Tom Sharpe and The Telegraph’s Disgraceful Smear..

Tom Sharpe’s article in The Telegraph, provocatively titled “India is an enemy, not a friend or a neutral,” is a shameful exercise in yellow journalism—sensationalist, misleading, and steeped in colonial arrogance. By branding India, a vibrant democracy and global economic powerhouse, as an “enemy” of the West, Sharpe and The Telegraph have not only embarrassed themselves but also jeopardized a critical bilateral relationship for the sake of cheap clicks. This isn’t journalism; it’s a calculated stunt to provoke outrage and gain viral traction, as evidenced by the scathing backlash on Telegraph itself and on platforms like X. The UK, far more dependent on India than vice versa, stands to lose dearly from such reckless rhetoric. Sharpe and The Telegraph must be called out for their intellectual dishonesty and for undermining a partnership vital to Britain’s dwindling global influence. The public’s response, both in the article’s comments and on social media, reveals the depth of disdain for this provocative narrative, and it’s time to set the record straight.

The UK’s Dire Need for India
The balance of power between India and the UK is starkly lopsided, and not in Britain’s favor. India is the world’s third-largest economy by nominal GDP, having already surpassed the UK and Japan, and is projected to overtake Germany by 2030. With a population of 1.4 billion and a dynamic, tech-driven economy, India is a global leader in IT, pharmaceuticals, and renewable energy. Its young, skilled workforce contrasts sharply with the UK’s aging population and strained labor market. Cities like Bengaluru and Hyderabad power global innovation, with British firms like Barclays, HSBC, and Rolls-Royce relying heavily on India’s IT and outsourcing sectors. India’s pharmaceutical industry, often dubbed the “pharmacy of the world,” supplies affordable generics to the UK’s NHS, saving billions annually. In contrast, the UK grapples with post-Brexit economic stagnation, a crumbling healthcare system, and a military so underfunded that defense officials warn it cannot sustain a major conflict.

Economically, India holds the upper hand. Bilateral trade with the UK reached £38 billion in 2024, but India’s global trade network—spanning the US, China, the EU, and ASEAN—gives it leverage to dictate terms. The UK, post-Brexit, is desperate for a free trade agreement with India, a priority for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has publicly emphasized its importance. India, however, can afford to negotiate hard, as its economy thrives without reliance on British markets. India’s trade with the US alone was $120 billion in 2024, dwarfing its trade with the UK. The UK’s services sector, particularly finance and education, benefits disproportionately from Indian students and professionals, with over 100,000 Indian students contributing £5 billion annually to British universities. India, meanwhile, has diversified its educational partnerships, with growing ties to Australia and Canada. As one X user, Nandini Singh, aptly noted, “India is not going with a begging bowl. India is working hard and focusing on its national interest.”

Geopolitically, India is a cornerstone of the Indo-Pacific, central to the Quad (India, US, Japan, Australia), which counters China’s growing influence. The UK’s much-touted “Indo-Pacific tilt” hinges on India’s cooperation, particularly in maritime security and countering China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Alienating India risks isolating the UK from this strategic framework, leaving it sidelined in Asia. As Bene Fishery on X pointedly asked, “Of all the actual or potential friends for the UK in Asia you’d prefer what – China or Pakistan to India? Perplexed….!” India’s role in hosting the Dalai Lama and countering Chinese aggression along the Line of Actual Control further underscores its strategic importance. The UK, by contrast, lacks the military or economic clout to project power independently in the region. Incidents like the Royal Navy’s F35 crash landing in India, mocked online as “the butt of India Tourist Board jokes,” highlight Britain’s vulnerabilities. India’s navy, with its domestically built destroyers and aircraft carriers, is outpacing the UK’s shrinking fleet, which struggles with procurement delays and budget cuts.

The UK’s defense industry has repeatedly failed to secure Indian contracts, not because of India’s “duplicity,” but due to uncompetitive costs and poor after-sales support. India’s purchase of French Rafale jets and American Apache helicopters reflects a pragmatic approach to quality and reliability. The UK’s inability to compete in India’s defense market is a self-inflicted wound, yet Sharpe has the audacity to paint India as the problem. This colonial mindset—expecting India to prioritize British interests over its own—ignores the reality that India, unlike the UK, faces existential threats from hostile neighbors like Pakistan and China. India’s strategic autonomy is not a betrayal but a necessity, a point echoed in online discussions: “Nothing wrong in doing things in own interest. Every one every where does that.”

