and climate. He tweets @kalravjoshi_.

British Home Secretary Braverman Wades in and Puts a Spanner in the UK-India Trade Deal

She is also against more Indian migrants and students, accusing them of overstaying their visas.

London: Cutting a somewhat insignificant looking figure on a late-night television show when Boris Johnson was about to resign as prime minister three months ago, Suella Braverman announced to a bemused television panel that she would stand in the contest to succeed him. She was the first candidate publicly to state her intentions, but neither Robert Peston, the ITV interviewer, nor subsequent media reports seemed to take the then little-known attorney general very seriously.

Born to Kenyan Indian and Mauritian parents who moved to Britain in the 1960s, Braverman has, however, proved to be ambitious, ruthlessly controversial and outspoken. That has led to her playing a seemingly leading role in slowing progress on the current India-UK free trade deal (FTA) negotiations by opposing the sort of economic migration that her parents enjoyed.

Though quickly eliminated from the leadership contest that eventually produced Liz Truss as a crisis-prone prime minister, Braverman strengthened her post-Brexit popularity within the anti-immigration and anti-woke right wing of the party during the campaign. That led to her being made home secretary, one of the four top posts in the cabinet, at the age of 42 – even though she lacked the experience of most predecessors.

Along with Priti Patel, who she followed as home secretary, Braverman is far to the right of other top politicians of South Asian descent, notably Rishi Sunak and Sajid Javid.

Her stance horrifies many others from the subcontinent because she is denying would-be new immigrants the success that she is able to enjoy as a result of the opportunities given to her parents when they were economic migrants. She has said she is proud of what her parents achieved – her mother became an NHS nurse and local councillor in north London, and her father worked for a housing association.

Along with Patel, Braverman’s motives are widely thought to stem as much from political ambition as ideology. Both pander to the Conservative Party’s 80,000 largely right-wing members who elect the leader. They want to show they are “whiter than the whitest of Cheltenham colonels,” I was told, controversially but maybe aptly, by a friend of Indian origin.

Last week during the Conservative Party’s chaotic party conference, Braverman horrified government insiders by opposing more open immigration during a Spectator magazine interview for Indian students, key workers and others being included in the trade agreement that Truss and Narendra Modi had been aiming to sign by Diwali. That festival is celebrated at the end of next week and the target now has slipped to later in the year, unless some sort of interim deal is concocted.

Braverman also infuriated British universities with complaints about students’ extended families and said she wanted to drive down immigration, even though Truss’s economic growth needs immigrants to help fill over one million job vacancies.

Other cabinet ministers cashed in on the conference’s free-for-all and rebelled against Truss, who had been weakened a few days earlier by a disastrous mini-Budget and a financial crisis, but Braverman was perhaps the most disruptive. She has gone quiet publicly since then and last weekend joined a chorus of party leaders appealing for unity behind Truss.

British Prime Minister Liz Truss and Chancellor of the Exchequer Kwasi Kwarteng attend the annual Conservative Party conference, in Birmingham, Britain, October 2, 2022. Photo: Reuters/Hannah McKay

In The Spectator interview, she said she had “concerns about having an open borders migration policy with India” because she didn’t “think that’s what people voted for with Brexit”.

In the context of the trade agreement, she said there could be flexibility for students and entrepreneurs, though she had reservations. “Look at migration in this country – the largest group of people who overstay are Indian migrants. We even reached an agreement with the Indian government last year to encourage and facilitate better cooperation in this regard.”

The remark about India not abiding by the agreement to take back over-stayers is in line with Home Office grumbles over several years. It brought a predictable response from the Indian government that said it was committed to facilitating the returnees and awaited “demonstrable progress” from the UK.

Braverman talked about immigration in other interviews and has complained about the number of dependents who accompanies students – “family members who can piggyback onto their student visa.”

Lord Joe Johnson, who was universities minister in his elder brother Boris Johnson’s government, said her ideas on foreign students “bode ill for her period as Home Secretary if this is going to be her approach to, frankly, one of the most promising export industries that the UK has”. Without international students, the government could “kiss goodbye” to its ambition for Britain to become “a science superpower”.

The reverberations from the interview continued and led to a story in the UK’s Times newspaper on October 12 headlined “Indian trade deal in peril after Suella Braverman migrant comments”. This quoted anonymous sources from India saying the “relationship has taken a step back” while a British source alleged Indian officials were “apoplectic”.

