Prince Harry has come a long way in educating himself about race since his youthful days, when he used an offensive slur against a fellow army cadet from Pakistan and dressed up as a Nazi soldier at a party.
In an explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Queen's grandson explained that his mixed-race wife Meghan had helped him on his journey of awareness, and he wanted his family, the media and Britain at large to educate themselves too.
"I've spent many years doing the work and doing my own learning," the 36-year-old said, noting his privileged background meant "I wasn't aware of" racial issues on the whole.
"But my God, it doesn't take very long to suddenly become aware of it," Harry said, reflecting years on from his early 20s, when the details emerged of the fancy-dress party and his calling the fellow cadet a "Paki".
The interview has certainly sparked new debate about race in Britain, but there is little common ground between white commentators and black voices following Harry's assertion that racism was a "large part" of the reason why he and Meghan quit the UK for North America.
"America has a long and profoundly tragic history when it comes to racism. But they acknowledge it and they know it," Lola Adesioye, a British commentator on race based in New York, told AFP.
"I still feel that the UK has a sort of delusion about its racial standing, and the idea that racism is not a really a thing in the UK, 'that's an American problem', and that the UK is much more integrated," she said.
"So when you hear someone like Meghan Markle who's clearly a modern woman talking about some of the racial issues that she confronted in the royal family... people asking about what colour will your son be, is something that is very hard for people in America to get their heads around."
- TV tantrum -
Buckingham Palace said the queen took the claims of racism "very seriously" and they would be addressed by the family privately, even if "some recollections may vary".
Historian David Olusoga, author of the book Black and British: A Forgotten History, said the allegations should force a reckoning for both the royal family and the UK.
"Yet rather than use this moment to embark upon an honest national conversation about race and racism there will, I fear, be further demonisation of Meghan and Harry," he wrote in The Guardian on Tuesday.
"Trapped in denial -- about everyday racism, structural racism, slavery and empire -- there are parts of British society that appear incapable not just of change but even of its necessary precursor: honest self-reflection."
Journalist Piers Morgan -- one figurehead of the anti-Meghan, "anti-woke" camp -- stormed out of his own TV studio Tuesday as a black presenter dissected the racial tinge to UK press coverage of Meghan before and after her 2018 wedding to Harry.
Morgan returned later for a painful interview with Meghan's estranged father Thomas Markle, who said the couple's claims that an unidentified royal wanted to know the likely skin tone of their unborn son were "bullshit".
There is deep divide between those who believe Meghan's remarks on race and self-harm, and others who view her as a publicity-seeking Hollywood export who by her own admission failed to learn anything about her future role before the wedding.
The debate is all the fiercer coming after nearly a year of Black Lives Matter protests sparked by the death of George Floyd as he was held by US police.
Prime minister Boris Johnson is refusing to get involved, other than to laud the queen's "unifying role" for Britain and the 54-nation Commonwealth she heads, most of whose 2.4 billion people are not white.
But his government set out its stall in new policing legislation introduced Tuesday that would raise the maximum penalty for criminal damage of a memorial from three months to 10 years.
That followed the government's stated intention to prosecute BLM protesters in Britain who last year toppled a statue of a 17th century slave merchant and defaced another of Winston Churchill.
Politicians from Johnson's ruling Conservative party have also railed against organisations such as the BBC and National Trust, which manages more than 500 stately homes, for seeking to educate the public more about Britain's colonial and slaving past.
- Press 'not racist' -
Those supporting Meghan can produce many examples of double standards, including side-by-side comparisons of newspaper headlines on coverage of Meghan and her white sister-in-law Kate.
One notorious jibe came in 2016, soon after the couple started dating. "Harry's girl is (almost) straight outta Compton," the Daily Mail wrote of the Los Angeles native, describing her upbringing close to a district known for its gang violence.
Prince Harry told Winfrey that the UK press, especially tabloid newspapers, were "bigoted".
That sparked an angry denial from the Society of Editors, a guild of senior British newspaper journalists, some of whose members have faced lawsuits from the royal couple.
The UK media has a responsibility to hold people to account, it said. "If sometimes the questions asked are awkward and embarrassing, then so be it, but the press is most certainly not racist."
That prompted bafflement on social media from many journalists, noting the bigotry they themselves had witnessed in newsrooms and the lack of racial diversity in UK media as a whole.
Marcus Ryder, a professor in media diversity at Birmingham City University, said the editors' claim was "utterly bizarre".
"To say the press is not racist is like saying society is not racist," he told AFP, adding: "The idea that race doesn’t play a part in (Meghan's) coverage is naive."
A CONVICTED child sex offender from Pakistan has successfully challenged government attempts to send him back to his homeland, claiming he faces danger because his criminal acts became public there.
