Colonial Hangover: Why India’s Success Triggers British Whining

• British media often reacts negatively to India’s achievements in space, defense, and infrastructure, reflecting unresolved colonial attitudes and discontent with India’s progress.
• Many in Britain struggle to accept that India, once a colony, is now a rising global power, which leads to petulant and critical comments on India’s advancements.
• High-profile British figures like Michael Vaughan and Piers Morgan express biased and unfounded criticisms, accusing India of using its economic power unfairly in sports and international relations.
• The British media’s critique of India’s spending on major projects and aid programs ignores the historical context of British colonial exploitation and the vast wealth extracted from India.
• The ongoing negativity from Britain risks damaging future economic partnerships and strategic relations, as India grows increasingly significant on the global stage while Britain faces decline.

When an Indian spacecraft lands on the Moon, the predictable reaction from the British media is: “How dare they?” When India launches a nuclear attack submarine, the Brits are outraged that a former colony is now capable of building a strategic weapons platform. When India’s Mangalyaan spacecraft reaches Mars, the Brits lament that their ‘aid’ money is being misused. When India builds the world’s largest statue, the British media whines that a developing country is spending money on “an expensive vanity project.” [1]

India is no longer a colony of the British Empire, but there are a significant number of Brits who have not reconciled with that reality.

Big-ticket Indian defense and aerospace projects invariably draw petulant comments in Britain, partly because the British once enjoyed a leadership position in these fields. In contrast, today, it is forced to watch from the sidelines as India shoots for the stars.

India is no longer a colony of the British Empire, but there are a significant number of Brits who have not reconciled with that reality. Take former England captain Michael Vaughan, who couldn’t hide his disappointment with India entering the final of the T20 World Cup in June 2024. He made the outrageous claim that the World Cup was set up for India. “It’s their tournament, isn’t it? Literally, it’s their tournament. They get to play whenever they want. They get to know exactly where their semifinal will be. They play every single game in the morning so people can watch them at night in India.” [2]

He implied that it was India’s money power that was helping Team India win. “I get that money is a big play in the world of cricket. And I get that in bilateral series, but you would think that when you get to a World Cup, (the) ICC should be a little fairer to everybody. And it shouldn’t just be India just because they bring a few quid in. Like I said, I completely get it in bilaterals, but when you get to a World Cup, any kind of sympathy or any kind of sway towards one team. This tournament is purely set up for India, as simple as that.”

Morgan’s Meltdown

British churlishness was on full display again when Prime Minister Narendra Modi was officially presented with Russia’s highest civilian honor, the Order of St Andrew, on July 9, 2024, by Russian President Vladimir Putin. During the ceremony, Putin praised Modi’s efforts to elevate Russian-Indian relations to a “special and privileged strategic partnership.” The Russian President highlighted the implementation of large-scale projects in trade, economics, nuclear energy, and space exploration under Modi’s tenure.[3]

Predictably, there was considerable heartburn in some sections of the Western media [about the Indian PM being felicitated by the Russian president]. British journalist Piers Morgan took to X to comment: “Shame on you, @narendramodi.”

Predictably, there was considerable heartburn in some sections of the Western media. British journalist Piers Morgan took to X to comment: “Shame on you, @narendramodi.”[4]

Morgan is clearly not a neutral anchor. His blind hatred for Modi and his agenda-fueled journalism are driven by his desire to promote the interests of his political masters. As such, he cannot stomach the fact that two large countries – and their leaders – need to maintain their long-standing ties.

Responding to Morgan’s outburst, geopolitical expert and defense writer Vaibhav Singh pointed out that the West brought war to Putin’s doorstep, and therefore, Russia has a right to defend itself just like any other country. He also observed that India has every right to stand with its strategic ally, Russia.

Singh posted: “The biggest war criminal of this century is Barack Obama, who killed millions and destroyed the lives of tens of millions in his bloodthirsty wars in Syria, Iraq, Libya, and countless other regions and countries. Despite this, he was awarded the ‘Nobel Peace Prize’ while you cheered and clapped for him. Every war he waged was supported by your beloved motherland. The UK itself is responsible for killing millions in the past, and the ‘Union Jack’ should be replaced by a flag with a skull printed on it, soaked in the blood of people from every race, ethnicity, and religion. You have zero moral authority to question anyone in this world.”[5]

Like many British journalists, Morgan has a special corner of his heart full of venom for India. In 2016, he took to X to call India’s celebration of two medals at the Rio Olympics exaggerated. He posted: “Country with 1.2 billion people wildly celebrates two losing medals. How embarrassing is that?”[6]  He was responding to a post from an Indian describing the massive welcome given by Indians to the two silver medalists, Sakshi Malik and PV Sindhu.

