New Delhi:

The National Conference-Congress alliance may have won more seats in Jammu and Kashmir but the BJP has emerged as the single-largest party in terms of vote share, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Tuesday. 

In his customary evening address after election results, PM Modi pointed out that the BJP had set a record by winning in Haryana for the third straight time and thanked voters for the verdict. Shifting focus to Jammu and Kashmir, he said elections have taken place in a peaceful manner in the erstwhile state after decades.

“Peaceful voting was held, results were declared. This is a victory for the Constitution, for democracy. The people of Jammu and Kashmir have given more seats to the National Conference and its allies. I send them my best wishes as well. In terms of vote share, the BJP has emerged as the single largest party in Jammu and Kashmir,” he said in Hindi. 

The National Conference-Congress-CPM alliance won 49 of the Union Territory’s 90 Assembly seats for which elections were held. The National Conference contributed 42 of these, with the Congress winning six and the CPM one. 

The BJP achieved victory in 29 seats, four more than it had in 2014. Its vote share, however, stood at 25.64% while the National Conference polled 23.43%. The Congress’ vote share was only 11.97%.

National Conference chief Farooq Abdullah has said his son and party Vice President Omar Abdullah will be the next chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir. Omar Abdullah, however, insisted that the chief minister will be decided by the MLAs of the party and the alliance. 

Terming the election result a rejection of the removal of Article 370, Mr Abdullah also said he hoped that the PM would fulfil his promise and restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir at the earliest. 

“The PM is an honourable man… he promised statehood to the people of Jammu and Kashmir and I hope he lives up to that,” Mr Abdullah told NDTV.

Less than a year ago, tech billionaire Elon Musk was Britain’s star guest at a conference, with the then Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, playing the role of a fawning interviewer to the world’s richest man. A year on, things have changed in Britain. The Labour government, which came to power in July, has decided not to invite Musk to a mega investment summit to be held in London on October 14.

The Tesla and X boss ostensibly did not like the snub and hit back at the UK government with full force, urging the guests not to go to the UK. “I don’t think anyone should go to the UK when they’re releasing convicted paedophiles in order to imprison people for social media posts,” he said when he learnt he was not invited. 

Origin Story

It is true that many prisoners have been released recently under a government scheme to decongest overcrowded British jails. But there is no evidence to suggest that sex offenders or paedophiles were let out. Musk’s tweets have sparked controversy and raised concerns about the spread of misinformation, with the British media reminding the tech billionaire of his recent acts of “spreading disinformation” about the UK. A few weeks ago, Musk shared a baseless report that the UK was building internment camps in the Falkland Islands for rioters, though he swiftly deleted the tweet after facing backlash.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer addressed Musk’s latest provocative comments during his recent visit to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York. Dismissing them as being vastly different from the positive feedback received from investors, Starmer claimed that the latter have expressed strong interest in attending and that they praised their meeting with the UK government as the best they’ve had.

Why The Summit Is Important

The summit – in its third edition since 2021 – aims to attract significant investment to drive economic growth, a top priority for the Labour government. According to a government release, last year’s meeting generated a promise of nearly £30 billion of investment. This year, as Chancellor (finance minister) Rachel Reeves and Business and Trade Secretary (minister) Jonathan Reynolds join Starmer in showcasing the UK’s potential, the government hopes to secure an investment commitment worth around 60 billion pounds in sectors like technology, green energy and artificial intelligence (AI).

But the elephant in the room is the government’s cold shoulder to Musk. It has ignited debate about the UK’s true commitment to openness and whether it’s willing to engage with influential business leaders who are critical of the Labour government. As the government seeks to reset relations with global trading partners and promote innovation, Musk supporters and the opposition Conservative Party have raised questions about Starmer’s willingness to walk the talk. Despite the tech billionaire’s inflammatory comments, the Labour government’s decision to ignore him smacks of vindictiveness and pettiness. Musk is no ordinary man. His influence on modern business, technology, and society is undeniable. I rate him alongside the Israeli historian and thinker Yuval Noah Harari — both being the visionaries of our time, but with distinct approaches. I would like to say that while Harari focuses on the bigger picture, encouraging introspection and societal evolution, Musk actively shapes the future through groundbreaking technologies. There is no doubt that both visionaries inspire and challenge our understanding of human potential.

Musk, Agent Provocateur

The relationship between Musk and Starmer has been frosty at best since the Labour Party came to power in July. Starmer, many believe, and justifiably, is upset with the American billionaire for his unsavoury remarks on how the Labour government handled the nationwide riots in August. Following the horrific Southport stabbing that claimed the lives of three children, Musk donned the role of an agent provocateur as he unleashed a barrage of criticism against Starmer and his new government. In one of his tweets, he ominously forecast a ‘civil war’ in the UK. Musk has 193 million followers on X, which means whatever he says on the platform gets amplified across the world in seconds. There is no doubt that as violence and riots spread across the country, fueled by misinformation and far-right extremism, Musk’s misleading tweets added fuel to the fire.

