Trinidad and Tobago's move to honor Indian PM Modi divides opinion
Modi's two-day visit to the country on Thursday marks the first time a sitting Indian prime minister sets foot in Trinidad and Tobago. Modi accepted the invitation from the recently appointed prime minister, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, who has longstanding diplomatic ties with India.
India and Trinidad and Tobago share a diplomatic relationship stretching back decades and anchored in the legacy of Indian indentureship.
Announcing the decision to honour Modi with the prestigious Order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (ORTT) during his visit, the government described it as 'a tribute of the nation's appreciation for prime minister Modi's outstanding contribution to the development of Trinidad and Tobago; and service to the region and wider international community'.
But on Wednesday the Anjuman Sunnat-ul-Jamaat Association (ASJA) said it planned to write to the prime minister's office and the Indian high commission to express concern over the honour being extended to a political leader they say has a widely criticised human rights record.
In a statement signed by general secretary Rahimool Hosein, the ASJA said it has 'deep and principled concern' about the state's legitimisation of a figure they believe has emboldened religious intolerance in India and targeted the Muslim minority. 'We cannot ignore Mr Modi's political legacy and its ramifications for Muslim communities globally,' the organisation said.
The ASJA referenced the revocation of Kashmir's special status, and the 2002 Gujarat riots, during which more than 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed. Modi was the chief minister of Gujarat at the time, though the Indian supreme court cleared him of wrongdoing in 2022. The ASJA also pointed to continuing criticism from international human rights groups.
While some Muslim communities and human rights advocates have criticised Modi's policies, he has also received state honours from several Muslim-majority countries, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt.
The ASJA said it welcomed opportunities for interfaith dialogue but were 'compelled to clarify that interfaith dialogue requires more than polite diplomacy, it necessitates justice, truth, and accountability'.
About 35% to 40% of Trinidad and Tobago's population is of Indian descent, one of the largest and most prominent Indo-diasporic communities in the Caribbean. Most trace their roots to the approximately 143,000 indentured workers brought from India between 1845 and 1917 to work on sugar estates after the abolition of slavery.
Leaders from the Indo-Trinidadian Hindu population have welcomed Modi's visit. 'This moment means something profound,' said Dr Devant Maharaj, a former UNC government minister and former executive member of the Sanatan Dharma Maha Sabha (SDMS), Trinidad and Tobago's largest Hindu organisation.
Describing Modi as a 'hero', Maharaj said: 'It is not just about politics or diplomacy. It is about the reawakening of a people who were once scattered but never severed. For Indo-Trinidadian Hindus, Modi's India feels like a karmic realignment – a mother remembering her children, and the children looking homeward with both awe and affirmation.'
Under Modi's leadership, India has sought to deepen ties with the Caribbean. Earlier this year, he visited the oil-rich Caribbean nation of Guyana, where he met with President Mohamed Irfaan Ali and other leaders from the Caribbean Community (Caricom), an intergovernmental organisation of 15 Caribbean nations, at a Caricom-India Summit.
On social media, there have been mixed reactions to the visit, with some people supporting diplomatic ties and others questioning the logic behind the ORTT honour.
Modi's trip to Trinidad and Tobago is said to be a part of a broader diplomatic tour spanning Africa and the Americas. After departing Port of Spain on 4 July, the prime minister will travel to Argentina, Brazil and Namibia.
