I chose my dissertation topic on the grounds that it would enable me to dive deeper into my roots and find out more about the journey that those who came before me made, but also as an offering to the wider diaspora, to bridge a gap in academic literature and tell an untold story. Hence I have decided to upload this here. I would love to hear all thoughts and opinions on my work, and ask that you credit me should you use it in any writing of any form.
I truly hope you enjoy reading this, and that you are able to take something from it.
Best wishes,
Chanpreet
CKM Writes
Why did the resettlement of the Kenyan Indians in the United Kingdom during the 1960s and 1970s result in intergenerational differences in self-identity amongst the diaspora?
A study into the experiences of the Kenyan Asian community in Britain
Contents
Acknowledgements
Abstract
Introduction
Chapter 1: Literature Review
Chapter 2: They're here because you were there
Chapter 3: Self-identity
Chapter 4: Intergenerational Differences Explored
Conclusion
Bibliography
Acknowledgements
This dissertation is my humble attempt to fill a gap in post-colonial literature and tell the story of the Kenyan Asians, and how they came to settle in the UK. It has been an honour to hear people’s individual experiences of this tumultuous time that followed mass decolonisation in the global South, humanising a topic that many surely feel distant from.
I have to first thank my grandparents for my initial interest in the topic of post-colonial migration; hearing their stories whilst growing up fuelled an interest in this part of our family history, which finds itself to be spread across East Africa and India.
I would also like to thank my dissertation supervisor, Dr. Antara Datta, for her support in the writing of this dissertation. Her advice and guidance have been invaluable, and I am truly grateful.
Special thanks go to my family and loved ones, for the tireless support and motivation they provided me with over the course of my degree, and in the writing of this dissertation.
Lastly, I would like to thank my interview participants for the time that they gave me to contribute to my work and their thoughtful answers, that have helped me to uncover the themes of this migration pattern.
Abstract
In recent years, the role of colonialism in the construction of contemporary British society has been extensively discussed within academic spaces. These discussions cover a wide range of colonial pasts, encompassing multiple ethnicities and identities, and their experiences of imperialism, concluding that the acts carried out in the name of the British Imperial project have impacted the individuals who grew up under colonial rule, with lasting effects to this day. This dissertation seeks to look specifically at the Kenyan Asian community and their resettlement in the United Kingdom during the 1960s and 1970s, to outline and explain the intergenerational differences in self-identity that have come about as a result of this migration.
Introduction
This dissertation seeks to answer the question: ‘Why did the resettlement of the Kenyan Indians in the United Kingdom in the 1960s and 1970s result in intergenerational differences in self-identity among the diaspora?’.
The Indian community existed, and exists, in Kenya as a result of indentured imperial labour, whereby Indians moved to East Africa in the early 20th century to build the Kenya-Uganda railway (Bhachu, 1985; Brown, 2006; Mangat, 1969). Their arrival in East Africa is their original migration, however after being forced out by “post-independence Africanization policies” (Bhachu, 1985, p.3), these Indians embarked on a second migration, largely to the UK, becoming known as ‘twice migrants’ for this double movement (Bhachu, 1985).
My research consisted of consulting files at The National Archives, to build an understanding of the political context of the exodus and arrival of the Kenyan Indians from Kenya to the UK, respectively. I analysed a range of files written in the time leading up to the arrival of the Kenyan Asians, and extensively after their arrival, thus more focussed on their resettlement. These files detailed the political situation in Kenya leading up to, and after independence, and how the Kenyan Asian problem evolved.
In order to obtain a holistic and deeper understanding of this migration and why it occurred, I conducted fifteen interviews. Thirteen out of fifteen respondents arrived in the UK from Kenya during the 1960s and 1970s, with the two remaining having arrived in the UK just before 1960 and just after 1970, respectively, as a way of comparing the experiences of those who arrived slightly before or after the mass movement of individuals to see if their experience was markedly different, which it was not. The sample of interviewees was a quota sample, with participants of a range of ages and ethnicities, with a relatively equal gender balance. Questions focussed on the self-identity of the participants, whether or not they felt, or feel British, as well as their initial experiences in this country and their reasons for leaving Kenya, allowing room for participants to add extra information if they felt comfortable to do so.
To find an answer to the research question, I will first outline a short literature review. Secondly, I will consider the political contexts in Kenya and the UK in the 1960s and 1970s, and how this resulted in the movement of the Kenyan Asians. Thirdly, I will outline the contemporary intergenerational differences in self-identity within the community. Lastly, I will offer explanations for the existence of these intergenerational differences, basing my findings in my interview responses, archival research, and the wider literature.
1. Literature Review
The existing literature on the Kenyan Indians is split into three categories: the exit of the Asians from Kenya and their arrival in the UK, the diaspora in Britain, and in a limited way, issues of identity.
