Indo-UK News & Discussions- June 2017

mmasand · Post by **mmasand** » 27 May 2019 01:20

I can vouch, I live in a country where a non-immigrant visa has been issued for 99 years to Indians in particular for their contribution to society and trade. I believe there was a reciprocal arrangement prior to the 70's where several Indians moved to the UK under the previous Commonwealth resettlement scheme, a fair few Anglo-Indians and those who held British Overseas Territory passports moved to India.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 27 May 2019 03:35

Suraj wrote:Which major economy allows an endlessly renewable non immigrant work visa status ?

Germany, which is a major economy, issues endlessly renewable work visa, with no automatic path to citizenship. I lived there for 8 years, though I do not claim to be a specialist on immigration there. There are two catagories (for non-EEC citizens, including Indians): Unbefristetaufenthaltserlaubnis and Aufenthaltsberechtigung. The first can be cancelled at will, the second gives some rights of appeal. Germans did not believe in granting citizenship unless you are racially German. Fifth generation born German speaking Turks are not granted citizenship, but non-German speaking ethnic Volga Germans are granted citizenship automatically. This situation has improved somewhat currently, but they still talk of Blut und Boden (race/blood and soil) for granting citizenship.
I also lived in UK for two years, but I am not going to bring that up. In UK, the Indian community is strong economically and they know it. And "we are there because they were here."
Gautam

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 27 May 2019 11:17

Those are both settlement permits similar to a US green card, and not a work visa tied to an employer as such. Even the US green card can be revoked under several conditions. India does not have any settlement or permanent residence statuses.

The UK subject is much more different. They used to have no such thing as a citizenship, and everyone born in the whole 'empire' was a British subject. Then in the late 1940s the implemented the BNA1948 whereupon those who had right to citizenship of newly independent countries gained that citizenship and lost British subject status. Therefore, everyone born in India before 1947 was a British subject. Those who did not automatically acquire Indian nationality this way, e.g. Indians born in Uganda or Kenya where they did not give local citizenship to ethnic Indians - got Citizen of the UK and Colonies (CUKC) British status. Those people could freely move to and live in UK (which is what they did when Idi Amin kicked them out).

Later in 1971, the UK realized all those people born in the ex colonies could inundate the UK, and following hardline anti immigrant sentiment (led by Enoch Powell, who is most famous for his Rivers of Blood speech. However, Powell is less known for the fact that he had since his childhood desired to become Viceroy of India, and Clement Attlee's actions traumatized him and made him fiercely anti-colonial as a reaction. He's on record stating that he spent August 15 1947 traumatized, walking around London all night filled with anger that his 'dream' was shattered.

Regardless, until 1983, anyone born in UK was British by birth, and several combinations of circumstances, their children too became British by descent. This causes complications when people are unaware and later find out and leads to immigration related complications - something I know firsthand. The laws changed many times over.

However, the bottomline is, no major country has an endlessly renewable non-settlement status visa. It's not clear how some agents of influence have been able to continuously reside in India and even acquire property while being UK nationals.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 27 May 2019 14:44

Surajji,
I am afraid I can not agree with your conclusion. Germany does not have a green card for non-EEC citizens. Germany may give you a visa for one year or two years. These are renewed year after year, I know a lot of people with this situation. In my own case, I had a visa for 1 year, that was changed to a two year visa and then extended every two years. If I had stayed there, I would still get a visa for two years, till I was able to get a visa that was limitless (Unbefristet). But I was not given a right to this visa. After you have been there for a "long" time, and your profession is in need, they may or may not give you a "permanent" visa. Totally up to the civil servant's decision, or the current guidelines of the government. Rules are often not transparent as in UK, India or US, which are coming from the the legal system developed by the British. Germany follows the Napoleonic system which is significantly different. After giving visa, they may cancel at any time. With the second option there is some legal recourse of appeals. But Germany believes in keeping foreigners in tight control in this way. Jews were living in Germany for thousands of years, but they lost their citizenship quite legally. An extreme example, but it did happen not too long ago. Against this, the USA has the green card system, a permanent residency that is ultimately meant to lead to citizenship. Once you have a green card, you are eligible for citizenship after 5 or 3 years, depending. There is a presumption that a green card holder will be come a citizen. He is not allowed to leave the country for long periods of time presumably to grow roots in the country, and help in the economy. Germany on the other hand believes that citizenship is based on German ancestry not birth or stay. They say clearly that Germany is not a immigration country (Einwanderungsland). Non-EEC foreigners working in Germany are called "Gastarbeiter" or "guest" workers. The meaning behind "guest" is someone who is will go home after his time is done in Germany. In the meantime they are on an endlessly renewable non-settlement status visa. This system of Guest workers is not new. Germany had a need of foreign workers after the industrial revolution. They have been importing labor ever since. It reached a peak during WWII, when slave labor powered the armament industry. This continued after the end of WWII. For example, young men from Turkey, whose grand parents or great grand parents who came over are still not citizen.They no longer speak proper Turkish and speak German only, they are not expected to leave Germany at all . Yet they continue to be without German citizenship and remain on visas. The last point I would like to make is that Germans in general do not accept someone foreign with a German citizenship as "German". That is the reason most Indians living in Germany for a long time continue with a renewable visa. They do not want to loose Indian citizenship for a piece of paper. In this respect US, Canada and the UK are very different.
This is my last contribution on this topic.
Gautam

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 27 May 2019 20:36

You claim to disagree with me and then state largely in agreement with what I stated

India, like Germany, is a jus sanguinis country and has entirely eliminated jus solis basis of citizenship acquisition. India does not provide a path to naturalization from a work visa at all. As such, an infinitely renewable work visa that some foreign journalists use, is incompatible with Indian immigration law. India, unlike Germany, has no sustained skills shortage requiring such a visa system for workers, particularly when such a visa is monopolized by journalists (NOT a skilled visa category).

