Kashmir: Self-determination

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for self-determination in Kashmir.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I am grateful to be given the opportunity to have this very important and timely debate in this Chamber today, because for millions of Kashmiris across the world and the UK, the question of self-determination is not some distant, abstract foreign policy matter; it is about families torn apart, homes bulldozed, voices silenced, human rights abused and a people denied the most fundamental democratic right—the right to choose their own destiny; the right to self-determination. As someone who has campaigned on this matter for over a decade in this House, may I begin by saying very plainly that the world has failed the people of Kashmir and continues to do so?

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend speaks with great passion. He says that the world has failed the people of Kashmir, and I agree. Does he agree that no longer should politicians in this place view the matter of Kashmir as some kind of bilateral issue between Pakistan and India? In fact, it is a matter for international law, and our Government and our country have a special historic duty not to wash their hands of the matter of self-determination for the people of Kashmir, which is their birthright.

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Order. Let me put down the marker now: interventions are interventions, not speeches.

[Imran Hussain]

I thank my hon. Friend for that timely intervention. He is right, and I will come on to the substance of the point he makes shortly.

Kashmir remains one of the world’s most heavily militarised zones and longest unresolved international disputes. Today’s problems have their origins in the unfinished business of partition in 1947, and it is important to start there—a moment in history when Britain played a direct and undeniable role. In 1948, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 47, which mandated a free and fair referendum to allow the sons and daughters of Kashmir to determine their own future and their own destiny.

[Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend speaks with great moral clarity. Does he agree that, given that the matter has been decided by the UN, lasting peace in the region cannot be achieved without dialogue that includes the voices and aspirations of the people of Kashmir themselves?

--- Later in debate ---

[Imran Hussain]

As ever, my hon. Friend makes a fine point. She is absolutely right. Let us make that point clear: only the Kashmiris themselves can determine their own destiny. It is not a matter for India, for Pakistan or for any other country.

As I was saying, the Kashmiris were promised a referendum 70 years ago. That referendum never happened. Their calls for justice have gone unanswered, their fundamental human rights have been violated, and their right to self-determination has been repeatedly denied. For more than 70 years, Kashmiris have continuously endured persecution, oppression and injustice. Throughout the period, draconian and repressive laws, including the Indian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, the Public Safety Act and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, have been used to grant sweeping powers to the Indian security forces, allowing detention without trial, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. All three of those Acts are illegal under international law, yet we continue to have silence from the international community.

[Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)]

I commend my hon. Friend on his continued advocacy on this subject. Does he agree that international humanitarian law is clear that the protection of civilians is not optional, that the UK has deep and historic ties to Kashmir and its people, and that we are therefore not fulfilling our obligations? Given that context, does he agree that we need to do more?

[Imran Hussain]

I absolutely agree. We have a deafening silence and lack of action. One cannot choose between human rights abuses. In Kashmir, we continue to see human rights defenders, journalists and political leaders being targeted relentlessly. Political prisoners are denied the right to a fair trial and used as an example of what happens when Kashmiris dare to speak the truth. That is not the rule of law; it is state-sponsored persecution designed to break the will of an entire people.

[Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making a powerful contribution. Could explain he explain what actions the UK Government could best make to assist the Kashmiri people to get self-determination?

[Imran Hussain]

That is the very point that I am coming to. As my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) said, for decades successive UK Governments have hidden behind the policy and line that Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan. Let us start by saying clearly that Kashmir is not a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan but an international issue. The first thing the Government can do is start recognising it as that. The roots of the situation continue to be within UN Security Council resolutions that Britain helped to draft and promised to uphold.

When a people are denied their right to self-determination, when human rights abuses are systematic and documented and when—this is another point—two nuclear states sit on a knife edge, the world, and especially the UK, cannot wash its hands of responsibility.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[Anna Dixon]

Thank you, Sir Roger, and please accept my apologies. I thank my hon. Friend, who is a great advocate, for taking an intervention. In the great city of Bradford we share a large British-Kashmiri community, whom I met recently. Will he join me in calling for greater international diplomatic efforts to try to bring a resolution to the situation and give the Kashmiri people the self-determination for which they have been waiting for so long?

