
War in Kashmir will explode onto Britain's streets
Thanks to decades of mass migration, spiralling tensions between India and Pakistan could lead to serious outbreaks of civil disorder on our streets.
While we may be thousands of miles away, the UK has a vested security interest in ensuring that the current face-off does not escalate into a full-blown conflict. Such is the reality of modern Britain.
The April 22 massacre, in which gunmen slaughtered at least 26 civilians in the forest-covered valley of Pahalgam, was the deadliest terror attack in Indian-controlled Kashmir since 2000.
Responsibility has reportedly been claimed by a rebel militant group called The Resistance Front, which is said to be an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a jihadist organisation that desires full Pakistani control of Kashmir.
While Pakistan has denied any involvement in the attack, India has shut the main border crossing, expelled its military diplomats and suspended the landmark Indus Water Treaty (a water distribution agreement between the two countries arranged by The World Bank).
Pakistan has in turn threatened India with war.
This is bad news for Leicester, which experienced weeks of rioting between its Indian and Pakistani communities in 2022 over a cricket match between their respective home countries.
The city's already-shaky reputation as a positive example of multiculturalism was blown to smithereens as subcontinental-style communalism spilt onto the streets. Progressives were faced with an uncomfortable wake-up call when footage of Hindu and Muslim youth gangs brawling across the Belgrave suburb exploded onto social media.
Leicester was already home to large migrant-descended communities when it was hit by the ' Boriswave ', the unprecedented cascade of migration that followed the former prime minister's changes to the visa system after Brexit.
For the year ending June 2023, total immigration to the UK was an astonishing 1.32 million.
1.1 million of these were from outside the EU, with 308,000 coming from either India or Pakistan. Nigeria, which has its fair share of problems with ethnic and religious conflict, was also a common country of origin for new arrivals.
The rise of ethnic and religious identity politics – accelerated by the post-Brexit immigration system – means that the King's peace is increasingly threatened by conflicts in far-off lands.
This is exacerbated by the fact that the UK is a soft touch on Islamist extremism, even when compared to much of the Muslim world.
Britain also now increasingly has to contend with the threat of Hindu-nationalist ideology.
The last general election saw overt sectarian politics with The Muslim Vote (TMV) campaign, as well as the production of a 'Hindu Manifesto' that called for the proscription of those 'attacking the sovereignty and integrity of India'.
While we should be cautious over civil-war-is-coming alarmism, we must guard against diversity-is-our-strength complacency and not allow the normalisation of ethnic-religious tribalism in British life.
The Government must use all diplomatic channels at its disposal to ensure that growing India-Pakistan tensions over Kashmir do not spiral into an all-out war. Otherwise, it may well find itself having to respond to serious forms of communal disorder in its own cities and towns.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

South Wales Argus
17 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
MP repeats calls for inquiry into British role in 1984 storming of Golden Temple
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) referred to official documents released by the government in 2014 which showed the UK was aware of the plans by then-Indian president Indira Gandhi for troops to storm the temple to break up a protest by Sikh separatists who wanted an independent homeland to be formed, called Khalistan. The documents indicated Margaret Thatcher's government sent an SAS officer to help the Indian government plan the attack in 1984. Thousands of protesters gathered in central London on Sunday to call on the Government to honour previous manifesto commitments, and pledges by Sir Keir Starmer, to hold an independent inquiry. Speaking at business questions in the Commons, Mr Juss said: 'I was in the House during business questions on January 9 when (Tan Singh Dhesi) referred to the storming of the Golden Temple in Amritsar in June 1984, ordered by the then-Indian government. 'Documents revealed in 2014 said that the Thatcher government had helped their Indian counterpart by providing advice for Operation Blue Star. Since 2014, there have been many calls made and assurances given to establish the extent of the British government's involvement. 'So will the leader of the House please now agree for a statement to be given to the House for an independent, judge-led public inquiry, to get to the bottom of what happened, in her own words.' After the protest on Sunday, Mr Dhesi, a Labour MP, told Sky News he had been informed by ministers and Downing Street that an inquiry was 'under consideration'. After the release of documents in 2014, an internal government review found the UK's role was 'purely advisory' and given months beforehand. Then-foreign secretary William Hague said British military advice was given to India ahead of the deadly attack but said it had only 'limited impact'. Official Indian figures put the death toll at 575 according to the former Tory leader, who now sits as Lord Hague of Richmond in the House of Lords. Commons leader Lucy Powell said: 'It was raised with me previously a few months ago and I made clear what I hope would happen on that occasion. I absolutely understand the concerns of members across this House and from those from the Sikh community and many of those he represents as well. 'I did follow up when I was asked that previously, I have followed up these issues with the Foreign Office. I'm sorry to say I'm still waiting to hear about that from them, but I will ensure that when I do, he and other members are made fully aware of that and the House is updated.'


Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The 12 countries on Trump's travel ban list
President Donald Trump targeted 12 countries with a new travel ban, with seven more countries facing restricted travel. Nationals of Afghanistan, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will be barred from entering the United States under the new order, which goes into effect on June 9. Citizens of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela will be partially restricted from traveling, removing access to all immigrant visas and several non-immigrant travel options. Trump also issued a warning that Egypt could soon join the no-fly list in the wake of the Colorado terror attack in which an Egyptian national who overstayed his visa allegedly set fire to pro-Israel demonstrators. 'We don't want 'em,' Trump said bluntly in a video released shortly after the ban was announced. 'Very simply, we cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen.' The White House offered a range of reasons of why these countries were targeted: saying these countries have lax screening of travelers, have a 'significant terrorist presence,' and their government wasn't cooperative enough in accepting deported citizens or residents who were prone to overstaying their visas in the United States. In his first term, Trump tried to bar travelers from seven mostly Muslim-majority countries. Five of those countries are on the new list: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Exceptions will be made for lawful permanent residents, existing visa holders, certain visa categories and individuals whose entry is deemed to serve U.S. national interests. The order is expected to draw legal challenges. Only two of the 19 countries are on the US government's State Sponsors of Terrorism list - Iran, which has a full ban, and Cuba, which has partial travel restrictions. During his first term in office, Trump announced a ban on travelers from seven majority-Muslim nations, a policy that went through several iterations before it was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. Former President Joe Biden, a Democrat who succeeded Trump, repealed the ban in 2021, calling it 'a stain on our national conscience.' But Trump touted the successes of his initial 2017 travel bans in his proclamation. 'During my first Administration, I restricted the entry of foreign nationals into the United States, which successfully prevented national security threats from reaching our borders and which the Supreme Court upheld,' the president wrote. 'It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes. 'The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests. 'More importantly, the United States must identify such aliens before their admission or entry into the United States. 'The United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other threats to our national security.' Trump said the list is 'subject to revision' if nations work toward improving the vetting system of their nationals. Similarly, other nations can be added to the list if Trump later believes they pose a risk to national security. But as it stands, the nations included on the list have disappointed Trump in various ways, either by having a high rate of nationals who overstay their visas or by limiting the United States' access to security data. The primary concern for Iranian nationals is that the government 'is a state sponsor of terrorism.' In that instance, Trump argued 'Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, is the source of significant terrorism around the world, and has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals.' Similarly, the inclusion of Somalia comes after 'The United States Government identified Somalia as a terrorist safe haven. 'Terrorists use regions of Somalia as safe havens from which they plan, facilitate, and conduct their operations.' Haitian nationals, Trump argued, have a higher likelihood of trying to overstay their visas. 'Additionally, hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration,' the president said. 'This influx harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats.' During the run-up to the election, thousands of Haitian migrants who had moved to Springfield, Ohio drew the ire of President Trump, who claimed that some of them were even eating pets. Eritrea, for example, has been included on the list because 'the United States questions the competence of the central authority for issuance of passports or civil documents in Eritrea.' Trump wrote: 'Criminal records are not available to the United States for Eritrean nationals. Eritrea has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.' Trump added that 'many of these countries have also taken advantage of the United States in their exploitation of our visa system and their historic failure to accept back their removable nationals.' Trump said the decision was made in collaboration with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Ratcliffe. For the seven nations who have had their access to the United States severely restricted, Trump has clarified that authorities will no longer accept any immigrant visa applications. Additionally, a host of nonimmigrant visa options will be revoked, and those that remain will have 'reduced validity... to the extent permitted by law.' Looking ahead to the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, Trump has already added a clause in his proclamation which states: 'Any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event' will be exempt.