In parallel, India’s Economic Times ran a headline that the deal was “stuck over access to skilled workers”. It said India had hardened its position demanding easier immigration into the UK amid the concerns raised by Braverman. A Delhi trade department spokesman was quoted saying India would not “sacrifice quality for speed”.

There are many other issues as yet unresolved in the trade negotiations where subjects range from access in India for Scottish whisky and British cars. A stumbling block is the UK wanting effective protection such as international arbitration for UK investments and freedom to store business data overseas, both of which India resists.

But apoplectic or not, relations between the countries seem as cordial as ever, at least at top levels.

India’s new high commissioner in London Vikram Doraiswami arrived three weeks ago and has been extremely active with a country-wide tour. Those he has met include King Charles, at a reception in Scotland, Liz Truss in a Downing Street reception, plus regional leaders and Keir Starmer, who heads the Labour Party.

Ultimately, the trade agreement prospects could rest on whether Truss has enough prime ministerial authority to overrule her home secretary in the interests of a deal that would be good for the British economy. Usually, a prime minister would be able to do that – but these are not usual times. Truss’s future is in doubt, and it might just be easier to let issues slide for now.

Braverman may however not have won the admirers and supporters she desires in the past week with her outbursts and could have even reduced her chances of stepping into No 10 Downing Street if Truss loses the job before the next general election in 2024.

John Elliott is a journalist.

‘Action Initiated in All Cases’: India Counters UK Home Secretary’s Claim on Visa Overstayers

Suella Braverman said that Indians are the “largest group of people who overstay” their visas in the UK.

London: India has countered UK home secretary Suella Braverman’s claim that the Migration and Mobility Partnership (MMP) had not “worked very well” saying that India had initiated action on all cases raised with it under the agreement.

In response to a PTI query about Braverman’s interview in The Spectator that branded Indians as the “largest group of people who overstay” their visas in the UK, the Indian High Commission here said that India awaits “demonstrable progress” on certain commitments undertaken by the UK government under the MMP that was signed last year.

“As part of our wider discussions under Migration and Mobility, the government of India is committed to working with the government of the UK to facilitate the return of Indian citizens who have overstayed their visa period here in the UK,” the High Commission of India statement said on Thursday.

“As per the data shared with the Home Office, as of date, action has been initiated on all of the cases referred to the High Commission. Further, the UK has also undertaken to fulfil certain commitments as part of the Migration and Mobility Protocol, on which we await demonstrable progress,” it said.

With reference to Braverman’s controversial comments about having visa-related “reservations” over the proposed Free Trade Agreement (FTA) being negotiated between the two sides, the High Commission noted that any future arrangements would be of mutual benefit.

“While certain issues pertaining to Mobility and Migration are currently under discussion as part of these negotiations, any comment on these matters may not be appropriate given that the negotiations are underway, and that any arrangement will include issues of interest to both sides,” the High Commission said.

Braverman, the Indian-origin minister who took charge at the Home Office last month, said she had “concerns” over the FTA with India, fearing what she termed as an “open borders” migration policy.

“I have concerns about having an open borders migration policy with India because I don’t think that’s what people voted for with Brexit,” Braverman told the British weekly news magazine.

Asked about visa flexibility for students and entrepreneurs under an India-UK FTA, she said: “But I do have some reservations. Look at migration in this country – the largest group of people who overstay are Indian migrants”.

“We even reached an agreement with the Indian government last year to encourage and facilitate better cooperation in this regard. It has not necessarily worked very well,” she said.

Braverman’s contention that the MMP has not worked very well is seen as a clear indication that she is likely to withhold Cabinet backing for any visa concessions for India as part of an FTA.

This would put her on a collision course with her boss, Liz Truss, who is keen to stick to the Diwali deadline for an FTA with India as one of her highlight trade deals since taking over as the British prime minister. Diwali falls on October 24 this year.

On the Indian side, the ease of mobility for students and professionals has always been a key aspect of any trade agreement.

At Event With UK Foreign Secy, Jaishankar Alleges ‘Campaign’ Against India on Buying Russian Oil

Liz Truss had insisted that the UK will not interfere in the sovereign decisions of nations, but the difference over Russian oil came forth in answer to a question at an event on Thursday night.

New Delhi: While Indian external affairs minister S. Jaishankar claimed that there was a ‘campaign’ to target India over buying Russian oil, visiting UK foreign secretary Liz Truss pointed out that while Europe may be purchasing this oil now, countries have expressed serious intent to bring down their dependence on Russia.

