English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

“Two Muslims Near The Very Top In British Politics”

Published

on

“Two Muslims Near The Very Top In British Politics”

~By Saeed Naqvi

The three column, six inch deep headline on page 1 of the Daily Telegraph caught my eye:

“Doors open to thousands more skilled migrants.” Given the anti-immigrant rhetoric I had heard in Rome and elsewhere in Europe, the headline was refreshing. Even more noticeable was the name of the Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, the third highest ranked member of Prime Minister Theresa May’s cabinet who had reversed policy with the statement which formed the headline.

The 48 year old son of Pakistani migrants who started business with £ 500 bank loan had already established his clubability with the Conservative Party when he became Managing Director of Deutsche Bank.

Of comparable agility in the political race is the high profile Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, of the Labour party. He is only 41 but has already graduated through a stint in the cabinet as Transport Minister. “I am the first Muslim in Britain to have attended cabinet meetings” Khan said with pride.

One of the obstacles in the way of Donald Trump making a state visit in 2017, a banquet with the Queen et al, was the Conservative Party’s very bipartisan objection: how can we host a US President who has imposed restrictions on citizens of Muslim countries? “We have a Muslim mayor and therefore a state visit by Trump is out of the question.”

“There are two Muslims in this country who are positioned to make a bid for the Prime Minister’s post” said Lord Meghnad Desai. He was chairing a discussion on “India at 70: Nehru to Modi” in Committee Room 1 of the House of Lords. Instantly a question surfaced: can a Muslim nurse such aspirations back home where he has a history for a 1000 year?

“Two Muslims Near The Very Top In British Politics”

Last year, at a similar seminar at the King’s College, London, someone pointed to the presence of four Muslims in the English cricket team. This time I find that even the ever present Moeen Ali, with a beard longer than W.G. Grace’s, is not in the squad. This waxing and waning is itself proof of a consistent quest for merit. It is not just a blanket upward mobility that Muslims have acquired: a process of distillation is taking place.

The post 9/11 war on terror which distorted most democracies by transferring extraordinary powers to the Deep State, did not leave Britain unscathed. But persistent reliance on the Rule of Law has kept prejudice from taking root at an institutional level. The brief travel I have undertaken from London to Manchester has been something of an eye opener.

A distinguished psychiatrist with the National Health Service married to my sister, has been bed ridden with a stroke he suffered three years ago. The care he has received in hospitals has to be seen to be believed. He is under 24/7 observation. The four very English “carers” who visit him round the clock have virtually become members of the family. It would be malicious to put it down to the aromatic cuisines my sister rustles up every time the carers arrive.

One evening I was invited to a “All Faith”, post Iftar talk on a theme which surprised me because of its incongruity: the “wave of Populism in Europe”. It was all very graceful.

Earlier in London, I had seen Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, the local Rabbi and Priests of various churches, breaking bread with their hosts at a “street Iftar Party” outside Finsbury Park mosque. The enthusiastic white, English participation in the event was heartwarming.

The war on terror with its random targets did cast the Muslim in an unfortunate image particularly during the Tony Blair years. But excesses of those years also filled the ordinary people with a sense of guilt and compassion.

This somewhat exclusive focus on the Muslim in Britain must not obscure the overall south Asian profile in the country.  A recent study produced a very negative image of Pakistanis among the public. 1,668 British adults were asked last month to indicate the extent to which Indians, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis made a positive or negative contribution to life in UK. The image of Indians was by far the most positive. 25 percent of those asked thought that Indians made a positive contribution. When positive and the negative figures were placed side by side for Bangladeshis and Pakistanis their score was -4 (minus four) and -3 (minus three) respectively.

Obviously proportionate to their population in the country, there are fewer Muslims in the high aspirational bracket than there are Indians, mostly Hindus in diverse careers. This imbalance can be traced to India’s social history. The majority community took to western education in late 19thcentury itself while Muslims remained anchored to feudal nostalgia and their rich Urdu culture.

I, in my earlier years, have seen this country rattled by Enoch Powell’s anti-immigrant speech in 1968, exactly 50 years ago: “Like the Roman, I see the Tiber     foaming with blood.” The Liberal press reached out for Powell’s jugular and for a while Powellism appeared to be receding. But soon enough the country experienced another bout of street racism. “Paki bashing” became the war cry in the run down parts of the country. But such upheavals never unhinged Britain from its basic anchor: the Rule of Law. It is this anchor which has been the primary enabling factor in Sajid Javid and Sadiq Khan’s rise.

It may be instructive for us in India that Britain is a very resilient Protestant monarchy which overseas secularism tied with hoops of steel to the Rule of Law.

It would be absurd to compare apples and oranges. The bewildering variety of our civilizational tapestry is unique. Even so our trajectory could have borne some resemblance to “genuine equal rights”, a phenomena Britain can boast of. Instead our politicians dissembled at the very outset leading us into a messy path. I shall explain.

Latest world news

Trump says Iran getting more serious in talks, no decision yet on major strikes

Donald Trump says Iran is becoming more serious in negotiations with the US but insists no decision has been taken on launching major military strikes against Tehran.

Published

on

Donald Trump

US President Donald Trump has said he has not yet decided whether to authorise major military strikes against Iran, stating that Tehran has become “more serious” in its negotiations with Washington even as tensions between the two countries remain high.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Friday, Trump said discussions with Iran were continuing and suggested diplomatic efforts were showing signs of progress.

