13 Nov 2025 | Americas, Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Germany, India, News, Singapore, United States, Volume 54.03 Autumn 2025
This article first appeared in Volume 54, Issue 3 of our print edition of Index on Censorship, titled Truth, trust and tricksters: Free expression in the age of AI, published on 30 September 2025. Read more about the issue here.
We are right to be concerned about what artificial intelligence is doing to our present and what it might do to our future. But I am more worried about what it can do to our past.
Access to archives is becoming harder. Manuscripts are fragile, and verifying historical evidence contradicting established narratives is time-consuming. Technology makes history seem fun and exciting by enabling direct communication with historical figures and using visuals that simplify the past, but it weakens our understanding. Artificial intelligence reshapes research by digitising archives and analysing data quickly, but it poses risks. AI often lacks academic rigour, drawing from biased sources and oversimplifying complex events. It presents information with unearned authority, spreading errors rapidly. Unlike historians, AI cannot evaluate credibility, weigh accounts or identify gaps in records.
The result is that our history runs the risk of being skewed towards what’s most accessible online: mainstream narratives drawn from popular databases, digitised books, encyclopaedias, widely-read history books and even crowd-sourced portals. Marginalised voices – Indigenous people, minorities, or communities without digitised records – risk being erased further. When AI amplifies the dominant version of events, alternative interpretations fade into obscurity.
For all its potential, AI cannot replace the human historian. Critical judgment, contextual thought and insights, and the ability to navigate conflicting evidence and picking plausible theories remain essential to safeguarding the integrity of the past.
Consider a recent experiment by Indian historian Anirudh Kanisetti. A trained engineer, Kanisetti has written two engrossing books on the Chaulukyas and the Cholas, two medieval-era dynasties of southern India. Despite his background in engineering, or perhaps because of it, he is sceptical of the use of AI in history. He decided to challenge the Goliath. He sought AI assistance and then wrote about his experience on Instagram. He calls AI “language calculators, and not very good ones”. He asked Copilot, Microsoft’s AI tool which uses OpenAI’s ChatGPT, to write an essay based on his work about a medieval regiment in India.
In its references, the tool produced a paper by an academic Kanisetti knew of, but he had never heard of this paper. He called out Copilot, and it immediately admitted it had made up the fact. Its subsequent apology was insincere. Kanisetti then posed another query, instructing Copilot to cite primary sources. This time, the bot confidently misquoted primary sources and, again, admitted the fabrication when he called it out.
Kanisetti is worried because he knows the sources and can find out when AI is lying; other users may not be that knowledgeable and may rely on AI to do the grunt work of checking citations. As he puts it: “Large language models (LLMs) are trained to seem to be helpful, so you think they have value. But they are actually faffing, lying, fabricating … Engagement generates shareholder value.”
Our information ecosystem is being destroyed, he added.
He has grasped the essence of the problem that is bothering many historians in the global south.
The future historian’s skillset
Aanchal Malhotra, who has written a fascinating history about India’s Partition, told me: “This thought of AI rewriting history is new but a terrifying one, because of the scale it can achieve.”
Doyenne of Indian history Romila Thapar told Index: “What AI can do to history is in a sense already being done by what the Hindutva-vadis [right-wing Hindu nationalists] are doing to Indian history. It is an alternative, distorted history that they are propagating. So far, professional historians are dismissing it by showing that there is no reliable evidence to provide proof of what is being stated in the Hindutva version. One can predict that with the availability of AI there can be massive forging of many documents that will be put forward as proof. So training in professional history will require the ability to recognise forged documents, especially if they are documents that are said to belong to earlier times. The historian of today has to be a multidisciplinary person, but the historian of tomorrow will also have to be trained in the technology of verifying documents and publications.”
She wonders if the techniques of historical excavation will need to change, since the authenticity of three-dimensional artefacts gathered from sites will have to be proved. As soon as an artefact is discovered, will it need to be intensively photographed and marked and documented and a tiny sample be analysed? This will make excavation absurdly expensive if the veracity of every object has to be proved, she adds. And she is concerned about how AI’s apparent ability to bring characters from the past back to life would interfere with what we know to be true.
She also worries about what AI can do to historical questioning and education. If students start asking AI to write their papers and tutorials (as many are), they will become masters at writing prompts, but not at drawing their own analysis. They will know how to use a machine, but truth will elude them. “They won’t know why they have written what they have,” she said.