The literature focussing on the history of the migration pattern is the largest section of literature. Much of this focuses on the creation of hostile environment in Kenya, preventing Asians from obtaining local citizenship. The policy of Africanisation is cited as a principal reason for the exit of the Kenyan Asians (Aiyar, 2015; Cosemans, 2021; Dickinson, 2015; Hansen, 1999; Qureshi, 1968), and a number of these authors also refer to the marginalisation of Asian interests in Kenyan politics as a further reason for their exit. El-Enany (2020) offers a timeline for the racialisation of immigration laws, which is useful when considering the plight of the Kenyan Indians. The literature considers the role of UK legislation in the resettling of the Kenyan Indians in Britain, with a considerable focus on the 1962 and 1968 Commonwealth Immigrants Acts. Hansen (1999) details the issues of the 1968 Act in terms of how it limited Kenyan Indians from obtaining British citizenship, despite their rights to it, and Britain’s obligation to them. The literature highlights the plight of the Kenyan Indians as so unique, that it resulted in a radical reassessment, and consequently redefinition of citizenship (Hansen, 1999; Patel, 2021).
Aiyar (2015) leads the diasporic based discussions on the Kenyan Indians. The diasporic based literature exposes the role of imperialism in the fracturing of a number of societies and communities, including the Kenyan Asians, with lasting impact to this day (Sanghera, 2021). Mishra (1996) raises the point that the Indian diaspora emerged as a result of the British movement of labour due to imperial projects, to colonies outside of South Asia (with Kenya as just one example), with this spread of the diaspora creating what are referred to as ‘little Indias’ in the countries of settlement, meaning Indians kept close to other Indians, as they did in Kenya. Mishra’s (1996) work speaks to a wider issue, opening up a space to discuss the Kenyan Asians. Mishra (1996) speaks of the role of the diaspora as a source from which novel diasporic discourses can emerge, allowing the formation of new, specific cultures, within the existing Indian culture, impacting contemporary identities, as it has in the case of the Kenyan Indians. Brown (2006) touches upon similar themes, describing the broader Indian diaspora as having been created by several trajectories of migration, resulting in the creation of “multiple strands in the diaspora” (Brown, 2006, p.29), as is embodied by the existence of the Kenyan Asian identity or community.
The section of the literature covering issues of identity as influenced by colonial patterns of migration is the most limited, in terms of its lack of a focus on the Kenyan Asians. Brown (2006) discusses the role of British anti-discrimination legislation in enabling first-generation immigrants of Indian origin to feel British. Trovão (2012) makes a valuable contribution to the identity section of the literature through the comparison of the British and Portuguese legacies in East Africa, and the implications they had on identity formation. Trovão (2012) touches upon the accumulation of wealth and education of the Asians in East Africa as a whole, and how this enabled them to set themselves up rather quickly upon arrival to Britain, fuelling a sense of belonging amongst the older generations due to their economic success.
The literature fails to look at the longer-term impact of the resettling of the Kenyan Indians in Britain, and how this impacted different generations in different ways. This dissertation seeks to fill the gaps in the the literature; combining the historical context of the Kenyan Asian migration to Britain, with individual oral histories in order to present and explain the intergenerational differences in self-identity that have come about as a result of this specific migration pattern
2. They’re here because you were there.
This chapter will look at why the Kenyan Indians chose to leave Kenya, leading to their mass resettlement in the UK, subsequently resulting in intergenerational differences in self-identity. I will explore these choices by considering the political context in Kenya both leading up to and after independence, as well as the political context of the UK, and its obligation to Commonwealth nationals, forcing Britain to accommodate the Kenyan Indians. Understanding the political context of the exodus and arrival is an essential foundation for understanding the intergenerational differences that arise due to this migration.
Kenya gained independence from British colonial rule in December 1963. The only individuals who would automatically obtain citizenship were those “born in Kenya, one of whose parents was also born there” (TNA, DO 175/92). In 1959, the Kenya National Party called for the Civil Service to be “Africanized as soon as possible” (TNA, CO 822/1859), and it was this policy of Africanisation, motivated by the idea of “Africa for the Africans” (Aiyar, 2015, p.212) that pushed the Asians out of Kenya.
Resentment for, and hostility towards, Asians, grew after independence, and with the pursuit of Africanisation (Qureshi, 1968). Interviewee F described “three-part” segregation between the Asian, Black, and White populations. The Asians were a buffer between the Black and White population, having the upper hand over Black individuals, yet perceived as inferior to the White population (Cosemans, 2021; Dickinson 2015; Qureshi, 1968), providing a further explanation as to why anti-Asian sentiment existed (Sanghera, 2021). Due to large numbers of Asians retaining their British citizenship, the Kenyan government viewed the exodus as “Britain’s responsibility” (TNA, HO 376/125), driving individuals to choose Britain as their new home. Thus far, the literature and archival files I have discussed have presented the Asians as victims in their exit from Kenya, however, issues of discrimination towards the Black population at the hands of the Asians were not uncommon, with Asians in general being described as “arrogant and contemptuous in their attitude to Africans” (TNA, DO 213/45). The Asians became an unwanted colonial legacy, possessing 80% of East Africa’s wealth (Qureshi, 1968), dominating the economy. As a result, policies of Africanisation were pursued, and tensions between the Asians and Africans increased, creating a hostile environment that pushed the Asians out.