The response from Labour MPs was swift and stinging. Leading voices within the party accused Musk of deliberately spreading disinformation and seeking to sow division within British society. One Labour MP described Musk’s intervention as “grossly irresponsible”, suggesting that his comments were intended to play into existing societal fractures for personal or ideological reasons.

But It’s Not Easy To Just Dismiss Musk

Starmer’s office, too, condemned Musk’s “civil war is inevitable” comment and said there was no justification for such remarks. But it’s not easy to silence Musk, who is seen in many right-wing circles as a defender of free speech. He doubled down on Starmer and posted a series of provocative tweets, even accusing the British police of being harsher on White protesters during the riots.

To Starmer’s comment on X that “We will not tolerate attacks on mosques and on Muslim communities”, Musk replied, “Shouldn’t you be concerned about attacks on ‘all’ communities?” In another post, he claimed the UK was censoring online content, and asked “Is this Britain or the Soviet Union?”

Governments And Businessmen Have Clashed Often

The clash between Musk and the UK government is not an isolated incident. Throughout history, influential industrialists and businessmen have challenged governments, often sparking tensions and drama. Indian-born British industrialists, the Hinduja brothers, were embroiled in the “Hinduja Affair” during Tony Blair’s premiership. The brothers were accused of bribing Indian officials to secure defense contracts. Blair’s government faced allegations of improperly granting the Hindujas British passports. But an investigation cleared them. However, the scandal led to the resignation of Blair’s minister, Peter Mandelson. The episode underlined the complex relationships between business, politics, and national interest.

Media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s showdown with the Margret Thatcher government began when he acquired The Times and The Sunday Times newspapers. Murdoch’s media empire was investigated for unexplained business dealings, which eventually led him to sell The Times.

It is a widely known fact that billionaire investor George Soros has long been a thorn in the side of Hungary’s nationalist government, led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Soros’s Open Society Foundation (OSF) promoted democratic values and human rights, which Orbán saw as a threat to his rule. His government launched a campaign against Soros, accusing him of promoting immigration and undermining Hungarian culture. The government also passed laws restricting NGOs, allegedly targeting OSF. Soros ultimately closed the OSF’s Budapest office, citing “unprecedented” government harassment.

Can Regulation Tame X?

Under the Online Safety Act, social media platforms are required to proactively remove illegal content, including inflammatory material, and prevent it from appearing in the first place. The UK’s communications regulator, Ofcom, has the power to punish non-compliant platforms with fines up to £18 million or 10% of their global annual turnover. It is believed the new act, passed last year, gives the government enough power to tame social platforms if they were found to be spreading falsehood in society.

It is reported that some Labour MPs have quietly suggested that action must be taken against Elon Musk for his inflammatory tweets during the riots in August and he should be summoned by Parliament to face questions from MPs. But there are no strong indications of that happening. Not as yet. 

(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

According to sources, India and Russia will sign “several” documents at the end of the talks on Tuesday, including a comprehensive joint statement, a vision statement, the future course on energy and trade, cooperation on investments in Russia’s Far East and a number of MoUs. The two sides are also discussing India’s desire to open new consulates in Russia, the sources confirmed.

As was widely expected in the UK elections, the Labour Party has registered one of its biggest victories, inflicting a huge defeat on the Conservative Party.

No one had expected this seismic outcome just a few years ago. But Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who is going to be the next British Prime Minister, is being hailed by everyone for changing the fortune of the party. He promised to get Britain out of economic stagnation and claimed he would fix the ailing National Health Services. He even reached out to ethnic communities, including the Indian diaspora.

‘Namaste’, Starmer

In the last days of the election campaign, Keir Starmer visited the Shree Swaminarayan Mandir Kingsbury, a prominent Hindu temple in London, and said “namaste” with folded hands. His charm offensive included him wearing a tilak on his forehead and a floral garland around his neck. Starmer may have looked out of place, but it was an attempt to placate angry Indian diaspora voters, the majority of whom were expected to favour the Conservative Party. The temple visit was also intended to send out a strong signal of friendship with India.

Also Read | Labour Sweeps UK Polls, Rishi Sunak’s Party Ousted For 1st Time In 14 Years

Despite his awkwardness, Starmer knew he had to perform this political act, not only because his visit underscored Labour’s commitment to embracing and celebrating diversity within the UK, but also because he needed to repair relations with the influential Indian diaspora, and, by extension, India. It had been clear for quite some time that his party was returning to power after a hiatus of 14 years and he was going to be the next UK Prime Minister; that is why he needed to undertake an India outreach before assuming office.

The Baggage Of The Past

Starmer’s gesture of visiting the temple was particularly significant given the events of September 2019, when during its annual conference in Brighton, the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership had passed a motion addressing the situation in Jammu and Kashmir. The motion declared that there was a humanitarian crisis in the region and asserted that the people of Kashmir should be granted the right to self-determination. Additionally, it had called for the deployment of international monitors to the area to ensure the protection of human rights and the assessment of the situation on the ground.