History abounds with examples of misinterpretations, such as the figurine of a horse in Mohenjo-daro in Pakistan, which suggested that the horse had been domesticated as early as the second millennium BC.
Peter Frankopan, who teaches history at Oxford, told Index: “The skill of a historian is to be able to deal with complex materials… The idea of lots of forgeries is as old as writing systems. Information has always been used and manipulated to embed hierarchies, to spread falsehoods and to manipulate people – whether literate or otherwise. So training historians in the present and future simply requires the right skills to be learned, and the discipline of asking the right questions. Clearly, we have some challenges ahead; but there have always been such problems in the past.”
The risks heighten with the seductive charm of AI-generated visual imagery. Manu Pillai, who has written thoughtful and engrossing books on the history of southern India and, more recently, about the making of modern Hindu identity, told Index it was only a question of time before we find sophisticated imagery or videos generated by AI that would make the crudely written WhatsApp messages appear believable. There are twin dangers in India, he said. There is high digital access but weak digital literacy, “which means large segments of people are likely to be misled. We also live in a time when more and more people have an appetite for conspiracy theories and for ‘alt’ facts, and many therefore would be predisposed to swallow some of the material that comes their way”.
AI for good…occasionally
AI does provide notable benefits, such as drawing patterns from vast amounts of data and deciphering handwriting. It helps restore and better understand complex historical texts. The Arolsen Archives use AI to catalogue documents related to Nazi persecution victims. Yad Vashem uses AI to identify unknown Holocaust victims. The USC Shoah Foundation and Illinois Holocaust Museum use AI-driven holographic displays, voice recognition and virtual reality to create transparent, immersive experiences for remembrance and education.
AI’s inability to separate truth from lies is the real danger. As an aggregator, if it finds a particular version of a story cited more often, it is trained to assume it is part of the mainstream discourse. It overemphasises the dominant narrative over alternative views, which reinforces misinterpretations and falsehoods.
Manila-based Singaporean historian Thum Ping Tjin (better known as PJ Thum) is wary. The founder of New Naratif notes that throughout human history, tools have emerged to make our communication and information exchange quicker, and these tools have raised alarms. They have inevitably been co-opted by those with money and power in order to get more money and power. “They have used those tools to present versions of history to further their own goals,” Thum said.
“In many cases, the worst-case scenario you fear already exists,” he told Index. “Southeast Asian governments have long used their resources to fabricate, censor and present their own version of history and their power to enforce it. Singapore has had an entire industrial complex of official historians repeating the ‘official’ version of history. Professional historians who seek to correct the record are treated as public enemies.”
Thum himself underwent hours of gruelling questioning by government officials when he critiqued Singapore’s official interpretation of how it got separated from Malaysia, and the government introduced a new law intended to attack disinformation but which in effect ensured that the dominant, state-approved narrative would prevail.
Alarmed by the attacks on crucial aspects of American history, primarily dealing with race, the American Historical Association Council has issued guidelines based on principles that reinforce the need for historical thinking, reminding us that AI produces texts, images, audio and video, but not truth. It also warned about AI’s tendency to hallucinate and introduce false certainties.
AI’s biggest impact on history is deepfake technology. Erasing inconvenient truths or spreading lies isn’t new – Joseph Stalin famously airbrushed Leon Trotsky out of photos. In the late 1990s, a Malaysian newspaper altered photos to remove Anwar Ibrahim after he fell out with prime minister Mahathir Mohammed.
The problem of AI fakes
Forged documents have long confused historians; for example, Nazi era expert Hugh Trevor-Roper believed the fake Hitler diaries were genuine because of their voluminous content. The fabricated 1903 Protocols of the Elders of Zion fuelled antisemitism and conspiracy theories. Recently, AI-generated deepfake videos, such as one of US congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, which depicted her in Congress arguing that a jeans ad featuring Sydney Sweeney was racist, have gone viral, highlighting new dangers in disinformation.
Kanisetti points out that many Indians consume historical materials now through videos. These don’t claim authenticity, but to the untrained mind the realistic-looking videos appear to be well-researched. “The right wing has no incentive to doctor primary sources yet, because the general public is already uninterested in the ambiguities of evidence-based history,” he said. Many viewers want affirmation of their beliefs; they no longer care if what they are seeing is accurate.