The Guardian has contacted Persad-Bissessar's office for comment and the Indian high commission in Trinidad and Tobago.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Palestine Action isn't a danger to British democracy – but this repressive government is
No one can be trusted with power. Any government will oppress its people if not constantly and inventively challenged. And the task becomes ever-more urgent as new technologies of surveillance and control are developed. The UK government is run by a former human rights lawyer. Its home secretary, Yvette Cooper, has expressed her admiration for the Suffragettes in parliament. Yet such credentials do nothing to defend us from attacks on our fundamental rights. With a huge majority, no formal constitutional checks and a ruthless, scarcely accountable governing machine, this administration is abusing its power to an even greater extent than its Conservative predecessors. Though there is tough competition, Cooper's proscription of the protest group Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 is probably the most illiberal thing any home secretary has done in 30 years. If Palestine Action's legal challenge to the order fails, you could receive 14 years in jail as a terrorist merely for expressing support. It's a massive threat to the right to protest and to free speech. In 2001, as the act came into force, I warned that it could be used to ban nonviolent protest groups and imprison those who support them. Supporters of Tony Blair's government told me I was talking rubbish: its purpose was to keep us safe from people who wanted to kill and maim us. At the time, Cooper was a junior minister. She must have known what the act could do. Now she vindicates the warning. Like the drafting of the Tory anti-protest laws, this application of the act appears to be a response to lobbyists. The junktanks of Tufton Street, in concert with the billionaire media, have called for ever-more extreme measures for protesters demonstrating against the genocide in Gaza. The government seems to have been sharing the contact details of police and crown prosecutors with the Israeli embassy: there appears to be deep entanglement between domestic law enforcement and the interests of a foreign state. In response to lobbying, the UK has become arguably the most repressive of all nominal democracies. Both in legislation and application, it looks more like a repressive autocracy. You can see this not only in the extreme sentences for peaceful protest but also in the extraordinary double standards deployed – a classic sign of the authoritarian mindset: 'for my friends everything, for my enemies the law'. While climate protesters are arrested for setting foot in the road, even when a group of farmers in tractors blocked the road where Keir Starmer was giving a speech, forcing him to flee, not only were no arrests made but, as far as I can discover, no minister said a word about it. Far from repealing the draconian anti-protest laws imposed by the Tories, Labour is augmenting them with a clause (section 124) slipped into the current crime and policing bill. Scarcely noticed by either legislators or the public, it greatly increases police powers to stifle protest. The police will be able to ban demonstrations close to a place of worship that they decide could be intimidating to worshippers. As almost every urban area contains a place of worship, this empowers the police, using only their own discretion, to shut down any expression of dissent. Palestine Action is not a danger to democracy. But Cooper is. I have no doubt that, were they active today, the home secretary would proscribe as a terrorist organisation the Suffragettes she claims to honour. One of the causes of the global democratic recession is the escalating inequality of arms between governments and their people. At the time of the French Revolution, governments feared the people, as the distance between pikes and pitchforks was not so great. But as states developed ever-more sophisticated weapons, their powers could no longer be matched by those they sought to crush. In combination with facial recognition technology, now being widely deployed in the UK among many other nations, autonomous weapons systems, for both military and civil use, would greatly increase the distance between state and citizen power. This is the future we appear to be rushing towards, with scarcely any democratic debate. All over the world, autonomous weapons systems are in development, largely for use in warfare. Ukraine and Russia are in the midst of a robot arms race, accelerating at shocking speed. In Gaza, Israel has automated its target selection, with horrifying results. As security sources explained to +972 magazine in April 2024, Israel's Lavender AI program had marked about 37,000 Palestinians as suspected 'Hamas militants', selecting them as potential targets for assassination. A further program, with the sinister name of Where's Daddy?, was tracking them to their homes so that they could be bombed at night, often killing not only their families but many other people in the same block. 'Once you go automatic,' one of the sources told the journal, 'target generation goes crazy.' Almost everyone in Gaza had been given a Lavender rating of between 1 and 100. As soon as the number in the AI system was high enough, the name would be added to the kill list. That would be treated as a military order, even though the operators knew that at least 10% of the targets were misidentified. Anyone who imagines that such systems would not be embraced by governments for use against their citizens is deceiving themselves. As autonomous target selection aligns with the autonomous delivery of munitions, which could range from teargas to rubber bullets to metal bullets, governments will acquire terrifying new powers to contain dissent. Real robocops are likely to have propellers, not legs. As the Stop Killer Robots campaign points out, such machines dehumanise us: we become a set of data points, to be interpreted by an algorithm. Once an autonomous weapons system has been programmed, oppressive regimes can absolve themselves of responsibility for what it does. AI reinforces prejudice and discrimination: the way it develops ensures that Black and brown people and other minorities targeted by the police will be disproportionately selected. Once such systems are in place, they will be very hard to dismantle. When you create a market you create a lobby, and the lobby will insist on retaining and expanding its investments. Autonomous weapons systems, for both military and civilian use, should be prohibited under international law before they progress any further. Technologies of control are ramping up while democratic rights are ramping down. We drift towards extreme political repression, driven by the demands of capital and foreign states, accelerated by automation. This is why we must protest – now, while we still can. George Monbiot is a Guardian columnist On Tuesday 16 September, join George Monbiot, Mikaela Loach and other special guests discussing the forces driving climate denialism, live at the Barbican in London and livestreamed globally. Book tickets here or at
