A PETITION calling for the removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s statue in Leicester is being scrutinised by the city council to ensure it is not a fake one, given there appear to be multiple signings by the same people.
Those who sign the petition also have to live in Leicester.
The council will have to go through the identities of each and every one of the 6,052 people who have signed the petition to make sure they do exist and also meet the residence criteria.
It seems the council appears not to know very much about one “Keri P from Derby, ENG, United Kingdom” who started the petition. A high proportion of the petitioners were merely abusive, while others appeared to have little knowledge of history. Gandhi was accused of being against Muslims, for example, which is an odd accusation since he had tried very hard to prevent the partition of India by urging Indian National Congress leader Jawaharlal Nehru to let Muhammad Ali Jinnah, leader of the Muslim League, become the first prime minister of an independent India.
On January 30, 1948, Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu extremist who objected to Gandhi’s tolerance for the Muslims.
Analysis of the people who signed the petition – assuming they all exist – will probably reveal various political groups with their own anti-India agenda on issues such as Kashmir, caste and religion, according to those who have looked at the names. Why a person living in Derby should focus on Gandhi’s statue in Leicester is unclear even to the council, but Keri P posted a message on June 13 closing down the petition: “I have received an update from Leicester City Council requesting me to close the petition and formally submit it with presenting arguments.”
The Labour MP for Leicester East, Claudia Webbe, said in a carefully worded statement: “I stand in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter protests here in Leicester and across the UK.
“I will continue to support all those across the world who are safely and peacefully protesting systems of racist oppression. I believe that the calls to take down the statue of Mahatma Gandhi in Leicester are a distraction from this crucial movement.
“I recognise that, like many people of his era, Gandhi said and did some questionable things in his life.
“Yet Gandhi was part of creating a historical anti-imperialist movement in the same way that Martin Luther King created a ground-breaking civil rights movement.
“His form of peaceful protest, like Black Lives Matter today, was a powerful force for change.
“The difference between a statue of Gandhi and statues of slavers such as Edward Colston, is that there is no reasonable debate that Colston – who derived his wealth from the murderous slave trade – is a morally defensible figure to be memorialised.
“The same cannot be said for Gandhi, who remains a hero to many of Leicester’s Asian community and to millions across the world.”
To be fair, the demand for the removal of the Gandhi statue has not come from the Black Lives Matter movement, but appears connected with sub-continental politics.
The former Labour MP for Leicester East, Keith Vaz, has secured an undertaking from Sir Peter Soulsby, the elected Labour MP on Leicester, who said: “I well remember the pride and pleasure we enjoyed when this very prominent statue was unveiled on Belgrave Road.”
Soulsby, who was the MP for Leicester South from 2005 to 2011 when he was elected mayor, assured Vaz of “our joint commitment to honouring this great man in our City of Leicester”.
He recalled: “It was a matter of great pride that our city with the generous support of the donors was able to celebrate the life of Bapu (as Gandhi was also known) who was so inspirational in the creation of modern India and such an example to the rest of the world. I am delighted to be able to give you an absolute assurance that there is no prospect whatsoever of the council agreeing at any time to the removal of the statue – and certainly not while I remain mayor!”
In his letter, Vaz pointed out: “The statue of Bapu was established by the Samanvara Parivaar Charitable Trust. No public money was spent on it. It was greeted with over whelming warmth by the people of Leicester and indeed the world. It was unveiled in the presence of the then home secretary Alan Johnson MP and His Holiness Swami Satyamitranand Giriji Maharaj. All the elected officials in Leicester supported this initiative.
“At the time you said the following in your capacity as the MP for Leicester South: ‘Gandhi was a person whose teachings transcend any particular nation or faith. His teachings in the way of life showed us peace and non-violence protest can change the world. I would be proud to see a statue in our city that is a reminder to us for all his philosophy and peace.’
“I was a little puzzled by a statement issued by a spokesperson from Leicester City Council which stated that statues and road names were to be reviewed, the implication being that the Mahatma Gandhi statue would be part of that review.
“I would be grateful therefore for your absolute assurance as mayor of the City that you will not do anything nor will you permit anything to be done which would result in the statue being removed from its current position on Belgrave Road. I hope you will agree with me that the statue should stay exactly where it is.”