Needless to say, the Labour Party had gone too far. And despite the clarification issued by Jeremy Corbyn, the damage was done.

The motion was met with significant backlash from the Indian diaspora, who felt that it was one-sided and did not consider the complexities of the Kashmir issue. The event marked a turning point as many members of the Indian community began to shift their allegiances to the Conservative Party.

Also Read | “This Is A Massacre”: Conservative Leader As Labour Heads For Massive UK Win

The Indian government also responded sharply to the Labour’s motion. It was reported that the Indian High Commission in London took the unprecedented step of cancelling a scheduled dinner for Labour leaders, signalling its strong disapproval. The Indian government officially rejected the motion, emphasising its concerns about what it viewed as interference in its internal affairs.

In an effort to mend relations, Starmer attempted to address the situation last year, when he asserted that the Labour Party would strive to maintain strong relations with India, indicating a desire to rebuild trust and cooperation. Despite these efforts, the episode highlighted the fragile nature of Labour’s relations with India and underscored the significant political influence of the Indian diaspora in the UK.
Labour’s image makeover under Starmer

A Changed Labour

Indeed, the Labour Party has now made a triumphant comeback, securing a thumping majority. We should keep in mind that the party is a much-changed one under Starmer. It wants to inject more depth and substance into Britain’s strategic partnership with India.

India is most likely to carefully monitor Labour’s policy stance on Kashmir, immigration and the proposed Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The Indian government may have apprehensions about Labour’s views on its internal matters, but on balance, the India-UK bilateral relations will not change much under Starmer. In fact, Labour supporters in the Indian community believe that under him, the relations are likely to improve. It is being claimed that the number of Indian-origin Labour MPs would double from the current six members in the outgoing Parliament. 

Will The Ties Improve?

Academics in the UK at times tend to romanticise the bilateral ties between the two countries, looking at it chiefly from the prism of colonial nostalgia. We are led to believe that it is in India’s interest to have a deeper strategic partnership with Britain. To be honest, however, India sees Britain as a middle power, whose influence on the global stage has been on the wane for long. One can only blame the Conservative Party for it, a beleaguered and divided house which presided over 14 years of stagnation. India under Narendra Modi, who was born after the country’s independence, is, whether rightly or wrongly, not in awe of its erstwhile colonial masters.

Also Read | UK’s Labour Party Commits To Stamping Out “Anti-India Sentiments”

Yes, the bilateral trade in goods and services is growing steadily, and stood at £39 billion last year, with the balance of trade heavily in India’s favour. Yes, we have a vocal, upwardly mobile Indian diaspora, which acts as a bridge between the two countries and it often works to India’s advantage. But the oomph factor in bilateral relations has been missing for a long time. For example, India and the US warmed up to each other and became trusted partners only after the Civil Nuclear Agreement between the two countries was brokered under President George W. Bush. It was a pivotal moment that added significant “oomph” to bilateral ties and transformed the dynamics of the relationship, fostering deeper strategic, economic, and technological cooperation. It set the stage for an enduring partnership in the 21st century. Even during the Obama and Trump administrations the bilateral ties never ran out of excitement. 

One cannot say the same about India-UK relations, which badly need to be injected with energy, excitement and a mega-deal. 

FTA: Starmer’s First Challenge In India-UK Ties

With regards to India, one of the first tasks on Starmer’s desk will be to reach a Free Trade Agreement. He has maintained his commitment to completing the FTA, but it is not going to be easy. India’s priority appears to be to finalise an agreement with the European Union (EU) first. The bilateral trade in goods and services last year stood at €113 billion. The two sides relaunched the negotiations in 2022 and the progress is said to be satisfactory.

According to a group of researchers, another stumbling block in the India-UK FTA is “the opposition in the UK to Indian demands for more visas for intra-company transfers and particularly to demands that social security contributions from Indian workers during such transfers be reimbursed”.

Immigration Policies

Brexit has led to record levels of Indian immigration. Of the 6.85 lakh immigrants in the UK today, the majority come from India. The Labour Party’s stated aim is to reduce legal immigration and curb illegal immigration. Many of the legal Indian immigrants are IT professionals on work permits, contributing to the UK’s technology sector. There is a small number of illegal immigrants from India as well.

The party’s policy seeks to balance the economic benefits of skilled migrants with the goal of controlling overall immigration numbers, reflecting broader political and economic priorities.
Human Rights and Citizenship Laws

Historically, the Labour Party has been vocal about human rights issues in India, particularly on laws like the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The Labour Party’s criticism has been viewed by the Indian government as interference and a misrepresentation of India’s internal policies aimed at addressing specific security concerns. Starmer will be under pressure from domestic human rights organisations to put forward liberal British perspectives. His diplomatic skills are bound to be tested in the coming months and years.

The relations between the UK’s Labour Party and the Indian government are complex, influenced by historical ties, diaspora politics, and divergent policy priorities. Addressing such challenges will require nuanced diplomacy, mutual respect, and an understanding of the sensitivities involved on both sides.

(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author