There is nothing in Rishi Sunak’s elevation to celebrate for Indians

“The takeaway from the hullabaloo over the elevation of a beef-eating-yet-cow-worshipping opportunist as the new PM of Britain is that there is nothing to celebrate in it for Indians. In fact, if Sunak is a Churchill worshipper, like most other Tories, India has a lot to be worried about while dealing with a seemingly brown person on the other side of the table. The contempt of the British government — which included Sunak — for Indian territorial integrity was in full display last year when it hosted the Khalistan referendum in London.”

“With the Kamala Harris example, it should have by now become clear to Indian politicians that a person of Indian origin gaining political office abroad is often more of a liability than an advantage to further India’s interests in that country. A politician by definition is at the mercy of his or her constituents, colleagues, co-conspirators and the media. So, even a hint of a lack of loyalty to the local mores can finish off a career. No wonder the US has still not elected a President or a Vice-President from a minority religious group or even an atheist; all of them since 1789 seem to have got sworn into office with a hand on the Bible.”

At  closer inspection, all the panegyrics – mother of all parliaments, the womb of democracy, the Westminster Model – ring ridiculously hollow. Sure, no one ever told the British king that his democracy was showing. It was only when Rishi Sunak was appointed (or selected) to the Prime Minister’s office did it occur to the world that the mother of all parliaments had all along let only White children hold her hand. The celebrated Westminster Model was all about protecting White privilege, and yet, the knaves of the old colonies were copying it, again, to preserve White privilege, for this model afforded the old master the occasion to tinker with newly-freed slaves.

An Indian-origin person gaining political office abroad is more of a liability than an advantage to further India’s interests. It is indeed a matter of great shame that an institution that traces its history back to the 13th century never allowed a person from a minority community to head the house. So, all the talk of diversity, often funded by British NGOs, should now start by addressing why it took Britain so long to have diversity at 10 Downing Street. And that question leads to another, more pertinent one: Why now? Why should a nation that prides itself on its customs, traditions, wigs and gowns suddenly abandon it all for a brown man professing a “beastly religion”? The answer could only be that it is in the British interest to have Sunak as Prime Minister. Only those who have a good ear to the London ground can tell us exactly what particular interests Sunak serves.

But there is no doubt whatsoever that he has been chosen to serve the interests of the White privilege or the western consensus. After becoming the Prime Minister, Sunak has pressed all the right buttons. He pumped up Zelenskyy, snubbing Putin, promised to counter China’s ‘malign influence’ and appointed an anti-immigration Home Secretary. So, it remains a mystery why it should be Sunak and not another White MP. Does this appointment have anything to do with a course correction in the British or western perspective over their loosening grip over India?

The fear of the rise of China has obviously restricted the movement of the instruments of global finance capital headquartered in London, and they would obviously have far fewer takers in an emasculated Europe, particularly after Brexit. In that context, the best possible market to make money is the poorly regulated yet bottomless Indian market. Despite demonetization devastating the informal sector and the Covid lockdown inflicting untold pain on the poor, the Indian market is bouncing back like a ping-pong ball. With almost every other slightly upper-middle-class Indian family sending its wards to the West for higher studies, it would seem as if middle India on an average has a disposable income of about half-a-crore rupees. So, it makes sense for a nation of shopkeepers to have a brown man to sell its wares.

The takeaway from the hullabaloo over the elevation of a beef-eating-yet-cow-worshipping opportunist as the new PM of Britain is that there is nothing to celebrate in it for Indians. In fact, if Sunak is a Churchill worshipper, like most other Tories, India has a lot to be worried about while dealing with a seemingly brown person on the other side of the table. The contempt of the British government — which included Sunak — for Indian territorial integrity was in full display last year when it hosted the Khalistan referendum in London.

Interestingly, even the grandsons of old colonial collaborators — like the one who gave a saropa to General Dyer or the false witness in the Bhagat Singh trial — are still feted by the British establishment. Till recently, a letter from one of these old collaborators’ grandsons could fetch an asylum visa for a regular immigrant to the UK or Canada.

This week marks 75 years of the first war against India by Pakistan. According to Mountbatten’s ADC Narendra Sarila, it was predicted by General Leslie Hollis of Churchill’s war cabinet a good five months earlier, in May 1947. Well, it could not have been predicted without the idea having been conceived by the same group that wanted Kashmir to accede to Pakistan against the wishes of its people. The burden of history is so strong that it is difficult to expect anything dramatically positive from a government led by a party that unapologetically created circumstances for the Bengal famine that killed three million people — half the number of those dead in the Jewish holocaust. While dealing with the brown people on the other side of the table, Indian politicians must remind their counterparts that they should lock up and deport overstaying Indian visa violators, but at the same time they should understand that their asylum policy has been exposed as a means to strengthen religious secessionism in India. Also, Britain should stop being a safe haven for Indian fugitives. Let businessmen buy residencies in the UK, but not with the aim of finding a hiding place to enjoy the fruits of bank defaults and frauds.

With the Kamala Harris example, it should have by now become clear to Indian politicians that a person of Indian origin gaining political office abroad is often more of a liability than an advantage to further India’s interests in that country. A politician by definition is at the mercy of his or her constituents, colleagues, co-conspirators and the media. So, even a hint of a lack of loyalty to the local mores can finish off a career. No wonder the US has still not elected a President or a Vice-President from a minority religious group or even an atheist; all of them since 1789 seem to have got sworn into office with a hand on the Bible.

India, on the contrary, has been truly democratic and inclusive till, of course, the BJP decided not to have Muslim ministers in the Union Cabinet. Just 20 years after Partition, which created a separate nation for Muslims, India had a Muslim President. According to the Westminster model, this would be like asking King Charles to convert!