For many, in fact, for most Indians, the UK remains a first-choice country for so many pursuits. For study, visiting friends and family, for work, for a second home, and most of all, for a holiday. A change in government after 14 years of rule by the Conservatives is a significant change, given the global churn in motion. What does this change mean for Indians and India? Ambassador Nalin Surie, who retired from the Foreign Service some 13 years ago, recounts in an exclusive conversation how he sees the future of our bilateral relations, including the much heralded and delayed FTA with them.
How was Rishi Sunak’s tenure in general and for India in particular? Was his defeat kind of imminent even when he took over, and when he called for early elections, did he become the fall guy?
Given the geopolitical circumstances in which he took over as the Prime Minister of the UK as also the domestic political, economic and societal conditions, I would say that Mr Sunak did a pretty good job in the 20 months he was in office. In my opinion, he was perhaps best suited at that point in time, in the Conservative Party, to take over the reins of office. Effectively, he was the only credible alternative and he brought stability to the party and to governance for the brief period that he was prime minister. Relations with India were steadied. This is not surprising because, from what one reads, he is not prone to take extreme positions. Besides, his understanding of the domestic situation, particularly economic and social, was especially keen having been the Chancellor of the Exchequer under
Mr. Johnson.
The dice of course was loaded against him from the very beginning and yet he took up the challenge. This was perhaps for a variety of reasons, not excluding future ambitions of leadership. But, there is no doubt that he knew that he was going to be the captain of a sinking ship. Yet, he managed to keep it afloat for long enough to bring in an element of stability, not only in the economy, but also in Britain’s external relations. The latter assumes some importance because of the ongoing war in Ukraine and the need for the United Kingdom to demonstrate solidarity, not only with NATO but also with Europe. Ultimately, UK security cannot be delinked from European security.
Only Mr Sunak can explain why he called elections before the mandatory maximum limit that was available to him. I think he did the right thing. He understood that the remaining few months would not enable him to bring about any drastic changes, either in the economy or in the lives of the common people. Postponing the inevitable, made no sense. I don’t believe that he is the fall guy in this context. The fact that he has won his seat to Parliament with a healthy majority and so have some of his closest allies would suggest that the people are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Defeat of the Conservative party was inevitable and the writing had been on the wall for over a year now if not more. The conservatives lost because of their own shortcomings, insularity and arrogance. They came to be seen more and more as a party of the wealthy and were not seen to be empathetic enough to the millions who were facing economic and social hardships as well as a feeling of insecurity.
Brexit had failed. The famed NHS was in disrepair. The problem of immigration was not under control and Britain’s position in the world had visibly waned. The fact that the British people wanted change after 14 years of conservative rule, was staring you in the face. (This is also reflected in Scotland where the ruling SNP lost badly and Labour made very substantial gains. Labour also won Wales.) They wanted a party which was empathetic to their economic and social welfare needs not simply in the long run, but in the immediate future. They had understood that the campaign for Brexit had been misleading and the fight against the Covid pandemic bungled badly. The NHS waiting list is running into millions. The law and order situation was also not particularly happy. While the economy has begun to show signs of some improvement, including on the inflation front, the people’s patience had effectively run out.
In his defeat what do you read? What is the signals coming from the public in that country?
Labour has undoubtedly come back to power with a landslide in Parliament but its vote share has barely increased. The Conservatives lost vote share to the LibDems and Reform. The new government will have to bear in mind that the extreme right in the form of Nigel Farage’s Reform Party made major gains in vote share though not seats because of the ‘First past the Post’ system. Fortunately though for Labour, the pro-European Liberal Democrats have made major gains both in vote share and seats. The latter is a good omen for the new labour government.
It will therefore be important for the new labour government, to demonstrate that its agenda for “Change” will be put to work on an urgent basis and the benefits of the new or revised economic, financial and social welfare policies will reach the majority of targeted beneficiaries at an early date.
While, Mr Farage and his Reform party have made notable inroads in the vote share, sensible and systematic implementation of economic and welfare policies would help ensure that the extreme right tendencies and forces can not only be kept at bay, but also pushed back. Even in Europe, the move to the extreme right should not be overstated as was demonstrated by the recent second round of voting in the French elections to the national parliament.
The new government – what does this mean for India? In the overall perspective?
I believe that the new government will want very good relations with India. In this endeavour, India will be happy to work with them. The international community, including the West understand India much better now, including the compulsions and objectives of India’s developmental, security, and foreign policies, I believe that this is true, also of the new Labour government and particularly Prime Minister Starmer.
India can not only be a valuable economic partner for the UK, but equally important, help ensure the maintenance of peace, stability and balance in the Indo Pacific.
Additionally, the Labour party has recognised in its manifesto that terrorism remains a significant threat and steps would be taken to address it. They also intend to develop a comprehensive framework to deal with non-state terrorism and adapt it to deal with state-based domestic security threats. Terrorism is a major concern for India and this would suggest that the India- UK collaboration and cooperation against terrorism of all types and manifestations should and can be strengthened.
Bilaterally between us, with regard to their overtures with China, with regards Pakistan and the Kashmir issue, with regard to growing Right power growing in Europe?
In its dealings with China and Pakistan, the new Labour government will undoubtedly focus on areas of cooperation with these two countries that are of mutual benefit. As long as these do not impinge on India’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and development interests or on India- UK relations, there should be no problem.
Recent decisions taken by the Labour party, including on the Gaza conflict would suggest that the new government would take the national security dimension of issues into consideration before adopting any particular stance. We would expect that a similar approach will guide its policies towards Khalistani and separatist Kashmir elements and activities in the UK.