In What is History?, EH Carr wrote: “The facts speak only when the historian calls on them: it is he who decides to which facts to give the floor, and in what order or context.” The selection of facts is integral to historical research. Good historians must be aware of their personal biases and the context of their work. Only humans have the capability to understand the emotions involved and the ethical choices that need to be made; it is why at universities, history is part of the humanities department and not in a scientific lab.
Historians are quick to caution. One of the biggest risks is Holocaust denial and revisionism. Unesco published a report last year with the World Jewish Congress, which showed how hate groups could use AI to deny the Holocaust, including by fabricated testimonies and altered historical records. The Historical Figures app allows users to ‘chat’ with prominent Nazis such as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels, and it falsely claims that Goebbels (for example) was not intentionally involved in the Holocaust and had tried to prevent violence against Jews. Unesco has its own recommendations for ethics in AI, which it urges governments to follow. It has also asked tech companies to improve their standards and act responsibly.
But governments have neither the capacity nor, in some cases, the willingness to prevent disinformation from spreading widely. Can states be trusted? Can corporations, which are incentivised by maximising shareholder value? Open-source algorithms, digital watermarking and community-based content moderation are all necessary potential solutions, but none is sufficient. Educating the public, particularly young people, on how to critically evaluate information and recognise misinformation is crucial to combat the negative impacts.
Thum told me: “The only defence against this is by educating ourselves to be more sceptical and information-literate; by democratising the tools and skills of history; and by teaching people to be more sceptical and critical of those with information and power, so that we are less likely to be tricked by AI or whatever the next technology is.”
In 1987, I interviewed Salman Rushdie in Bombay, as the city was then known, when he had completed writing The Satanic Verses. Other than his editors, few knew what the novel was about.
When I asked him, he said: “It is about angels and devils and how it is very difficult to establish ideas of morality in a world which has become so uncertain that it is difficult to even agree on what is happening. When one can’t agree on a description of reality, it is very hard to agree on whether that reality is good or evil, right or wrong. When one can’t say what is actually the case, it is difficult to proceed from that to an ethical position. Angels and devils are becoming confused ideas … It is an attempt to come to grips with that sense of a crumbling moral fabric or, at least, a need for the reconstruction of old simplicities.”
AI makes us believe in simplicities, that truth is easy to access, and that answers to complex questions are just one click away. It is the product in our age of instant gratification. Reality, like history, is more nuanced. The challenge lies in our not being condemned to repeat it.
7 Nov 2025 | Middle East and North Africa, News, Yemen
On the outskirts of Sanaa, 28-year-old Badr Yaseen sits inside a four-square-metre salon. The interior wall is lined with full-length mirrors, and scissors, electric shavers, combs, and hair care products are neatly arranged on a cupboard and small shelves.
Yaseen greets each customer with confidence and warmth. Once they settle into the chair, he politely asks about their preferred haircut style before getting to work. As he cuts, he keeps up a friendly conversation, making the experience relaxed and personal.
Yaseen did not inherit his profession from his father or grandfather. He is the first in his family’s generation to take up this work. It has been a decision many in his family have called an act of “mutiny” against long-held traditions.
His brothers urged him to give up the job, and his uncles tried to dissuade him from continuing. Relatives frowned upon his choice, believing that Yaseen’s work as a barber “shames” the family. They all believe that this profession is only suitable for the “lower class”. Such beliefs run deep, woven into the fabric of social hierarchy and pride.
Yet Yaseen defied these norms. He has disregarded the opinions of his family, friends, and acquaintances. He has refused to bow to social censorship or the entrenched prejudices surrounding his choice.
In a country where a decade-long conflict has devastated the economy and wiped out countless jobs, Yaseen has prioritised survival over social status. Like him, many others have defied social norms and stereotypes, doing whatever they can to endure these harsh times.
“Not ‘wrong,’ not ‘obscene,’ not ‘immoral’.” These are the verbal bullets Yaseen fires back at anyone who criticises or disrespects him.
In Yemen, the law prohibits discrimination based on colour, origin or job. Despite that, discriminatory norms remain a prevalent plague in society.
Survival over status
Yaseen is classified as a tribesman. Married with four children, he was miserable when he was jobless two years ago, he recalls. Financial troubles darkened his life. He was willing to accept any job, except being a fighter for the war rivals in his country.