The exodus of the Asians from Kenya in the late 1960s was principally caused by the policy of Africanisation (Aiyar, 2015). This experience of being forced out of the country due to discrimination and Africanisation was central to the memories of my interview respondents. Interviewee B moved to the UK in 1966 due to enrolling on a university course in Kenya, before being “told that because I was not a Kenyan citizen, I would have to pay fees”, whereas a Kenyan citizen would not have had to. In this experience we can clearly see the distinctions that were made between citizens and non-citizens. Interviewee G moved to the UK in 1966, recounting a similar story. They were accepted onto a law degree in Kenya, but “told I would have to pay the fees, while if I was African there was [sic] no fees…I just felt discriminated against…to get Kenyan citizenship, you had to ‘oil some palms’”, or in other words, bribe the administration officials, and this individual found this to be greatly unfair, and so made the decision to leave Kenya. Issues with citizenship applications are mentioned in the literature, with the conclusion being drawn that resentment towards Asians resulted in civil servants ignoring Asian citizenship applications (Hansen, 1999), upholding the hostile environment. Interviewee L, who moved to the UK in 1970, explained that they had a job in the civil service, but their post was Africanised. They found themselves unemployed with no employment opportunities, thus had no choice but to leave. Interviewee M had a similar experience, and when asked why they moved to the UK, they explained to me that their “husband was working, but his position was Africanised, so it was difficult to get jobs.”, highlighting how influential the Africanisation policy was in the exodus of the Kenyan Asians.
Africanisation was not the only factor influencing the Kenyan Asians exit from the country. The Kenyan Asians were marginalised in Kenyan politics, with their interests unrepresented (Aiyar, 2015). This left the Asians in a vulnerable position, fearful that they may be deported without much warning (Aiyar, 2015). This fear resulted in a sort of domino-effect; more and more Asians left, encouraging others to follow, but also having the adverse effect of fuelling nationalism in Kenya, making the remaining Asians feel unwelcome by societal attitudes (Aiyar, 2015). In addition, post-colonial conceptions of nationhood and citizenship were “singular and distinct” (Aiyar, 2015, p.266-267) posing a direct challenge to the tripartite Kenyan Asian identity that transcended South Asia, Africa, and Britain, by virtue of being a British subject. The combination of Africanisation, an air of fear surrounding one's secure place in a country, and the more black-and-white conceptions of identity and nationhood meant that living in Kenya was no longer a viable prospect for the Kenyan Asians.
In the following section, I will explore why the Kenyan Asians came to Britain after leaving Kenya, and also why Britain was eventually forced to accept the Kenyan Asians as citizens of the United Kingdom.
The period of time between 1948 and 1968 saw the racialisation of British Immigration Law, coming to a head with the passing of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act in 1968, influenced by independence movements, and the migration of former colonised peoples to Britain. In 1948, the British Nationality Act was passed, affording Commonwealth citizens the right to enter Britain as a way of holding together the remains of the Empire (El-Enany, 2020). Under the 1948 Act, around 500,000 non-white Commonwealth citizens made the journey to Britain in the years 1948-1962 (El-Enany, 2020). In 1962, the first legal steps were taken to limit the immigration of non-white Commonwealth citizens, “depriving them of access to wealth accumulated” (El-Enany, 2020, p.95) by the colonisation and exploitation of the global South; the countries from which they came. In 1962, laws on the immigration of Commonwealth citizens to Britain became exclusive, with the right of entry to the UK based on how they obtained their passports. The only individuals exempt from this control were citizens who were born in Britain or Ireland, possessing either a British or Irish passport, and these individuals were mostly white, highlighting a racist undertone to the passage of this legislation (El-Enany, 2020).