The entire line of original inquiry is about what visa does Indian immigration law offer, that can be infinitely renewed, and why India needs to eliminate it.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 11 Jun 2019 15:30

https://www.spiegel.de/international/eu ... 69597.html
British Austerity
One Family's Struggle to Escape Poverty in the UK
Although the United Kingdom is the fifth-richest country in the world, 14 million people in the country live below the poverty line. The problem has grown dramatically since the financial crisis -- as shown by the family of Kris Thomas.
By Raphael Thelen und Thomas Victor (Photos)
Kris Thomas is hungry. It's the kind of hunger that can make people weak and ill -- and ultimately destroy them. The 27-year old is looking for work. He has to provide for two children, and although he has the right to state benefits, that's currently not enough to keep his family fed and clothed in the United Kingdom -- the fifth richest country in the world.
So Thomas heads to the Bridgeway Hall Methodist Church in Nottingham. He walks into the low-ceilinged foyer with an empty sports bag in his hand and sits down at a table with his head down, surrounded by men in tattered clothes.
A woman in a green apron sits down with Thomas and asks, "What's the reason for your visit?" She's a volunteer at Nottingham food bank, a non-profit organization that distributes donated groceries to the needy for free.
As Thomas glances up to give her his pink voucher, a tattoo becomes visible on his neck: Stacy, his girlfriend's name. She and their children -- Cleo, 10, and Kaydn, 8 -- are also here. They're the ones Thomas is most worried about.
He says, "The Job Center sanctioned us and cut our payments, even though we had two job interviews." The woman in the green apron shakes her head. "That's a nightmare," she says, adding, "I start ranting when I hear this. Don't get me there."
Thomas nods and says that it makes his blood boil when he thinks about it. Many others are in a similar predicament: Millions of Britons struggle to make ends meet and hunger has become rampant in the country. Over 14 million people -- including workers, the unemployed and children -- live below the poverty line, and more than half of them are food insecure. For them, it's a daily struggle to put food on the table. More than 4 million children are affected.
Since 2008, the number of food banks has soared from 29 to 2,000. Hundreds of thousands of people use them. Because of widespread malnutrition, children have trouble focusing in school. Parents are more likely to get sick. The old are dying earlier.
It all began a decade ago, amid the 2008 financial crisis. The British government provided 500 billion pounds to bail out the financial sector, and by April 2009, Time magazine ran an article entitled "More Quickly Than It Began, The Banking Crisis Is Over." Profits started rolling in again for financial institutions. Stock prices recovered. Shortly after that, the newly elected Conservative-Lib Dem coalition government pushed through an austerity program and made cuts to the welfare system. The specter of hunger returned.
.....
Gautam

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 11 Jun 2019 15:33

^^dont look in isolation sir, UK has imported a lot of refugees in this period from Syria and where not...

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 11 Jun 2019 15:51

X Posted on the Terroristan Thread

MQM founder Altaf Hussain arrested in London: Metropolitan Police - News Desk

Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) founder Altaf Hussain was arrested in a raid by the Scotland Yard on Tuesday.

The arrest was confirmed in a statement released by the London Metropolitan Police.

The MQM founder was reportedly arrested in relation to the 2016 hate speech case in which he urged his followers to “take the law in their hands”.

Cheers

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 11 Jun 2019 16:09

Another interesting article:
https://www.spiegel.de/international/eu ... 70238.html
Oxford Professor on Brexit's Colonial Roots
'The Empire Was Celebrated as A Great Thing'
In the view of Oxford Professor Danny Dorling, a British elite drunk on nationalism is responsible for the Brexit disaster. Raised in the traditions of the British Empire, they continue to glorify the crimes committed during colonialism.
By Jörg Schindler, May 31, 2019
.....
DER SPIEGEL: Are the remnants of the Empire visible in normal places as well?
Dorling: You can see them everywhere. Go to the home counties, this ring of counties around London. Many people who live there are descendants of men who worked for as long as 30 years or more for the colonial offices in India. Then they came back and got a cottage with roses around the door, the one everybody is dreaming of. It was their kind of reward, a way to move up socially. So, our geography of the South of England is a geography based on the empire. And then, of course, there are the cities in the north of England that became rich because they were at the heart of the slave trade or various other trades which only existed and got so large because of unfair terms of trade with the colonies.
DER SPIEGEL: The British historian David Olusoga, whose father is Nigerian, writes in "Black and British: A Forgotten History" that the country is in a state of denial about certain aspects of its past. Why is that?
Dorling: Because it is too painful. We built up the most effective slave trade the world has ever known for 400 years. We depopulated almost the entire continent of Africa. You can see it on world maps. Then we go, oh, you do know that the Spanish and Portuguese started it first. And we teach children about the philanthropist William Wilberforce, who fought that system, as if we're the people who ended slavery in the world. It's remarkable.
DER SPIEGEL: But isn't it always the case that nations glorify their past?
Dorling: Not always. The effect on you if you're English on a visit to Berlin is stunning because it's so alien to be somewhere where violence isn't celebrated. You go into a war memorial, and there's just a woman holding a child crying, no soldiers. Whereas in my city -- I grew up in Oxford -- the highest statue on the public high street is still the statue of Cecil Rhodes. He was one of the most inhuman human beings in the history of mankind. He was probably also a pedophile. The irony is that more people are worried about whether he's a pedophile than the fact that he happily watched thousands of young black children die in his mines.
DER SPIEGEL: You argue in your book that Britain had to join the EU in the early 1970s because it had lost its colonies and was in economic decline as a result.
Dorling: Yeah, things were going badly wrong. We were tanking economically. We were crashing down because, every year, India was buying less woven cotton from Manchester mills because as a free nation it didn't need to anymore. And the assumption of joining was that, by joining the new market of the European community we would do well.
DER SPIEGEL: Which you did.
Dorling: But for many people it felt like a national humiliation.
DER SPIEGEL: Do you have evidence that the longing for the old empire was the biggest driver for Brexit?
Dorling: Not evidence, I think it is largely subconscious. But we do have evidence about the immigration worries. Why do the British hold such a disdain for immigrants and foreigners? Because our Empire textbooks told us we were superior to all these people.
DER SPIEGEL: But Britain has also been a largely successful multicultural nation because of the Empire.
Dorling: It is multicultural. It's a large family, but an extremely patriarchal family in which the domineering and violent and brutal father is white.
DER SPIEGEL: Do you think Theresa May's immigration obsession has its roots in in the Empire myth?
Dorling: Well, yes. She grew up not far from the place where I grew up. From the age of six, I was living in the Oxford suburb Risinghurst. If I had lived 40 meters further east, I'd have gone to her school. In my school there were a lot of black and Asian pupils. Urdu was the second language. Whereas Theresa May's school was an all-white school.
DER SPIEGEL: So?
Dorling: Don't forget that was in a time when black people were seen as dirty and beneath. Black men were not allowed to work in the car factory until the 1950s in Oxford. She grew up in a deeply racist time and deeply racist environment.
.....
DER SPIEGEL: Let's assume there will be a hard Brexit. Is it possible that Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson and the other nationalists are right, that Britain will succeed and maybe head toward an Empire 2.0?
Dorling: Oh, yes. The way you do it is you turn the whole of Britain into a Treasure Island. And we know how to do that because most of the world's Treasure Islands are under the Privy Council, like the Cayman Islands, Guernsey and Jersey and the Isle of Man. We know how to do shadowy Panama-style banking. It would be the death knell for all those islands, by the way, because if you can do it in London, why do it somewhere else?
DER SPIEGEL: You mean transforming Britain into a sort of XXL version of the Cayman Islands?
Dorling: We rapidly move towards that. It is exactly what the elite of the hard exit people want. The plan is that we offer really low tax rates for billionaires. And we can have the great London party season revised again and the May balls in Mayfair return again. The world's super rich would come to their London home for that part of the year. And they can have servants again. We'll have many more servants in the future if the Brexiteers get their way. We will boost our education sector. We will go to American-style fees, £60,000 to come to my university for the children of the very wealthy from China and India. And if you've worked hard enough and you're talented and you've got it in you, you can rise to the top and enjoy part of this and make the wheels of the world work better. We will be great again.
......
Gautam

