FOR British Asians, perhaps the grimmest story of the week has not been the saga from the White House, but something closer to home.
A boy and a girl, aged 14 and 12 respectively, are accused of killing an 80-yearold Asian man in Leicester. Bhim Kohli died in hospital a day after the attack on September 1 last year.
The boy, who is now 15, “racially abused” Kohli before attacking him, the court heard. He is accused of murder and manslaughter. The girl, who has turned 13, is accused of manslaughter. She allegedly “encouraged the violence and filmed it on her phone while laughing”.
These are children, who cannot be named because of their age. The trial is expected to last six to eight weeks.
Kohli was only yards from his home, taking his dog for a walk in a nearby park.
The cause of death was given as a neck injury, causing spinal cord damage. Kohli had a number of other injuries, including fractured ribs.
Prosecutor Harpreet Sandhu KC said, “Mr Kohli had the misfortune to encounter these two defendants”.
He added: “The prosecution says that as a result of causing those injuries, (the boy) is guilty of murdering Bhim Kohli and (the girl), who encouraged the causing of those injuries. is guilty of manslaughter…. He had put his balaclava on in preparation for the violence he was going to use against Mr Kohli.”
The victim, when found by two of his children, was “on the ground and in obvious pain”. He said he had been “punched in the face, kicked, and racially abused”.
The question for politicians who have turned the debate on migration into an attack on immigrants and “alien cultures” is this: how did these children acquire so much hate? This could happen to any vulnerable Asian in the country.
IN SIR KEIR STARMER’S cabinet reshuffle last week, triggered by the resignation of Angela Rayner, the prime minister shifted Jonathan Reynolds from business and trade secretary and president of the board of trade after barely a year in the post to chief whip, making him responsible for the party.
The move doesn’t make much sense. At Chequers, the UK-India Free Trade Agreement was signed by Reynolds, and the Indian commerce and industry minister, Piyush Goyal. They had clearly established a friendly working relationship.
Reynolds apparently bought Goyal an ice cream some weeks ago when they were walking in London’s Hyde Park and ironed out the last remaining problems.
Goyal will have to start all over again with Reynolds’s replacement, Peter Kyle.
At least, Lisa Nandy, who managed to sign a cultural agreement with India, remains culture secretary, despite persistent reports she was due for the sack. I have high hopes of Kanishka Narayan, who has been appointed parliamentary under-secretary in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. Crucially, chancellor Rachel Reeves has not been given another job.
But, in his heart of hearts, Starmer must know he cannot win the next general election if she remains his chancellor. Her vindictive VAT raid on private schools has ruined the lives of many children and forced school after school to close. And the rules on inheritance tax and non-doms have driven many Indian entrepreneurs to flee to Dubai. Starmer should be “pragmatic” – a word he likes – and reverse these policies for the good of the country.
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.
Finding romance today feels like trying to align stars in a night sky that refuses to stay still
When was the last time you stumbled into a conversation that made your heart skip? Or exchanged a sweet beginning to a love story - organically, without the buffer of screens, swipes, or curated profiles? In 2025, those moments feel rarer, swallowed up by the quickening pace of life.
We are living faster than ever before. Cities hum with noise and neon, people race between commitments, and ambition seems to be the rhythm we all march to. In the process, the simple art of connection - eye contact, lingering conversations, the gentle patience of getting to know someone - feels like it is slipping through our fingers.
Whether you’re single, searching, or settled, the landscape is shifting. Some turn to apps for convenience; others look for love in cafés, gyms, workplaces or community spaces. But the challenge remains the same: how do we connect deeply in a world designed to move at lightning speed?
We’ve become fluent in productivity, in chasing careers, in cultivating polished identities. Yet are we forgetting how to be fluent in intimacy? When was the last time you sat across from someone and truly listened - without checking your phone, without planning the next step, without treating time like a currency to be spent?
