Why illegal migrants are a bigger crisis for UK than US

A photograph of anti-migrant protesters at London’s Canary Wharf last week in an inside page of a major British daily this week included a Sikh waving a placard saying “Stop calling us Far Right. Protect our women & children” and there was at least one other south Asian in the frame. But the overwhelming impression in the British media is that only gangs of white, Far-Right thugs are on the rampage to stop the influx of poor, starving, non-white asylum seekers.

That is clearly not the correct picture, as a few candid photos show. It’s not only the white nativists who are alarmed at the boatloads of ‘asylum seekers’ arriving on British shores to increase the burden on already inadequate public services—even as scores of more prosperous Britons flee to escape rising taxes. Britons with businesses struggling to survive or even those living in neighbourhoods where changing demographics have caused huge tensions are worried.

More from Opinion

Why Trump’s tariffs on India are a colossal mistake Apache induction and Aatmanirbhar Bharat: Striking the right balance in defence modernisation

Migrants becoming a hot button issue in the US—a country built by successive generations of emigration from Europe and elsewhere—has so engrossed the media space that similar crises in other Western countries, especially the UK, have almost escaped notice. And yet, given that the UK has such a large population of what is largely now third or fourth generation British-Indians, the warning signals should be heeded about rising public apprehensions about migrants.

Many of those agitated on both sides of the migration issue are unable to understand that all migrants are not the same; nor are their intentions. Former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s parents, for instance, did not go to Britain from East Africa to live off welfare and create mini ethnic enclaves. They were hardworking professionals who contributed meaningfully to their adoptive country and assimilated even as they preserved their own cultural best practices.

Impact Shorts

View All

Why Trump’s tariffs on India are a colossal mistake

Putin-Trump talks: Can a fragile trust lead to a Ukraine ceasefire?

The waves of migrants who have arrived in Britain in the 21st century do not all fall into the Sunaks’ category of new arrivals. Many of them have made little effort to support themselves financially and far too many of them have been unable to integrate with or even understand the society they are now part of. And the incomprehension is mutual because the newcomers are not very willing to let the locals into their close-knit social and even religious network.

The result is the latest phase of unrest and demonstrations at hotels in various English counties that have been mandated by the government to house migrants. And the catalyst—several recent violent incidents in the UK allegedly linked to migrants—make President Donald Trump’s views on similar happenings in the US seem scarily prophetic. Except that Britain is far smaller and more densely populated than the US and therefore more vulnerable to rising tensions.

It is germane to note that the people preemptively described as “asylum seekers and refugees” arriving in the UK by boats across the English Channel from Europe are mostly Muslim and mostly from the Middle East, from Iran to Syria, though the two largest nationalities right now are Pakistani and Afghan. Ukrainians are another cohort. In 2024, a record 1.8 lakh asylum applications were made in the UK (the highest since 2002) and most of them were permitted to stay.

The trial and sentencing of an 18-year-old Somali-British national to 52 years in jail for killing three girls (aged 6 to 8, each was stabbed over 80 times) revealed that he had been flagged thrice in the five years before his murderous rampage, but investigators did not act on any of the complaints. The same reluctance to follow up cases of Pakistani-British men grooming and sexually exploiting white girls in northern England also showed institutional laxness.

That has given rise to very justified fears among the public that their government is not willing to understand the ramifications of years of deference to multiculturalism, and that its institutions are chary of taking action for fear of being pulled up for racism. Protesters also believe if something is not done to regulate the flow of different kinds of migrants—winnowing out freeloaders and allowing in only those who can benefit the UK—there will be hell to pay.

Branding all anti-illegal-migrant protesters as ‘Far Right’ does not do any cause any favours. The key word is “illegal” which is often deliberately omitted in reports to further the narrative that opposition to this ingress comes only from one quarter. There is also a big difference between migrants and asylum seekers. Migrants can be qualified professionals moving for career advancement, but the latter almost always implies that the state will have to look after them

Lodging migrants, whether families or single men, in hotels situated in small communities pending processing is also an ill-thought measure, as integration there is even more difficult than in big cities. An Ethiopian asylum seeker arrested and charged this month with trying to forcibly kiss a local teenager in one such small community—to which he has registered a plea of not guilty—highlights the inherent danger of summarily accommodating migrants just anywhere.

Opting to house asylum seekers in cities also draws flak as can be seen from the uproar over a four-star hotel in London’s once glitzy Canary Wharf being kitted out with new mattresses, sanitaryware etc to house migrants. Instances of local police forces escorting “pro-migrant” activists to places where the “anti-migrant” camps are protesting—in the name of the democratic right to protest—only make matters worse as they increase the public’s suspicion of official bias.

Britain has to face up to the fact that it is no longer an Empire with millions of acres of land at its disposal; it is a tiny island which is trying desperately to keep its faltering economy above the water. It may be flattering that so many refugees still consider the UK to be an attractive destination, but the fact is, there is no land to house them and no public willingness to accommodate them economically, socially or culturally. Seeing it as anything else is self-delusional.

The author is a freelance writer. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.