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
Global firms ‘profiting from genocide' in Gaza, says UN rapporteur
The UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories has called for sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel and for global corporations to be held accountable for 'profiting from genocide' in Gaza. A report by Francesca Albanese to the UN Human Rights Council on Thursday points to the deep involvement of companies from around the world in supporting Israel during its 21-month onslaught in Gaza. 'While life in Gaza is being obliterated and the West Bank is under escalating assault, this report shows why Israel's genocide continues: because it is lucrative for many,' the report says. Special rapporteurs are independent human rights experts appointed to advise or report on specific situations. Albanese, an Italian legal scholar who has been the special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories since 2022, first referred to the Israeli offensive in Gaza as a genocide in January 2024. The international court of justice (ICJ) is weighing the charge of genocide against Israel but Albanese has argued that the evidence of genocide is overwhelming and pointed out that the court issued preliminary measures last year recognising the possibility of genocide in Gaza, triggering universal responsibility to prevent it. Israel has largely ignored the ICJ's calls on it to take steps to mitigate the toll on Palestinian civilians and disputed the court's jurisdiction. Albanese said there was no reason to wait for an ICJ judgment, which she said was only being delayed by the long queue of cases the court has to judge. 'I have investigated it day by day for 630 days and, frankly, after five months I could tell you that it was genocide. You don't need a scientist to establish what is genocide. You just need to connect the dots,' she told the Guardian. 'Israel has [committed] acts that are recognised as genocidal, like acts of killing nearly 60,000 people, probably more, creation of conditions of life calculated to destroy, destruction of 80% of the homes and no water, no food.' According to the Gaza health ministry, more than 56,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel's campaign in Gaza, which was triggered in October 2023 when a Hamas attack killed 1,200 Israelis. Many experts have said the real death toll in Gaza could be much higher as many Palestinians are missing and believed to be buried under the rubble. The special rapporteur's report is titled 'From economy of occupation to economy of genocide' and looks at international corporate involvement in supplying weapons and supplying heavy machinery used to raze Palestinian neighbourhoods in Gaza and the West Bank, agricultural companies selling produce from illegal settlements, and investment firms helping fund the war. 'While political leaders and governments shirk their obligations, far too many corporate entities have profited from Israel's economy of illegal occupation, apartheid and, now, genocide,' the report says. 'The complicity exposed by this report is just the tip of the iceberg; ending it will not happen without holding the private sector accountable, including its executives.' The report says the Israeli military has benefited from 'the largest ever defence procurement programme' for the F-35 fighter jet, made by Lockheed Martin with the involvement of more than 1,600 other manufacturers and eight states. It says Israel was the first to fly the warplane in 'beast mode', carrying 18,000lb of bombs at a time. On Monday the UK's high court ruled that Britain's export of parts for the F-35 to Israel was lawful on the grounds that a court should not intervene in a sensitive political issue that was best left to ministers and parliament, even though it said UK-made parts could be used in the 'commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza'. A Lockheed Martin spokesperson said: 'Foreign military sales are government-to-government transactions. Discussions about those sales are best addressed by the US government.' The Trump administration has been enthusiastically supportive of Israel in the Gaza war. On its website, Lockheed Martin says it is 'proud of the significant role it has fulfilled in the security of the state of Israel'. The US technology firm Palantir comes under particular criticism in the Albanese report for its close partnership with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), with which the company agreed a strategic partnership for Palantir to assist its 'war-related missions'. Palantir, whose software allows automated decision-making on the battlefield, has denied any involvement in the IDF's Lavender or Gospel programmes for identifying targets in Gaza. Palantir did not respond to a request for comment but has said in response to earlier allegations: 'We have no relationship to these programmes and their use but are proud to support Israeli defence and national security missions in other programmes and contexts.' It said it took a variety of methods to 'mitigate against human rights risk in our work'. The Albanese report also criticises heavy equipment manufacturers such as Volvo for allegedly supplying heavy machinery used in mass demolitions of homes, mosques and infrastructure in Gaza and the West Bank. 'These companies have continued supplying the Israeli market despite abundant evidence of Israel's criminal use of this machinery and repeated calls from human rights groups to sever ties,' Albanese says in the report. 'Passive suppliers become deliberate contributors to a system of displacement.' Volvo said much of the equipment being used had been acquired on the secondhand market, over which it had no influence. The Sweden-based company has an agreement with an Israeli company, Merkavim, to assemble buses on Volvo chassis. A Volvo spokesperson said the agreement included a requirement that 'Merkavim shall comply with applicable laws and regulations and the Volvo Group supply partner code of conduct, which includes specific human rights requirements.' Albanese pointed to an ICJ advisory opinion last year that said Israel's continued presence in the occupied territories was unlawful and that Merkavim was on a UN database of companies operating on the West Bank. 'So the due diligence that is imposed on Volvo is to withdraw immediately from the partnership that it has with companies that are on the database and with Israel,' she said. The report notes that Israel has helped pay for the war and consequent deep budget deficits by selling treasury bonds. By buying them, the report argues, international finance has helped keep the war going. 