Again, earlier during a discussion on his TV show, Morgan defended the genocidal monster Winston Churchill right after a guest told him that the British Prime Minister had killed millions of Indians in an engineered famine in 1943-44.[7]

Churchill was single-handedly responsible for depriving millions of Indians in the Bengal Presidency of rice by exporting the harvest to Europe. This caused the Bengal Famine, in which more than three million people died, according to official British reports, although the final tally may have touched seven million. This death toll was entirely due to Churchill’s racism, and Morgan’s unwavering support for him exposes his own blatant bigotry.

What’s Bugging Britain?

After it was kicked out of India in 1947, Britain kept up the pretense that it was fascinated by India. Their view was that the British Raj – if you ignored its brutal and genocidal aspects – was the glue that bonded both nations. They argued that for Britain, India is like the high school crush – you never quite forget your first love.

But in recent years, that mask has slipped. As Indian companies started snapping up the crown jewels of British industry (Corus, Land Rover, Jaguar, and ironically, the East India Company!), colonial aversion for Indians reappeared. It doesn’t matter that India is among the largest investors in the UK, generating tens of thousands of local jobs.

India’s relentless rise back to prosperity comes when Britain is in steep decline and poverty and hunger are common.

India’s relentless rise back to prosperity comes when Britain is in steep decline and poverty and hunger are common. While India doles out more than $6 billion in aid (including a generous multi-million-pound sterling grant to Cambridge University), London’s arc of influence is shrinking. While the Royal Navy is to be scuttled to a littoral force of 19 ships, India is building a 200-ship navy. A few years ago, when the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carrier sailed into New York, Russia’s RT[8] questioned “whether Britain even needed any new aircraft carriers, considering that paying for them meant the navy couldn’t then afford to pay for enough sailors to actually sail them.”

The relationship between the UK and India is now primarily driven by economic considerations rather than political/normative ones. As India’s economic power has grown, its hand has been strengthened politically vis-a-vis the UK. This represents an asymmetric relationship where India is more important to the UK than the UK is to India.

The UK-India relationship is seen as an early test case for the UK’s new role in a changing world post-Brexit, particularly in terms of balancing values and interests. India’s growing importance means the UK has to navigate this relationship carefully. India’s rise thus represents a shift in the power dynamics of their historical relationship, with India gaining more economic and political leverage.

Myth of British Aid to India

UK aid to India was meant to have stopped in 2015 after India said it did not want it, but a review by the UK aid spending watchdog has found that around £2.3 billion in UK aid went to India between 2016 and 2021.

The irony is that India doesn’t want the [British aid]… Back in 2011, Mukherjee and other Indian ministers tried to terminate Britain’s aid but relented after the British begged them to keep taking the money.

In 2012, India’s then finance minister, Pranab Mukherjee, had famously mocked Britain’s annual £280 million aid to India as “peanuts.” For the year 2023, the total British ‘aid’ earmarked for India was £57 million. This is indeed peanuts because currently the Indian government gives more foreign aid to countries than it receives. [9]

The irony is that India doesn’t want the money. Back in 2011, Mukherjee and other Indian ministers tried to terminate Britain’s aid but relented after the British begged them to keep taking the money.

Further, according to a leaked memo, senior Indian diplomat Nirupama Rao had proposed “not to avail of any further British assistance with effect from April 1, 2011” because of the negative publicity of Indian poverty promoted by Britain’s aid disbursement agency. However, London requested Delhi to keep taking the money because canceling the program would cause “grave political embarrassment” to Britain.[10]

Let that sink in – Britain wants to give aid to India not because India needs it but because the British wish to continue with the pretense that they are a great power that continues to civilize brown people…you know, the “white man’s burden.”

Politics of Aid

The British have good reasons to continue their so-called aid work in India. The reality is that Britain has little to offer India by way of trade, so aid acts as a useful toehold. According to Britain’s former Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell, the focus of British aid would be public-private partnerships rather than education or health.

Translation: British aid is being diverted to schemes that sound uncannily like lobbying.