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 Jun 2019 05:38

Sorry to gloat but... Month's worth of rain in 1 day and Brishitstan ain't so prepared neither

Month's worth of rain in 1 day triggers flooding, travel chaos in UK
June 11, 2019, 11:52:57 AM EDT
Parts of the East Midlands and South East England were inundated with more than a month's worth of rain in just 24 hours spanning Monday into Monday night, and more downpours are targeting the United Kingdom. ]

But I came to gloat about the WONDERFUL geniuses who scheduled the ICC World Cup in this place at this time. High danger of all teams having same points because they are all getting washed out. Stay tuned for TSP- AUS Matchup Of Champion (crooks) to get washed out todin. All that Reberj Shwing expertise on both sides going waste, so many bottle caps and vaseline wasted.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 12 Jun 2019 07:34

UlanBatoriji,
In a match between the white pigs and brown pigs, who to support as a Dharmic? I have been pondering on this for some time and can not come to a conclusion. Can you or others help?
Gautam

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 Jun 2019 07:54

We at UBCN are very clear on this. Here is the algorithm.
1. Support whoever is playing against Pakistan - UNLESS it is UQ.
2. If it is UQ vs. Pakistan, support Pakistan.
3. Windies vs. AUS/RSA/UQ/NZ: support Windies
4. AUS/RSA: THERE Dharma comes under real stress, but generally I would support RSA, they are poorer and less arrogant (since Nel and Herschel Gibbs left). After all RSA is the team of Hans Cronje the Father of Bookiestan, u gotta respect that.
5. AUS/NZ: support NZ because it is nice to see Roos getting defeated by tiny NZ.
6. BD/SL: I support SL unless they are in danger of getting ahead of desh in points.
7. Afghanistan: Fortunately they have only one player (the guy who plays in IPL), and he gets injured in due course.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Jun 2019 09:13

KSA is saudi, south africa is RSA.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 12 Jun 2019 09:19

OK. So, I must support AUS against PAK. This will burn my my p***c hairs, but a man's got to do what a man's got to do.
Thanks UlanBatoriji.
Gautam

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 12 Jun 2019 10:07

Support Pakistan against Britain?

Please see professor Dorling’s views above. And this man is at Oxford. Would a Muslim Pakistani ever write an honest appraisal of his nation’s crimes? Could he? Even if 10 % of brits hold such sensible views, that’s a lot more the any analogous Pakistanis.
Would you be subject to Pakistani justice or take your chances with British?

Never support Pakistan in any endeavour.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 12 Jun 2019 12:26

sanjaykumar wrote:Never support Pakistan in any endeavour.

What if they endeavour to destroy themselves?

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 Jun 2019 19:38

Rahul M wrote:KSA is saudi, south africa is RSA.

Now that I think about that, the K was in Three-Star King (whom MouthOffrikans often praise in every sentence). For instance, herschelle gibbs on Pakistanis as caught by Stump Microphone:

I ***King hate these ***King Pakistanis who ***King can't be ***King trusted.

. Also, Hans Kronje, the ***King of Krooks.
Speaking of Crooks, the Pakis seem to have reberj-shwung the 'Roos amazingly in the Death Overs. Bottle caps must be at work, though Amir's 5 seemed to all pace.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 14 Jun 2019 03:07

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019 ... is-johnson
The Empty Promise of Boris Johnson
The man expected to be Britain’s next Prime Minister makes people in power, including himself, appear ridiculous, but that doesn’t mean he’d dream of handing power to anybody else.