In 1962, the Macmillan Conservative government introduced the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, ending “unrestricted immigration from the Commonwealth” (Hansen, 1999, p.816). In 1967, Britain saw the numbers of Asians migrating from East Africa soar to an abnormal level, out of fear that the UK Government was planning to “slam the door” (TNA, HO344/352). The 1962 Act drew distinctions between white and non-white individuals, and their racialised status implicated whether they had the right to citizenship in Britain. In terms of Asian immigration from Kenya, 6,000 Kenyan Asians arrived in the UK in 1966, doubling to 12,000 in 1967 (Brown, 2012). With this increase, the Government was called upon to immediately curtail the number of immigrants entering Britain (Qureshi, 1968), resulting in the passing of an amended Commonwealth Immigrants Act in 1968. This stated that “only individuals, or their children or grandchildren, born, naturalized or adopted in the United Kingdom could enter the country” (Hansen, 1968, p.821). The 1968 Commonwealth Immigrants act created a huge human problem, described as a breach of international law due to its attempt to deprive British nationals from entering the country they had a right of citizenship to (TNA, FCO 53/25). The effect of this act was to “create a group of citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies who did not have an immediate right of entry” (El-Enany, 2020, p.109) to the UK, despite only possessing British passports, again exposing racial undercurrents. Upon Kenya’s Independence, white settlers were able to return to Britain, meanwhile the Kenyan Asians were seemingly forgotten (TNA, FCO 53/25), leaving them in a vulnerable position in a country that was growing increasingly hostile towards them.
Interviewee I recounted a difficult experience as a direct result of the passing of the 1968 Act. Their brother “could not get to Britain [from Kenya], because they would not give him a Visa, to come and join the family”, when the Interviewee’s father passed away in the UK. Over time, the issue was resolved to allow some Kenyan Asians to make their way to the UK firstly, as a result of a previous decision to “base immigration control on a passport’s issuing authority… and, second, the granting of Independence to Kenya in the absence of inclusive local citizenship” (Hansen, 1999, p.834). The migration of the Kenyan Asians was so influential that it resulted in the redefinition of the citizenship of all non-white British citizens living abroad (Patel, 2021).
As British citizens, the Kenyan Asians had access to Local Authority housing, however, due to existing familial ties within the UK, many of the Kenyan Asians joined their relatives who were already settled in Britain, putting little to no pressure on local housing provision (TNA, CK 3/47). The arrival of the Kenyan Asians made little impact on other welfare services, with community councils actually concerned that the new arrivals were not making sufficient use of the help available to them. The Kenyan Asians dispelled the view that immigrants place a burden on social and welfare services (TNA, CK 3/47). However, the initial arrival to a new country is only the first chapter in a long story to follow. Migrants from all places have a lot of work to do to ensure the establishment of new homes and social circles, ensuring that they comfortably adopt their new identity whilst maintaining their place in the diaspora they belong to, and this task of becoming secure in one’s identity can take generations (Brown, 2006).
East African migration in the late 1960s was said to be “mainly noticeable only to Asian immigrant communities” (TNA, CK 3/47), due to the immigrant families knowing relatives that they could stay with. Interviewee F described this help as “paramount”. The general trend of staying with family before obtaining permanent residence was corroborated by my interviewees. Thirteen out of fifteen respondents stated that knowing people already in the UK, helped them to settle in this country. Interviewee A explained that their family lived with their father’s Chacha Ji temporarily, before buying a house of their own. Interviewee B described living with relatives for a few months before finding their feet. This temporary arrangement of staying with family was further mentioned by Interviewees C, J, L, N and O, highlighting the importance of family units for the resettling and establishment of the Kenyan Asian community in Britain, providing a more personal explanation as to why the arrival of these migrants did not put pressure on local housing or welfare provision. It is worth noting, however, that those individuals who acquired their own lodgings rather than staying with family, encountered discrimination. Interviewee G described the only landladies that considered taking Indians in as Polish, “and they charged you a bit more” than they would charge a white individual. This highlights that although the Kenyan Asians were British citizens and thus had access to housing, they were still limited by the racist attitudes in society. In this sense, the Kenyan Asian community were largely fortunate to have had relatives to receive them in this country enabling them to save up and buy their own properties, otherwise the prosperity of the community would likely have been limited.
Upon arrival to the UK, the Kenyan Asians tended to accept jobs below their abilities, taking any reasonable job (TNA, CK 3/47; TNA LAB 8/3409). Interviewee D spoke about how they worked as a teacher in Kenya, yet could not get a teaching job here, and so it became “a question of getting some income in”, so they started working at a department store until they could find something better. This was not a unique experience. Interviewee L worked in the Kenyan Civil Service, but on arrival to the UK, initially took up a factory job. Additionally, ladies who were housewives in Kenya, took up manual or shop assistant jobs (TNA, LAB 8/3409). Interviewee A discussed their mother’s job as a home machinist as a way to make money whilst taking care of the family. This idea of working to suit the family life was reverberated in conversation with Interviewee M, who was formerly a housewife, but took on a factory job in the evenings, before switching their hours to suit the time that “the children were at school”. Interviewee J explained to me that their father had been an engineer in Kenya, whilst their mother was a housewife, but on arrival to this country, both became factory workers, before their father could find a job more suited to his ability. Here we can see a real shift in lifestyle for the Kenyan Asians. These issues extended to education, with Interviewee G explaining that when they “came here, I was told my education wasn’t recognised. And yet…I had O Levels which were…the examination was set by Oxford and Cambridge board”, but because these exams had been taken in Kenya, their qualifications were not recognised and they were told that “the only job available was at a grade of a labourer”, highlighting the discrimination these individuals faced on arrival to this country.
