logo
The Empire writes back

The Empire writes back

Burmese politician who served as Prime Minister of British Burma during the colonial era before the Second World War played a big role in instilling the sense of oneness among Burmese people. And this he did by promoting discrimination against Indians. Sam writes, 'Saw declared it his government's 'sacred duty' to promote Buddhism's proper practice. He set about passing bills that were prejudiced against Indians, including making visas to Burma too expensive for most Indians.
An interesting thing about Sam's writing is that it is cinematic. Picking up a book that covers complex history can get boring. Where's the lie? Especially if you've been in a reading slump. But with Shattered Lands, there is a very slim chance of that happening because you might have heard about Jinnah being popularly referred to as Quaid-e-Azam but not know much about his love for ham sandwiches. Sam mentions an incident where Jinnah's wife, Ruttie, drove to meet him at the town hall with packed ham sandwiches. Jinnah screams at her, saying, 'What have you done! If my voters were to learn that I am going to eat ham sandwiches for lunch, do you think I have a ghost chance of being elected?' Now, that reads straight out of a dramatic Bollywood script. Anecdotes like these make you want to keep going.
Sam's research on the Raj's westernmost protected states—reconstituted today as Yemen and five of the seven Gulf states—is not as extensive. The reader is also bound to make comparisons with the in-depth research about the east. However, he digs up many forgotten histories from dusty archives. Sam mentions Muhammad Ali Luqman, a Gandhi-loving Arab journalist in Aden, who once thought that the city's 'connection with India was organic'. By the time of the Suez crisis in 1956, he'd become a staunch Yemeni nationalist, arguing that South Asian residents, who'd lived there for decades, should 'quit our country'.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

India's West Asia Drift: From Moral Voice to Strategic Silence
India's West Asia Drift: From Moral Voice to Strategic Silence