How do you expect them to evolve their own kind of multi-polar relationships if that can become a term increasingly for countries that want to assume neutral stance? Tony Blair’s endorsements of the past of ally US have been often questioned?
I do not believe that the United Kingdom is ready to look at the development of a multipolar world on a serious basis. It is too embedded in the US dominated NATO structures. It is also in the process of developing structures of a security and defence relationship with Europe. Neither of these structures is likely to be multipolar oriented. Certainly not neutral. Russia’s war in Ukraine and China’s growing threat to the West, now clearly articulated by NATO too, would suggest that while there may be some tinkering in the overall approach towards international governance, there will be no fundamental change. Indeed, in its manifesto, the Labour party has clearly announced its unshakeable commitment to NATO. It has also described its commitment to its nuclear deterrent as absolute.
It remains to be seen whether the announced strategic defence review by the new UK government within the first year will propose any new suggestions for any serious change that would impact on international governance structures.
Coming to the UK itself, domestically, how much has the country declined in global play and prominence? The poor have become poorer, doles are at an all time high, social security especially healthcare has fallen! How will this impact the new government policies and how do you see the road going forward?
There is no doubt that post Brexit, the UK is a relatively diminished economic power. It́s overall infrastructure is creaking and there has been inadequate spending on social welfare, health, education, policing etc during the last decade and more under the conservative governments. However, it retains many strengths, particularly on economic and financial issues, on technological innovation, in R&D etc. The UK, in spite of its reduced circumstances is still a permanent member of the UN Security Council and through its accumulated experiences over the last two centuries of being the most important colonial power has still in place systems that can work to its advantage. Among European countries, its armed forces are perhaps the best trained even though their record in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya may have been below par. The UK cannot be ignored by the western alliance in any security or financial arrangements being planned going forward.
Post Brexit, the UK economy has not done well. However, in the last year there have been improvements. Inflation is down and the green shoots of growth have begun to reappear. But the problems that have accumulated are very substantial and it is because of the inability of the conservatives to address them that Labour has been returned to Parliament with the mandate that it has. The new government will have no option but to focus, as I already mentioned earlier, on providing financial, economic and social benefits to the vast majority of the population. The road ahead is not going to be easy and the new prime minister seems perfectly aware of that. The financial constraints are real. The new government is in its honeymoon period and will want to make the best of it to be able to further entrench itself with the public and demonstrate its intention to set right the events of the past few years. In this context, it would of course be helpful for the new government if the burden of providing assistance to Ukraine could be reduced. In this regard, one option could be to work much more closely with the European Union, which has announced a huge package of assistance for Ukraine.
Specifically with regard to the protracted talks on the FTA, where are the bottlenecks; do we expect solutions soon? What impact will this have on the Indian economy?
In so far as the India-UK FTA negotiations are concerned, it would appear that both sides have been keen for some time now to finalise this agreement but have been unable to do so since there are obviously critical issues for both sides on which there is no agreement. I personally am not convinced that India needs an FTA with the UK. The UK is an useful trade partner but no longer even a gateway to the EU. It ranked 16 last year for India. The overall trade is not very substantial. The FTA would be useful from India’s perspective only if India’s critical concerns on movement of labour, social security, investment into India and access to technology among others are guaranteed. Our services sector cannot be left unprotected. There is also the question of how an India-UK FTA would impact the India-EU FTA also currently under negotiation. Frankly, calling these proposed agreements FTAs is incorrect because what India seeks are much broader trade, technology, investment, mobility and service sector arrangements that also cover NTBs & climate conditionalities.
I am not aware of the precise state of negotiations on the India-UK FTA and hence would not want to venture an arbitrary guess on when such an arrangement can be finalised to mutual benefit.
How do you see the future of Indian origin citizens in the UK in the new regime? Is Hindu phobia a concern and how will the government come down on fringe elements like the pro- Khalistanis?
The Indian community in the UK is a very strong and core component of the UK Labour party. I do not visualise a Hindu phobia problem. There will however, always be fringe elements that will attempt to create crises situations and it would be the responsibility of the new government to ensure that these elements are not allowed to vitiate peace in the UK nor the bilateral relationship with India.
How about more cultural exchanges between India and the UK? Apart from politics there is so much more that we share?
Our two countries share so much in common that there are no limits to the kind of exchanges we can have with each other. Already a lot happens beneath the surface and away from the glare of media publicity. For instance, London is awash with Indian tourists every summer. There is no doubt that we can do much more particularly in areas such as education, science and technology, exchanges among museums, literary exchanges, historical studies to name a few.
How have things changed since the days when you were the Indian HC? Life in the UK, global power play and India’s standing in the global community?
I retired from London at the end of July 2011. The world has since changed quite dramatically. India has evolved in a very substantial and positive manner, domestically and internationally. Post Brexit, the UK is battling to restore its confidence in itself. Europe is at war. Instability in the US political establishment is impacting the entire international community. China is now seen as a growing challenge and threat to the existing global order and Russia has virtually been forced into the arms of the Chinese. Both India and UK have to tread these treacherous waters very carefully. There are thus opportunities for us to work together, but this may require a change in the manner in which the UK addresses the future of international governance and how best the challenges of the global commons should be addressed.
The UK has a history of being able to overcome serious challenges, both international and domestic. It has the institutions and the intellectual capacities to be able to do that again. The new Labour government has the mandate to rejuvenate the UK. In the LibDems it also has a useful ally if needed.
The new Labour government can also change the underlying dynamics of our bilateral relations by changing outdated mindsets.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Nalin Surie is a former high commissioner for India in London; an alumni of St. Stephen’s College, he has also served as Ambassador in China, in his distinguished career in the foreign service. He is presently on the board of Delhi Policy Group in New Delhi.