Jamil Ahmed, 48, persuaded immigration judges that deporting him would breach his human rights after newspapers in Pakistan reportedly covered his convictions for abusing teenage girls in Scotland, reported The Times.
The case highlighted ongoing legal complexities surrounding the removal of foreign nationals who have committed serious crimes in Britain.
Ahmed first faced justice in 2008 when courts found him guilty of unlawful sexual activity with a girl aged between 13 and 16. He received a three-year probation order and was ordered to complete 240 hours of unpaid work.
Five years later, he appeared in court again on similar charges involving another teenager. This time, magistrates sentenced him to three years and six months in prison and placed him permanently on the sex offenders register.
Following his second conviction, immigration officials issued a deportation order. However, Ahmed has spent nearly ten years fighting through the courts to remain in Britain, losing two previous appeals but never actually being removed.
At his latest tribunal hearing in Edinburgh, Ahmed's representatives argued that media coverage of his crimes had reached Pakistan through various publications, including the Daily Kashmir News.
The tribunal judgment said, "Ahmed asserts that he has a well-founded fear of persecution and is at risk of suffering serious harm in Pakistan because knowledge of his crimes have become known in Pakistan and published in newspapers."
He further claimed that local authorities in Pakistan had opened an investigation based on his convictions, and that religious leaders had issued a fatwa against him. He alleged that extremists were distributing leaflets containing his photograph and that armed men had visited his family home searching for him. Tragically, he said his father was subsequently shot dead.
The Home Office challenged the authenticity of the alleged Pakistani newspaper reports during proceedings.
Ahmed called Pakistani legal expert Asad Ali Khan to testify about the newspaper coverage, but the 2024 hearing judge dismissed this evidence, leading to Ahmed's initial defeat.
However, the Upper Tribunal ruled that the previous judge had made legal errors by failing to properly consider the expert testimony and other key evidence.
Judge Jeremy Rintoul concluded, "I consider that, cumulatively, the judge has failed to reach sustainable conclusions with respect to the documents, the wife's evidence and the expert's opinion."
Ahmed, who is married with children and continues living in Scotland, will now face a fresh hearing to determine his immigration status, the newspaper report added.
Bertrice Pompe (CL) and Bernadette Dugasse (CR), who were both born on Diego Garcia, speak outside High Court following their campaign's failed bid to prevent Britain transferring ownership of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, on May 22, 2025 in London.
A BRITISH court on Thursday cleared the way for the government to proceed with a deal to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, lifting a temporary injunction that had blocked the signing of the agreement.
The deal would involve the UK transferring the Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius and paying to lease the US-UK military base on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the territory.
Prime minister Keir Starmer was scheduled to finalise the agreement in a virtual signing ceremony with Mauritian representatives on Thursday. However, a last-minute injunction granted to two Chagossian women by London's High Court delayed the process.
The injunction, granted early Thursday morning, temporarily blocked the deal, leading to criticism of the government. At a 10:30am hearing, Judge Martin Chamberlain lifted the ban, stating that extending it could harm the UK’s national and public interest. He added that any further legal challenges must be brought before the Court of Appeal.
“We welcome the judge's ruling today,” a government spokesperson said.
The opposition Conservatives criticised the proposed agreement. “You’re seeing British sovereign territory being given away to an ally of China, and billions of pounds of British taxpayers’ money being spent for the privilege,” said Conservative MP Robert Jenrick. “This was always a bad deal,” he added.
Earlier, the two Chagossian women, Bernadette Dugasse and Bertrice Pompe, had sought the injunction after a leaked newspaper report on Wednesday night indicated that the deal was set to be announced.
Outside the court, about 50 protesters gathered. The women's lawyer, Philip Rule, said the government was acting “unlawfully” and argued that Thursday could be the court’s last chance to intervene.
Starmer has said Britain’s ownership of the Chagos Islands has been questioned by international legal rulings and that an agreement with Mauritius is the only way to ensure the base remains operational.
The base on Diego Garcia is leased to the United States and is considered a key military facility in the Asia-Pacific, having been used during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Ahead of the court’s ruling, a government spokesperson told AFP, “The deal is the right thing to protect the British people and our national security.”
The Conservative Party called the agreement a “sellout for British interests”.
Britain retained the Chagos Islands after Mauritius became independent in the 1960s. Thousands of Chagossian residents were later removed from the islands and have pursued legal claims for compensation.
In 2019, the International Court of Justice recommended that the UK return the islands to Mauritius following decades of legal disputes.
Under the proposed deal, the UK would obtain a 99-year lease for the base, with the option to renew. The government has not disclosed the cost but has not denied reports of a £90 million annual fee.