What is evident from these personal stories is that the transition from Kenya to the UK was rocky. Their educational and career experiences were not recognised by British institutions, embodying the racial discrimination that accompanied their arrival. The Kenyan Asians became somewhat limited by their choice to come to Britain when they found their qualifications to be disregarded. However, what can also be drawn from this overview of the Kenyan Asian experience of leaving Kenya, coming to the UK, and initial experiences of employment, is that these twice migrants capitalised off of their unique position. Their relatively affluent lifestyle in Kenya, with an upper hand over the Black population through being the middle layer between the White man and the Black man (Cosemans, 2021), gave them the advantage of strong English language skills, and an experience of being economically strong. This resulted in large numbers of them becoming homeowners soon after arrival, and in the Kenyan Asians being “more socially mobile and confident” than other immigrant populations, allowing them to eventually thrive after an initial struggle (TNA, CK 3/47).
Despite a difficult start, these twice migrants were able to work their way up, through experience, and English-speaking skills, to eventually obtain jobs that matched their skills (Aiyar, 2015). For example, Interviewee J’s father eventually “moved on to…British airways, where he was an engineer”, which was much more in line with his ability. Similarly, whilst Interviewee D initially accepted that they had to focus on having some form of income, they were later offered a job within the Civil Service, which was an upgrade from their previous shop work.
Over the course of this chapter, I have looked at the political situation in Kenya leading up to and after independence, resulting in the Kenyan Asians leaving the country en masse, why the Kenyan Asians chose Britain and why Britain was obliged to take them in. I have also considered the transition from British subject to British citizen in both legal and social terms. This chapter provides a solid grounding to now consider how these experiences impacted the self-identity of the Kenyan Asians in Britain.
3. Self-identity
This chapter will discuss intergenerational differences in self-identity, and in the number of languages spoken between those who spent large portions of their childhood and young adulthood in Kenya, and those who spent a fraction of their childhood there. I am exploring this because the central question of this dissertation revolves around the resettlement as experienced by the Kenyan Asian diaspora, and whether generational differences had an impact on their settlement in the UK and the subsequent development of their self-identities.
Bhachu (1985) highlights that a sense of not belonging to a particular place, neither East Africa nor India, for the twice migrant population is often discussed by the younger generation of Sikhs from East Africa. In my interviews, I found that this conflict of identity was not unique to Sikhs, but rather was experienced by a large portion of respondents who arrived in the UK as young adults or children, regardless of religion. The older generation, on the other hand, seemingly felt that they were able “to merge into the British background” (TNA, LAB 8/3409) seamlessly, with few vocal complaints made in interviews, and a willingness to identify as British; something that the younger respondents were reluctant to do.
For the purposes of this discussion, I identify Interviewees A, B, D, F, G, I, J, K N and O as belonging to the younger generation of Kenyan Indians who moved to the UK in the 1960s and 70s, and Interviewees C, E, H, L, M as belonging to the older generation.
There are clear intergenerational differences in the number of languages spoken by my interviewees, with the older generation able to speak 5 or more languages, with the exception of Interviewee C, who only speaks 4. Amongst the younger generation, there is a clear split between those who spent most or all of their childhood in Kenya, moving to the UK as young adults, versus those who moved as young children, with only two exceptions: Interviewee I and Interviewee K. Those who moved to the UK in adulthood speak 4 or more languages (other than Interviewee I, who speaks 3), and those who moved to the UK as young children, speak 3 or fewer languages (other than Interviewee K, who speaks 4). I asked those who moved in childhood to tell me how many languages their parents spoke, with their parents speaking between 4 and 6 languages. From these differences I have inferred that learning languages other than one’s mother tongue, and English, was less important once the Kenyan Indians had arrived in the UK, hence the disparity in the number of languages spoken between the generations.
The Kenyan Indian community was praised for their knowledge of the English language, with school-age children needing less English language classes, presenting “less difficulty to the local education authority as compared with most of the children of Indian and Pakistani origin” (TNA, CK 3/47). This proficiency in English enabled the Kenyan Asians to be “more socially mobile and confident” (TNA, CK 3/47) than other immigrant groups, contributing to the success of the community. It seems logical to me from observing these intergenerational differences in the number of languages spoken within the community, that those who moved as young children simply had to focus on being able to speak English, and their mother tongue, as a way of assimilating with the host population, whilst retaining their original regional Indian identity through knowledge of languages such as Punjabi or Gujrati. A clear change was identified in the closeness of the community when they were in Kenya, versus the UK, and this is a further reason for the reduction in the number of languages spoken by the youngest interview respondents. Interviewee N spoke of how “everyone was…united in Kenya…everybody was everybody’s ‘Aunty’”, a figure to be respected and to look up to, thus it is hardly surprising that these individuals took the time to learn languages other than English and their own mother tongues, given they had close relationships with those of different South Asian regional identities.