[Imran Hussain]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I will come to that firmly when I get to my asks. The international community cannot continue to ignore Kashmir for the whole number of reasons I have outlined.

Let us to turn to the current situation, which has deteriorated sharply since August 2019 when the authoritarian, right-wing Modi Government unilaterally and unconstitutionally revoked articles 370 and 35A. That stripped Jammu and Kashmir of what little autonomy it had, in direct violation of international law, of commitments made to the people of Kashmir and of decades of United Nations resolutions. The consequences were immediate and devastating, with a 150-day communications blackout, mass detentions of political leaders, violent crackdowns across the valley, journalists silenced and civil society dismantled. It transformed communities into open-air prisons.

Families were separated, businesses destroyed, young people denied education and everyday life suffocated under curfews and lockdowns. Nearly six years on, the prosperity and normality that was promised never materialised. Instead, we see further repression and further deepening of the injustices. Now, with the domicile rules, we are seeing blatant attempts to permanently change the demographics of Kashmir. Let there be no doubt: the right-wing Modi Government have one aim, which is to try to quash the Kashmiri struggle for good.

This is a timely debate, as I said at the beginning. While we mark UN Human Rights Day today, let us be clear that Kashmir’s human rights abuses are not isolated or occasional events; they form a systematic pattern of intimidation and control. Arbitrary detention, custodial torture, forced disappearances and collective punishment continue with impunity. Women have endured gender-based violence at shocking levels, with over 11,000 documented cases since 1989—an appalling statistic that speaks to the use of sexual violence as a weapon of repression.

Political prisoners remain behind bars without any due process. Khurram Parvez, a globally respected human rights defender, has spent years in prison for documenting abuses. Yasin Malik has been convicted in proceedings widely condemned for lacking fairness and transparency by every human rights organisation and now faces the death penalty. Many others, including Asiya Andrabi and Irfan Mehraj, remain imprisoned under draconian legislation. Political disputes are criminalised with one aim: to silence legitimate voices for self-determination. Kashmiris continue to suffer under a system that strips them of dignity, voice and agency.

In Azad Kashmir, where conditions are arguably much better and where there can be simply no comparison with the violence and bloodshed faced daily by Kashmiris on the Indian side, we have recently seen, very concerningly, a region-wide lockdown triggered by deep public grievances and followed by the suspension of mobile internet and even landline services. Markets have been closed and transport halted. Heavy deployments of security forces have created real fear and uncertainty for ordinary people. Those events have tragically led to the deaths and casualties of many. The current dispute started with Kashmiri grievances and demands, at the core of which were basic rights such as the right to a decent education, decent healthcare, fair pricing for electricity, and basic human rights that should be granted to all people.

Of course, I welcome the de-escalation of the situation and the positive negotiations between the Pakistani Government, the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government and the grassroots movement, the Awami Action Committee. I thank all colleagues who signed the letter from the all-party parliamentary group on Kashmir, and I am grateful to those Governments for liaising with it. But let me make it absolutely clear that the human rights of Kashmiris must be respected and that all the reasonable demands of the Awami Action Committee must be met in full and implemented in full.

The central point of this debate is our moral, legal, historical and political duty. The United Kingdom is not a neutral observer in this conflict. Our decisions at partition, our diplomacy in the early decades and our vote for United Nations resolutions created obligations that remain unfulfilled to this day. We helped to shape Kashmir’s unresolved status, and therefore we bear a share of the responsibility for resolving it. We cannot speak of human rights in other parts of the world while telling Kashmiris that their rights are a matter for someone else to address. That is completely absurd and a clear abdication of our responsibilities.

