‘Sunak’s reset could cause rifts as Tories face election nightmare’
How did Braverman get away with what she did for so long, and why did the prime minister hesitate so publicly to remove her from one of the great offices of state?
By Barnie ChoudhuryNov 16, 2023
TO HER party, Suella Braverman was able to say things which the prime minister thought but could not voice.
To his critics, Rishi Sunak was the man who stabbed Boris Johnson in the back and someone whose party did not elect him as its leader.
Braverman gave him a shield and a way to keep the right quiet. Now, though, Sunak has got rid of the right’s standard bearer.
According to sources who have spoken to Eastern Eye, questions remain. How did Braverman get away with what she did for so long, and why did the prime minister hesitate so publicly to remove her from one of the great offices of state?
“Don’t forget that Rishi owed her,” said one south Asian parliamentarian. “He had already lost against Liz Truss, and when she resigned, Rishi faced another fight against Penny Mordaunt.
“The last thing he needed was another bloody nose from the members. Suella backed him, and that was a game changer.”
Sue-Ellen Cassiana Braverman KC, was born in Harrow, northwest London, and named after one of the female characters in the US TV soap, Dallas.
Her parents – Uma, a Hindu, and Christie Fernandes, a Christian – emigrated to the UK from Mauritius and Kenya, respectively.
Braverman’s mother was an NHS nurse and Tory councillor who also ran to become an MP.
The former home secretary read law at Cambridge and was chair of the university’s Conservative Association. In 2005, she stood against Keith Vaz in Leicester East, but lost by about 16,000 votes.
It would be another 10 years before Suella Fernandes, as she was then, won the safe Tory seat of Fareham in Hampshire.
In 2016, she was a firm Brexiteer, reflecting the wishes of her constituents.
The following year, she became the chair of the European Research Group, made up of pro-leave Conservative MPs.
After the 2017 general election she was appointed as a junior minister by Theresa May, but she resigned the following year. Also in 2018, the Buddhist married Rael Braverman, a Jew, at the House of Commons. Their children George and Gabriella were born in 2019 and 2021.
When Liz Truss became prime minister in September 2022, she appointed Braverman as the home secretary, responsible for overseeing UK borders and policing.
At a fringe event at that year’s party conference, she said, “I would love a front page of the Telegraph with a plane taking off to Rwanda. That is my dream, it’s my obsession.”
Around the same time, she used her oratory skills to great effect.
“I am afraid that it is the Labour party, the Lib Dems, the coalition of chaos, the Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati and, dare I say, the anti-growth coalition that we have to thank for the disruption we are seeing on our roads today,” she told parliament.
But hubris is the downfall of many.
The next day, she resigned after sending an official document from her personal email, which is against the rules.
Yet, like a game of snakes and ladders, six days afterwards, Sunak appointed her as … home secretary, where an emboldened Braverman never shied away from controversy.
In March 2023, she said with a straight face, “There are 100 million people around the world who could qualify for protection under our current laws.
“Let us be clear – they are coming here.”
When questioned about the figure, Braverman told the Daily Mail, there was “likely billions” eager to come to the UK.
The problem with that statement is the experts do not agree – the UK receives far fewer asylum seekers than other countries.
Lest we forget that Braverman’s parents were immigrants to a welcoming Britain, she concluded in September (26) that “multiculturalism makes no demands of the incomer to integrate – it has failed.”
Many would have heard alarm bells when No 10 and her colleagues distanced themselves from their comments, but not Braverman.
She ploughed on regardless, this time targeting pro-Palestinian demonstrators, claiming their chants amounted to anti-Semitic attacks.
“There’s only one way to describe those marches – they are hate marches,” she declared.
Barnie Choudhury
Then came that infamous post on social media which angered many an ordinary Tory.
“We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.”
Sources who spoke to Eastern Eye were incandescent with rage – telling this newspaper that Braverman had resurrected the moniker of Conservatives being the “nasty party”.
Finally, the Times article which ended her tenure as home secretary, where she accused the police of playing favourites, being harsher on the right than the left.
Last Saturday (11), London saw membes of the far-right English Defence League (EDL) descend on the capital, causing mayhem.
The man who led the Metropolitan Police operation, Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist said, “The extreme violence from the right-wing protestors towards the police today was extraordinary and deeply concerning.
“They arrived early, stating they were there to protect monuments, but some were already intoxicated, aggressive and clearly looking for confrontation.
“This group were largely football hooligans from across the UK, and spent most of the day attacking or threatening officers who were seeking to prevent them being able to confront the main march.
“Many in these groups were stopped and searched and weapons including a knife, a baton and knuckleduster were found as well as class A drugs.”
And yet Braverman concentrated her fire on the 300,000 pro-Palestinian demonstrators.
“This can’t go on,” she posted on X, formerly Twitter. “Week by week, the streets of London are being polluted by hate, violence, and antisemitism.
“Members of the public are being mobbed and intimidated.
“Jewish people in particular feel threatened. “Further action is necessary.”
For now, Braverman will not be the one who will influence policing or migration in the country.
But only a fool would be writing her political obituary just yet.
If Lord Cameron has shown one thing, it is that politicians come, politicians go…only to return when people least expect it.
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.