In the context of decolonisation and the development of the postcolonial identity, the Kenyan Indians faced an identity crisis, resulting in the community creating their own “cultures and ethnic identities” (Said, 1994, p.433), that not all members of the same community align with, and I view these differences to be explained by the generation one is from. It is understood that “double-lives are led in the postcolonial world” (Bhabha, 2004, p.306) as a result of migration patterns and empire. This is exemplified by the Kenyan Indians, with their identity label used for the purposes of this dissertation, hinting at the idea that they are different from Indians who moved directly from India, suggesting a sort of hybridity between being Kenyan and being Indian, that only applies to this community as a result of their historical migration pattern (Werbner, 2003).
When asked whether they felt British, the older generation seemed to find this an easy question to answer, with Interviewee E stating “Of course, yes. I am Indian British”, and Interviewee M explaining to me that “when we came here, we were British, so we are British now”. When asked about how they self-identify, being British was not the most common response among the older generation, with Interviewees E and L identifying as Punjabi Sikh, Interviewee C identifying as British Indian, Interviewee M identifying as solely Indian, and Interviewee H identifying as British, citing the reason for this as their possession of British citizenship. Thus, whilst all members of the older generation that I interviewed stated that they did feel British, this did not lead to one homogenous self-identity among the group. This raised the question of whether the respondents stated they felt British simply by virtue of progressing from being a British subject living under colonial rule in Kenya, to becoming a British citizen by virtue of living in the UK (Gorman, 2002).
The question of feeling British was met much more tentatively amongst the younger generation. Interviewee B declared that they feel British because they “spent more of my life now in UK than anywhere else”, whilst Interviewee K declared they feel “One-hundred percent” British, similar to Interviewee N who said, “I think I’ve always felt British”. However, the remaining respondents from the younger generation could not give such definitive answers. One such response that stuck out to me was from Interviewee G, who stated that they feel like “a man of no roots”, due to not feeling Indian or British. Interviewee F touched upon the transition between arriving in the UK and having settled here, explaining that they “feel British now, but back then, no”. Interviewees D and J state that they consider themselves to be Indian, whilst Interviewee I detailed the difficulty in fully identifying as British, concluding that “sadly, no”, they don’t feel British. Interviewee O definitively told me that they “never thought [sic] myself as British”, as did Interviewee J who felt as though the UK “is just not really home”. The younger generation had a wider range of self-identities, with majority of them combining the British identity with either their faith or their Indian origin, showing a level of retention of an imagined ‘homeland’ to which they feel they belong, highlighting the trauma of having been away from that for so long that they now experience a conflict of identity, as is embodied by their self-identities (Rahemtullah, 2010), in stark contrast to the older generation. Interviewee O explicitly identified themselves as a “Sikh African”. Interviewee N simply described their identity as “a bit of a mish mash”, owing to their origins lying in India, but by virtue of being born in Kenya and spending most of their time in the UK, they found it hard to pinpoint just one identity point, and reflecting on the interview responses gathered, this is a conflict that plagues the entire community.
These differences between the older and younger generations in the number of languages spoken, a feeling of Britishness, and individual self-identity left me wondering how they had come about. Having asked my respondents whether they were selective about who they surround themselves with (whether they preferred to associate with those of the same or a similar self-identity), none of them said that this was something they looked to do. However, I did gain an insight into how the East African Asian community viewed themselves to be different to Asians who had migrated to the UK directly from their countries of origin. This is partly due to the fact that the East African (specifically Kenyan) Asian community was strongly established before individual families moved to the UK, and so these ties were kept strong (Bhachu, 1985). Interviewee A spoke of the “cultural difference with the experience of East Africans and Indians”, owing to the more affluent, or European, lifestyle of the Kenyan Indians (Trovão, 2012), in relation to the Indian community. Interviewees D and F spoke about the connection between fellow East African Asians, due to being able to “relate more to them”, and for Interviewee D, their self-described “close friend[s], acquaintance[s], tends to be from East Africa”. Interviewee F spoke about how when they meet fellow “East Africans…[they] will straight away try and connect with them”, and I view this to be due to the comfort in the familiarity of experiences and lifestyles, as the Kenyan Indians, on arrival to the UK, soon realised that the host population was generally unwilling to provide support, and so the best way to find support was to look to those who share language and cultural commonality with you, and thus we see the growth in the kinship and ties of the Kenyan Indian community (Ballard, 2008). Interviewee D recounted a story that consolidates this idea, whereby they went to a local Hindu temple and “met this Indian guy and his wife…then through the course of the conversation realised they are from East Africa…and we exchanged addresses…then we became the best of friends”. Simple as that; a conversation that began as a result of a cultural commonality created a lifelong friendship, and had I had the scope to speak to more participants, I am certain that more stories like this would come to light.