Mauritian prime minister Navin Ramgoolam has said Mauritius would continue to pursue full sovereignty over the islands if the United States did not support the agreement.
(With inputs from agencies)
Keep ReadingShow less
Salal Dam on the Chenab, the first hydropower project under the Indus Water Treaty
INDIA is considering plans to dramatically increase the amount of water it draws from a major river that feeds Pakistani farms downstream, as part of retaliatory action for the deadly April attack on tourists that New Delhi blames on Islamabad, according to four people familiar with the matter.
Delhi “put in abeyance” its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, which governs the use of the Indus river system, shortly after 26 civilians were killed in Indian Kashmir in what India described as an act of terror. Pakistan has denied any involvement, but the accord has not been revived, despite both countries agreeing to a ceasefire last week.
After suspending India’s participation in the treaty, India’s prime minister Narendra Modi ordered officials to expedite planning and execution of projects on the Chenab, Jhelum and Indus rivers, three bodies of water in the Indus system that are designated primarily for Pakistan’s use, six people told Reuters.
One of the key plans under discussion involves doubling the length of the Ranbir canal on the Chenab to 120 km, according to two of the sources. The canal, which runs through India to Pakistan’s agricultural heartland of Punjab, was built in the 19th century, long before the treaty was signed.
India is permitted to draw a limited amount of water from the Chenab for irrigation, but an expanded canal – which experts said could take years to construct – would allow it to divert 150 cubic meters of water per second, up from about 40 cubic meters currently, the four people said, citing official discussions and documents they had seen.
Details of the Indian government’s deliberations on expanding Ranbir have not previously been reported. The discussions started last month and continue even after the ceasefire, one of the people said.
The Indian ministries responsible for water and foreign affairs, as well as Modi’s office, did not respond to Reuters’ questions. Indian hydropower giant NHPC, which operates many projects in the Indus system, also did not respond to an email seeking comment.
Modi said in a fiery speech this week that “water and blood cannot flow together,” though he didn’t refer to the treaty. Water minister CR Paatil told a media event last Friday (16) that his ministry would “implement what prime minister Modi says” and “try to ensure that not a drop of water goes out.”
The water and foreign ministries of Pakistan did not respond to requests for comment. Foreign minister Ishaq Dar told lawmakers last week that the government had written to India arguing that suspending the treaty was unlawful and that Islamabad regarded it as remaining in force.
A dry stretch of the Indus River in Pakistan’s Jamshoro and Kotri districts earlier this month
Islamabad said after India suspended the treaty in April that it considered “any attempt to stop or divert the flow of water belonging to Pakistan” to be an “act of war.” About 80 per cent of Pakistani farms depend on the Indus system, as do nearly all hydropower projects serving the country of some 250 million.
Any efforts by Delhi to build dams, canals or other infrastructure that would withhold or divert significant amount of flow from the Indus system to India “would take years to realize,” said water security expert David Michel of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
International relations expert Happymon Jacob at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University said that India’s new focus on the Indus Waters Treaty reflected an attempt to pressure Pakistan over Kashmir.
“With the latest conflict, Delhi may refuse to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan in any format,” he said. “Delhi has not only progressively narrowed the scope of bilateral talks but has also curtailed the agenda, focusing only on specific issues like the IWT.”
Pakistan said it is preparing legal action in several international forums, including the World Bank, which facilitated the treaty, as well as the Permanent Court of Arbitration or the International Court of Justice in the Hague.
“Water should not be weaponised,” Pakistan’s finance minister Muhammad Aurangzeb told Reuters on Monday. “We don’t even want to consider any scenario which... does not take into account the reinstatement of this treaty.”
The Indus system runs through some of the world’s most geopolitically tense areas, originating near Lake Mansarovar in Tibet and snaking through India’s north and Pakistan’s east and southeast, before emptying into the Arabian Sea.
The treaty is widely seen as one of the world’s most successful water-sharing accords, having survived several major wars and longstanding tensions between India and Pakistan.
Islamabad has previously opposed many Indian projects in the Indus system, while Delhi said after the Kashmir attack that it had been trying to renegotiate the treaty since 2023 to account for population increases and its rising need for clean hydroenergy.
The treaty restricts India largely to setting up low-impact hydropower projects on the three rivers allocated to Pakistan. Delhi has freedom to utilise the waters of three other rivers – the Sutlej, Beas and Ravi tributaries – as it sees fit.
Delhi has also created a list of hydropower projects in its Jammu and Kashmir territory that it hopes will expand capacity to 12,000 megawatts, up from the current 3,360 MW.
The list, which was created by the power ministry and seen by Reuters, was not dated. A person familiar with the document said it was created before the Kashmir incident but is actively being discussed by government officials.