Sharpe’s Flimsy Case and The Telegraph’s Complicity
Sharpe’s article is a masterclass in distortion, painting India’s pragmatic foreign policy as “duplicity.” He fixates on India’s purchase of discounted Russian oil, ignoring the necessity of energy security for a nation of 1.4 billion. India’s historical ties with Russia, forged during the Cold War when the West often backed Pakistan, explain its diversified defense and energy partnerships. When the US and UK supported Pakistan’s military regimes, Russia provided India with critical arms and diplomatic backing. Sharpe’s sanctimonious claim that India “finances Putin’s atrocities” is hypocritical, given that European nations, including the UK, have indirectly imported Russian energy through refined products. Germany, for instance, imported Russian gas via pipelines until 2022, yet Sharpe singles out India for moral censure. As Hilary Lazard noted on X, “Russia has always supported India while China supported Pakistan, there is no reason for India to line up behind European states and NATO.”

Sharpe’s critique of India’s Russian-built warships, like the INS Tamal, is equally dishonest. India’s defense diversification is a strategic response to its volatile neighborhood. His anecdote about the INS Teg’s 2012 performance is outdated and misleading. India has since shifted to domestic shipbuilding, with yards like Mazagon Dock and Cochin Shipyard producing world-class vessels, including stealth destroyers and nuclear submarines. As one commenter on X pointed out, “This is the last ship that India will be buying from abroad. All ships are now being built in Indian Docks.” Meanwhile, the UK’s Royal Navy struggles with a fleet so depleted that it cannot deploy two aircraft carriers simultaneously. Sharpe’s selective outrage ignores these realities, focusing instead on a dated incident to smear India’s capabilities.

The Telegraph’s decision to publish this inflammatory piece is a betrayal of journalistic standards. By labeling India an “enemy,” it indulges a colonial mindset that assumes the Global South must obey Western dictates. The article’s sensationalism is a transparent bid for attention, not a serious geopolitical analysis. Online commentators have called it out, with one describing it as “written by a simpleton” and another labeling it “poor/stupid journalism.” The Telegraph knows—or should know—that such rhetoric risks alienating a key partner and the 7 million British citizens of Indian descent who strengthen UK-India ties. The article’s comment section and X posts reveal widespread disgust, with readers accusing Sharpe of a “jealous colonial mindset” and criticizing the lack of research. This isn’t journalism; it’s a deliberate provocation designed to exploit anti-India sentiment for clicks.

The Fallout of Reckless Provocation
Sharpe’s article isn’t just wrong; it’s dangerous. India and the UK share deep historical, cultural, and economic bonds, with millions of Brits of Indian ancestry contributing to British society. As one X user put it, “India is a massively important country… We share close historical and cultural ties going back hundreds of years.” Calling India an “enemy” over its neutral stance on Ukraine—a conflict irrelevant to India’s immediate security—jeopardizes these ties for no gain. India faces daily threats from Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and Chinese border incursions, yet it maintains a multi-religious democracy with low levels of gun violence. As another commenter noted, “India has enemies on all sides, yet is a multi religious democracy… In the end it will be India and the West against the autocratic states – Russia, China and Iran.”

The UK, by contrast, faces internal challenges—illegal immigration, overflowing prisons, and past terror attacks—that demand focus closer to home. India’s strategic choices, like buying Russian oil or weapons, are driven by necessity, not malice. The UK’s own history of arming Pakistan, despite its record of fostering terrorism, undercuts any moral high ground. Sharpe’s article ignores this context, opting instead for a black-and-white narrative that paints India as a villain. The Telegraph’s complicity in publishing this drivel is a low point in British journalism, risking a partnership critical to Britain’s economic and strategic future.

A Call for Accountability
Sharpe and The Telegraph owe India—and their readers—an apology. By framing India as an “enemy,” they’ve indulged in reckless provocation that undermines Britain’s interests. India, with its economic might, military modernization, and global influence, will thrive regardless. The UK, clinging to fading imperial relevance, cannot afford to burn bridges with a rising power. This article’s backlash, both in its comments and on X, reflects a public that sees through the charade. The Telegraph must retract this shameful piece and commit to fostering dialogue, not division, with a nation indispensable to Britain’s future. Anything less is a betrayal of journalistic integrity and a disservice to the UK’s global standing.