It’s a strange paradox: we have more access to people than ever before, yet many feel more isolated. Fun is always available - dinners, drinks, nights out, fleeting encounters - but fulfilment is harder to grasp. Are we mistaking access for intimacy? Are we human, or are we slowly adapting into versions of ourselves stripped of those raw, humanistic qualities - vulnerability, patience, tenderness - that once defined love?
Perhaps we’ve grown comfortable with the fast exit. It’s easier to ghost than to explain. Easier to keep moving than to pause. But what does that cost us? What do we lose when romance becomes a checkbox on an already overstuffed to-do list?
The truth is - the heart doesn’t move at the pace of technology or ambition. It moves slowly, awkwardly, with a rhythm that resists acceleration. Maybe that’s the point. Love has always lived in the messy spaces - hesitant pauses, nervous laughter, words spoken without rehearsal.
So the real question for 2025 is not “Have we gone too far?” but “Can we afford to slow down?” Can we still allow ourselves the sweetness of beginnings - the chance encounters, the unplanned moments, the quiet courage to be open?
Because in the end, connection is not about speed or access—it’s about presence. In a world that won’t stop moving, choosing to be present might be the bravest act of love we have left.
Instagram & TikTok: @Bombae.mix
Keep ReadingShow less
Shabana Mahmood, US homeland security secretary Kristi Noem, Canada’s public safety minister Gary Anandasangaree, Australia’s home affairs minister Tony Burke and New Zealand’s attorney general Judith Collins at the Five Eyes security alliance summit on Monday (8)
PRIME MINISTER Keir Starmer’s government is not working. That is the public verdict, one year in. So, he used his deputy Angela Rayner’s resignation to hit the reset button.
It signals a shift in his own theory of change. Starmer wanted his mission-led government to avoid frequent shuffles of his pack, so that ministers knew their briefs. Such a dramatic reshuffle shows that the prime minister has had enough of subject expertise for now, gambling instead that fresh eyes may bring bold new energy to intractable challenges on welfare and asylum.
“Can Shabana Mahmood save Keir Starmer?” is the question being asked in Westminster. Small boats are increasingly talked about as an existential risk to the government. It will not be the only issue at the next general election – the economy and public services will matter, too – but Labour fear being unable to get heard on anything else without visible progress in the Channel.
The new home secretary has been asked to “think the unthinkable”. Ministers and MPs should be eager to try anything that might work – but might heed the lessons of six years of failure to stop the boats as they do. It is hardly as if former Conservative home secretaries Priti Patel and Suella Braverman were unwilling to brainstorm the unthinkable, nor indeed to legislate the unworkable. If performative gestures – asylum seekers on barges – could stop the boats, it would have been all quiet in the Channel long ago.
As justice secretary, Mahmood’s voice was tough on crime, reflecting her communitarianism. Yet her policy involved a liberalism of necessity. With the prisons overflowing, shortening sentences and seeking public consent for alternative forms of punishment was unavoidable. Number 10 media briefings about being willing to make Labour MPs ‘queasy’ on asylum could – ironically – be a form of comfort zone politics; a distraction from tougher choices that might actually work. Hotel use for asylum could end in 2026 – not 2029 – if ministers both streamlined appeals and gave asylum seekers from high-risk countries limited leave to remain – with the right to work and the responsibility to house themselves. It could save billions, if the government can navigate the political risks. Labour’s challenge is to show how it can deliver an orderly and humane system by cooperating with allies, not ripping up treaties.
Migrants in a dinghy crossing the English Channel
As Mahmood becomes the most prominent British Asian and British Muslim in public life, others project contradictory ideas of what they imagine her politics, faith and personality mean. It is curious that Maurice Glasman could declare her the new leader of his Blue Labour faction (though Mahmood does not share the baron’s misplaced enthusiasm for US president Donald Trump) while Reform donor Aaron Banks declared that a Muslim lawyer as home secretary would immediately ‘open the floodgates’ to refugees from Gaza, exemplifying more about his presumptions and prejudices, than her politics.