During her short visit, Truss had insisted that the UK will not interfere in the sovereign decisions of nations, but the difference over Russian oil came forth in answer to a question at an event on Thursday night.

According to the Guardian, on being asked to comment on India’s oil buys, Truss repeatedly said that she was not lecturing India or any other nation on how to react to the crisis in Ukraine, but framed the conflict was one between authoritarians and democracy. Severely critical of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, Truss said at the India-UK forum that her country will end its dependence on Russian oil by the year-end and added that India is a sovereign nation and she is not going to tell it what to do.

“We are reducing and eliminating our dependence on Russian oil and gas. That takes time. That is also true for other countries and the important thing for me is that the G7 has set a timetable to end that dependency and sent a strong signal in the market,” Truss said.

“There have been some pretty remarkable changes. Germany has changed its entire energy and defence policy as a result of the invasion of Ukraine. We need to keep doing that,” she said.

Truss said sanctions against Russia must be enforced. “We need to continue to put pressure on (Vladimir) Putin and continue to supply weapons to Ukraine.”

Jaishankar, meanwhile, insisted that the media and other countries were only focusing on India’s purchases, while ignoring similar oil buys from European countries. “It is interesting because we have seen for some time what looks almost like a campaign on this issue. I was just reading a report today, that in the month of March, Europe has bought, I think, 15% more oil and gas from Russia, than the month before. If you look at the major buyers of oil and gas from Russia, I think you’ll find most of them are in Europe. When oil prices go up. I think it’s natural for countries to go out and look for what are good deals for that thing.”

“But I am pretty sure if we wait for two or three months and actually look at who are the big buyers of Russian oil and gas, I suspect the list would not be too different from what it used to be and I suspect we won’t be in the top 10 on that list,” he added.

Jaishankar and Truss made these remarks at the India-UK Strategic Futures Forum, shortly after holding extensive talks with her on a range of issues, including the situation in Ukraine.

Truss’s visit to India on Thursday came amid increasing disquiet in the western capitals over India not criticising Russia for its attack on Ukraine and its decision to buy discounted Russian crude oil.

Jaishankar said India gets the bulk of its energy supplies from the Middle-East and around 7.5-8% from the US, while the procurement from Russia in the past was less than 1%.

The British foreign secretary said strengthening her country’s relationship with India has become more important than it was before as “we are living in a more insecure world, precisely because we have Putin’s appalling invasion of Ukraine and violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity”.

She wondered what would be the message the democratic countries will send across the world if the Russian president was successful. “If he was able to have success invading a sovereign nation, what message will that send to other aggressors around the world? I think it is very significant that the sanctions are applied on Russia along with weapons being supplied to Ukraine in its fight for freedom,” Truss said.

“We have seen the alliance of G7, including Japan, putting on sanctions. We are also seeing countries like Australia, South Korea and Singapore participating in those sanctions because I think countries across the world, regardless of their specific status or structure, understand that there is a fundamental problem if an aggressor gets away with invading a sovereign nation,” she added.

Truss said the impact of the Ukraine crisis will not be limited to Europe and will have far-reaching consequences.

“The idea that somehow we should only focus on Europe because of this crisis is completely wrong. I am afraid to say that the implications of this crisis are far-reaching. We are seeing global food security threatened, global energy security threatened,” she said.

Referring to major geopolitical developments, Jaishankar said what happened in Afghanistan last summer had a very strong impact on India, but it was not the case for Europe.

Ahead of her talks with Jaishankar, the British High Commission said Truss will work to deepen cyber security and defence cooperation between the two countries and announce a new joint cyber security programme.

It said the programme will aim at protecting the online infrastructure in both countries from attacks. It said India and the UK will work together to increase cyber security and carry out joint exercises to practise combatting threats from cybercriminals and ransomware.

“The UK will join India’s Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative and become a lead partner on maritime security issues, coordinating work with key partners in Southeast Asia,” it added.

The High Commission said the foreign secretary will also confirm 70 million pounds of British International Investment (BII) funding to support renewable energy use in India.

It said the current volatility in oil and gas prices and energy security concerns as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine underscored the importance of India’s green transition and move towards energy self-sufficiency.

In the talks, the two sides also discussed the implementation of Roadmap 2030.

The India-UK relationship was elevated to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership during a virtual summit held between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his British counterpart Boris Johnson in May last year.

At the summit, the two sides adopted a 10-year roadmap to expand ties in the key areas of trade and economy, defence and security, climate change and people-to-people connections.