Appearing to care for the poor in India also does wonders for Britain’s self-esteem. Images of British citizens working amidst thin, unkempt children hawking stuff on the streets reinforce the widespread belief in Britain that colonialism was okay because Indians were unfit to govern themselves.

Britain doesn’t have to be concerned about India’s poor because it has plenty of its own to worry about.

Another spinoff is that having British natives on the ground in India is handy for recruiting informers and spies. This isn’t as far-fetched as it sounds. Employment in a nondescript NGO would be the perfect cover for British intelligence agents. Only someone incredibly naive would dispute that intelligence agencies routinely use such cover.

Also, at a time when Britain has become (in former French President Nicholas Sarkozy’s words) an industrial wasteland, such aid programs keep scores of Britons employed.[11]

Britain doesn’t have to be concerned about India’s poor because it has plenty of its own to worry about. The Guardian’s Breadline Britain series [12] notes the combination of soaring living costs (particularly food and childcare), welfare cuts, and charges for previously free services (such as homework clubs) have put Britons under immense, and in some cases, almost intolerable pressure. People affected include the low-income mum who ate once a day and never on Saturdays to ensure that her kids got a decent meal, for example, and the indignity of “just coping” – more than one interviewee reported “people fighting for the discounted vegetables” in the supermarket.

And that’s not including the Explosion of the Peacefuls – the massive increase in the number of Islamic fundamentalists who are invading white middle and lower-class neighborhoods and the proliferation of child sex rings dominated by Pakistani immigrants.

Further, at least 50 million Indians are lifted out of poverty every year thanks to India’s growing economy. Poverty is being removed from India through the hard work of Indians who are creating jobs and brand-new cities. It is against this backdrop that Britain – along with its many Anglosphere allies, the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and European sidekicks such as Norway, Germany, and the Netherlands – continues to peddle the nonsense that India needs Western aid. The Rising India story doesn’t align with the Western narrative of a poor country that cannot survive without external aid.

Some British politicians have pointed out the irony of British aid to India. Said Tory politician Philip Davies: “Here we are spending money in a country that has not only got its own space program but is developing its own overseas aid program…. the public is not just sick and tired of this but angry too. It is completely unjustifiable and truly idiotic.”

Davies was echoing what his colleague Douglas Carswell had said when Mukherjee gave London the finger: “The fact is that India’s economy is growing much faster than our own. We should be encouraging free trade with them and trying to learn from them rather than handing out patronizing lectures.” [13]

Britain is in no position to moralize because it alone is responsible for India’s poverty. Britain’s rapacious colonialism turned India from the world’s richest country in the 1700s to one of the poorest by the time the British were kicked out in 1947.

Britain is in no position to moralize because it alone is responsible for India’s poverty. Britain’s rapacious colonialism turned India from the world’s richest country in the 1700s to one of the poorest by the time the British were kicked out in 1947. Within the span of 190 years, the British also killed at least 60 million Indians through wars, population displacement, and artificially engineered famines.

Amaresh Misra, a writer and historian based in Mumbai, argues in his book ‘War of Civilisations: India AD 1857’ that after the First War of Independence in 1857, British reprisal killings (which he calls an “untold holocaust”) caused the deaths of almost 10 million people over the next ten years. [14]

English author Charles Dickens said after the 1857 war: “I wish I were commander-in-chief in India…I should proclaim to them that I considered my holding that appointment by the leave of God to mean that I should do my utmost to exterminate the race.” And how can one forget the view of The Guardian, the liberal voice of Britain? “We sincerely hope that the terrible lesson thus taught will never be forgotten,” it wrote about the genocide.

Clearly, the British have a lot to answer for. And yet they double down on their racism.

What Britain Stands to Lose

Unlike in the past when racism was hidden, today, it is exposed and amplified due to social media. There is no way to hide it, and social media platforms transmit it to the furthest towns and villages. This is ominous for Britain because both India’s political leadership and the influential middle class are fiercely nationalist. The naked racism and Hinduphobia displayed by British journalists like Piers Morgan are undoubtedly bad press and could result in lost opportunities in India.

Historically, Britain has failed to win any large defense deal in India since the Jaguar fighter aircraft in 1979. Going forward, there are more areas where it could lose out.