TENSIONS with Pakistan, fluctuating ties with Bangladesh, and growing Chinese influence in Nepal and Sri Lanka have complicated India’s neighbourhood policy, a top foreign policy and security expert has said.
C Raja Mohan, distinguished professor at the Motwani Jodeja Institute for American Studies at OP Jindal Global University, has a new book out, called India and the Rebalancing of Asia.
He also described how India’s engagement with the US, Japan, Australia and Europe has moved from symbolism to one of substance. Raja Mohan said, “After independence, India withdrew from regional security politics, focusing on global issues and non-alignment. But the past decade has seen a reversal. India is now back in the Asian balance of power. The very concept of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ reflects that, putting the ‘Indo’ into the ‘Pacific.’”
The idea, he explained, has deep historical roots: “The British once viewed the Indian and Pacific Oceans as interconnected realms. Now, after decades of separation, those spaces are merging again.”
Narendra Modi with Xi Jinping and (right)Vladimir Putin at last month’s SCO summit in China
While India once aspired to build a “post-Western order” alongside China, those dreams have long since faded, according to the expert.
“Contradictions between India and China have sharpened,” he said, citing territorial disputes, a $100 billion (£75bn) trade deficit, and China’s growing influence among India’s neighbours.
By contrast, India’s ties with the US and Europe have strengthened.
“Where once India shunned security cooperation with Washington, it is now deeply engaged,” he said. Yet he emphasised that India remains an independent actor, “not a traditional ally like Japan or Australia.”
His comments were made during the Adelphi series, hosted by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) last month. According to the expert, who is also a visiting research professor at the National University of Singapore, the return of India to regional security politics marks a significant change in its foreign policy since independence. Popular discussions about the “rise of Asia” tend to oversimplify what Raja Mohan explained was a deeply uneven transformation. “It’s more accurate to say Asia as a whole is rising,” he said, adding, “but not evenly. China has risen much faster than the rest.”
This imbalance has created internal contradictions within Asia, according to the academic. “China’s sense of entitlement to regional dominance and its territorial claims have provoked reactions from other Asian countries,” he said.
While China’s economic ascent, once “a marriage of Western capital and Chinese labour”, that relationship has strained over the past 15 years as the Asian country grew into a global military and economic powerhouse, according to Raja Mohan.
And the US, which previously nurtured China’s growth, now seeks to restore balance in Asia, shifting from a policy of engagement to one of cautious competition, he said.
Dwelling on India’s rise, he said, “The question is not whether India can match China alone, but whether it can help build coalitions that limit unilateralism. History shows weaker states can play crucial balancing roles, as China once did against the Soviet Union.”
He explored how the US-China and India-China dynamics might evolve, particularly under US president Donald Trump.
“Some believe the US is retrenching to focus on Asia, others think Trump might seek a grand bargain with China,” Raja Mohan said. “Much depends on how Washington manages its ties with Russia and its global posture.”
He also described how India’s engagement with the US, Japan, Australia and Europe has moved from symbolism to one of substance. Raja Mohan said, “After independence, India withdrew from regional security politics, focusing on global issues and non-alignment. But the past decade has seen a reversal. India is now back in the Asian balance of power. The very concept of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ reflects that, putting the ‘Indo’ into the ‘Pacific.’”
The idea, he explained, has deep historical roots: “The British once viewed the Indian and Pacific Oceans as interconnected realms. Now, after decades of separation, those spaces are merging again.”
While India once aspired to build a “post-Western order” alongside China, those dreams have long since faded, according to the expert.
“Contradictions between India and China have sharpened,” he said, citing territorial disputes, a $100 billion (£75bn) trade deficit, and China’s growing influence among India’s neighbours.
By contrast, India’s ties with the US and Europe have strengthened.
“Where once India shunned security cooperation with Washington, it is now deeply engaged,” he said. Yet he emphasised that India remains an independent actor, “not a traditional ally like Japan or Australia.”
His comments were made during the Adelphi series, hosted by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) last month. According to the expert, who is also a visiting research professor at the National University of Singapore, the return of India to regional security politics marks a significant change in its foreign policy since independence. Popular discussions about the “rise of Asia” tend to oversimplify what Raja Mohan explained was a deeply uneven transformation. “It’s more accurate to say Asia as a whole is rising,” he said, adding, “but not evenly. China has risen much faster than the rest.”