(With PTI inputs)

India, UK Have a Roadmap for Defence, Security Ties, but Pursuing It Will Be a Challenge

While the two countries see a convergence of interests in the wider Indo-Pacific region, the roadmap has little to offer on the question of regional stability in India’s immediate neighbourhood.

In a bold move, India and the United Kingdom earlier this month unveiled a 10-year ‘road map’ to guide cooperation, a first for both countries, demonstrating confidence in their bilateral relationship. Defence and security ties were highlighted as one of five key ‘pillars’ to elevate the relationship to a ‘comprehensive strategic partnership’. Strengthened partnership in these areas is a prerequisite for a high degree of mutual trust. But, implementation requires imaginative thinking and sustained political and bureaucratic will on both sides, which will be challenging.

India-UK defence and security ties have been longstanding but low-key with unfulfilled potential. In 2015, the UK-India Defence and International Security Partnership (DISP) attempted to “intensify” cooperation, but implementation has been slow. The UK’s share of India’s defence market, for example, is less than 2% today.

But, the evolving strategic environment provides a unique opportunity to push hard to strengthen and raise the visibility of their defence and security ties. The UK’s post-Brexit foreign policy tilt to the Indo-Pacific and its defence focus on a “maritime partnership” with India provides a convergence of interests with India’s outreach to foreign naval forces as a potential ‘counterweight’ to China and its re-engagement with the UK after a nearly five year long hiatus due to domestic political wrangling over Brexit. Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Boris Johnson have publicly sought a “quantum leap” in bilateral relations.

Also read: Modi, Johnson Agree on FTA Talks, Visa Relaxations in Exchange of India Taking Back Illegal Migrants

In this endeavour, Modi and Johnson, in a joint statement following their virtual summit on May 4, agreed to enhance defence and security cooperation, welcomed the conclusion of a new defence logistics MoU, agreed to work together to support India’s indigenous development of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) (Mark 2) and sought to increase maritime co-operation. This was elaborated in their ambitious India-UK Roadmap to 2030, launched during the summit. In a welcome move, the roadmap widely identified the defence and security components to include maritime cooperation, cybersecurity and counter-terrorism, along with space and cooperation in the nuclear domain (especially on nuclear security and safety, non-proliferation, disarmament and non-proliferation issues).

However, there were no ‘big ticket’ announcements on defence and security, such as the launch of an enhanced trade partnership (paving the way towards a Free Trade Agreement and more than doubling of trade by 2030) and the signing of the Migration and Mobility partnership agreement. But, maritime affairs is set to be at the centre stage of their defence and security cooperation.

Both countries seek a partnership in the western Indian Ocean to promote freedom of navigation and improve maritime cooperation with the launch of a new maritime dialogue, information sharing and mechanisms for operational coordination. The new logistics and training MoUs, along with joint service exercises of greater complexity, facilitate such an engagement, as do bilateral discussion within the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), where the UK is a dialogue partner and India a member.

The first operational deployment of the UK’s new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier and its strike group, currently underway, will include joint naval and air force exercises with India. The UK is to appoint a Liaison Officer at the Indian Navy’s Information Fusion Centre for Indian Ocean Region (IFC-IOR). But, surprisingly, the roadmap does not mention the prospect of cooperation between the two navies in the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), an Indian navy initiative, where both are full members.

India-UK 2018 joint naval exercise in Goa. Photo: Twitter.

However, to be meaningful, this new official ‘track 1’ maritime dialogue needs to be ably supported by a policy-relevant ‘track 1.5’ maritime security dialogue between Indian and the UK think tanks that will be broader in scope to encompass the Indo-Pacific region and can raise sensitive issues in a private forum as well as discuss the best means by which to further bilateral collaboration.

Both India and the UK have agreed to work together to develop a “free, open and secure” Indo-Pacific region, underpinned by the rule of law and freedom of navigation and overflight in the international seas. They are closer than ever before in terms of their shared concerns over an increasingly assertive China. But, key differences remain, with both requiring to understand and discuss the other’s intent and priorities in relation to both China and the Indo-Pacific. Such a discussion could also include differing perspectives towards the strategically-located Diego Garcia/British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) in the central Indian Ocean, despite the political controversy over sovereignty.