There is no novelty in a British Asian home secretary now. Sajid Javid broke that ceiling in the Conservative government of 2018, yet Mahmood is already the fifth visible minority politician to hold that office. However, overt racism towards her goes unchecked on X/Twitter – where radicalised site owner and US businessman Elon Musk is infinitely more likely to retweet than to suspend racist voices who say no Muslim should ever be home secretary. That is Tommy Robinson’s view – yet Musk champions his London march on Saturday (13), where ex-soldier and minor TV celebrity Ant Middleton will pitch a London mayoral campaign founded on the absurdly racist proposition that Sadiq Khan, Mahmood and Conservatives opposition leader Kemi Badenoch should be barred from high office if their grandparents were not British-born.
This is the curious paradox of multi-ethnic Britain today: British Asian faces in high places have never been more common. Yet a vocal minority challenges the equal status of ethnic and faith minorities more aggressively than for a generation. It is not just the government that must show more leadership by speaking up to defend our multi-ethnic society. Every civic institution can contribute to how we respect differences and strengthen our common ground.
Knowing our history better is one vital foundation. Everyone is aware of this country’s pride in defeating fascism matters – but fewer know that the armies that won the war look more like our modern Britain of 2025 than that of 1945. Half of the public do know that Indian soldiers took part. Not so many understand that Hindu, Sikh and Muslim soldiers fought alongside British officers in the largest volunteer army the world has ever seen. The My Family Legacy campaign from British Future, the Royal British Legion and Eastern Eye will help British Asian families find and tell their stories. Writing this vital chapter fully into our national history remains work in progress – but can show why national symbols, like the poppy, belong to us all and can help to bring this diverse society together.
Sunder Katwala
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.
How noticing the changes in my father taught me the importance of early action, patience, and love
I don’t understand people who don’t talk or see their parents often. Unless they have done something to ruin your lives or you had a traumatic childhood, there is no reason you shouldn’t be checking in with them at least every few days if you don’t live with them.
Earlier this year, I had the privilege of looking after my parents – they lived with me while their old house was being sold, and their new house was being renovated.
Within this time, I noticed things happening to my dad (Chamanlal Mulji), an 81-year-old retired joiner. Dad was known as Simba when he lived in Zanzibar, East Africa because he was like a lion. A man in fairly good health, despite being an ex-smoker, he’d only had heart surgery back in 2017. In the last few years, he was having some health issues, but certain things, like his walking and driving becoming slow, and his memory failing, we just put down to old age. Now, my dad was older than my friend’s dad. Many of whom in their 70’s, dad, at 81 was an older dad, not common back in the seventies when he married my mum.
It was only when I spent extended time around my parents that I started noticing that certain things weren’t just due to old age. Some physical symptoms were more serious, but certain things like forgetting that the front door wasn’t the bathroom door, and talking about old memories thinking that they had recently happened rang alarm bells for me and I suspected that he might have dementia.
Dementia generally happens in old age when the brain starts to shrink. Someone described it to me as a person’s brain being like a bookshelf. The books at the top of the shelf are the new memories and the books at the bottom are the new memories. The books at the top have fallen off, leaving only the old memories being remembered. People with dementia are also highly likely to suffer from strokes.
Sadly, my dad was one of the few that suffered a stroke and passed away on 28th June 2025. If you have a parent, family member or anyone you know and you suspect that they might have dementia, please talk to your GP straight away. Waiting lists within the NHS are extremely LONG so the quicker people with dementia are treated, the better. Sadly, the illness cannot be reversed but medication can help it from getting worse.
One thing I would also advise is to have patience. Those suffering with dementia can be agitated and often become aggressive, but that’s only because they’re frustrated that they cannot do things the way they used to.