European view of Boris Johnson
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... british-pm
'Mini-Trump across the Channel': EU media on Boris Johnson as British PM

The Dutch daily newspaper de Volkskrant said Johnson’s appeal was as a “Brexit-believer, a 21st-century buccaneer, a pirate who surfs the oceans in search of wealth, unconstrained by rules or conventions”. But it said there was good reason to think he “believes rather more in himself than in Brexit”.

It said Johnson’s main strength was that “no scandal seems to stick, be it extramarital affairs, fraudulent statements, offensive utterances or an offer to help an old college friend attack a tabloid journalist.” For the Tories he was “the joker in the card game that Brexit has become”.

An American view of Boris Johnson
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/d ... -minister/
Watch: Don’t Underestimate Boris Johnson, One of Trump’s Picks for Prime Minister

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 15 Jun 2019 03:00

twitter

UK exports in 2017:

(£bn) EU £274.00bn

USA £46.50bn

China £16.91bn

Japan £5.79bn

Canada £4.90bn

Australia £4.59bn

Saudi Arabia £4.26bn

India £4.13bn

South Africa £2.15bn

Brazil £1.83bn

Spot the problem. #Brexit

RajD · Post by **RajD** » 21 Jun 2019 17:02

INTEL @ ind4ever just tweeted that the londonistan gave credit line of 4billion pounds to pakis. Is it true? When did this happen?

RajD · Post by **RajD** » 21 Jun 2019 18:42

RajD wrote:INTEL @ ind4ever just tweeted that the londonistan gave credit line of 4billion pounds to pakis. Is it true? When did this happen?

He is saying in another tweet that it was given very quietly to pak 3 days back.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 23 Jun 2019 18:11

https://www.spiegel.de/international/wo ... 73642.html
Nicola Sturgeon Interview
Boris Johnson Lacks 'Competence and Integrity'
In an interview with DER SPIEGEL, Nicola Sturgeon, the head of the Scottish government, discusses her plans for an independence referendum, the possibility of a no-deal Brexit and the battle in the Tory Party to pick Theresa May's successor.
Interview Conducted By Jörg Schindler, June 21, 2019
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, 48, is the head of the Scottish government and the chair of the Scottish National Party (SNP). The SNP has been shaping Scotland's future for the past 12 years with an unusual mixture of left-wing social policy and environmentalism, and a nationalist but immigration-friendly agenda. Sturgeon was also a prominent figure in the lead-up to Scotland's 2014 independence referendum, in which 55 percent of voters rejected the proposal to leave the United Kingdom. Sturgeon, a lawyer by profession from Glasgow, has now announced plans for a second referendum -- in two years at the latest.
DER SPIEGEL: First Minister, are you crossing fingers that Boris Johnson will make it into Downing Street?
Nicola Sturgeon: No. I think the prospect of Boris Johnson as prime minister is a horrifying one for most people, certainly in Scotland, but I suspect for large numbers of people across the United Kingdom as well.
DER SPIEGEL: Mr. Johnson appears to be an advocate for a no-deal Brexit. And according to recent polls, no-deal would boost the desire for Scottish independence enormously. Isn't that exactly what you want?
Sturgeon: I never relished the prospect of damaging things happening to the UK just to fuel the case for independence. I've always wanted that case to be fought and won on the positive perspectives for Scotland. I don't want Brexit to happen, although it will of course build support for independence, especially if Boris Johnson becomes prime minister.
DER SPIEGEL: Have you read the poem Mr. Johnson authorized as the editor of The Spectator, where the author referred to the Scots as a "verminous race" who should be exterminated?
Sturgeon: I've seen it, yes. I've also been reminded in the last couple of days of his comments that Scottish people couldn't become prime minister because of our political disability. Well, most Scottish people don't think he is capable of becoming prime minister either. So, the feeling is mutual.
DER SPIEGEL: Johnson claims there is no better person to unite the United Kingdom than him. But is he?
Sturgeon: There's nothing at all in Boris Johnson's political performance so far that would suggest that is the case. I travel a fair bit across Europe and further afield. And over the past couple of years, it has been very obvious that the UK's global reputation has been deeply damaged. The biggest cause of that is Brexit, obviously. But actually, pretty close behind is Boris Johnson's tenure as foreign secretary, when he demonstrated his lack of competence or any basic integrity. His career is littered with almost deliberate attempts to gratuitously offend groups in order to curry favor with somebody else. He's offended gays. He's offended Muslim women. Most people struggle to believe that somebody like him as prime minister could actually unite people in a common endeavor.
DER SPIEGEL: What do you think will be the likeliest outcome of the Brexit mess?
Sturgeon: I think two things have become more likely since the European elections and Theresa May's resignation. The prospect to have a second referendum that will potentially overturn the Brexit decision has increased. But so has the danger of a no-deal Brexit. People like me want to try to ensure the former happens.
DER SPIEGEL: Let's assume there will be no Brexit. Will you call for a second Scottish independence referendum anyway?
Sturgeon: Look, I am very firm there will be a second referendum on Scottish independence. I think the whole Brexit experience demonstrates to Scotland the real downsides of not being independent. Scotland voted by 62 percent to remain in the European Union, and that's been ignored.
.....
Gautam

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 24 Jun 2019 21:15

UK falling behind in race to engage with India, warns UK Parliament inquiry

The UK is falling behind in the global race to engage with India because it has failed to adjust its strategy to fit India's enhanced influence and power on the world stage, a new UK parliamentary inquiry report concluded on Monday.

'Building Bridges: Reawakening UK-India ties', released to coincide with the first-ever India Day in the Houses of Parliament to mark the launch of UK-India Week 2019, called for a reset of ties through better visa and immigration policies for Indian tourists, students and professionals as it accuses the UK government of missed opportunities in the bilateral relationship.

"The UK is falling behind in the global race to engage with a rising India ... The story of the UK's recent relationship with India is primarily one of missed opportunities," the report said.