Fluid situation calls for imaginative thinking

There also needs to be ‘imaginative’ thinking to maximise naval interactions alongside the new programme of joint trilateral exercises; this could include a quadrilateral naval exercise among India, the UK, the US and France. They also need to take advantage of their privileged port access to Oman’s Duqm port, where the UK has built a joint logistics support base, for joint patrols and exercises, including with the US and Oman.

The second significant but ambitious defence component is industrial collaboration on key military technologies through the co-development and co-production of the next generation of combat aircraft, maritime propulsion system and complex weapons. The April 2019 MoU on Defence Technology and Industrial Capability Cooperation (DTICC) was a welcome step in this direction. But, to be successful, there will need to be a ‘leap of faith’ to identify select projects and take them forward in terms of both funding and technological support. However, results are not likely in the short term.

Also read: Understanding the UK’s ‘Tilt’ Towards the Indo-Pacific

However, regional security developments will heavily influence advances in defence and security cooperation, far more than any of the other five ‘pillars’ of the roadmap (connecting countries and people, trade and prosperity, climate and health, climate change and mobility and migration). It is therefore awkward that on counter-terrorism cooperation there is only a single rhetorical sentence in the roadmap to take “decisive and concerted actions against globally-proscribed terrorists and terror entities”. Perhaps, this is due to the secrecy of the issue, although the joint statement has no hesitation in elaborating further. Or, perhaps, one side is less inclined or confident to share intelligence than the other; or both are? Yet, both have cooperated on intelligence-led successes in the past; this will be key in the future. Surprisingly, there is no mention of the inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to curb terror financing.

There is also no reference in the roadmap to the requirement for stability in India’s immediate neighbourhood. Perhaps, this suggests a divergence of perspectives on the Afghanistan-Pakistan region after the withdrawal of US/NATO forces in less than four months? If so, this is likely to re-emerge as a major challenge in advancing bilateral defence and security cooperation. The UK’s ongoing efforts at facilitating ties with Pakistan in order to seek stability in Afghanistan appear to India as enabling the Afghan Taliban to return to power in Afghanistan alongside greater Pakistani influence; India remains the only major power in Afghanistan’s neighbourhood that has not, yet, recognised the Taliban. Both India and the UK urgently need to raise their level of consultation on Afghanistan.

It must be recognised that the bolstering of defence and security ties does not take place in a vacuum. Among the European Union (EU) countries, France, Germany and the Netherlands have ‘full-fledged’ policies towards the Indo-Pacific, which the UK still lacks. India already has defence logistics MoUs with the US, Australia, Japan, France, South Korea and Singapore. The first EU-India maritime security dialogue took place virtually in January 2021. And, the UK is India’s fifth ‘comprehensive strategic partner’ after Australia, Indonesia, Vietnam and the UAE.

Finally, both India and the UK need to ensure visible and high-profile implementation on defence and security cooperation within the next 12-18 months, after which the political momentum in India will be lost in preparations for its next general elections in the summer of 2024. An important benchmark will be the visit of India’s cabinet-rank defence minister to the UK within the next 12 months, to mark the first such visit in 20 years.

Rahul Roy-Chaudhury is Senior Fellow for South Asia, The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), London.

‘It Is Very Painful That Whenever Sikhs Protest They Are Branded as Khalistanis’: UK MP

Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, a labour party MP in the British House of Commons, has been tweeting and making strong statements about the farmers’ protests in and out of parliament.

Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, a labour party MP in the British House of Commons, has been tweeting and making strong statements about the farmers’ protests in and out of parliament. Dhesi, who is of Indian origin, represents Slough, just outside London and the most diverse constituencies in all of the UK. People of South Asian origin are among the largest minorities in Slough.

Dhesi’s statements have angered the Indian government and this week’s debate in the British parliament on the protests and human rights in India, prompted the Indian foreign secretary to summon the British high commissioner in Delhi to advise MPs not to speak about the internal matters of another country. In 2019, civil aviation and housing minister Hardeep Puri had said he wouldn’t have met Dhesi in India if he had known about the MP’s views on Kashmir.

Dhesi said he’s outspoken about issues such as the mistreatment of minorities in Pakistan, and Article 370, because “if we do not stand for the rights of others, then what exactly are we doing in media and politics?”

In an interview to The Wire, Dhesi said “human rights are a universal issue” and the British parliament had held debates on abuses in other countries as well. He said he has always being outspoken and have to also represent the concerns of his constituents.

Dhesi said it pains him and other Sikhs in the UK that when they hold langars they are good and when they raise their voice they become Khalistanis.

Here’s the video of the full interview.