“I approached a salon owner and asked for work. He offered me a job, and I began as a barber,” Yaseen told Index.
When he started, he already had the know-how. “My brothers and close friends used to need a haircut, and I would do that. I did not do it for money. That is how I developed my skill.”
Yaseen was not planning to be a barber. It was just a favour or entertainment. Now, it is his money-making job.
“Had I been kept imprisoned by the social norms, my suffering would linger, and my children would starve. A barber is not a lower person. That is how hardships changed my mindset.”
Since 2015, a destructive civil war coupled with airstrikes has devastated Yemen, and it remains unresolved. Famine and food insecurity have prevailed, risking the lives of millions of people.
United Nations reports reveal that over 17 million people are going hungry in Yemen. This figure may rise to 18 million by February next year. Women and children are the most vulnerable.
With this bleak reality, Yaseen and countless of his like no longer disdain “lower class” jobs.
Yaseen has a friend named Nasser. Two months ago, Nasser shared his business idea with Yaseen: opening a chicken slaughterhouse. Although being a butcher is often considered a lower-class job among Yemenis, Nasser – himself a tribesman – doesn’t care about such judgments.
“Call him a butcher. That won’t cost him his life. Hunger and unemployment will,” Yaseen said with a serious tone.
The teacher-turned painter
Public employees in Yemen have not been immune from the economic consequences of the decade-long war. Those who were once proud of their job titles abandoned their careers and began entering fields they had never worked in before.
Before the war erupted in 2015, Yahia, 42, had been a passionate teacher in a government school in Sanaa. His passion died down and morale vanished as the war was prolonged. Salaries stopped coming as war rivals held one another responsible for paying public workers.
“I kept coming to the classroom for three years unpaid. I exhausted my savings and felt unprecedented financial pressure. I was compelled to take a U-turn in my professional life,” he told Index.
Over one million public employees have not been paid their regular salaries since September 2016. About 6.9 million people are estimated to live on that income.
In 2020, Yahia began working as a helper for a professional painter in Sanaa. Within six months, he learned enough about the job. Now, he considers himself as an “outstanding painter”.
Yahia feels no embarrassment when he puts on his paint-stained clothes and heads to work.
“I left the classroom and set aside the markers, picking up brushes and rollers instead. Surviving amid war is an accomplishment,” he said, his voice filled with gratitude.
The veiled seller in the qat market
The 2024 Humanitarian Response Plan for Yemen estimated that 18.2 million people required humanitarian assistance, including 4.2 million women and 4.8 million girls. But not every woman waits for assistance or surrenders to hunger.
Um Ahmed, 30, sits on the ground in a popular market in Sanaa selling bags of qat, a narcotic leaf ubiquitously consumed in Yemen. She begins at 11am and leaves at 2pm.
She places the qat bundles before and beside her. Customers stand or sit to pick and look at the product. Bargaining over the price begins. Eloquent and confident, she is a glib bargainer. Her face is veiled. Only her narrow eyes are visible.
Qat selling is dominated by men in Yemen. However, Um Ahmed and others of her like have tried it and fared well. Today, she does not fear what society thinks of her.
“When I started this work four years ago, few encouraged me and many found it weird. But the weird thing is to stay idle, starving to death,” Um Ahmed told Index.
She earns 5,000 Yemeni riyal ($20) a day. Her profit can increase or decrease.
“Today, I spend on myself and my three children and save some of my income. If I continued being ashamed of work and became obedient to unfair social norms, I would be a hungry loser,” she says.
31 Oct 2025 | Africa, Americas, Asia and Pacific, Iran, Middle East and North Africa, News, Nigeria, Tanzania, United States, Vietnam
Bombarded with news from all angles every day, important stories can easily pass us by. To help you cut through the noise, every Friday Index publishes a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression. This week, we look at the deployment of the military against protesters in Tanzania and a rock band playing on the streets of Tehran.
Tanzania: Military deployed and curfews enacted
Protests have erupted in Tanzania following a disputed election and the deployment of the military to enforce a curfew across Dar es Salaam.
President Samia Suluhu Hassan, incumbent leader of the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) party and one of only two female leaders in Africa, won 78.8% of the vote. Her victory has been disputed, especially as candidates from the top two opposition parties had been disqualified from running in the election. CCM has been in control of Tanzania since it gained independence in 1961.