The Hindu

time7 hours ago

  • The Hindu

India's West Asia Drift: From Moral Voice to Strategic Silence

Published : Jul 23, 2025 07:24 IST - 9 MINS READ It is a high-stakes game for India in West Asia given that it has over 90 lakh citizens living and working in the region. These workers, most of them blue-collar, remit an estimated $30 billion to the country annually. Three West Asian countries, namely Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), accounted for nearly 40 per cent of India's total oil imports in June 2025, underlining yet again the critical importance of the region for us. Indians of all religions work in West Asian countries in a variety of roles, skilled and unskilled. Skilled workers such as nurses and technicians earn substantial wages, sending high remittances to families in India. So, how does India engage politically with the region? Does it understand the region sufficiently to advance its interests? Are India's interests served solely by trade ties and monetary interests or does New Delhi have a role to play a role in the politics of the region? West Asia remains one of the most disturbed regions in the world, to put it mildly. Rivalries have long defined the region: Israel-Iran, US-Iran, Israel-Palestine, and Iran-Saudi Arabia are just some of those that have impeded the progress of the region. Loss of India's voice At the heart of all issues here is Israel, a state that has put itself above the law and killed more than 58,000 Palestinians since the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023. Over half of those killed by Israel are Palestinian women and children. On this most critical conflict in West Asia, India has lost its voice. Its failure to speak clearly and directly against Israel's daily massacre of Palestinians shows how closely the Central government's foreign policy is allied with Israel. As India cultivates various kingdoms in West Asia, it is clear that India's approach to the Palestine issue and to the US' attack on Iran on June 22, in conjunction with Israel, is no longer being seen through the prism of the basic protection of human lives or a violation of sovereign sanctity. For the record, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's tweet on the social media platform X after the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023, was clear and direct. His government stood in solidarity with Israel at 'this difficult hour' after being 'deeply shocked' by the news of the terrorist attacks. However, official statements have lacked this clarity or directness when it comes to Palestine or Iran. Toeing Israel's line Since Modi came to power in 2014, there has been a sustained effort to dilute India's support for the Palestinian cause and to address instead the repeated Israeli complaints about India's voting record at the UN. Indian statements, mostly general in nature, have avoided naming Israel as the state responsible for the relentless bombing of the Palestinians and the denial of food, medicine, and shelter to hundreds of thousands of people. Diplomatic both-siding is no substitute for upholding humanitarian values. Also Read | One year of Gaza War: Mental scars and a lifetime of invisible trauma On June 12, India abstained from voting on a UN General Assembly resolution calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and aid access to the starving people there. The resolution strongly condemned 'the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and the unlawful denial of humanitarian access and depriving civilians... of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supply and access'. But India did not join the 149 countries that voted for the UN resolution. Instead, it chose to stay in the camp of the 19 countries that abstained, while 12 nations, including the US, voted against the resolution. All South Asian nations, and Myanmar, voted in favour of the resolution, as did France and the UK. But India stood out. The General Assembly resolution, initiated by Spain, came after the US vetoed a similar resolution in the Security Council. While India's clear tilt towards Israel is because the Modi government and its right-wing supporters see Israel as a 'model' to emulate, the increased trade and military ties with Israel also play a role. The Modi government also does not want to displease the US or US President Donald Trump in any way. Remember India's silence on the tariffs imposed by the US and the repeated claims by Trump that he was the one who engineered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan during the conflict in May. Dialogue and diplomacy In an explanation of its vote to abstain at the General Assembly, an Indian representative claimed that there was 'no other way to resolve conflicts but through dialogue and diplomacy'. Given that India has not chosen to use dialogue and diplomacy with Pakistan, this claim not only rings hollow but is a contradiction of the aggressive language its party members and supporters use in public and on media channels. On June 14, India distanced itself from a Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) statement condemning Israeli military strikes on Iranian territory. The SCO said: 'Such aggressive actions against civilian targets, including energy and transport infrastructure, which have resulted in civilian casualties, are a gross violation of international law and the United Nations Charter. They constitute an infringement on Iran's sovereignty, cause damage to regional and international security, and pose serious risks to global peace and stability.' And this is what India had to say a day before on Israel's military strikes on Iran: 'We are deeply concerned at the recent developments between Iran and Israel. We are closely monitoring the evolving situation, including reports related