We cannot pick and choose when it comes to human right abuses, yet for decades successive Governments have done just that. Governments of all stripes since the early ’70s have relied on the easy line that this is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, which has allowed us to wash our hands of moral, legal or political obligations. Let me be clear: this is not a bilateral issue and never has been. At its heart are international law and the right of Kashmiris to self-determination.

Action is required. Silence is not neutrality; frankly, it is complicity. The world has allowed UN resolutions on Kashmir to sit gathering dust for decades, and that must end. The UK must match its words with action by raising human rights concerns at every diplomatic level, demanding the release of political prisoners, insisting on independent access for journalists and observers, and ensuring that any future trade negotiations with India contain binding human rights conditions. Trade cannot trump human rights, and economic deals must never come at the expense of the Kashmiri people’s dignity, safety and democratic rights.

I have some simple questions for the Minister. First, do the Government and the Minister, who speaks for them, accept that the UK has a moral, historical and legal responsibility to support the full implementation of United Nations resolutions? Will he confirm that the UK Government’s position is to support the Kashmiri people’s birthright to self-determination through a free and fair plebiscite? Will the Government commit to ensuring that future trade negotiations with India do not come at the expense of human rights, accountability or justice, as trade cannot be prioritised over the rights of people who have been oppressed for generations, or do we apply a different set of rules to Kashmir?

The key question that we, our Kashmiri constituents and everybody up and down the country who champions human rights are asking is: what is the Government’s stance on whether this is a bilateral or an international issue? When political parties go out campaigning in our constituencies, big promises are made on issues such as Kashmir. Frankly, people are fed up with promises made by successive parties and Governments, all of which have gone on to betray the Kashmiri people.

Do the Government have the moral courage to stand by and defend their obligations under international law, to provide a case that moves away from the age-old wrong argument—that this is a bilateral issue—to one that recognises it as an issue deep-rooted in international law? That is the central question for the Government and the Minister. Along with hundreds of thousands of people watching, I would appreciate a straight answer.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Imran Hussain]

I thank hon. Members for their excellent contributions. The courage and conviction with which many have spoken will send one message to the British Kashmiri community. There are more than a million British Kashmiris—I am surprised the Minister failed to acknowledge that number. Listening to this debate will be not only more than a million British Kashmiris, but also all those who champion human rights. This issue is not isolated to Kashmiris around the world; it is an issue with international law and human rights at its heart.

[Ayoub Khan]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Imran Hussain]

I am not sure I am able to give way. Am I able to, Sir Roger?

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Yes, you are able to give way.

[Ayoub Khan]

We have constantly heard that this is a bilateral issue. The existence of UN resolutions clearly suggests it is not a bilateral but an international issue. Does the hon. Member agree?

[Imran Hussain]

I absolutely agree. That has been the central theme throughout this debate, and it continues to be the most pressing matter. I will come back to that point, but I first want to pay tribute to the hon. Members who have spoken in the debate. Those listening to the debate will at least know there continues to be hope, because there are Members of Parliament who have the moral conviction to stand on the right side and ensure voices of justice and of their constituents continue to be heard.

I am disappointed but also grateful to the Minister. He has given me the most time ever to sum up—10 whole minutes. But equally, that shows how little he said. That is not personal to the Minister, because he is following the Government line. As we heard from the Opposition as well, these lines are decades old. Frankly, just because lines are decades old does not make them right. We not only lack the moral courage required by the situation, but our silence continues to make us complicit.

[Barry Gardiner]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Imran Hussain]

No. My hon. Friend said many completely baseless things and therefore I will not give him any more time.

At the heart of the issue is the fundamental right of a people—promised to them under international law and supported by the international community at that time—for which they have had to wait decade after decade. The Minister was asked how the Government could contribute to making India and Pakistan move towards dialogue. Tragically, that is not possible unless the Government first acknowledge that it is not a bilateral but an international issue. Without acknowledging that, we are unable to take the matter to the UN, because that is not our position.