The disease might hide the person underneath, but there’s still a person in there who needs your love and attention.” - Jamie Calandriello
This one is for you, dad x
Keep ReadingShow less
DIVISIVE AGENDA:Police clash withprotesters outside Epping councilafter a march from the Bell Hotelhousing asylum seekers last Sunday(31)
August is dubbed 'the silly season’ as the media must fill the airwaves with little going on. But there was a more sinister undertone to how that vacation news vacuum got filled this year. The recurring story of the political summer was the populist right’s confidence in setting the agenda and the anxiety of opponents about how to respond.
Tensions were simmering over asylum. Yet frequent predictions of mass unrest failed to materialise. The patchwork of local protests and counter-protests had a strikingly different geography to last summer. The sporadic efforts of disorder came in the affluent southern suburbs of Epping and Hillingdon, Canary Wharf and Cheshunt with no disorder and few large protests in the thirty towns that saw riots last August. Prosecutions, removing local ringleaders, deter. Local cohesion has been a higher priority where violence broke out than everywhere else. Hotel use for asylum has halved - and is more common in the south. The Home Office went to court to keep asylum seekers in Epping’s Bell Hotel, for now, yet stresses its goal to stop using hotels by 2029. The Refugee Council’s pragmatic suggestion of giving time-limited leave to remain to asylum seekers from the five most dangerous countries could halve the need for hotels within months.
The drumbeat from hyping up the asylum protests helped those trying to shift the political argument to the right. Reform leader Nigel Farage set out his plans on asylum: to abolish it entirely. Any asylum seekers who did arrive would be sent somewhere, anywhere else - perhaps to a faraway island, or back to the regimes they had fled. Farage’s opponents offered the most muted criticism. Opposition leader Kemi Badenoch declared he had copied the Conservatives’ homework. The government’s main point was that Farage had not shown how it would all work in practice. The Taliban said they would be delighted for Farage to deliver those who had fled their persecution back into their clutches - and would hardly need a cash bribe, too. Opinion polls showing broad public revulsion at this idea might yet encourage opponents to challenge the principles, not just the practicalities, of Reform’s plans.
A year ago, Farage said he would not pitch ‘mass deportation’ plans that were impossible to deliver. Doing exactly that, his former MP Rupert Lowe declared this a victory for the online right - but said he would keep pushing for a ‘proper deportations’ plan to remove many millions of legal migrants too. An increasingly radicalised Elon Musk critiqued Farage’s plans as “weak sauce”, promoting Tommy Robinson’s far right street protests and even the furthest right factions who decry Robinson for not advocating the forced deportation of British-born minorities too. Even as Musk shows no limits to which racists he will personally promote, the government stays mute on an epidemic of online racism. It is a strange world where the expectations we place on every primary and secondary school on British values, tolerance, respect and the rule of law go out of the window when the world’s richest man promotes neo-Nazis. If the government cannot find a voice to challenge racism, it can expect no credibility when it talks about community cohesion from ethnic minority Britons - nor, I would hope, from many of our fellow citizens too.
It was a summer when flags could be symbols of both pride and prejudice. We wore red and white face-paint in the Katwala household to cheer England’s Lionesses to winning the women’s Euros. The St George’s bunting in our High Street in Dartford has a welcoming intent, but the red paint crosses daubed messily on our street sign send a more intimidating message. An important British ethnic minority response - from the Windrush onwards - to those questioning our status as British has been that the racists should try to learn a little bit more of the history of our country. We should be loath to let our national flags be claimed as symbols of exclusion, by those of all ethnicities and faiths doing more to say and show what they can mean when we fly them together.
That depends on preventing the populist right setting the agenda by default. The irony of Farage being dubbed a populist is that he is often on the unpopular side of most major issues - slashing public spending, scrapping human rights, ditching closer UK-EU post-Brexit links, or not bothering about climate change. Yet Farage often speaks much more confidently for what a quarter of the public think than those who could try to mobilise the anti-populist majority. So the stakes are high for prime minister Sir Keir Starmer this autumn. If Starmer does not find a stronger response, populism may turn out to be more than a passing storm, exposing a lack of strategy, leadership, and ethics that could prove fatal for this government.