Index covered the lead-up to the election, and reported on fears that the opposition leaders are being silenced.
Internet watchdog Netblocks has reported an internet blackout across the country following the beginning of the curfew.
Opposition leader Tundu Lissu has been imprisoned on charges of treason for his calls for electoral reform, whilst Luhaga Mpina, who leads the second largest opposition party was barred from taking part in the election.
Protests are still ongoing as demonstrators reject the election results.
Iran: Rock band shows sparks of rebellion
In a startling video we saw this week, Iranians have taken to the streets of Tehran to watch a rock band playing the White Stripes 2003 single Seven Nation Army.
The video has been widely shared, and shows women dancing in the street without wearing head coverings in a display of freedom on the streets.
Index has been following the clampdowns on musicians in Iran over the last few years.
This display follows a growing movement of defiance against mandatory hijab requirements across Iran that has built steadily since the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom protests sparked by the murder of Mahsa Jina Amini.
Nigeria: Visa rejection for Nobel winner
91-year-old Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka announced on Tuesday that the USA had revoked his non-resident visa.
Soyinka won the 1986 Nobel Prize in Literature and is widely known for his work as a playwright and poet. He previously renounced his permanent US residency in protest at the election of President Donald Trump.
Soyinka said: “I was given a date to report to their consulate with my passport. I declined the invitation. First of all, I didn’t like the date. Everybody knows what happened on that date, 9/11, many years ago, so it is rather unfortunate that they picked that date. So I said, ‘Sorry, I’m superstitious; I’m not coming on that day.’ And ultimately, I made it clear I was not going to apply for another date to bring in my passport. So I travelled out.
“When I came back – even before I came back – I got a letter from the ambassador.
“So we arranged a call, and I explained. Again, he offered a special visit by me at the consulate, and they would ask a few questions about the possible facts that existed that they didn’t know about when this visa was issued. We spoke, and I said, ‘Shall I be equally frank with you? I’m not interested.’”
Visa rules changed for Nigerians in July, with non-immigrant visas now receiving single-entry three-month permits as opposed to the up to five-year multiple-entry visas available previously.
USA: Gamers wanted for ICE
The White House has continued its use of memes in its effort to recruit members for the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Recent posts by the Department of Homeland Security on X have used screenshots from the Halo video game series overlaid with phrases such as “stop the flood” equating the undocumented migrants ICE targets with the alien enemies faced in the video game.
The posts come in the wake of numerous controversies facing the organisation, with multiple shootings reported this week in relation to ICE, and a British national being held by the organisation after the US had revoked his visa.
Similarly AI has become a mainstay. We’ve covered the trend in the latest edition of our magazine – and that was before a post from President Trump on his Truth Social platform last week imagining him flying a fighter jet over protesters covering them in excrement.
Memes and online culture have been a mainstay of the Donald Trump presidencies since he first took power in 2016, with an online culture developing around his campaign on sites such as 4chan.
Vietnam: BBC journalist trapped
A journalist from the BBC has been blocked from leaving Vietnam according to a statement released by the broadcaster.
The Vietnamese national has not been named, however the BBC released the following statement: “One of our journalists has been unable to leave Vietnam for several months as the authorities have withheld their ID card and their renewed passport.
“During this time our journalist was subject to multiple days of questioning by the authorities. The BBC journalist was in Vietnam for a routine passport renewal and to visit family.
“We are deeply concerned about our journalist’s wellbeing and urge the authorities to allow them to leave immediately, providing them with their renewed passport so they can return to work.”
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer reportedly raised the issue with general secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Tô Lâm during a state visit to the UK this week, however no updates have been made on the status of the journalist.
30 Oct 2025 | England, Europe and Central Asia, United Kingdom
This article was first published in Index on Censorship volume 32, issue 2 in 2003.
My departure early in the 1960s from Leicester, where I was born, more or less coincided with the beginning of a process of transformation that changed the city from a small town in the East Midlands grown complacent on its long prosperity to the vibrant Asian capital of Britain. In the process, it was to be physically brutalised by overzealous developers and, for a time, to suffer the reputation of the most racist city in the UK.