Not once did the Minister even confirm our support for United Nations resolutions. It is a strange state of affairs when we cannot stand in this House and say, “Actually, we support United Nations resolutions.” It is not the first time; tragically, we see more and more situations where the international rules-based order is under serious threat. We cannot pick and choose where we say international law should apply. The double standards are now becoming so plain and bare, to be seen by all people. There may well have been a time when that could have been justified because people did not have social media and those truths were not exposed, and perhaps people and Governments could get away with it. That is simply not true now.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Imran Hussain]

I will take one or two interventions, but then I want to use the last two minutes to close this debate.

[Andy McDonald]

Can my hon. Friend help me with this conundrum? It has been suggested that somebody in a monarchical position in years past has decided to cede a territory to one country or another. Would that not therefore deny the people of that territory the right to self-determination? I am curious; I wonder what would happen in this country if there were an issue between France and Ireland, and yet the British people were not allowed the right to self-determination. Would that make sense?

[Imran Hussain]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right—the whole thing is absurd.

[Tahir Ali]

Many of my constituents would like this question answered: if Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, does that bilateralism then apply to Ukraine and Russia or to Palestine and Israel? If not, then why does bilateralism apply just to Kashmir?

[Imran Hussain]

My hon. Friend makes the point that I was coming to about the international picture at the moment. Frankly, it continues to expose time and again the absolute double standards and disrespect for international law, along with the need to reform the United Nations from its current format. Furthermore, it continues to expose the absolute denial to accept certain injustices in the world.

[Mr Falconer]

I am rather shocked by the discourtesy of giving my hon. Friend 10 minutes, only for him to claim that it was because I did not have enough speech to give. I am very happy to provide further remarks on the points that my hon. Friend raises.

The question of whether this is a situation of interest to India and Pakistan seems to me inarguable—it was inarguable in the 1940s, just as it is inarguable in the 2020s. One of my colleagues mentioned the build-up of military forces in the region. Clearly, we must attend to the world as it is and to conflicts as we have seen them in 2025. I want to reassure my hon. Friend, because I know he pays close attention to these issues: we do not take a two-sides approach to international law. We remain deeply and profoundly committed to it, but we also believe in diplomacy. It is inarguable that in south Asia diplomacy between India and Pakistan is necessary. We want to see more of it. Kashmir has been disputed for such a very long time; no plausible analyst in the entire world would believe that the issue is resolvable without the involvement of those two states.

I am sad that my hon. Friend felt that, in my speech, I was not attending to some of the core questions of the conflict. I reassure him that, just as during my engagements with Pakistan and my colleagues’ engagements with India, we are very conscious of the diplomacy.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Final remarks, Mr Hussain.

[Imran Hussain]

I am grateful to the Minister. The point that I made, and make again, is that he did not address the four very simple questions that I put to him.

In closing, I again thank all the hon. Members who have spoken passionately and have again shown the Kashmiri community and others that they have a voice in this place. We may not get the response from the Government, but there is an early-day motion that now has the support of over 40 Members from different parties. Later today I will also be giving the Prime Minister a letter signed by over 50 parliamentarians from across the parties. The voice of Kashmiris will never be silenced as long as I am in this place.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Government support for self-determination in Kashmir.

Gaza and Hamas

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

Let us be clear: peace cannot exist under impunity. Weeks into the ceasefire, Israel has once again bombed Gaza, killing over 100 Palestinians, including 35 children, as it continues its genocide. Our Government have shamefully yet to reply more than a year and a half after the substantial ruling by the International Court of Justice, which made it absolutely clear that any Government who allow trade with Israel’s settlement economy are complicit in sustaining the illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories. British companies continue to trade in goods and financial services with the settlements, undermining our obligations under international law. When will the Government suspend the UK-Israel trade deal and end all trade linked to the settlements, or will the Minister continue to sit back and allow this complicity?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Member refers to the ICJ advisory opinion. I would not want the House to have the impression that the British Government have done nothing. At the centre of that advisory opinion is the question of the status of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We have been clear, subsequently, in recognising the status of that territory.