The older generation of interviewees seemed, overall, to be much more certain of who they were and where they came from, but this certainty did not carry through into the younger generations, who either spent their childhood or young adulthood in the UK. Interviewee I arrived in the UK in 1966 at the age of 18 and spoke of how their “initial experience in Britain was being welcomed…But my latter experiences…I suppose discrimination increased”. They spoke about their time as a doctor, when “the surgery door got sprayed by National Front with National Front signs…we washed it off, but it leaves a mark”, thus it is hardly surprising that Interviewee I found a conflict within feeling British. Interviewee I also spoke about how their younger relatives “would say… ‘we won the football!’…I find it very hard to say, ‘we won the football’, I’ll just say ‘Britain won the football’”, perfectly summarising this conflict of identity, despite having lived in the UK for so long. It is evident that these encounters with the National Front and experiences of racism have influenced the self-identity of the younger generation. For example, Interviewee G’s response to my question of how they self-identify, sadly included what they were called by the general population, or how they were perceived: “generally on the street you’re seen as Indian. At one point you’re seen as ‘Paki’”, highlighting how the younger generation internalised the perceptions of the host population.
It is possible that the older generation felt more secure in their British identity due to their tumultuous journey to becoming citizens as was discussed in the previous chapter. Hostile attitudes towards the arrival of the Kenyan Asians were encouraged by the fear that there were too many ‘coloured’ people settling in Britain (Patel, 2021). At the same time as facing these hostile reactions in Britain, the Kenyan Asians were unwanted in Kenya, pushed out by policies of Africanisation as is widely explored by the literature. Thus, once Britain accepted them as citizens, the older generation were bound to accept their newfound British identity, and proudly align themselves with it; after all, if they did not accept this identity, they would have no sense of belonging or knowledge of who they are. For the younger generation on the other hand, spending more time growing up in Britain and being exposed to regular discrimination due to their ethnicity and cultural origins, they were made to feel as though they did not quite belong here, with Interviewee A describing themselves growing up and feeling “distinctly different to the white kids”. In feeling different to those who have a British identity, it is hardly surprising that the younger generation were more reluctant to declare that they felt British. These causes for the intergenerational differences will be further explored in the chapter that follows.
In this chapter, I have outlined the intergenerational differences observed from my interviews, relating to self-identity, the number of languages spoken, and feelings of Britishness amongst the older and younger generations within the Kenyan Asian community. This paves the way to now discuss the explanations for these intergenerational differences, due to the different experiences of the generations within the diaspora.
4. Inter-generational differences explored
The previous chapters have looked at the reasons that the Kenyan Asians left Kenya and came to live in the UK, the moment of arrival, and the differences in generational self-identity and the number of languages spoken within the Kenyan Asian community that has now settled in Britain. This final chapter will further explore the reasons for the intergenerational differences outlined in the previous chapter, now considering the context of life in Britain in the years that followed their arrival, and the role that racism, discrimination, and right-wing politics played in it, and how these factors affected the Kenyan Indian diaspora, rounding off my answer to why the resettlement of the Kenyan Indians in the UK resulted in these intergenerational differences.
The issue of race exploded onto the political scene in the UK in the late 1960s (Spencer, 1997), coinciding with the mass arrival of the Kenyan Indians, and the formative years of the younger generation of these migrants. It seems that the discrimination these individuals faced, resulted in conflicts of self-identity that impact them to this day. Racial tensions in Britain are a lasting legacy of British imperialism (Tabili, 1994), thus it is unsurprising that there was widespread hostility towards mass Asian immigration after mass decolonisation in the global South (Spencer, 1997). After this period of decolonisation, the previously colonised populations were relabelled as ‘immigrants’ rather than British subjects or Commonwealth citizens, defining them in isolation to the host population; as individuals who arrived after British society was already complete, resulting in their social isolation (Smith, 2009). This period of time saw a hardening of attitudes towards non-White immigrants, allowing far-right ideologies to fester (Gorman, 2002). Enoch Powell was a significant figure at this time, representing far-right ideas, and vocalising them. Powell declared that “Britain’s colour problem, which has long been simmering below the surface, is now the top domestic issue as a direct result of Asian immigration from Kenya” (Collings et Al, 1991, cited in Aiyar, 2015, p.276). Powell’s rhetoric shifted the central political spectrum to the right, also shifting public opinion, creating an anti-immigrant sentiment that would prove dangerous for the Kenyan Indians and other immigrant populations (Crines et Al, 2015; Higgs, 2016). There was widespread fear in the late 1960s that the large number of Indians arriving in Britain would “throw out of balance” the nation’s ability to socially and economically “absorb” and “assimilate” its citizens “without undue friction”” (TNA, FCO 41/790 cited in, Aiyar, 2015, p.276-277); a fear that was exacerbated by the media, with headlines urging control on who could and could not enter the country (TNA, DO 232/109), resulting in racial hostility towards immigrant populations. The political right blamed immigrants for the decline of the country, using metaphors of floods of people, to stir up resentment and fear of the new arrivals (Tomlinson, 2017).