When I returned for an extended stay in the 1980s, the landscape of my memory had been swept away; the house where I grew up was now the city’s leading sari emporium. In repeated visits to family and friends over the past decade, I have had to relearn the city, try to fathom the complex economic, social and ethnic geography that has today earned it the title of ‘beacon city’, a place others look to for lessons in racial harmony and pointers to the achievement of that elusive target ‘cultural cohesion’, a newtake on what we once called ‘multiculturalism’.
But all that was a long way in the future in the year of my birth, 1938. Let me remember. In 1801, the population of Leicester was a modest 17,000; by 1901 it had grown to 212,489. They came for jobs from all over the UK and Ireland to work in the thriving hosiery, knitwear and boot and shoe factories, and the engineering works that provided the machines for these industries on which Leicester’s wealth was built. They lived in spreading acres of terraced houses thrown up in the latter part of the century to accommodate them.
Out of Africa
But, to all intents and purposes, Leicester remained a provincial market town, its medieval street plan and many of its timber-frame houses more or less intact. Despite the Victorian incursion with its factories, villas and teeming streets of workers’ housing, it was not a creation of the Industrial Revolution. Nor was it dependent on a single heavy industry and vulnerable to the vagaries of recession.
The population grew only another 60,000 or so in the following century. Most of the new arrivals came in the past 50 years, many of them from Africa. Their arrival in this provincial town brought changes more lasting and profound than anything since the Romans.
The town I walked with my schoolmaster grandfather was the ancient town of the Romans, with medieval streets and buildings dating from the time of the Crusades. We would stroll from the Castle Gardens at the foot of the remains of the castle by the river to the timbered Guildhall, the houses and almshouses built by city merchants, narrow streets with huddled shops smelling of tobacco and liquorice. These led, finally, into the Victorian facades of department stores and gents’ outfitters — and, of course, the vast (or so it seemed then) Leicester Co-operative Society store that dominated the high street of the modern town.
The second richest city in the Empire
Today, most of the old town has gone. The winding streets have been swept away in doubtless necessary slum clearance; much more has been sacrificed to a 1960s orgy of road-building. The Magazine stands marooned between the lanes of an urban freeway, accessible only by underpass; the castle, its gardens and the monuments of my childhood are cut off by swirling motorways and elevated roads. They have become a ‘heritage park’, no longer a living part of the city, a backwater for tourists and a throughway for students at De Montfort University. The murky waters of the Soar have been cleaned up and offer a riverside walk and, so the brochure tells me, a unique variety of river flora and fauna. Leicester is the UK’s first ecological city and is doing its best with what is left, but the destruction of the 1960s razed more than just slums. It is too late now for the once shabby but characterful seventeenth- and eighteenth-century city-centre facades, replaced with bland, anonymous reconstructions in the 1960s and 70s.
In 1936, Leicester, I was told, was the second richest city in the Empire; by 1953, it could still claim the distinction of having the second highest per capita income of any city in Europe. We grew up being told by my banker father we should be proud to live in such a city. But it didn’t translate into anything we wanted to do. Joe Orton, a local boy, said it was the most boring city in England and got away as fast as fame would carry him; JB Priestley, on a brief visit, stayed only long enough to remark that there were many worse places in which he’d rather stay. We agreed with them: it was a cultural wilderness, the result, perhaps, of the inward-looking nonconformist temperance spirit that had ruled the city council for decades and lingered still. The city fathers of the 1950s had no more time for culture entertainment than they were to show for architectural heritage. The last three commercial theatres — the Theatre Royal, the Opera House and finally the Palace of Varieties — closed, depriving us of pantomime, the Royal Ballet and other visiting delights. It was long after my day, in 1973,that the Haymarket Theatre opened and restored Leicester to the theatre circuit. We had music in De Montfort Hall, named for a long-dead earl; swimming in the open-air Lido; expeditions to the countryside, and long months spent vegetating in Lincolnshire with our grandparents. Our school was the best the city had to offer — but it was dull, provincial, and we longed to escape.
Which I did, in 1957, to university. And only then did I find out that Leicester is not what you see; at least not what I had seen. For all its complacency, Leicester had another side, invisible but discovered with shock when I delivered Christmas post in the vacations. The mean streets of working-class housing, by now down at heel and many still without bathrooms or inside lavatories, crowding up with the factories to the iron railings of our own house were familiar enough. But they hid much worse. Slums that could have come out of Dickens.