The hon. Member raises important questions about the trade in goods with settlements. We do not accept trade with settlements on the same basis as trade with Israel. Where British companies are doing so, they are in breach of the trading arrangements, and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs will take an interest. They must ensure that they know who they are trading with and in which territory. If people in settlements wish to falsely label where the thing is produced, it is difficult—as a whole range of nations and states have found—for others to determine.

I know that the hon. Member follows these issues closely. He will no doubt be interested in the efforts of the Irish Government to try to pass exactly the kind of legislation that he is describing, and in the very many difficulties that they have encountered in so doing. We are not in breach of our international obligations. If he could point me to legislation that is in operation and does what he says, I would be grateful to see it, but I think this is one of those questions on which we must continue to work with our partners to ensure that the status of the Occupied Palestinian Territories—part of the Palestinian state—is understood by all.

Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Tuesday 10th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I called next week’s conference what it is called by the French and Saudi Arabian authorities. I can confirm to the right hon. Gentleman that I have done no deals, grubby or otherwise; we take sovereign steps on this issue.

The right hon. Gentleman has asked about timing. As I know many Members will appreciate, working in concert with our allies and making a joint announcement of this kind requires some co-ordination. I was in the Chamber last Wednesday, when I was understandably asked by many Members when I would be in a position to announce further steps. I would have liked to have been in a position to announce further steps earlier than I have been, but we have always taken the view that it is most powerful to act with our allies. As such, we took the time to enable us to work in concert with them.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

Many of us have been consistent in our calls for sanctions against those who commit war crimes in Gaza, so the sanctions placed on these two far-right Ministers today are a step in the right direction. But let us be clear: this is nowhere near enough. Palestinians starve and aid is blocked in flagrant violation of international law while the UK continues to allow arms exports to Israel. We cannot condemn the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza while continuing to arm those who contribute to it. The Government must act now and end all arms sales to Israel. Anything less is not just a failure of diplomacy; it is an absolute failure of moral leadership in the face of a genocide.

Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman asked me a similar question a few weeks ago, and I gave him the answer that we suspended arms sales; that was a sober decision we made. They are not being given to Israel for use in Gaza at this time—that is a strict decision under our export licensing regime—save for the carve-out we made for F-35s. I know he disagrees with that, but that is the position, because we are not prepared to disrupt supply chains across the world.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

What we have heard from senior UN officials this morning should frankly send shivers down the spine of every Member in this Chamber. Some 14,000 Palestinian children could die in the next 48 hours because of Israel’s actions. Today we are getting stronger words, but limited action, and the time for it is long, long past. We need further bold and immediate action. We need to end all arms sales to Israel, impose economic sanctions and ban Israeli settlement goods. What are the Government waiting for?

[Mr Lammy]

I set out the position as it stands today, and I ask my hon. Friend to look carefully at the Prime Minister’s statement just this morning, and at what he has indicated. Further action could be taken if we do not see this further expansion, and the restriction of aid, come to an end.

Gaza: UK Assessment

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Wednesday 14th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

As Members would expect, I will not discuss internal legal advice in the Chamber, whether it applies to me or other Ministers. I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that, right across Government, we understand the gravity of the situation and the weight that falls on us to ensure changes to this diabolical trajectory. We will continue to use our role in the Security Council, the G7 and the E3, as we did yesterday, and that action will not stop.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The Minister still refuses to address the central issue, which is that our obligation to prevent genocide under the Rome statute has already been triggered by the ample evidence of Israeli war crimes in Gaza. In the week marking 77 years since the Nakba, how many more times will he come to the Chamber with just words—words that do nothing? We need action. Let us be clear: it is not a case of if but when he will end the UK’s complicity in arming a state that is accused of genocide against the Palestinians, and of when he will finally impose sanctions on Israel. History will judge his delay.