Farmers’ Protest: Indian High Commission Says ‘False Assertions’ Made by British MPs

The UK government said on Monday that the upcoming visit of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson will be utilised to raise “serious and specific concerns” as required.

New Delhi: The High Commission of India in London has condemned “false assertions” in a “distinctly one-sided discussion” among a group of British parliamentarians on Monday on the issue of peaceful protests and press freedoms in India, amidst the ongoing farmers’ stir against three new laws on agricultural reforms.

The Indian mission pointed out that foreign media, including British media, had been present and witnessed the events surrounding the farmers’ protests in India first-hand and therefore any “question of lack of freedom of the media in India does not arise”.

“We deeply regret that rather than a balanced debate, false assertions without substantiation or facts were made, casting aspersions on the largest functioning democracy in the world and its institutions,” a statement issued by the high commission said, following the debate which stemmed from an e-petition that attracted over 100,000 signatures on the parliamentary website.

The mission said it would normally refrain from commenting on an internal discussion involving a small group of honourable parliamentarians in a limited quorum.

“However, when aspersions are cast on India by anyone, irrespective of their claims of friendship and love for India or domestic political compulsions, there is a need to set the record straight,” the statement said.

It said that a false narrative over farmers’ protest was sought to be developed even though the High Commission of India has been, over a period of time, taking care to inform all concerned about the issues raised in the petition.

The statement followed a group of around dozen cross-party British MPs debating issues around the use of force against protesters opposed to agricultural reforms in India and journalists being targeted while covering the protests taking place at several border points of Delhi for over 100 days.

The UK government said on Monday that the upcoming visit of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson will be utilised to raise “serious and specific concerns” as required.

“While this is an exciting time for the UK-India partnership, it does not hinder our raising difficult issues,” said UK foreign office’s minister of Asia Nigel Adams.

Regarding the forthcoming visit of Johnson to India, Adams stated, “This will be an opportunity to discuss a range of bilateral issues with India. Where we have serious and specific concerns, we will raise them directly with the Indian Government, as would be expected of a friend and neighbour. Candid discussions are an important part of our mature and wide-ranging relationship with the Indian Government.”

Also read: Indian Agriculture’s Enduring Question: Just How Many Farmers Does the Country Have?

In his response to the debate, Adams said that UK diplomats have been monitoring the farmers’ protests since September. He stated that the Indian Supreme Court had set up a committee, whose final report is expected this month. “We are also aware that the Indian Government have met farmers’ unions on several occasions and that those talks remain inconclusive, but are ongoing,” he added.

The minister stated that it was understandable the events “have caused alarm and uncertainty for many British people who have family ties to farming communities in India”.

“The Government’s written response to the petition aimed to address those concerns while making clear that agricultural policy is a domestic matter for the Indian Government, as the Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Aberavon (Stephen Kinnock), confirmed. The UK Government firmly believe, however, that freedom of speech, internet freedom, which was mentioned by the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton South East (Mr McFadden) and many others, and the right to peaceful protest, are vital to any democracy.”

The UK minister stated that the if a protest “protest crosses the line into illegality, security forces in a democracy have the right to enforce law and order in a proportionate way”.

“We encourage all states to ensure that domestic laws and the way in which they are enforced comply with international human rights standards. In that spirit, we look to the Indian Government to uphold the freedoms and rights guaranteed to the Indian people by the constitution and by the international instruments to which India is party,” he noted.

The UK government, stated Adams, has discussed the farmers protests at several fora including during foreign secretary Dominic Raab’s visit in December 2020.

He asserted that this march, UK foreign office officials met with the Indian high commissioner and discussed “the UK parliamentary interest in the freedom of civil society groups, for example, to operate in India”.

Adams stated that his colleague, minister of state in charge of South Asia, Tariq Ahmad regularly spoke to his counterparts in the external affairs ministry. “Human rights issues are an essential part of these conversations.”

On the issue of Amnesty International being forced to wind up operations in India due to multiple cases, Adams said that this had been raised with Indian side in November and December. “We have requested that Amnesty’s accounts be unfrozen while the investigation is ongoing, and in our contacts with the Government of India we have noted the important role in a democracy of organisations such as Amnesty.”

(With PTI inputs)

Watch | What Is Global Britain’s Post-Brexit Grand Strategy?

In this episode of National Security Conversations, Happymon Jacob discusses the recently published Chatham House report entitled ‘Global Britain, global broker’ with Dr Kate Sullivan de Estrada.