The Asian transformation
When I returned, the transformation of these places was even more dramatic than the loss of the city landscape I had once known. What I wandered through seemed nothing less than a small miracle. With the help of local council grants, whole neighbourhoods had been regenerated, houses as well as factories. Grey, depressing streets of mouldering Victorian housing had burst forth in candy colours and were once again thriving local communities — of Asians. Corner shops sold food and spices from India alongside the stock-in-trade of any neighbourhood store; the Leicester Mercury rubbed pages with publications in Gujarati and Punjabi; colourful bilingual books and wall posters for children displayed the alphabet and numbers in several languages.
It was the same with the factories and inner-city churches. Mills where the looms had long fallen silent were back in business, with the names of their new Asian owners superimposed on the ghostly letters of former household names; others had been divided into a myriad of small manufacturing units and workshops for Asian enterprise. Churches, nonconformist meeting houses, even in one case an old factory site, had become temples and mosques serving the neighbourhood.
The same was true of other old inner-city housing areas that had escaped demolition in the nick of time and had been rescued by the arrival of Asians from East Africa. The brand new Sikh gurdwara built on the site of Holy Bones, disappeared site of my ancient city, summed things up: not an appropriation, but a restoration of the city to itself. Economically and socially, the migrations of the late 1960s and early 70s — largely of Gujaratis fleeing ‘Africanisation’ in Kenya, Uganda and most recently Malawi — had, it seemed to me, saved a dying city. Along the Belgrave Road, for instance, the neglected shops of the old city centre were now Leicester’s ‘Golden Mile’, a glittering strip of shops dominated by jewellers and goldsmiths. Asians from all over the UK come here for their wedding finery, I was assured, rather than make the trip to Bombay. Diwali brings huge crowds into the area to celebrate the Hindu festival of light when this part of the city is lit up with a million lights and the explosion of fireworks. The biggest celebration outside India, it brings people into this once enclosed city. Leicester is no longer the self-regarding, inward-looking place it was, but looking out and welcoming a wider world.
Leicester is no stranger to migration. As Cynthia Brown of Leicester University’s Living History programme points out, people have been coming here since early in the nineteenth century. Then it was in pursuit of work; latterly, that went hand in hand with flight from war and persecution. Many, like the Poles who had fought in World War II and now found themselves unwelcome back in Communist Poland, settled in Leicester after the war; the late 40s saw the arrival of immigrants from the Caribbean plus the first Asians.
The flatness of the city
In 1951, the Asian population was just 624. Migration was hastened by the Commonwealth and Immigration Act of 1962: fuelled by people anxious to pre-empt its more restrictive conditions, migration had risen by 1961 to 4,624. They settled in the older inner-city areas, where cheap housing was available in the wake of the departure of English residents offered the chance to escape the decay by moving to council estates around the city. It was this early settlement that acted as the magnet, drawing dramatically increased immigration from Africa. Only a decade later, the arrival of Asians, largely Gujarati from Kenya, had swelled Leicester’s Asian population to 20,190. Despite warnings by Leicester City Council printed in Ugandan papers and inflammatory headlines speaking of disaster in the influential Leicester Mercury, it was inevitable that a ready-made community of their own kind and Leicester’s reputation as a ‘friendly’ city would draw the majority of Idi Amin’s Asian refugees to the city. The appeal of friends, family and their own community, as well as the promise of jobs, increasingly in Gujarati-owned enterprises, were not the only reasons, it seems. ‘I travelled all over the UK,’ says one African Asian, ‘and I made up my mind if I could choose anywhere I could come that I would settle in Leicester . . .I particularly liked Leicester . . . I was attracted to the flatness of the city.’
Of the 30,000 Asians expelled from Uganda in 1972, 6,000 came to the city. By 1981, the New Commonwealth population was 59,709 in a population of something over 250,000. The arrival of the new settlers in the ’70scoincided with Leicester’s first serious economic downturn. The city’s staple manufactures were being replaced by cheaper goods from abroad: factories were in decline and closing; unemployment was rising. Resentment among the white population burst into open racism and discrimination, at the workplace as well as in the streets. Bolstered by Enoch Powell’s dire warnings of the dangers of unbridled immigration, the National Front targeted Leicester and inserted itself into local politics. In 1976, it won 18 per cent of the vote in local elections; in 1979, in a climate of racial hostility fostered by the NF, Leicester witnessed one of worst racial confrontations in the country. Shocked and shamed out of complacency, it actively began to work at escaping the opprobrium of being labelled the UK’s most racist city.