This imbalance has created internal contradictions within Asia, according to the academic. “China’s sense of entitlement to regional dominance and its territorial claims have provoked reactions from other Asian countries,” he said.
While China’s economic ascent, once “a marriage of Western capital and Chinese labour”, that relationship has strained over the past 15 years as the Asian country grew into a global military and economic powerhouse, according to Raja Mohan.
And the US, which previously nurtured China’s growth, now seeks to restore balance in Asia, shifting from a policy of engagement to one of cautious competition, he said.
Dwelling on India’s rise, he said, “The question is not whether India can match China alone, but whether it can help build coalitions that limit unilateralism. History shows weaker states can play crucial balancing roles, as China once did against the Soviet Union.”
He explored how the US-China and India-China dynamics might evolve, particularly under US president Donald Trump.
“Some believe the US is retrenching to focus on Asia, others think Trump might seek a grand bargain with China,” Raja Mohan said. “Much depends on how Washington manages its ties with Russia and its global posture.”
China, he noted, has already toned down its aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomacy, realising that assertiveness has backfired. Yet the underlying structural contradictions between China and both the US and India “are unlikely to disappear.”
Asked about India’s balancing act between the US and Russia, especially after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, the expert was pragmatic.
“India has steadily moved closer to the US and the West, but Trump’s trade-first approach has caused turbulence,” Raja Mohan said.
He cited the threats of high tariffs on Indian imports and resentment over trade imbalances with Washington DC.
On Russia, Raja Mohan’s view was that the relationship has been “in slow decline since the 1990s.”
While India’s GDP now outpaces Russia’s, it continues to engage Moscow for practical reasons. “India’s oil purchases from Russia rose from two per cent to forty per cent after 2022. That’s pragmatism, not alignment,” Raja Mohan said.
He added that prime minister Narendra Modi’s recent handshakes with China’s president Xi Jinping and Russia’s president Vladimir Putin at the Shanghai Co-operation Organization (SCO) summit in China were “signals, reminders to the West that India has options.”
Raja Mohan said India was at the cusp of a historic transformation. “India once provided security across Asia - in both world wars, millions of Indian soldiers fought overseas. That history was forgotten when India withdrew from global security,” he said.
“Now we are reclaiming that role. Ideally, the partnership with the US is the best. But if not, India and other Asian powers will have to shoulder the burden themselves.”
“Japan, Korea, India, Australia - all will have to do more on their own,” he said. “We’ll need to pull up our own bootstraps.”
Dr Benjamin Rhode, senior fellow at IISS, chaired the session.
aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomacy, realising that assertiveness has backfired. Yet the underlying structural contradictions between China and both the US and India “are unlikely to disappear.”
Asked about India’s balancing act between the US and Russia, especially after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, the expert was pragmatic.
“India has steadily moved closer to the US and the West, but Trump’s trade-first approach has caused turbulence,” Raja Mohan said.
He cited the threats of high tariffs on Indian imports and resentment over trade imbalances with Washington DC.
On Russia, Raja Mohan’s view was that the relationship has been “in slow decline since the 1990s.”
While India’s GDP now outpaces Russia’s, it continues to engage Moscow for practical reasons. “India’s oil purchases from Russia rose from two per cent to forty per cent after 2022. That’s pragmatism, not alignment,” Raja Mohan said.
He added that prime minister Narendra Modi’s recent handshakes with China’s president Xi Jinping and Russia’s president Vladimir Putin at the Shanghai Co-operation Organization (SCO) summit in China were “signals, reminders to the West that India has options.”
Raja Mohan said India was at the cusp of a historic transformation. “India once provided security across Asia - in both world wars, millions of Indian soldiers fought overseas. That history was forgotten when India withdrew from global security,” he said.
“Now we are reclaiming that role. Ideally, the partnership with the US is the best. But if not, India and other Asian powers will have to shoulder the burden themselves.”
“Japan, Korea, India, Australia - all will have to do more on their own,” he said. “We’ll need to pull up our own bootstraps.”
Dr Benjamin Rhode, senior fellow at IISS, chaired the session.
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.