Historically, Britain has failed to win any large defense deal in India since the Jaguar fighter aircraft in 1979. Going forward, there are more areas where it could lose out[15]:

• Access to India’s large and growing consumer market. India’s middle class is expected to double from 30 million in 2019 to 60 million by 2030 and nearly 250 million by 2050.
• Reduced trade barriers and tariffs: An India-UK free trade agreement (FTA) would remove tariffs on UK exports to India, making British goods more competitive. Currently, the average tariff on UK goods imported into India is 14.6%, compared with just 4.2% on Indian goods imported into the UK.
• Diversification of trade and supply chains. Strengthening economic ties with India helps the UK reduce its reliance on China and diversify its trade relationships, making its supply chains more resilient to global shocks.
• Strengthening the UK’s strategic position in the Indo-Pacific region. An FTA with India would help cement the UK’s role as a leader among a network of countries committed to free trade and strengthen ties with a key Indo-Pacific power.

By deepening its economic partnership with India, the UK stands to gain greater market access, reduced trade barriers, more resilient supply chains, increased investment and jobs, as well as enhanced strategic positioning in the Indo-Pacific. As a growing – and much larger – market, India does not need Britain. However, a downsizing and declining Britain, shunned by its European rivals and no longer needed by its Anglosphere allies, certainly needs India. Keyboard monkeys like Morgan Piers should remember that before getting too uppity with India.

Citations

[1] That’s rich! We gave £1billion aid to India as they built £330million statue  | Daily Mail Online; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6348295/Thats-rich-gave-1billion-aid-India-built-330million-statue.html

[2] ‘T20 World Cup is Purely Set up For India’: Michael Vaughan Slams ICC, Adam Gilchrist Claims Cricket ‘Compromised’ – News18; https://www.news18.com/cricket/t20-world-cup-is-purely-set-up-for-india-michael-vaughan-slams-icc-adam-gilchrist-claims-cricket-compromised-8949086.html

[3] PM Modi awarded with Russia’s highest civilian honour (ddnews.gov.in); https://ddnews.gov.in/en/pm-modi-awarded-with-russias-highest-civilian-honour/

[4] Piers Morgan on X: “Shame on you @narendramodi 👎👎👎” / X; https://x.com/piersmorgan/status/1810954214421496257

[5] Vaibhav Singh on X: “Biggest War Criminal of this Century @BarackObama who killed Millions & Destroyed Lives of Tens of Millions in his Blood Thirsty Wars of Syria, Iraq, Libya & Countless other Regions & Countries was Awarded “Nobel Peace Prize” while You Clapped & Cheered for him. Every War he” / X; https://x.com/vaibhavUP65/status/1810987148385849706

[6] Piers Morgan on X: “Country with 1.2 billion people wildly celebrates 2 losing medals. How embarrassing is that? https://t.co/FYSBM7ErAf” / X; https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/768352437166112768

[7] Eminent Intellectual on X: “@piersmorgan @narendramodi If a racist British prick is unhappy with Modi, then I have to say, without knowing the details, Mr Modi has done something very very good for India. Thank you @narendramodi 🙏 https://t.co/dlNG55a0rr” / X; https://x.com/total_woke_/status/1811029940474728544

[8] Britain’s biggest warship parks off the US coast, looking just a little bit needy — RT; https://www.rt.com/op-ed/442041-britain-military-us-warship/

[9] UK still gives aid to India dressed up as ‘business investments’ rather than direct handouts: Britain watchdog – Times of India (indiatimes.com); https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/uk-still-gives-aid-to-india-dressed-up-as-business-investments-rather-than-direct-handouts-britain-watchdog/articleshow/98641083.cms

[10] Bitter baby empire: It’s time the UK minds its own business (opindia.com); https://www.opindia.com/2018/11/uk-daily-mail-statue-of-unity-mind-own-business-narendra-modi/

[11] Nicolas Sarkozy says Britain has ‘no industry’ (telegraph.co.uk); https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/nicolas-sarkozy/9048640/Nicolas-Sarkozy-says-Britain-has-no-industry.html

[12] The ‘despair’ and ‘loneliness’ of austerity Britain | Patrick Butler | The Guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jul/17/despair-loneliness-austerity-britain

[13] India’s secret history: ‘A holocaust, one where millions disappeared…’ | World news | The Guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/aug/24/india.randeepramesh

[14] No plans to review India aid, says UK (deccanherald.com); https://www.deccanherald.com/amp/story/india/no-plans-review-india-aid-2311414

[15] UK-India Free Trade Agreement – The UK’s Strategic Approach (publishing.service.gov.uk); https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/61e1b75e8fa8f5058d5a76bf/uk-india-free-trade-agreement-the-uks-strategic-approach.pdf