“We’re talking to them right now. I think they’re getting more and more serious as the days go by,” Trump said, adding that no final decision had been taken on launching military action.

Trump says diplomacy remains an option

Trump said the United States remained prepared for military action if required but indicated that ongoing talks could still lead to an agreement.

“We’re locked and loaded and ready to go. But we’re talking to them, so I think while we’re talking, we’ll see what comes of it. I believe they’re very serious. They should be,” he said.

The US President also warned that Iran would face a “much higher level” of strikes if negotiations failed, while reiterating that preventing Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon remained his key red line.

The United States has said its military operations are aimed at preventing Iran from closing the strategically important Strait of Hormuz. Iran, meanwhile, has carried out retaliatory strikes on US bases, with four American service members reported killed.

Reports claim Trump discussed large-scale military operation

Trump’s remarks came after media reports suggested he met senior advisers to discuss the possibility of a large-scale military operation against Iran. Another report said he was considering a “massive attack”, although Trump did not confirm those reports during his interaction with journalists.

He also acknowledged that the prolonged conflict, which he had earlier expected to last only a few weeks, was approaching its fifth month and had become a political challenge ahead of the US midterm elections scheduled for November.

Trump issues warning over support for Iran

Trump also addressed reports claiming that Russia and China were providing intelligence or military support to Iran. He said both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin had assured him they would not arm Tehran.

“I think they wouldn’t want to have me disappointed,” Trump said.

In a separate post on his Truth Social platform, Trump warned Moscow and Beijing against supplying weapons to Iran, saying such a move would not be in their interests.

He further stated that Xi had assured him during their meeting in Beijing in May that China would not provide weapons to Iran, while Putin had conveyed a similar position despite the ongoing war in Ukraine.

Continue Reading

India News

For second time, US strikes ship with Indian crew near Strait of Hormuz

Published

on

By

Strait of Hormuz

The United States Central Command (CENTCOM) has said that an oil tanker carrying Indian crew was drifting with its engine switched off near the Strait of Hormuz before it was struck by US forces.

A CENTCOM spokesperson said the vessel had stopped due to engine failure and was drifting after its crew repeatedly sought additional time to carry out repairs. US officials said the tanker was struck only after it failed to comply with directives issued by US forces enforcing a blockade on vessels allegedly transporting Iranian oil. The military said the strike was aimed at disabling the ship by targeting its engine room rather than sinking it.

The incident involved a tanker carrying Indian seafarers near the Gulf of Oman, close to the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s busiest maritime trade routes. The strike triggered a fire onboard, prompting rescue efforts by Omani authorities and maritime agencies. Indian authorities closely monitored the situation and coordinated with local officials regarding the welfare of the crew members.

The incident has drawn concern in India, with the government emphasising the safety of Indian nationals working aboard commercial vessels in the conflict-hit region. The Ministry of External Affairs has remained in touch with the authorities concerned as tensions between the United States and Iran continue to pose risks to international shipping.

In June, three Indian sailors were killed in a US strike on another oil tanker. The Strait of Hormuz handles a significant share of the word’s oil trade, and the latest incident has renewed concerns over the security of merchant vessels operating in the region. Maritime experts have warned that escalating hostilities could further disrupt commercial shipping and endanger civilian crews navigating one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump announces phased tariff of up to 200% on generic drug imports, India may face impact

US President Donald Trump has announced a phased tariff plan on imported generic medicines, raising duties to 200% after three years, a move that could affect India’s pharmaceutical exports.

Published

on

Donald Trump

The United States has announced a phased tariff plan for imported generic medicines that could have implications for pharmaceutical exporters, including India. US President Donald Trump said the policy is intended to encourage companies to shift generic drug manufacturing to the United States by imposing steep tariffs after a two-year transition period.

The announcement is particularly important for India, one of the world’s largest suppliers of affordable generic medicines and a major exporter to the US market.

Trump outlines phased tariff plan

In a post on his Truth Social platform, President Trump said the new policy will take effect from August 1, 2026. Under the plan, imported generic medicines will continue to attract zero tariffs for the first two years.

Beginning in the third year, the tariff will increase to 100%, before rising further to 200% thereafter.

Trump said the measure is designed to encourage pharmaceutical companies to establish manufacturing facilities in the United States instead of relying on imports.

He added that companies choosing not to invest in US-based production during the transition period would face the higher tariff rates. According to Trump, the existing policy governing patented, branded and innovative medicines will remain unchanged.

Why India could be affected

India is widely regarded as the “pharmacy of the world” because of its large-scale production and export of generic medicines.

Indian generic drugs account for nearly 40% of the US generic medicine market by volume. According to a Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) report, India exported pharmaceutical products worth USD 9.7 billion to the United States during the 2024-25 financial year, representing around 38% of the country’s total pharmaceutical exports of USD 25.8 billion.

However, the immediate impact of the newly announced tariff policy on Indian pharmaceutical companies remains uncertain.

Existing trade agreement and industry concerns

India and the United States struck a trade pact in February that states India would receive negotiated outcomes regarding generic pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients.

Despite that provision, previous tariff threats by Trump had already raised concerns within the pharmaceutical industry over the future of affordable medicine exports from India.

Indian pharmaceutical companies supply a wide range of generic medicines used to treat conditions including hypertension, diabetes, depression, cancer, infectious diseases and mental health disorders.

According to a Financial Post report cited in the source material, around 65% of birth control pill prescriptions in the United States during 2024 were manufactured by two India-based companies — Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Lupin Ltd.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com