Will Boris Johnson call the Indian PM on farmers’ agitation? His January visit to Delhi uncertain 

On 9 December at the weekly Prime Minister’s Questions in the British House of Commons, Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, one of the two Sikh MPs in the chamber, asked Boris Johnson: “Many constituents, especially those emanating from the Punjab and other parts of India, were horrified, as I was, to see footage of water cannon, tear gas and brute force being used against peacefully protesting farmers. However, it was heart-warming to see those very farmers feeding those forces who had been ordered to beat or suppress them. What indomitable spirit—it takes a special kind of people to do that. Will the Prime Minister convey to the Indian Prime Minister our heartfelt anxieties and our hopes for a speedy resolution to the current deadlock? Does he agree that everyone has a fundamental right to peaceful protest?

The British prime minister astonishingly replied: “Of course. Our view, as the honorable gentleman knows well, is that we have serious concerns about what is happening between India and Pakistan, but these are pre-eminently matters for those two Governments to settle. I know that he appreciates that point.”

Astonishing because Johnson was until last year married for 25 years to Marina Wheeler, a person whose mother was Sikh, and over this period met many of her Indian relatives socially both in India and Britain. For him not to be aware that the current farmers stir in India had nothing to do with what is otherwise happening between India and Pakistan beggars belief

He was clearly not paying attention, perhaps distracted by the deadlock in talks between the United Kingdom and the European Union over a free trade agreement to replace the present single market arrangement when the transition period before Brexit ends on 31 December.

Indeed, soon after sparring in the Commons, he air-dashed to the EU capital Brussels for a dialogue with the president of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen. It was a last ditch effort to resolve sticking points over fishing rights, a level playing field for government support for industry and enforcement of a deal, including jurisdictional issues. The negotiations were extended up to 13 December.

Indo-British economic relations have diminished since Indian independence. In fact, trade between the two countries contracted in the aftermath of the 2008-09 global economic meltdown, until reversed by an initiative on the part of David Cameron, undoubtedly the most pro-India British prime minister ever. But the special relationship he sought was politely ignored by Delhi.

Sir Philip Barton was until August the British high commissioner in India. He is now permanent under-secretary at the UK’s foreign office. In early November he and the Indian foreign secretary Harsh Shringla met in London. After their discussions, the former said: “Foreign Secretary Shringla and I agreed a strengthened UK-India partnership will be a force for good in the world, in facing the big international challenges over the next decade, such as climate change and global security.”

Ties between the two nations have been somewhat dormant since Britain voted to exit the EU in June 2016. The British government was far too preoccupied with hammering out a Withdrawal Agreement, which consumed three and a half years, and grappling with the fine print of an FTA subsequently to devote time to India. It obtained such an arrangement with Japan and was chasing the same with the Donald Trump administration in the United States. But while there have been noises about a limited, strategic FTA with India in a post-Brexit scenario, no concrete progress was made to accomplish this.

Britain and India now have a common concern – China. Since the outbreak of the deadly COVID-19 – widely believed to have originated in Wuhan - Beijing has trampled on the Hong Kong Handover Treaty with the UK; and has violated the Line of Actual Control with India in Ladakh and not really retreated from forward positions in Doklam since 2017.

On 27 November, Narendra Modi phoned Johnson and the two decided to “deepen and strengthen” the bilateral relationship, with an emphasis on, among other areas, defence and security. Modi stressed the importance of improving trade and investment flows. He uttered such words in the past; but these have remained empty rhetoric. Now, out of necessity – with both countries’ economies having crashed in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and each desperately seeking to dig themselves out of their respective holes – are considering a clinch. It remains to be seen how this will square with Modi’s now declared policy of self-reliance, which is essentially an insular, import averse stance.

The exchange of views on defence and security, though, could be significant. British defence hardware, including the BAE Systems manufactured multi-role combat aircraft Eurofighter Typhoon, have been overlooked in favour of Israeli, French and US made equipment, while Russia has remained India’s principal military supplier. This might undergo a change. Johnson informed Modi that the new British aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth’s first deployment will be to the Indo-Pacific, which means a potential scope of collaboration with the Indian Navy.

New Delhi seems to sense Britain is in an economically vulnerable state and therefore susceptible to granting concessions. This could transpire to be wishful thinking, especially if the UK and EU strike an FTA. Nevertheless, Modi appears to have invited Johnson to be the chief guest on India’s Republic - the first such honour to be extended to a British head of government after John Major in 1993. While the latter’s participation is yet to be confirmed, greater cooperation – at least on paper – are on the cards.

There is, however, a suspicion in informed circles in London that any mouth-watering defence order from the Indian side would be conditional upon Britain extraditing Bangalore businessman Vijay Mallya to India. 10 months have passed since he lost his appeal against deportation at the London high court; yet he has not been sent back. Rumours are rife about an asylum application from him to British authorities being under consideration. Having shouted from the rooftop about bringing him back to face justice in India, anything other than achieving this would be a considerable loss of face for Modi.

In 2018, Modi fell out with Johnson’s immediate predecessor Theresa May on her inability to give assurances on a case that was then being heard in a magistrates’ court. The British judiciary or the asylum process is not under any government’s thumb, even though Modi might think so, given a person of Gujarati origin Priti Patel presently being home secretary or a key arbiter on the matter.