THE late great singer Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan took qawwali to unimaginable heights before he prematurely passed away aged 48 in 1997.
After his death, there was a void that had to be filled. His nephews, Rizwan and Muazzam, headed a qawwali group that should have been the natural successor – they took the same starmaking steps as Nusrat with a performance at Womad festival, along with getting the influential record label Real World to sign them up. Despite being truly talented, the young maestros were thrown into the deep end too early and were not able to capitalise on those early breaks.
Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan
Meanwhile, Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, who had been performing with Nusrat since a teenager, saw himself as a natural successor. But, he struggled to make a mark, despite working with many of his late uncle’s group members.
Rahat would regularly perform concerts at smaller venues for negligible remuneration.
Then, one day, his career changed course when actress turned film producer Pooja Bhatt signed him to sing for her directorial debut Paap in 2003.
This was followed by her father, Mahesh Bhatt, giving him the chance to sing the super-hit song Jiya Dhadak Dhadak for his film Kalyug two years later.
After that there was no looking back, as he became hot property in Hindi cinema and delivered a string of successful songs. Bollywood raising his profile saw him performing at prestigious venues.
He then teamed up with big-thinking promotor Salman Ahmed and went from performing to relatively small crowds to delivering sold-out shows at arenas around the world. Even when Bollywood put a ban on Pakistani singers, he still had enough songs to sell out shows globally. The singer who once performed for a few thousand pounds became a multi-millionaire.
Despite the presence of more talented qawwali singers, the global fame meant he became the natural successor to his late uncle Nusrat despite having just a fraction of his creative ability. What most people didn’t see, and some only got glimpses of, was the dark side to the singer’s personality.
I remember going to see him at a major Pakistani concert at Wembley arena and subsequently writing about how he seemed to be clearly intoxicated on stage. He struggled to mime to his own song and slurred his words. Within music and media circles there was always talk about his heavy consumption of alcohol. Then, with the advent of social media, people started getting glimpses of him being allegedly intoxicated via embarrassing videos.
A basic online search using the query ‘Rahat Fateh Ali Khan drunk’ will reveal numerous videos and news articles depicting him in an alleged intoxicated state. In Islam, alcohol is strictly prohibited, especially for Sufi singers due to their spiritual practices.
Thus, his alleged regular consumption of alcohol brought disgrace to the esteemed reputation of his uncle, whom he was expected to succeed as the heir apparent, as well as to his family’s musical lineage spanning centuries.
This leads to what happened recently. Shortly after announcing he was terminating a long-term partnership with his international tour manager, another embarrassing video went viral on social media, where he can be seen beating up a staff member for losing a ‘bottle’. It was widely reported that he was drunk and angry that his liquor had been misplaced. Those who listen to the way his words are slurred in the video would likely agree.
Rahat Fateh Ali Khan
Rahat then shared a video with the man he was shown beating and denied all the allegations. He gave the most laughable explanation about the bottle in the video being spiritual water and said he had apologised to the man whom he had assaulted. The staff member backed up the account.
But it was hard to find anyone who believed him and not surprisingly, he was once again heavily trolled. After realising his explanation was utterly ridiculous, Rahat released another video where he asked for forgiveness from everyone, including his fans, family, god, and females he had worked with, for any bad behaviour. He promised to never put himself in such compromising situations again. The apology was undone, however, with him admitting that more embarrassing videos from the past might turn up. Pakistan’s Federal Investigation Agency has also reportedly initiated a money-laundering and tax evasion inquiry against him.
What has been clear is that Rahat Fateh Ali Khan has balanced his talent, stardom, and opportunities with shameful behaviour on a regular basis. His illustrious uncle has never faced accusations of being in a drunken rage, assaulting staff members, performing intoxicated on stage, or undergoing investigation for serious tax evasion and money laundering.
However, a Google search reveals that Rahat has consistently been the target of such damaging allegations.
Those who believe there is no smoke without fire, will agree that he doesn’t deserve to wear the crown of Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. He has regularly shamed himself and his family that has proudly carried the torch of spiritual Sufi music across different generations.
Him promising to do better, won’t undo shameful behaviour that has lasted so many years.
US president Donald Trump gestures next to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Ben Gurion International Airport as Trump leaves Israel en route to Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, to attend a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, amid a US-brokered prisoner-hostage swap and ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, in Lod, Israel, October 13, 2025.