"There are certain practical steps the government must take to reset its relationship with India, in particular making it easier for Indians to visit the UK and to work or study here," it noted.

On the issue of visas, it expressed concern that India seems to face tougher norms than a non-democratic country like China.

"There is no excuse for the migration policies that have led the UK to lose ground in attracting Indian students and tourists – who not only contribute to our economy but build lasting bilateral ties.

"The FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) should ensure that the goal of improving the overall relationship with India is woven into the broader government migration policy.

"Something has gone wrong, if it is more difficult for citizens of a strategically important democracy that shares our values, language and history to visit or study in the UK than those of an autocracy such as China," the report said.

While the inquiry acknowledged that in all fundamental respects the UK is well placed to capitalise on a mutually beneficial relationship with India, it warned that the relationship between the two democracies is not fulfilling its potential because the right message is not going out to New Delhi.

"As the UK prepares to leave the EU, it is time to reset this relationship. We cannot afford to be complacent or rely on historical connections to deliver a modern partnership," it said.

The report followed the year-long "Global Britain and India" inquiry, launched by the House of Commons' cross-party Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) in July last year to explore the India-UK relationship in the context of Britain's impending exit from the European Union (EU).

Through a series of oral and written submissions from a diverse range of organisations and individuals working within the UKIndia corridor, the influential parliamentary committee concluded that the UK must prioritise talks with India and do more to lay the groundwork for an eventual free trade agreement.

The Indian Ocean is identified as a vital arena for closer defence and security cooperation between the two countries.

"The FCO should take care to ensure that stronger economic ties with China are not at the expense of a deeper partnership with India," it warned.

Tom Tugendhat, Conservative Party MP and Chair of the FAC, raised the issue of the UK government's failure to formally apologise for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre during the British Raj in time for its 100th anniversary in April this year as an "important symbolic opportunity" which was missed.

He said: "As new powers challenge the structure of global trade and dispute resolution, we cannot miss the opportunity to partner with India. Trade, security, a shared commitment to the rules-based international system — these are all factors in our growing and evolving partnership.

"The government needs to make sure the UK is making its support for India clear, reawakening the ties between us and building bridges that are made to last."

Asked to choose between Boris Johnson or Jeremy Hunt, the two prime ministerial contenders battling it out to replace UK Prime Minister Theresa May, as the ideal candidate to implement the findings of the report, Tugendhat said, "Both of them can, having both been foreign secretaries and interacted with India closely. We need somebody who is able sit down with Prime Minister Modi and build a proper strategic relationship."

Lord Jitesh Gadhia, the Indian-origin peer in the House of Lords who has clashed with Lord Norman Tebbit over the so-called cricket test of loyalty for the Indian diaspora in the UK, welcomed the "candid" report.

"This report proves that we have moved on from the Tebbit test to the Tugendhat test. While the previous test set in the 1990s was about proving your loyalty, this is rightly about maximising the potential of multiple identities," said Gadhia, behind India Day in the Houses of Parliament.

The report's findings are expected to feature heavily during the course of UK-India Week, organised by the UK-based media house, India Inc, which includes a high-profile Leaders' Summit in Buckinghamshire, south-east England. "UK-India Week 2019 will no doubt deliberate upon many of the issues flagged by this comprehensive inquiry, not least the need for Britain to prioritise talks with India across sectors and issues, and effectively press the reset button to unleash a truly winning partnership," said Manoj Ladwa, the organiser of UK-India Week.

"Recent figures of Indian companies increasing investments in the UK and creating many thousands of new jobs, demonstrates loud and clear, that Brexit or no Brexit, India backs Britain. It is now for the UK to raise its game," he said.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 24 Jun 2019 21:20

g.sarkar wrote:https://www.spiegel.de/international/wo ... 73642.html
Nicola Sturgeon Interview
Boris Johnson Lacks 'Competence and Integrity'

Does it really make sense to view UK's potential PM and Brexit campaigner from the eyes of German newspaper interviewing SNP leader which wishes to break away from Britain? Perhaps The Mirror will next ask Argentinian President for views on British leaders.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 24 Jun 2019 22:28

JTull wrote:
g.sarkar wrote:https://www.spiegel.de/international/wo ... 73642.html
Nicola Sturgeon Interview
Boris Johnson Lacks 'Competence and Integrity'
Does it really make sense to view UK's potential PM and Brexit campaigner from the eyes of German newspaper interviewing SNP leader which wishes to break away from Britain? Perhaps The Mirror will next ask Argentinian President for views on British leaders.

Not a valid comparison. The Spiegel - despite its origin during the British occupied period of post WW2 - is a reasonable proxy for a continental media source that is not part of the Anglo-Saxon orbit.

The British press in general isn't competent enough a source for someone to depend on as the only source of all Brexit news. If anything, every one of them - from the Times to Guardian to Economist - is biased one way or the other.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 25 Jun 2019 12:38

Tullji,
Everyone is biased, specially when the writer's or the paper's interests are directly involved. Too much moolah is involved for an unbiased reporting in this Kali Yuga. But if we understand the bias, we can understand some of the truths that shine through. The Germans certainly do not favor Brexit, and are also trying to understand the politics behind the decision to leave. Take their opinions with a pinch of salt.
Gautam
Added later, European opinion is really fun to read, as they dislike the Angrez (that tiny nation of shopkeepers), even though some try to hide that fact. But this is my personal bias.
GS

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jun 2019 15:39

https://www.businesstoday.in/opinion/co ... 51019.html

Naresh Goyal deplaning: From Nirav to Mallya, why Indian businessmen flee to London
A malleable, manoeuvrable, corrupt system makes Britain a safe haven for years.
Rakesh Krishnan New Delhi Last Updated: May 27, 2019 | 19:57 IST

Britain is home to hundreds if not thousands of less famous Indian fugitives, most of who will never be brought to justice because Britain offers a unique environment in which international mobsters, criminals and terrorists get the red carpet - no questions asked.

