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 rejects Iran peace proposal, warns Tehran over uranium dispute

Donald Trump has rejected Iran’s latest response to a US peace proposal, escalating tensions over uranium enrichment, sanctions relief and control of the Strait of Hormuz.

Published

on

Donald Trump statement

US President Donald Trump has rejected Iran’s latest response to a US-backed peace proposal, calling Tehran’s position “totally unacceptable” as negotiations aimed at ending the ongoing conflict remain stalled.

According to reports, Iran responded to the American proposal by demanding war reparations, the removal of sanctions, recognition of its sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, and the release of frozen Iranian assets. Tehran also warned it would retaliate against any fresh US military strikes and oppose the deployment of additional foreign warships in the region.

The dispute has intensified over Iran’s nuclear programme, particularly uranium enrichment. The US proposal reportedly sought strict limits on Iran’s nuclear activities, including a long-term halt to uranium enrichment and tighter international oversight. However, Iran’s counter-response did not accept key American demands related to dismantling or restricting its nuclear infrastructure.

Iran has maintained that its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes, while the US and its allies continue to push for stronger safeguards amid concerns over regional security.

The latest exchange comes amid continuing tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, a strategically important shipping route for global oil supplies. Concerns over disruptions in the region have already pushed oil prices higher in international markets.

Reports also suggest that the US proposal aimed to expand the current ceasefire framework and create conditions for broader negotiations involving regional conflicts and maritime security. However, both sides remain far apart on major issues, including sanctions relief and nuclear restrictions.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump approves nearly $9 billion weapons sales to Israel, UAE and other allies amid Iran tensions

The US has fast-tracked nearly $9 billion in weapons sales to Israel, UAE and other allies as tensions linked to the Iran conflict continue despite a fragile ceasefire.

Published

on

Donald Trump statement

The United States has approved nearly $9 billion worth of weapons sales to key Middle Eastern allies, including Israel and the United Arab Emirates, amid ongoing tensions linked to the Iran conflict.

The decision, cleared by the administration of Donald Trump, includes expedited military transfers to Israel, the UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait. The approvals were granted under an emergency provision, allowing authorities to bypass the usual congressional review process.

Emergency clearance amid ongoing conflict

Officials said the move was necessary due to the evolving security situation in the region, particularly as the conflict involving Iran continues despite a fragile ceasefire. The war, which began earlier in 2026, has heightened instability across West Asia.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio invoked emergency powers to fast-track the deals, citing urgent defence requirements for allied nations.

What the arms package includes

The approved package includes a mix of advanced defence systems and precision weapons:

  • Patriot missile defence replenishments worth over $4 billion for Qatar
  • Precision-guided weapon systems for multiple countries
  • Integrated battle command systems for Kuwait
  • Additional advanced weapons support for Israel and the UAE

The total value of these deals is estimated at over $8.6 billion, often rounded to nearly $9 billion.

Timing linked to iran war

The approval comes nearly nine weeks into the conflict involving the US, Israel, and Iran, with tensions still high despite a ceasefire that has been in place for several weeks.

Analysts note that the move signals continued US military backing for its regional allies, particularly in strengthening air defence and precision strike capabilities during uncertain conditions.

Criticism and concerns

The decision to bypass congressional oversight has drawn criticism from some quarters, particularly over transparency and the broader implications of increasing arms supplies in a conflict-prone region.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Trump and Putin hold over 90-minute call, discuss Iran war and Ukraine conflict

Trump and Putin held a 90-minute call focusing on Iran tensions and the Ukraine conflict, with warnings over escalation and talks of ceasefire.

Published

on

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump

US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a phone conversation lasting more than 90 minutes, focusing on escalating tensions in the Middle East and the ongoing war in Ukraine.

According to official statements, the discussion was described as “frank and businesslike,” with both leaders addressing key global security concerns. A major part of the conversation centred on the situation involving Iran and developments in the Persian Gulf.

Putin supported Trump’s decision to extend the ceasefire related to Iran, suggesting that continued restraint could create space for negotiations and help stabilise the region. However, he also issued a strong warning, stating that renewed military action by the United States or Israel could lead to “extremely damaging consequences” not only for Iran but for the wider international community.

Ukraine conflict also discussed

The leaders also discussed the ongoing war in Ukraine, which has continued for several years since Russia’s invasion in 2022. During the call, there were indications of potential efforts toward a temporary ceasefire, although no final agreement has been confirmed.

Reports suggest that the idea of a short-term pause in hostilities was explored, possibly linked to upcoming symbolic dates, but significant differences between the parties remain unresolved.

Focus on diplomacy amid global tensions

The call highlights ongoing diplomatic engagement between Washington and Moscow at a time of heightened geopolitical tensions involving both the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

While both sides acknowledged the importance of dialogue, the situation on the ground in both conflict zones remains complex, with no immediate resolution in sight.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com