In this episode of National Security Conversations, Happymon Jacob discusses the recently published Chatham House report entitled ‘Global Britain, global broker’ with Dr Kate Sullivan de Estrada (director of South Asian Studies and associate professor, University of Oxford).

de Estrada examines the myth of sovereign inequality and the inherent western liberal bias in the contemporary international order. She explains why the report views India as one of the four difficult countries along with Russia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. She also discusses UK-India relations in general, Britain’s attitude towards China, and its larger grand strategic concerns in a post-Brexit world.

Alex Ellis Appointed New British High Commissioner to India

The 53-year-old British civil servant will succeed Sir Philip Barton.

London: Alex Ellis, a British strategic expert, will take charge as the new UK high commissioner to India, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) announced on Tuesday.

The 53-year-old civil servant has been serving as deputy national security adviser in the UK cabinet office for the government’s integrated review on diplomacy, development and defence.

In his New Delhi-based role, he will succeed Sir Philip Barton, who moved back to the UK last year to take charge of the newly-expanded FCDO as its permanent under secretary.

“Mr Alex Ellis CMG has been appointed British High Commissioner to the Republic of India in succession to Sir Philip Barton KCMG OBE. Mr Ellis will take up his appointment during January 2021,” the FCDO said in a statement.

Ellis is described as having extensive experience in security issues and strategy, including as director-general responsible for the UK and European Union (EU) security partnership, international agreements with the UK’s closest partners and domestic and EU engagement on Brexit in the erstwhile department for exiting the European Union (DExEU).

He has also served as British Ambassador to Brazil between 2013 and 2017 and as ambassador to Portugal between 2007 and 2010. Ellis was also director of strategy in the foreign office, responsible for developing new tools for improving FCO and government policy.

As a member of the cabinet of the president of the European Commission, he had responsibility for energy, climate change, competition, development, trade and strategy; and before that in the UK representation to the EU working on the negotiations to establish the euro, the seven-year budget, and then institutional issues including the Treaty of Nice.

Ellis has also worked in the British embassy in Madrid, Spain, and started his civil service career as part of the team supporting the transition to multi-party democracy in South Africa, following the release of Nelson Mandela.

Prior to his civil service work, he was a history teacher and his other interests include singing in a choir, music, theatre and sports.

He is married to Teresa Adegas, and they have one son, Tomàs, who has Asperger’s Syndrome.

(PTI)

From Parliament to the Streets, London Takes Note of the Delhi Riots and CAA

Hundreds of Indian students and diaspora took to the streets outside the High Commission of India in London on Saturday in an “emergency” protest, and British politicians have been raising the issue both inside as well as outside Westminster.

London: The anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act protests and the riots in Delhi are having reverberations in the United Kingdom. Hundreds of Indian students and diaspora took to the streets outside the High Commission of India in London on Saturday in an “emergency” protest, and British politicians have been raising the issue both inside as well as outside Westminster.

House of Commons

On Thursday, Labour MP Khalid Mehmood told the House of Commons that “over the last few days Delhi has been burning at the hands of Hindu extremism” and urged the government to make a statement and debate the matter. Jacob Rees-Mog, the leader of the House, responded with: “The seriousness of what he (Mahmood) is mentioning in the House has not passed the government by.”

It would be wrong to assume that the criticism of the CAA is limited to the Labour party or the Liberal-Democrats. Steve Baker, a Conservative MP who is also closely associated with the influential European Research Group, as early as December 20, 2019 asked in the House of Commons whether the UK government had made an assessment of the effect the CAA would have on the human rights of Muslims in India. Labour MP Lyn Brown asked a similar question in the House of Commons on the same day.

Watch | Delhi Riot Survivors Feel ‘Abandoned and Stunned’: Farah Naqvi

Heather Wheeler, junior minister in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, replied that the British high commissioner and the deputy high commissioners are following “reports on the continued protests” and “raise issues with Indian officials where appropriate.” Baker has continued to use social media to highlight the anti-CAA protests in India.

House of Lords

A detailed discussion took place in the House of Lords on Tuesday, when the Earl of Sandwich, a cross bench peer, raised the issue. Displaying a close reading of the imbroglio in India, he spoke about the riots and protests in Aligarh and Delhi, and said that “five states” have refused to implement the law.

Referring to India’s founding leaders, he said that “it is doubtful that any of those leaders would be satisfied with the situation today”. He also referred to Khushwant Singh and R.K. Laxman and ended his speech with: “Will the [British] government now urge Mr Modi to carry out a review of the CAA and its effects on Indian society?”

