On 13th January, a Labour MP stirred another controversy as she led a debate on the “Political situation in Kashmir” on the floor of the House of Commons.
Sarah Owen, the first British Chinese MP from Luton North spoke about how the situation in Kashmir was felt across the world and in communities “such as mine in Luton North” ever since the pandemic. Ms Owens, who is also the chair of the group “Chinese for Labour”, noted the government’s response to the ongoing persecution of Uighurs, and called on the government to take a similar stance on Kashmir.
She said, “The lockdown of 2019 shut off entire communities and their communications to the outside world. Around 7 million people have been silenced and cut off. Students studying in Luton were unable to get fees paid by parents in Kashmir, as banking ceased. There are curfews to control people lives, not a virus—a lockdown enforced by half a million soldiers.
“I have attended numerous meetings with people living in Luton and internationally—those who live in Jammu and Kashmir, those who have loved ones there and people who just care about human rights. A person does not and should not have to be Kashmiri to care about their struggle for self-determination—their struggle to live safely and freely. What happens in Kashmir is felt across the communities such as mine in Luton North.”
On the following day, India raised the subject of “false assertions” and unsubstantiated allegations propagated by a “third country”, an allusion to Pakistan. In their statement, the Indian High Commission said, “Regarding the reference to ‘Kashmir’ in the title: the need is felt to differentiate between the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, which is an integral part of India, and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (when the erstwhile princely state of Kashmir legally acceded to India in October 1947, this part was forcibly and illegally occupied by Pakistan).
“It was also noted that references to the Indian Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, despite the volumes of authentic information available in the public domain—based on up to date and visible facts on the ground—ignored current ground reality and, instead chose to reflect false assertions of the kind promoted by a third country, such as unsubstantiated allegations of ‘genocide’, ‘rampant violence’ and ‘torture’.”