One of the greatest thinkers of the modern era was a convicted felon. On April 17, 1621, Francis Bacon, the English philosopher, statesman, scientist and author, was fined 40,000 pounds. What was his crime? The lord chancellor, who was responsible for the efficient functioning and independence of the courts, had accepted bribes from litigants.

In 1837 when Benjamin Disraeli got elected to the parliament, a lawyer from his constituency accused the future British prime minister of bribing his way to power. It was embarrassing no doubt but the accusation was the least of his worries. "His electors did not mind the first charge. They lived on bribes," writes biographer Robert Blake. Disraeli's real crime was that he had promised the lawyer a bribe - and not paid. "That was a much more serious matter."

Bribery was such a banal thing in Britain that Disraeli had nothing against it per se. He was just too cheap to pay up. In fact, in 1841 he dumped his original constituency and chose a cheaper seat with fewer voters requiring fewer bribes.

For nearly 200 years, Indians saw the British penchant for corruption up close. Virtually every British civil servant in India had at least one hand in the till. Governor Generals Robert Clive and Warren Hastings were both accused of massive theft. In 1757, Clive received a quarter of a million pounds (an astronomical amount of money in those days) as a reward for winning Bengal for the British. That bounty apparently wasn't enough and he proceeded to steal millions more from the Indians. At his trial, Clive said, with a dollop of chutzpah, that considering the wealth he had seen in India, he was "astounded" at his own moderation at not taking more.

This penchant for greed is indulgently corroborated by the influential Scottish philosopher and imperialist David Hume in his six-volume History of England: "The British conquerors in India directed their pursuits to one object exclusively, the acquisition of money. They considered in every transaction of war, peace or alliance what money could be drawn from the inhabitants. They pillaged not with the ferocity of soldiers but with the cool exactness of debtor and creditor. Before they planned aggression, they calculated the probable proceeds, the debts they might extinguish. They considered war with the natives merely a commercial adventure: by so much risk encountered a certain quantity of blood spilt, and a certain extent of territory desolated, great sums were to be gained. The sufferings of India attached no blame to the nation." Britain has had regular trysts with crooks.

Modern Britain: Mobster's paradise

It is easy to understand why Jet Airways owner Naresh Goyal may have been fleeing to London. Before Goyal, there was Nirav Modi of the great diamond heist and Vijay Mallya who owns more than Rs 9,000 crore to Indian banks. Plus, Britain is home to hundreds if not thousands of less famous Indian fugitives, most of who will never be brought to justice because Britain offers a unique environment in which international mobsters, criminals and terrorists get the red carpet - no questions asked.

But why Britain, why not the United States or France? Well, firstly the United States tends not to be a favoured destination for international fugitives because the Americans ask intrusive questions. Secondly, Indians find it difficult to navigate through continental Europe without the knowledge of German and French.

That leaves Britain. Less than an eight-hour flight from India, it is conveniently located so that the family and friends of the fugitives can visit them over the weekend. The authorities there have handed over only one Indian, Samirbhai Vinubhai Patel in 2016, since both the countries signed an extradition treaty in 1992. Britain has not only rejected a large number of extradition requests made by India on different grounds but is currently sitting on nine cases.

When Indian officials and minister press their extradition demands, Britain's excuse is that it is a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights. This means if British courts decide that a person could face torture or capital punishment, or the extradition is due to political reasons, they may deny the extradition request. However, the country is using the Convention to shield hardened criminals and even sex offenders from India.

The real reasons for Britain's indulgent attitude towards Indian criminals are different. One is good old greed. Wealthy fugitives escape to Britain with unaccounted cash and wealth which can be deposited - with a wink and a nod - in the tax haven of Isle of Man.

The tens of billions of dollars in illicit funds siphoned to Britain from India, Russia and Africa add up to a hefty chunk of GDP. It is a big deal in a country that is rapidly becoming - as a Russian diplomat famously said - "a little island nobody pays attention to".

Plus, there seems to be a deep desire among the British to snub India because of extreme envy at seeing the former colony race for the Moon and Mars. It is intolerable to see India making it to the six o' clock for science, technology and GDP - even as millions of British citizens slide into poverty. The British judiciary's appalling decision to accept Mallya's argument that Indian prisons are not good enough for him is a reflection of that sentiment.

Welcome mat for terrorists

If providing a soft landing for embezzlers and criminals isn't bad enough, Britain is a sanctuary for hardened terrorists as well. Mizo National Front founder Laldenga, who conducted terror strikes against India with Pakistani help, was among the many Indian extremists who were welcomed in Britain with open arms. In 1971 after Bangladesh kicked him out, Laldenga found it remarkably easy to set up base in London.

Jagjit Singh Chohan, the founder of the Khalistan movement that sought to create an independent Sikh state in Punjab also found sanctuary in London in 1980. Secure in his new British home, Chohan declared himself president of the "Republic of Khalistan". On June 12, 1984, Chohan told the BBC: "Within a few days, you will have the news that Mrs Gandhi and her family have been beheaded." On October 31, 1984, Indira Gandhi was assassinated.

In 1984 Indian diplomat Ravindra Mhatre was kidnapped and murdered in Birmingham by Kashmiri Muslim terrorists. Fingerprints recovered from the gun used to kill Mhatre were traced to Mohammed Aslam Mirza, a British citizen, who was arrested in Pennsylvania in 2004. However, British courts let him go after Mirza claimed he had no recollection of the events of 1984 due to severe memory problems.

ALSO READ:PNB scam: Fugitive diamond trader Nirav Modi denied bail for the third time

Laldenga and Chauhan finally surrendered to Indian authorities after sustained Indian military and diplomatic pressure. But Britain refuses to change - it continues to offer a secure space for Kashmiri groups that raise funds for terrorist groups in India.