Protest outside the Indian high commission in London. Photo: Ruhi Khan

He was followed by Lord Alton of Liverpool, who described the CAA and the proposed nationwide National Register of Citizens as a “draconian law that is communal and unconstitutional in its nature”. He told the House that “the promotion of majoritarian communalism, based on anti-minority rhetoric, has been evident since 2014, when the Bharatiya Janata Party came to power”.

Lord Alton referred to the role played by the RSS and the need to follow the constitution. “At a time when hate and intolerance are so much in evidence in many parts of the world, often fanned by xenophobic agendas, we must as India’s good friend urge its government not to abandon the high ideals of its constitution.”

Also read: A Hindu-Owned Parking Garage, a Muslim-Owned Footwear Shop and a 2 km Stretch of Riot Hell

Lord Raj Loomba, defended the CAA and said that it was passed by the Parliament and is “by no means anti-Muslim or discriminatory”. “India is the historical home of Hindus and Sikhs, and it is these minorities who have naturally migrated there,” said Lord Loomba, adding that “no Muslim country would either accept them or give them citizenship.”

Lord Meghnad Desai, one of the longest serving Indian-origin members of the House of Lords, said that there was a conjectural fear in India but it should be borne in mind by the British government that neither the CAA nor the NRC have been implemented. “The fear about this Act, which is quite genuine and has been expressed in a number of demonstrations, arises from what has happened in Assam.”

Other speakers included Lord Singhm who criticised the Indian government and referred to Amit Shah referring Muslims as “termites who should be thrown into the Bay of Bengal”.

Baroness Sugg, junior minister in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, representing the government accepted that the issue is divisive and that the UK government have concerns about the impact of the legislation. She also quoted Nehru (“whatever our religion or creed, we are one people”) to drive home the point of India being a secular democracy. She said that the British government had raised the issue with the UP administration for the first time on February 6.

Beyond Westminster

On the same day that Mahmood raised the issue in Westminster, Jeremy Corbyn, Labour Party leader, at a gathering said that in India, the human rights of everybody must be respected and protected. He spoke about how Hindus and Muslims “plough the same field, eat the same rice, cook the same dal, they live together and work together. So any citizenship law must respect that diversity, the right of free speech the right of assembly, the right to practise the religion you believe in.” Corbyn indicated that he would raise the issue in June at the UN convention in Geneva.

Also read: Ground Report: Brahmpuri’s Memories of Unity Lie Forgotten on Either Side of Barricades

Other MPs like Zarah Sultana from Coventry South took to social media to liken the Delhi violence to “Gujarat (2002), Mumbai (1992) and Delhi (1984)”. Tanmanjeet Singh Deshi, from Slough, recalled how the “incited violence in Delhi on basis of faith brings back painful memories of 1984 Sikh genocide. We must learn from history, not be fooled by those who aim to divide society, hell-bent on killing and destroying religious places – in the name of religion”. Nadia Wittome, MP from Nottingham East, called the “Delhi pogrom” as “no accident”. “The horrific scenes in Delhi show BJP ideology in action. British Indians will not be silent,” she said.

Another Labour MP, Yasmin Qureshi, wrote a letter dated February 16, 2020 to the Indian high commission saying that “she was deeply concerned that anyone who questions the policy of the government risk being labelled anti-national” and “being subjected to harassment and brutal attack by nationalistic groups.” “I urge you on behalf of thousands of my constituents from the Indian diaspora do not abandon the high ideals of your constitution.”

Outside India House

On Saturday, as hundreds gathered outside India House, joining protests across 17 other cities in the world including Berlin, Brussels, Geneva, Hague, Munich and Paris to expressed solidarity with the victims of the Delhi violence. The protests in London was organised by South Asia Solidarity Group, SOAS India Society, South Asian Students Against Fascism (UK), Federation of Redbridge Muslim Organisations (FORMO) and Co-ordinating Committee of Malayali Muslims.

“The violence in Delhi must not be seen as a riot. What has happened is a state-sponsored pogrom against the city’s Muslim communities,” said the South Asian Students Against Fascism. Catch Watch’s Satpal Muman condemned “the despicable and barbarous actions of all those people who killed innocent” in what was a “well-orchestrated, well planned” action. SOAS India society expressed their anguish over how the rule of law in India “has been suspended” and warned that “if the world does not take note and react urgently, the consequences will be disastrous.”