[Mr Falconer]

I remind the House of the decisions that we took last year. We have discussed the question of the F-35 global spares pool. The basis on which we made a carve-out is clear and has been debated many times. Let me be clear: aside from that carve-out, when we came into government, we took on the solemn duty of making an assessment, which did not appear to have been made, of the serious risk of potential breaches of international humanitarian law. We then suspended arms export licences where those weapons could be used in such conduct—that means in Gaza, on the west bank, and in relation to all the areas where those risks accrued. We took far-reaching action. That action is still in place, and we continue to conduct those assessments.

I can understand why many Members may feel frustrated by the F-35 carve-out. Perhaps they also feel frustrated about our continuing to sell arms that do not risk a violation, according to the assessment that has been much discussed here. We think it right that we, for example, continue to provide body armour that might be used by non-governmental organisations in Gaza, or provide parts of the supply chain that could end up in the hands of NATO allies. We have taken far-reaching action on arms. That is important work that we are proud of.

Oral Answers to Questions

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Lammy]

Let me be clear that the horrendous terrorism we saw—26 nationals stripped and shot—was horrific, and we condemn it. We will continue to work with close partners to deal with this terrorist threat. The hon. Gentleman is right: all of us have to lean in and ensure that we are supporting efforts on both sides to deal with horrendous terrorism. That is what, in the end, will maintain an enduring peace.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The reality remains that the international community has failed to act on the plight of the Kashmiris for over seven decades. From the revocation of articles 370 and 35A, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special status, to the mass arrests and political repression in one of the most militarised zones in the world, the attacks on Kashmiri human rights and civil liberties are intolerable. If we are serious about human rights and long-term peace and stability in the region, the central issue of Kashmir cannot be ignored any longer and must now get the attention it deserves. Will the Secretary of State today reaffirm our unwavering commitment to the birthright to self-determination of the sons and daughters of Kashmir?

India-Pakistan: Escalation

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Wednesday 7th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

The right hon. Lady asks important questions. Let me take this opportunity to reiterate our condemnation of terrorism in all its forms. Our thoughts are still with those affected by the despicable acts of 22 April, their loved ones and the people of India. The Prime Minister spoke with Prime Minister Modi on 24 April and the Foreign Secretary spoke with his counterpart on 27 April. We are all, as the right hon. Lady would expect, in regular contact with our counterparts. As she may know, the Foreign Secretary is travelling and I am not privy to his very latest contacts, but I know that they are ongoing.

The right hon. Lady asks important questions about community relations in this country. I am working closely with my Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government counterparts, who are talking to affected communities across the country and recognising the sensitivities that she points to. I can confirm that I have had extended discussions with my Pakistani counterparts about the terrorist threats within Pakistan and the efforts that need to be made to address that. That is a terrorist threat that affects Pakistan herself, which, even in recent months, has suffered significant terrorist attacks.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The reality is that India’s air strikes in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir have seen the killing and injury of dozens of civilians, including children, and led to a massive escalation in the real threat of war between two nuclear powers. That follows two weeks of bulldozer tactics and thousands of mass arrests in Kashmir, the unilateral withdrawal from the Indus treaty effectively threatening collective punishment on millions of Pakistanis and now this act of aggression, all in complete contradiction of international law.

The Minister is right to say that the international community must now focus on de-escalation and stability, but that cannot be achieved in full without addressing the central issue of Kashmir, an issue close to the hearts of many hon. Members. Indeed, the plight of the Kashmiris has been raised by me in this Chamber over the last decade. Does the Minister accept that the UK has a moral, historical and legal duty and responsibility to end this 80-year period in which UN resolutions on Kashmir have, frankly, sat gathering dust? Will he act so that the sons and daughters of Kashmir get their birthright of self-determination, promised to them decades ago?