to attacks on nuclear sites. India urges both sides to avoid any escalatory steps. Existing channels of dialogue and diplomacy should be utilised to work towards a de-escalation of the situation and resolving underlying issues.' There was no naming of Israel as the aggressor. No saying that Israel violated Iran's sovereignty. Nothing. Instead, India claimed to be monitoring the situation and urged 'both sides' to avoid escalatory steps. Israel had struck first, but India resorted to both-siding, as it has been doing of late between Israel and Palestine as well. On June 24, the External Affairs Ministry said: 'We have been following developments overnight relating to the conflict between Iran and Israel, including the US action against Iran's nuclear facilities and Iranian retaliation against US military bases in Qatar.' Stumbling vishwaguru This fuzzy logic approach is a far cry from what Modi once promised. Speaking in Sydney in November 2014, he had claimed that India would regain its lost status of 'vishwaguru' and would once again provide leadership to the world. If this were true, given India's relationships with key players in West Asia, one wonders why it is not mediating between Israel and the Palestinians, or why India is not helping Iran to talk to the US, or why India is not acting as a bridge between Iran and Israel. Given India's acclaimed new stature in the Modi era, it would have been fitting that New Delhi used its good offices to help resolve the many conflicts raging today. Instead, India proclaims dialogue for the rest of the world but not in its immediate neighbourhood. Interestingly, members of the all-party delegations who travelled overseas to convey India's point of view after Operation Sindoor said that they were repeatedly asked why India had nothing to say on the issue of Palestine. Change in stance vis-a-vis Palestine From refusing to agree to the creation of Israel at the UN in November 1947 to being among the first nations to recognise the Palestinian state in the 1980s, India has never baulked in its open and full-throated support not just to the Palestinian people but to all those engaged in anti-colonial struggles. Today, the situation is vastly altered. Notwithstanding Trump repeatedly equating Prime Minister Modi with Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir, India has stood with the US as it facilitates Israel's genocide. In the Russia-Ukraine war, however, India returned to its more traditional pro-Russia stance, even continuing trade in defiance of the US. India's membership of forums such as the SCO and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Asia) has increasingly become a problem in its diplomatic negotiations with the US. With a bully like Trump in power, someone who recently threatened an extra 10 per cent tariff on countries that side with BRICS (India is a founder-member) and 100 per cent tariff on countries that buy oil from Russia, India might find its balancing act coming to an end. It needs to be mentioned here that India's shifting votes on West Asian issues were also seen when the Manmohan Singh government voted with the US and against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency in September 2005. The vote created considerable consternation in the country and eventually resulted in the Left parties withdrawing support to the coalition government at the Centre. There was also considerable pressure on Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to send Indian troops to Iraq in 2003 as India and the US moved closer after the Kargil War of 1999. However, after consideration, the government decided against it because, as a senior official in the Vajpayee government told this writer, Indian troops would be seen as mercenaries. Equally, the weak-kneed response from West Asian countries to the ongoing genocide of Palestinians has also made it easier for India to take a pro-Israeli position. Even countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia have not gone beyond issuing statements. Engaging with West Asia For long, India has stressed the 'personal' nature of ties between Modi and the leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar and the importance of this in promoting India's interests in West Asia. However, in 2022, when two BJP functionaries made comments against Prophet Muhammad, there were strong statements from Qatar and protests from other West Asian countries. In a tweet, Lolwah al-Khater, the then Assistant Foreign Minister of Qatar, had said: 'The Islamophobic discourse has reached dangerous levels in a country long known for its diversity and coexistence. Unless officially and systemically confronted, the systemic hate speech targeting Islam in India will be considered a deliberate insult against 2 billion Muslims.' Also Read | Gaza: Scarred, ruined, and silenced by death Although the BJP took some belated action against the officials, the incident revealed that the world closely watches India and tracks hate speech by top-level members of the ruling party. One also recalls the uproar when the BJP's IT cell trolled Maldives, resulting in some diplomatic unpleasantness. Given the fact that key functionaries of the BJP have demonstrated a clear and consistent anti-Muslim bias, this story is far from over. Countries often stay quiet to serve or protect their own interests but speak up when pushed. In a world where colonial prejudices and policies have staged a vicious return, India would do well to re-embrace independent thinking, respect for the lives of people cutting across race and religion, and upholding the sovereignty of nation states across the world, which were once the hallmarks of its diplomacy. Amit Baruah was The Hindu's Diplomatic Correspondent and Foreign Editor of Hindustan Times. He is now an independent journalist.