North Wales Live
20 minutes ago
- North Wales Live
Donald Trump's travel ban - all you need to know and what it means for Brits
Donald Trump has implemented one of the most extensive travel bans in history. The US President has announced new travel restrictions on 19 countries, which is approximately a tenth of all nations globally. From June 9, nationals from Afghanistan, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen will be prohibited from entering the United States under the new regulations. Citizens from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela will encounter partial restrictions, losing access to all immigrant visas and several non-immigrant travel options, with only a select few on special visas, such as diplomats, permitted entry into the US from these nations. Trump has cited various reasons for imposing these bans, including insufficient traveller screening, "a significant terrorist presence" within these countries, governments that are hesitant to repatriate deported nationals, or citizens who frequently overstay their visas in the US, reports the Mirror. The bans are the latest in a series of anti-immigration moves introduced by Trump, which also include a block on people coming over the southern border to claim asylum and instructing heavily armed ICE immigration officers to make raids across the country. Why is the ban happening now? The announcement was made in the days after an Egyptian man in Colorado was arrested and charged with carrying out an attack on a group honouring hostages held in Gaza. The US President directly linked the travel bans to the "recent terror attack", claiming that it "underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted". Trump added: "We don't want them." In reality, the incident provides a convenient political reason to resurrect and expand policies that featured in Trump's first presidency, and comes after several months of build-up. In his first term, Trump was explicit about his desire to ban citizens from countries where Islam is the primary religion. At that time, he ordered a travel ban against people from seven Muslim-majority countries from coming to the US. This set of restrictions has clear echoes of the first. Made louder on Wednesday evening when Trump alluded to migration from Middle Eastern countries to Europe. "We will not let what happened in Europe happen to America," he said. Are there exemptions? Yes. If you are a national from one of the 19 "banned" countries, but have an existing visa to the US, you will be exempt from the ban, the New York Times reports. Green card holders, athletes travelling to the US for the coming World Cup and Olympics, and Afghans eligible for the Special Immigrant Visa program that was introduced following the US's invasion of the country, are also exempt. Those from the "banned" countries seeking visas through connections to US family members can continue to do so. That means those who have trips planned to the US, but already have their paperwork in order, will be able to travel. Whether they want to is a different question. There have been many reports of tourists to the US facing lengthy scrutiny at the US border since Trump's second term began, having their phones combed through and even being placed in detention for days at a time. The cooling effect is already being felt. The United States is on track to lose $12.5bn (£9.4bn) in international travel spending this year, according to a study published on Tuesday by the World Travel and Tourism Council. What if I'm a dual citizen? This is a situation a lot of Brits may find themselves in. If, for example, if you've got dual Somalian and British citizenship, you are exempt from the order. The same goes for all of the 19 countries included on the list. What if I've been to one of the banned countries? This is a little complicated, and the full answer is not yet clear. As things are now, UK passport holders can apply for an Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA), instead of getting a full visa. If, however, you're British but were in the following countries on or after March 2011, then you can't get an ESTA. The countries include: Iraq Libya North Korea Somalia Sudan Syria Yemen You cannot apply for an ESTA visa waiver if you travelled to or were in Cuba on or after 12 January 2021. However, if you fall into that camp, you can still apply for a visa. That is a lengthier process and the chances of getting rejected are higher.