Is Tory peer Warsi right to criticise chairman over valley views?

By Amit Roy

KASHMIR continues to be a divisive issue in British politics.

However, one of the most sensitive articles on Kashmir has been written by Prof Swaran Singh, professor of social and community psychiatry at Warwick University and an NHS consultant psychiatrist.

He was recently appointed chairman of the “independent review into prejudice and discrimination in the Conservative party”.

The article appeared in Spiked, a British internet magazine focusing on politics, culture and society, after the Indian government’s abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir in August last year.

Titled Kashmir: a tale of two mothers: A one-time homeland to Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs is being tragically torn apart, the 2,000-word article pointed out that Muslims were not the only victims in Kashmir. Sikhs and [Kashmiri Hindu] Pandits had been driven out in a policy of ethnic cleansing.

As a result of the article, Singh’s appointment was questioned by the Pakistani-origin peer, Sayeeda Warsi, who said: “I give you some views of the newly appointed chairman of the ‘independent review into all forms of discrimination and prejudice including Islamophobia’. I will let you make your own mind up.”

This is a subjective matter, but having read the whole article – it is available online – I find it is certainly the best I have read on Kashmir in many years. I accept others may come to a different conclusion.

But the editor of Spiked, Brendan O’Neil, was not pleased that Warsi had used the Kashmir article to disparage Singh.

“Sayeeda Warsi has reached a new low,” he commented. “This former Conservative cabinet minister and self-styled spokesperson for Britain’s Muslim community has instigated a pile-on against Swaran Singh, the professor who has been chosen by the Conservatives to head their inquiry into their internal handling of complaints about discrimination, including Islamophobia. Professor Singh’s crime? He once wrote a nuanced, moving essay for Spiked about his own family history in Kashmir which goes against Ms Warsi’s view of the Kashmir conflict. How dare he.”

Since Kashmir proved such a divisive issue in the UK general election, Labour’s leadership candidates also ought to make it clear that whatever their personal views on alleged human rights violations by Indian forces, they will not take sides between India and Pakistan.

In a meeting with the Indian Journalists’ Association in October 2017, the shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry, proudly said she was the author of the sections on Kashmir and Operation Blue Star in Labour’s 2015 election manifesto. It had said: “We will also urge negotiations towards a political resolution in all other regions currently experiencing conflict, including Kashmir, Libya, Nigeria, Sudan, South Sudan, Somalia and Yemen.”

The manifesto added: “Labour remains committed to an independent inquiry into Britain’s military role in the 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar.”

The question really is whether Jeremy Corbyn’s successor wants to repair relations with the Indian community in the UK?.