India-UK free trade deal approved: which luxury and labor-heavy industries will cash in big?
India-UK free trade deal approved: which luxury and labor-heavy industries will cash in big?

Time of India

time13 hours ago

  • Time of India

India-UK free trade deal approved: which luxury and labor-heavy industries will cash in big?

India's Union Cabinet finally approved the country's free trade agreement with the United Kingdom on Tuesday, July 22. This agreement, formally called the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, will be formally signed by India's Commerce and Industry minister Piyush Goyal, along with Britain's counterpart Jonathan Reynolds on July 24. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer will be there to witness the proceedings. The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement aims to smoothen out trade hurdles between India and the United Kingdom by imposing a zero-duty regime on Indian exports such as textiles, leather goods and footwear. The United Kingdom will also face reduced tariffs on luxury exports such as Scotch whiskey and premium cars. The India-UK free trade agreement benefits India's labor-intensive industries The free trade agreement that was just approved by India's Union Cabinet is focused on bolstering India's most labor-intensive industries. Textiles, leather goods and footwear continue to have high production costs due to the labor-intensive process required to ensure product quality. If the United Kingdom imposes zero import duties on these industries, a whole new market will open up. #WATCH | London, UK | Speaking on the UK-India Free Trade Agreement (FTA) at the India Global Forum, Union Minister Piyush Goyal says, "It is unfair to call it a giveaway. Indian people add value to the UK economy when they come here...""This is not something we raised after… This trade agreement is part of a wider effort by Narendra Modi's government to maximize export opportunities for Indian industries, as well as attract foreign investment. As Indian exports become more profitable and sough-after, Indian enterprises may garner additional funding and investment from foreign parties. Likewise, the reduced tariffs on the UK's luxury goods ensure that the markets of that country open up to a new customer base of wealthy Indians. From 2024 to 2025, the value of India's exports to the United Kingdom has risen by 12.6% to $14.5 billion. The value of imports India received from the UK grew by 2.3% to $8.6 billion. The India-UK agreement is yet to be ratified by the UK parliament While India's cabinet has approved of the bilateral free trade agreement, the United Kingdom has its own process of ratification, which will occur after the signing ceremony on July 24. Due to the Labor party's majority in the parliament, this process seems unlikely to face any hiccups. India, UK concludes FTA; An elated UK PM releases video of his telephonic talks with PM Modi. Calls FTA historic Aside from the trade agreement on goods and services, India and the United Kingdom have also inked out an agreement on Social Security, known as the Double Contribution Convention. This will allow Indians who have short-term work contracts in the United Kingdom to avoid double contributions to their social security funds, ensuring they keep more of their earnings. The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement has been a long time in the making, with negotiations on the pact concluding on May 6. This agreement is projected to double the value of bilateral trade between the two nations to $120 billion by 2030.

China, India and the conflict over Buddhism
China, India and the conflict over Buddhism