Russian experience

With 66,000 of its nationals on the run from justice, and a large number of them having found asylum in Britain, Russia is the most affected by Britain's policies. The Guardian explains how Britain has become a haven for some of the most dangerous and murderous criminals in the world: "This is competitive tendering, in terms of law and tax enforcement, and Britain comes in lower than other American and European rivals."

"Apart from the weather, what is there not to like here? An industry has been created to cater for the oligarchs' every need. Former ministers represent them in the Lords; former spin doctors do their PR; lawyers queue up to represent them, using Britain's hideously indulgent defamation laws to slap suits at the first sign of trouble."

"Financial advisers make sure the oligarchs pay as little as possible on their earnings, savings, and even their council tax. Private boarding schools welcome their children and their chequebooks."

Clearly, a customised ecosystem exists in the country that enables crooks and terrorists to either seamlessly integrate into British society or remain in private walled off enclaves in London's most expensive suburbs. This is the ecosystem that attracts the likes of Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi and Naresh Goyal who can continue to lead lives of affluence in a home away from home. And with London being a brown enough city, Indian fugitives are able to easily blend in too.

What India needs to do

A white collar criminal fleeing the country after wiring a billion dollars or more to his destination is more dangerous to society than a murderer. For, while a killer takes one life, a person who steals thousands of crores may ruin the lives of hundreds of families.

The prosperity of many of these families may be ruined forever; some may enter the ranks of the poor; others may commit suicide and leave behind a wife and children with little or nothing to survive on. This is why white collar criminals in the West often get longer prison sentences than homicidal maniacs.

Perhaps India could look at how Russia deals with white-collar fugitives. In 2003 Russian business oligarch Boris Berezovsky was given political asylum in Britain. British courts repeatedly refused to extradite Berezovsky who was convicted in Russia in absentia for embezzlement.

In 2013 he was found dead in his London home. In 2008 Berezovsky's long-time business partner Badri Patarkatsishvili had suddenly dropped dead. In 2006 their mutual friend Alexander Litvinenko, a KGB defector to Britain, had died of polonium poisoning. After Berezovsky's macabre end, the torrent of oligarchs fleeing Russia with their loot turned into a trickle and then dried up.

One doesn't expect India's political leadership to greenlight the development of polonium darts, but as they say, you have to shoot just one, the rest will get the message.

(The author is a New Zealand-based defence and foreign affairs analyst)

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 25 Jun 2019 19:07

It is not surprising at all that this was not from someone based in India.

ricky_v · Post by **ricky_v** » 25 Jun 2019 20:15

https://aeon.co/essays/from-tea-to-opiu ... k-on-china
Good piece on the Scots role in the eic, I recall there being some interest in the role of Irish , scots in the eic.

Scots’ relative poverty when compared with their southern neighbours, the resistance they faced obtaining administrative positions in London, and their experience and willingness to travel beyond the borders of the British Isles meant that Scots in Asia tended to be better educated and often better represented than their English counterparts in a range of professions across the empire, particularly the East India Company’s military. Towards the end of the 18th century, English observers commented, with a parochial dose of hyperbole, that everyone in India was either Scotch or Irish, or that you seldom saw more than five English to 20 Scotch in India

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jun 2019 20:35

they may have their internal divisions but against the indian they are all on same page wrt looting and beating.

aftr jallianwala bagh massacre a reign of terror was unleashed on people and pedestrians forced to crawl on their knees to pass certain streets.
same after the 1857 uprising, scots were at the forefront of the massacres , burning and plundering in old delhi. the city people ran away and city lay deserted for months.

so there is no need to spare any goodwill for scots or irish if they get harassed by their english masters now.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 26 Jun 2019 15:44

Singha wrote:they may have their internal divisions but against the indian they are all on same page wrt looting and beating.

aftr jallianwala bagh massacre a reign of terror was unleashed on people and pedestrians forced to crawl on their knees to pass certain streets.
same after the 1857 uprising, scots were at the forefront of the massacres , burning and plundering in old delhi. the city people ran away and city lay deserted for months.

so there is no need to spare any goodwill for scots or irish if they get harassed by their english masters now.

singha ji can you please put some credible links to be shoved up any brishit pomp..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jun 2019 18:03

the first confusion one should dispel is there were two Dyers involved. one was the rat who ordered the shooting and was in the military. the other was the governor of punjab. shaheed udham singh took care of the latter. the first rat died at age 62 in london of natural causes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Dyer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_O%27Dwyer

about the post massacre atrocities here ...

jallianwala bagh

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 773961.cms

1857

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/ ... deepramesh

http://theconversation.com/john-nichols ... ndia-99889

https://www.historynet.com/indian-mutin ... -delhi.htm - hodson, quixotically our IA still has armour regiment hodsons horse.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jun 2019 18:06

as per shashi tharoors book "era of darkness" which is a good read, the EIC goras got very lavish expat salaries while serving in india, and after completing a tenure were entitled to a fat pension in retirement back in england. this in addition to whatever they could loot or cart away on the side.

various men of questionable morals and a brutal lawless nature naturally found their way into EIC and the british overseas colonial officer corps. they had a field day in india and other colonies indulging in their cruel and vicious temperament - stuff that would never fly back home.

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 26 Jun 2019 18:27

I first came across this on a visit to Stirling Castle (the seat of Scottish power/throne) in Scotland - one of the exhibits is of the Scottish regiments based there and their 'exploits' in India during the 1857 war of independence. Looks like they were the foot soldiers for the English and responsible for much of the blood and gore in the colonies, and they are certainly still proud of it.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Jun 2019 20:04

Dyer the "Butcher of the Bagh", was hailed by the public after being tried, who contributed mightily to his cause and purse." The man who saved the empire", as the colonial spin doctors described him. The true facts and horror were not fully made aware to the Brit. public as were many instances of imperialist cruelty and misdeeds.A gloss of imperial pomp and pageantry covered a multitude of sins.To the average Brit., the empire was good for us natives and we should've been grateful for the treadmill, the lash and the lathi!