The prospective projects also include dams that can store large volumes of water, in what would be a first for India in the Indus river system, according to two people familiar with the matter. India has identified at least five possible storage projects, four of which are on tributaries of the Chenab and Jhelum, according to the power ministry document. (Reuters)
Keep ReadingShow less
Kim called the warship a “breakthrough” in the country’s naval forces
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, expressed his fury after witnessing a major accident during the launch of the latest North Korean warship, on Thursday. Kim considers this malfunction in the mechanism of the warship as a shame to the nation’s prestige.
As per Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), parts of the 5,000 ton destroyer’s bottom was damaged, and went off-balance as it eased into water during the launch. Parts of the destroyer’s hull was crushed, leaving the bow stranded on the shipway.
No casualties or injuries were reported after the incident.
The mishap took place in Kim’s presence, along with a large crowd from northeastern part of Chongjin, which added to his humiliation. He commented the accident as “criminal act”, and “carelessness”, from those in charge. He declared that those involved with the error will be held responsible and punished.
Multiple state institutions are considered responsible the accident – including the Munitions Industry Department, Kim Chaek University of Technology and the central ship design bureau.
Yang Wuk, an Asan Institute for Policy Studies military expert commented on the failed launch of the warship, embarrassing for the country.
According to a South Korean military analysis, the damaged warship is on their side in the water. The South Korean military spokesperson, Lee said that he expected the damaged destroyer to be equipped like the Choe Hyon.
“If the ship does not move together, the stresses will tear the hull apart,” said Sal Mercogliano, Professor at Campbell University and a maritime expert.
North Korea lacks floating docks usually found in shipbuilding states. Therefore, "Pushing from the side is the most basic, simplest and cheapest, if done right,” said Chol Il, retired South Korean submarine commander.
Kim called the warship a “breakthrough” in the country’s naval forces. Therefore, he ordered for the destroyer to be restored before the late June plenary session of the ruling Worker’s Party.
Keep ReadingShow less
The recall also sheds light on the ongoing debate around raw milk consumption
A milk product sold in Northern Ireland has been urgently recalled due to fears of contamination with a potentially deadly strain of E. coli bacteria. Kenneth Hanna's Farm Shop has issued a recall for its Ken's Raw Jersey Milk following the possible detection of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC), a dangerous form of the bacteria.
The recall applies to all batch codes and use-by dates of the two-litre bottles sold in Northern Ireland. Consumers have been advised not to consume the product. Instead, the milk should either be returned to the place of purchase or safely disposed of.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has issued a public health warning, stating: “The possible presence of STEC in this product. Symptoms caused by STEC organisms include severe diarrhoea (including bloody diarrhoea), abdominal pain, and sometimes haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS), a serious condition that can lead to kidney failure and can be fatal.”
STEC is a specific strain of E. coli that produces Shiga toxins, which are capable of causing serious illness. One of the most recognised strains is E. coli O157:H7, commonly linked to foodborne outbreaks associated with undercooked meat, unwashed produce, and unpasteurised dairy products.
Symptoms of an STEC infection typically develop within three to four days of exposure but can appear anytime between one and ten days. They include stomach cramps, diarrhoea—often bloody—and in some cases, fever. These symptoms may last for up to two weeks. While many recover without complications, the infection can result in severe outcomes in certain individuals.
One of the most serious complications is haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS), which affects approximately 5 to 10 percent of STEC cases. HUS primarily impacts young children and the elderly, and symptoms include reduced urination, pale skin, fatigue, swelling, and unexplained bruising. In severe cases, the condition can lead to kidney failure and, in rare instances, death.
The FSA has advised anyone experiencing these symptoms to stay at home and avoid attending work, school, or nursery until they have been symptom-free for at least 48 hours to minimise the risk of spreading the infection.
The recall also sheds light on the ongoing debate around raw milk consumption. Ken's Raw Jersey Milk is an unpasteurised product, meaning it has not undergone the heat treatment process used to eliminate harmful bacteria. While supporters of raw milk claim it offers health benefits such as improved digestion and a richer nutrient profile, health authorities continue to warn of the risks associated with its consumption.
Raw milk can carry pathogens including E. coli, STEC, Listeria, and Salmonella. These bacteria are typically destroyed during pasteurisation, a process not applied to raw milk products.
This incident serves as a reminder of the potential dangers of consuming unpasteurised dairy. The FSA continues to monitor the situation, and consumers in Northern Ireland are urged to heed the recall notice and take appropriate safety precautions.
For further updates or health advice, consumers are encouraged to consult the FSA’s official website or contact their healthcare provider if symptoms appear.