'Some of the world's largest banks, including BNP Paribas and Barclays, stepped in to boost market confidence by underwriting these international and domestic treasury bonds, allowing Israel to contain the interest rate premium, despite a credit downgrade,' it says. It names asset management firms including Pimco (owned by the German-based financial services company Allianz) and Vanguard as major buyers of Israeli treasury bonds. Pimco declined to comment. A spokesperson for Vanguard said the company 'maintains robust policies and procedures to ensure compliance with all applicable laws, regulations and sanctions in the various jurisdictions in which we operate. This includes adhering to laws that may require specific investment restrictions in companies that are sanctioned for human rights abuses.' The report also points to the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG), the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, for having increased its investment in Israeli companies by 32% since October 2023. On Monday, Norway's biggest pension fund, KLP, announced it would no longer do business with two companies – the Oshkosh Corporation in the US and ThyssenKrupp in Germany – because they sell equipment to the Israeli military that could be being used in Gaza. Neither company is named in the UN report. Oshkosh did not reply to a request for comment. A ThyssenKrupp spokesperson said the company 'conducts its deliveries exclusively on the basis of lawful authorisations and in strict compliance with the foreign and security policy guidelines of the Federal Republic of Germany. The German government is involved in the process from the outset, with preliminary inquiries submitted before any project begins.' KLP is a separate entity from GPFG but they are closely associated and reportedly share their environmental, social and governance analyses of investments around the world. A GPFG spokesperson said: 'The market value of our investments in Israel has increased but this is not because we have increased our ownership – the market value has increased due to returns.' They added that its investments were overseen by a council of ethics appointed by Norway's ministry of finance, which has excluded some firms because of 'serious violations'. 'As a responsible investor, we monitor our investments and expect companies to conduct enhanced due diligence in situations of war and conflict,' the spokesperson said. Albanese's report points to precedents in holding corporations legally accountable for human rights abuses they enable, including the prosecution of leading German industrialists at the Nuremberg tribunal after the second world war, in what was known as the IG Farben trial. Another example cited is the South African truth and reconciliation commission, which took the country's big companies to task for their involvement in apartheid. The UN published its own benchmarks in 2011, in its guiding principles on business and human rights, which said corporations had a responsibility to do due diligence to ensure they were not infringing human rights and to take steps to address harmful effects of their business. In her recommendations, Albanese calls for sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel, and urges the international criminal court 'and national judiciaries to investigate and prosecute corporate executives and/or corporate entities for their part in the commission of international crimes and laundering of the proceeds from those crimes'. This article was amended on 3 July 2025. An earlier version described Volvo as a Chinese-owned company; however, while Volvo Cars is Chinese-owned, the wider Volvo Group has no majority shareholders.
The Independent
6 hours ago
- The Independent
El Salvador's president disputes claims Abrego Garcia was tortured in notorious prison
El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele has disputed claims that Kilmar Abrego Garcia experienced 'severe mistreatment' and 'torture' while he was held in Salvadoran custody. This week, Abrego Garcia's attorneys said the 29-year-old was subject to 'severe beatings, severe sleep deprivation, inadequate nutrition, and psychological torture' while he was held in a notorious, maximum-security prison known as CECOT. Abrego Garcia was sent there in March after the Trump administration wrongfully deported him. Now, Bukele says Abrego Garcia 'wasn't tortured, nor did he lose weight.' Bukele wrote: 'If he'd been tortured, sleep-deprived, and starved, why does he look so well in every picture? Why would he gain weight? Why are there no bruises, or even dark circles under his eyes?' Bukele included a three-and-a-half-minute video of what he said was Abrego Garcia in custody. The clips appear to show Abrego Garcia doing various activities, including speaking with his cellmate, eating, working at a fish farm and holding a parrot as part of a 'mental wellness activity.' Salvadoran officials say Abrego Garcia was held in two facilities while in custody: CECOT and a second, lower-security detention center known as Centro Industrial. The video appears to show Abrego Garcia in the lower-security detention center. Abrego Garcia's attorneys say he was brutally beaten at CECOT. Prison employees hit him 'with wooden batons' when he first arrived, his lawyers wrote in their recent filing. The next day, 'Abrego Garcia had visible bruises and lumps all over his body,' they said. Abrego Garcia's attorneys said he was forced to share a cell with 20 other Salvadorans. They were all 'forced to kneel' from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m., 'with guards striking anyone who fell from exhaustion,' the complaint states. 'During this time, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was denied bathroom access and soiled himself,' his lawyers wrote. 'The detainees were confined to metal bunks with no mattresses in an overcrowded cell with no windows, bright lights that remained on 24 hours a day, and minimal access to sanitation.' Abrego Garcia lost 31 pounds while in custody, his lawyers added. Abrego Garcia entered the U.S. illegally at 16 years old after fleeing El Salvador. Before he was deported, he was living and working in Maryland with his wife and children. Lawyers for the Trump administration admitted the government wrongfully deported Abrego Garcia. But the administration launched a weeks-long legal battle to keep him in El Salvador soon afterward. The Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's return in April. He was returned to the U.S. in June after a grand jury indicted him on charges related to illegally transporting immigrants across the country. Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty.