‘They make a desert and call it peace’, wrote the Roman historian Tacitus. That was an early exercise, back in AD 96, of trying to walk in somebody else’s shoes. The historian was himself the son-in-law of the Roman Governor of Britain, yet he here imagined the rousing speech of a Caledonian chieftain to give voice to the opposition to that imperial conquest.
Nearly two thousand years later, US president Donald Trump this week headed to Sharm-El-Sheikh in the desert, to join the Egyptian, Turkish and Qatari mediators of the Gaza ceasefire. Twenty more world leaders, including prime minister Sir Keir Starmer and president Emmanuel Macron of France turned up too to witness this ceremonial declaration of peace in Gaza.
This ceasefire brings relief after two years of devastating pain. Tens of thousands of civilians have been killed. More of the Israeli hostages taken by Hamas are returning dead than alive. Eighty-five per cent of Gaza is rubble. Each of the twenty steps of the proposed peace plan may prove rocky. The state of Palestine has more recognition - in principle - than ever before across the international community, but it may be a long road to that taking practical form. Israel continues to oppose a Palestinian state.
The ceasefire will be welcomed in Britain for humanitarian relief and rekindling hopes of a path to a political settlement. It offers an opportunity to take stock on the fissures of the last two years on community relations here in Britain too. That was the theme of a powerful cross-faith conversation last week, convened by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, to reciprocate the expressions of solidarity received from Muslims, Christians and others after the Manchester synagogue attacks, and challenge the arson attack on a Sussex mosque.
Jewish and Muslim civic voices had convened an ‘optimistic alliance’ to keep conversations going when there seemed ever less to be optimistic about. The emerging news from Gaza was seen as a hopeful basis to deepen conversation in Britain about how tackling the causes of both antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice could form part of a shared commitment to cohesion.
This conflict has not seen a Brexit-style polarisation down the middle of British society. Most people’s first instinct was to avoid choosing a side in this conflict. The murderous Hamas attack on Jews on October 7, 2023 and the excesses of the Israeli assault on Gaza piled tragedy upon tragedy. The instinct to not take sides can be an expression of mutual empathy, but is not always so noble. It can reflect confusion and exhaustion with this seemingly intractable conflict. A tendency to look away and change the subject can frustrate those whose family heritage, faith solidarity or commitments to Zionism and Palestine as political ideas make them feel more closely connected.
Others have felt this conflict thrust upon them in an unwelcome way - including British Jews fed up with the antisemitic idea that they can be held responsible at school, university or work for what the government of Israel is doing. Protesters for Palestine perceive double standards in arguments about free speech - as do those with contrasting views. The proper boundaries between legitimate political protest and prejudice are sharply contested.
Hamit Coksun is an asylum seeker who speaks somewhat broken English. He would seem an unusual ally for Robert Jenrick. Yet the shadow justice secretary went to court to offer solidarity, after Coskun had burned a Qu’ran outside the Turkish Embassy, while shouting “F__ Islam” and “Islam is the religion of terrorism”. He had been fined £250, but the appeal court overturned his conviction. The judgment was context-specific: this specific incendiary protest took place outside an embassy, not a place of worship, in an empty street, and did not direct the comments at anybody in particular.
The law does not protect faiths from criticism, and indeed offers some protection for intolerant and prejudiced political speech too, though the police can place conditions on protest to protect people from abuse, intimidation or harassment on the basis of their faith.
So it can be legal to performatively burn books - holy or otherwise - though this verdict makes clear it does not offer a green light to do so in every context.
But how far should we celebrate those who choose to burn books? Cosun advocates banning the Qu’ran, making him a flawed champion of free speech. Jenrick is legitimately concerned to show that there are no laws against blasphemy in Britain, but could anybody imagine that he would turn up in person to show solidarity to a man burning the Bible, Bhagvad Gita or Torah, shouting profanities to declaring religion of war or genocide? The court’s defence of the right to shock, offend and provoke is correct in law. Those are hardly the only conversations that a shared society needs.
Sunder Katwalawww.easterneye.biz
Sunder Katwala is the director of thinktank British Future and the author of the book How to Be a Patriot: The must-read book on British national identity and immigration.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.