The Hindu

time14 hours ago

  • The Hindu

China, India and the conflict over Buddhism

As headlines trumpet Chinese naval expansion across the Indo-Pacific and India's strategic countermoves in this regard, there is a quieter, higher-altitude contest already reshaping Asia's future. The real geopolitical frontier between India and China lies not in the oceans but in the Himalayas. And at its heart is not oil, trade, or weapons but faith. What looks like a spiritual tradition rooted in non-violence and mysticism has become, in the 21st century, a geopolitical chessboard. Monasteries that once served as centres of meditation and monastic education now sit at the frontlines of national power games. The reincarnation of lamas has become a matter not just of religion but also of sovereignty. And in regions such as Ladakh, Tawang, and even remote Bhutan, Buddhist culture is increasingly shaped not only by the sacred but also by strategy. China's campaign has escalated Both India and China understand that influence over Himalayan Buddhism is influence over identity, and in borderlands where lines on a map are fuzzy, identity is everything. For China, this means turning Buddhism into a tool of statecraft. Since the 1950s, Beijing has worked to dominate Tibetan religious life: it exiled or marginalised independent lamas, co-opted institutions, and, most crucially, claimed the sole right to approve reincarnations. In 2007, the Chinese government formally asserted that any 'Living Buddha' must be sanctioned by the state. The message was clear: spiritual legitimacy flows from political authority. This campaign has escalated in recent years. China now maintains a database of officially recognised reincarnate lamas, monitors monastery activities across Tibet, and has launched an ambitious Buddhist diplomacy campaign across the Himalayas. Sacred sites are being repurposed as instruments of soft power. Roads lead to shrines built with Beijing's help. Conference invitations are extended to Himalayan monks who return home with subtle shifts in loyalty. Meanwhile, India has largely played catch-up. Hosting the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan exile government since 1959 gave India moral clout but little strategic advantage — until recently. Only in the last decade has New Delhi begun to engage seriously with Buddhism as a tool of influence, promoting its heritage as the Buddha's birthplace and funding regional pilgrimage circuits. Yet, these efforts remain fragmented when compared to China's centralised vision. As one scholar puts it, India practises Buddhist diplomacy: China practises Buddhist statecraft. Nowhere is the tension more visible than in the looming succession of the 14th Dalai Lama. The spiritual leader who turned 90 in July, has signalled that he intends to reincarnate outside Chinese territory — most likely in India. Beijing, predictably, has vowed to appoint its own Dalai Lama, using the centuries-old 'Golden Urn' method. The result will almost certainly be two rival Dalai Lamas: one recognised by the Tibetan exile community and much of the global Buddhist diaspora, and one endorsed by Beijing and installed in Lhasa under heavy guard. This schism would not just split Tibetan Buddhism. It would force Buddhist communities across the Himalayan rim — in Ladakh, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nepal, and Bhutan — to pick sides. In doing so, it could reshape the geopolitical allegiances of entire regions. If the spiritual figure they revere sits in India, loyalty may deepen toward New Delhi. If he is seated in Lhasa, with Chinese backing and resources, the gravitational pull could shift east. Already, signs of this tug-of-war are visible. In Arunachal Pradesh, China asserts its claim to Tawang, birthplace of the sixth Dalai Lama — not only through military posturing but also through spurious cultural logic. 'It is Tibetan,' Beijing summarily argues, 'and therefore ours'. In Nepal, Beijing has invested heavily in Buddhist infrastructure, especially around Lumbini, the Buddha's birthplace. And in Bhutan, China subtly courts monastic communities even as the kingdom maintains a tight control over religious affairs. Working on internal disagreements What is striking is how even internal Buddhist disagreements are now strategic openings. The Karma Kagyu school — one of Tibetan Buddhism's major lineages — has two rival Karmapas, each claiming rightful leadership. China and India have found ways to align with different sides of the split, transforming a spiritual dispute into a proxy conflict. Similarly, the contentious Dorje Shugden sect, ostracised by the Dalai Lama, has found unexpected empathy from Chinese authorities eager to weaken the exile hierarchy. The battle for Buddhism is not about dogma — it is about who gets to define legitimacy, and in doing so, shape the loyalties of border populations. This is particularly relevant in places such as Ladakh, where the Buddhist identity coexists with a deep nationalist pride that is Indian. India's challenge is to ensure that spiritual allegiance does not drift toward foreign-controlled lineages, especially when those lineages sit across the Line of Actual Control. It is tempting to dismiss all this as secondary — religious pageantry in the face of realpolitik. But that would be a mistake. In the Himalayas, where territory is often inaccessible and infrastructure scarce, soft power is hard power. A monastery that shifts allegiance is a strategic loss. A high lama that pledges loyalty across the border can change the balance of influence in a valley, or even a district. And the stakes are only rising. After the Dalai Lama's time, the question of succession will become a global issue. Countries with significant Buddhist populations, from Mongolia to Sri Lanka, may be asked to take sides. The diplomatic fallout could be severe. For India, hosting the next Dalai Lama will be both an opportunity and a challenge: a chance to cement spiritual influence in the region, but also a trigger for intense Chinese pressure. The stage In this unfolding story, the Himalayas are not a backwater. They are the stage. The monasteries-in-the-clouds, the chanting monks, the adorned prayer wheels; they are not just relics of a bygone age, but instruments of power in a new one. This is where China and India are already competing — not with missiles, but with a spiritual succession crisis. And that is why, even as the world watches for signs of confrontation in the oceanic waters of the Indo-Pacific, the real front may lie higher — among the clouds and the cliffs, in the realm where the spiritual becomes geopolitical. The next great struggle between Asia's two giants could well be fought not with submarines and aircraft carriers, but with threngwas (prayer beads in Tibetan) and reincarnations. Nirupama Rao is a former Foreign Secretary and the author of 'The Fractured Himalaya; India, Tibet, China: 1949 to 1962'She posts on X as @NMenonRao

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store