However, we are fast approaching 75 years of Independence and two generations of Indians born in post-colonial India. It's long past time for us blaming our
erstwhile colonial rulers for many of our current woes, chiefly corruption, political nepotism, family bandyism seen in several states across the country, and where we've unintentionally replaced our former royals with political upstarts behaving like potentates blessed by heaven !

Britain is also wondering how they let drop the India "ball".Despite the horrors of imperialism and Partition, India's equivalent of the Holocaust, a large amount of goodwill remained in India for its former rulers thanks to our forgiving nature. Yet British politicos ad its establishment , including its queen,prefer to deny the truth of imperial eviltude and cannot even apologise for the butchery at the Bagh. After losing an empire, Britain like a blind man in a dark room with the lights out looking for a black cat- that isn't there, is still searching for a role to play on the global stage that would reflect and resurrect in part its lost imperial grandeur..That ship sadly for Britain sailed long ago and Brexit has exposed how " little" Britain has become.Post Brexit it will decline even further and the fact that there was even an ethnic Pakistani contesting for No.10, indicates how the once mighty British empire has fallen.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 26 Jun 2019 23:08

This is a Europe-wide issue. UK, Netherlands and Belgium are all guilty of airbrushing their colonial history or basically avoiding it altogether - Belgium used to have 'human zoos' as late as the 1960s, where they exhibited Congolese people in cages for the natives to gawk at and take pics of. Netherlands does not - or at least until recently did not - teach the history of the Dutch East Indies in their schools at all. It's a great form of whitewashing - basically only those who try and look up the VOC archives will learn much.

A very standard argument of the British is that they brought industrialization to India. They point to the trains, roads and cities. There's a very obvious aspect of this that India has never historically countered. It's this: yes there was a rail system, cars, buses etc. They were almost entirely imported, and paid for in hard currency earned from agriculture.

There were approximately 12-15K (vsunder will have better data) locomotives in operation in India at the start of WW2. The first locomotive made in India was in 1895 at Ajmer Workshop, and until independence, they built ~400 of them. In other words, 1-2% of total locomotives in service in that period were Indian made. All the rails they ran on were also imported. Indian Railways claims to have been founded in 1853. However, there wasn't a single Indian Railways until 1947. What existed before it was 50+ independent companies running unconnected networks on half a dozen different gauges, all of it imported, with the Indian value add being the coolies installing the rails.

Now to cars - the first cars made in India were built by Mahindra and other during the WW2 under license. Every single car in India before that was imported. In 1950, New Zealand with 3 million people produced more cars than India with 125x more people.

Steel production in India in 1947 was 1 million tonnes. In 2018, it was 108 million tons (#2 in the world behind PRC). We exported ore and coal, imported finished products, and paid the value addition premium to UK.

Now step back and we can understand what the 'development' we got was - an entirely agrarian economy, where students were NOT permitted to pursue engineering studies, where the entire colonial services senior cadre was white, generated output at a VERY low output/capita (90% of the population was rural and engaged in agriculture then) and that income was used to pay for finished value-added industrial goods, with hard cash earned through primary economic activity - agriculture. India was blocked by tariff barriers from producing and exporting finished goods.

The goal of economic development is to increase value addition, and reduce the fractional share of workforce engaged in the lowest value addition activities. Agriculture has the lowest per-capita value addition, and that economy paid for the industrial goods it imported. That was our 'development' under British rule.

British rule did not bring industrialization to India. It brought industrial products to India, paid for with Indian wealth created from agriculture. Big difference. They argue that India lacked the skills base to actually produce the products and run an industrial economy. However, that is untrue - India ramped up steel, rail, locomotive and automobile production within a couple of years of independence, e.g. Chittaranjan Loco Works, the first generation steel plants and more. Data will likely show that production statistics rose an order of magnitude within the first decade after independence, over pre-independence production levels.

An extra piece of information on fixed asset infrastructure in India. The British imported and built a railway network until about 1920. At that point their perspective changed - it was clear that India would not be a forever possession, and loss of control was a matter of time, and investment dried up. By 1939, about a quarter of Indian railway infrastructure was ripped out and shipped to Mesopotamia, a major war front. In effect, in 1947 when IR was truly created, they rebuilt most of it from scratch.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 Jun 2019 00:57

It’s a pity the British did not colonise Japan. Japan would have been a mighty industrial power now.

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Jun 2019 03:49

JTull wrote:
g.sarkar wrote:https://www.spiegel.de/international/wo ... 73642.html
Nicola Sturgeon Interview
Boris Johnson Lacks 'Competence and Integrity'
Does it really make sense to view UK's potential PM and Brexit campaigner from the eyes of German newspaper interviewing SNP leader which wishes to break away from Britain? Perhaps The Mirror will next ask Argentinian President for views on British leaders.

Boss, had a couple of drinks with a few scots a few days back. SNP looks to forcibly enforce Scotlands divorce from "U" K if Boris gets to the helm, apparently one of them was literally frothing at the mouth !., chaps are not "commoners" and have direct influence with SNP policy makers. So take away message : Boris in Scotland out. Now some industrialists that i wont name can play spoil sport, but if not UK may not be "U" any longer

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Jun 2019 04:14

Been saying this for 20 odd years.After numerous visits
over 20 years
Scotland will leave the UK.I've seen a growing anger in Scotland growing each year against the mandarins in Whitehall ignoring Scottish interests.For example a stupid expensive bridge to the Isle of Skye was built 20+ years ago when the ferry took just a few minutes.Skye is famous for the escape by Bonnie Prince Charlie by boat from the mainland.Salmond was unlucky with his referendum verdict , perhaps Sturgeon will be luckier.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 27 Jun 2019 12:24

sanjaykumar wrote:It’s a pity the British did not colonise Japan. Japan would have been a mighty industrial power now.

Wasn't that done, at least partially, by their cousins-from-across-the-pond ?