[Mr Falconer]

It is well known to this House that there are, of course, a range of wider issues between India and Pakistan, and Kashmir is one of them. However, on this most delicate of days, it is important that the House remains focused on the importance of de-escalation. That is my key message from the Dispatch Box today.

Middle East Update

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Tuesday 6th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman and my constituency neighbour for his commitment to these issues. The problems the Palestinian people face at this moment are acute, immediate and practical. As I have set out, we stand by our commitments. We want to make a contribution to practically improving the lives of the Palestinian people, and we will view recognition in that light.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

No one can deny any longer that Israel is committing war crime after war crime, with over 50,000 Palestinians killed, millions forcibly displaced, the complete blockade of Gaza for the last two months and now plans to annex the entirety of the Gaza strip. Just what will it take for the Government to properly act over Netanyahu’s breaking of every single international norm and rule? I say to the Minister that simply opposing the expansion of military operations from the Dispatch Box is not securing peace or helping the Palestinian people. The Government have rightly imposed widespread sanctions on Russia. Why do they refuse to impose widespread sanctions on Israel?

[Mr Falconer]

I recognise the passion in my hon. Friend’s voice, and as he knows, it is not just at this Dispatch Box that we have set out our views. He asks for widespread sanctions. Of course, as the House knows, we have imposed sanctions on violent settlers, and we have suspended arms licences, according to a careful process and having looked at the risks to international humanitarian law. We will continue to take action across the full range of our diplomatic options, and not just at this Dispatch Box, as he would expect.

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Visit

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Tuesday 29th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I gently suggest to the right hon. Member that that logic does not wholly follow. There are complex final-status determination issues that would underpin any recognition. No two-state solution will be straightforward without significant negotiation, diplomacy and agreement on both sides. As I have set out, recognition remains our goal, but let us not pretend that it is a straightforward decision without complexity.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

In his remarks yesterday, the Palestinian Prime Minister quite rightly reminded MPs of the UK’s historic, moral and legal obligations to the Palestinian people. The importance of our actions to uphold international law today cannot be underestimated, so I must ask the Minister why the UK is still reluctant to sanction Israel for its war crimes against the Palestinians? Why are the Government deepening our trade ties with Israel, as the International Court of Justice warns countries not to assist or aid illegal occupation? Finally, I ask the Minister to listen to the growing calls in this Chamber and announce when the Government will finally recognise the state of Palestine.

[Mr Falconer]

Our position is clear on international humanitarian law and on the importance of accountability. I will not test your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker, by again going through the points about recognition.

Kashmir: Increasing Tension

Imran Hussain Excerpts

Tuesday 29th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

It is vital that effective channels of engagement to safeguard stability in the region exist, and we are encouraging both parties to that effect. There has been a lot of speculation about the diplomatic measures that have been announced so far. As we understand it, international agreements have been put in abeyance, rather than being rescinded. In the long term, the proper functioning of water management in the Indus water catchment area is vital for both sides of the line.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The whole House is united in its condemnation of the horrific attack that killed 26 people in Pahalgam, Kashmir. It has rightly been condemned by all in the region, and we must now see a full and independent investigation where those responsible are brought to justice. The response from the Indian Government has been somewhat concerning, with unilateral action taken to revoke the Indus waters treaty, risking the lives and livelihoods of millions in Pakistan. We are now hearing reports of crackdowns in Kashmir, with 1,500 people rounded up by the police and bulldozer tactics used on households. Hard-line groups have issued statements promising reprisal attacks, death threats and action against every Muslim in India. Kashmir continues to be a flashpoint between the two nuclear neighbours, so does the Minister agree that the international community must now seriously focus on de-escalation and long-term peace in the region? Can he also set out what the Government are doing to ensure that Kashmiris do not face further persecution or oppression?

[Mr Falconer]

This is clearly a time of heightened tensions, which inevitably invites concern both in the region and here in the UK. We are, as I said, engaged with both states to try to find the most effective way to prevent these terrible incidents from ever being repeated, but also to ensure continued stability in the region.