Why riot when they had money?
Twenty years on, hard work, dedication and commitment from all the communities have ensured that, unlike Oldham, Burnley, Bradford, Southall, Toxteth, Brixton and other places with high immigrant populations, Leicester has not exploded again. A lot of money has been funnelled to minority community projects. Not always the answer, but as Leicester race relations policy officer Paul Winstone said with a certain realism: ‘Leicester City Council poured millions of pounds into ethnic groups. Almost every group could get something like £50,000 more or less just by asking. It wasn’t open bribery, but it most certainly was bribery — and it worked. Why should the leaders riot when they had money and an office?
‘In retrospect, Winstone describes the 1970s as the years of conflict, the 80s as the bribery years and the 90s as the decade of consolidation. But there is more to it than that. Asked why Leicester has become something of a model multiracial city, why, given that the minority population is now around 38 per cent and forecast to become the first majority ethnic community in the UK within the present decade, it doesn’t explode in racial violence, Asians themselves have another explanation. Above all, they point to the fact that they came not from India or Pakistan but from Africa, where they had occupied a privileged position as professionals, businessmen and entrepreneurs. They explode the myth still current in many places that they came with their pockets stuffed with money, but point out that they knew how to do things, did not rely on the local authority for housing or jobs but bought modest properties and eventually built businesses again from scratch. They were not like the uneducated communities of Bangladeshis or funda-mentalist Pakistanis who settled in other places.
Something else too, they say: ‘Remember, this was our second migration. In Africa we already knew what it was to be an unloved but tolerated minority. We knew how to keep our heads down, blend in and get on with people. We’d learned all that before we came here.’
The next generation
Sitting in a local pub, once a down-and-out watering hole but now Asian-owned, bright and cheery, I am struck at the convivial mix of people— Hindus and Muslims, Gujaratis, Sikhs from the Punjab, a few white Englishmen. I am struck by the lack of tension. Are there really no sectarian problems in the city? Jay, a Gujarati from Uganda, explains: ‘Most of us African Asians had never seen India. Unlike the people who came from the subcontinent, its politics and its religious hatreds were nothing to do with us, and so we didn’t carry all that baggage and perpetuate the old quarrels when we got here. The common experience of coming from Africa keeps us close; that is stronger than any religious divide.’ And that, he concludes, is something else that keeps his city, Leicester, from the sectarian extremism that divides other communities.
But this mixture of races and religions is rare. Again, Leicester is not what you see when you meet and talk to the dedicated people who work to bring communities together. The city is as segregated and zoned as it ever was in the days of the old working-class and middle-class divide. That it is largely self-segregated raises the question of how these parallel lives will settle down in the long run when the white English are in a minority, as they already are in most of the city’s schools. Maybe it’s only the next generation, now in the schools, who can answer the question. As one Asian boy put it to me: ‘If there are as many of me as there are of you, we don’t have to be afraid of anything, do we?’
Meanwhile, as people in the city admit, there are challenges to be met. Asians will say they are not yet strongly enough represented in the upper echelons of local government and industry, despite the presence of a growing number of local councillors from the minority communities. And the mix of poverty and ethnicity on local sink estates is creating tensions between black and white not evident in the city itself.
But, more than anything else, representatives on both sides of the ethnic divide fear the import of religious and political extremism from outside. The Hindu nationalist fundamentalist BJP government in India keeps close contacts in the city; following the outbreak of sectarian violence in Gujarat last year, they have been keen to put their version of events to the Gujarati community in Leicester. In much the same way, the Muslims of Leicester are disturbed by the ongoing trial in the city of alleged al-Qaida suspects. They feel a threat from the identification in the media and elsewhere of ‘terrorism’ and Islam. They have become introspective and assertive at the same time, demonstrating a sense of insecurity in a more aggressive assertion of their religion.
But all of this, I am assured more than once, is manageable as long as the city remains aware of it and is sensitive to its handling. There is optimism and a justifiable pride in Leicester’s record. ‘There are things to be done, but compared to other places we are doing well. And that’s official: it said so in the Cantle report that came out after the riots in Oldham and Burnley in 2001.’