The National Front was a prominent group at this time, inspired by Britain’s imperial past (Higgs, 2016), directing hatred towards non-white people, as was detailed by a number of my interviewees. For example, Interviewee I spoke about the growth of the National Front resulting in it becoming “quite common to be…called a ‘Paki’, and to ‘go home’. And that has carried on ever since”. These experiences of racism implicated the perceived self-identity of the Kenyan Indians in the UK and is a principal reason for the intergenerational differences in self-identity that I have uncovered, and further intergenerational differences can be seen in terms of whether my respondents felt welcomed in the UK, and in their openness to share stories of discrimination.
A number of other respondents addressed the transition in societal attitudes from when they first arrived, compared to later on. As more Kenyan Asians arrived, the host population grew more hostile. Interviewee B who moved to the UK in 1966 at the age of 20, spoke of there being no “noticeable welcome or unwelcome”, when they arrived in the UK in 1966, however they described that their later experiences with the host population as leading them “to think that there were certain groups of people who didn’t welcome us”. Interviewee D arrived in the UK in 1975 at the age of 24 and spoke of not knowing what racism was until “people used to openly call you names and swear at you…that was quite an eye opener”. Interviewee F moved to the UK at age 17 in 1975 and spoke of there being “a lot of racial prejudice”. These are individuals who spent their formative years in the UK, and these experiences are sure to have had an impact on their self-identity now, and whether or not they feel British. This extends to those who moved as children, with Interviewee J, who moved to the UK at the age of 5, saying they did not feel welcome due to there being “a lot of racism at that time. A lot of National Front, a lot of skinheads”, and they viewed this anti-immigrant sentiment to be due to “the whole immigration from Kenya, India”; something that they were a part of, and have perhaps internalised, resulting in a struggle to identify as British.
The older generation, on the other hand, all expressed that they felt welcome upon arrival to the UK, with Interviewee M describing how they “didn’t have any problem, everybody welcomed us”, and Interviewee E detailing that they were “very welcomed, definitely. They are nice people”. What is particularly noteworthy, is that Interviewee C and H had moved to the UK just after, and just before the 1960s and 70s, respectively. However, they both still expressed that they felt no sense of unwelcome, with Interviewee C explaining that they were “in very privileged circumstances”, and so had no means of experiencing explicit unwelcome, and Interviewee H explained that there was, “nothing major to worry about”.
The clear intergenerational differences identified by my research are that the older generation feels more secure in their British identity and felt more welcomed in this country than the younger generation. It seems to me that these intergenerational differences in self-identity and feelings of Britishness are due to the younger generation spending their formative childhood and young adulthood years in the UK, exposed to racist abuse, social isolation, and a heavily right-wing political context. This reason for the intergenerational differences in self-identity is supported by the understanding that one’s self-identity is intimately linked to the experiences they have had, and how they have been treated by society as a whole (Brah, 1996). This relates to a key point that I made in the previous chapter; the idea that the older generation readily accepted their new British identity, perhaps not only because they had no other identity point (in being pushed out of Kenya with minimal ties to their South Asian countries of origin), but also for the sake of an easy and smooth assimilation process with the host population in Britain.
As an extension of this point, Brah (1999) discusses the defining of Englishness and Britishness, and what it means to be English or British, and that this defining was done in opposition to the non-white population, excluding the Kenyan Indians from comfortably identifying as British. Meanwhile, the older generation did not experience schooling in this country, nor did they all have their first experiences of work here. They came as fully established adults, with families and a wealth of experiences, perhaps allowing them to have a thicker skin, preventing them from internalising these difficult times, and that is a crucial distinction between the generations, explaining these differences.
Conclusion
This dissertation has sought to answer the question of why the resettlement of the Kenyan Indians in Britain during the 1960s and 1970s resulted in intergenerational differences in self-identity among the diaspora. My approach led me to formulate an answer to this by looking less at the widely covered topics and issues, but instead at the longer-term impact of this migration pattern, including people’s oral histories of this resettlement as an integral part of my research.
Overall, I discovered that the expulsion of the Indians from Kenya and their subsequent choice to come to Britain during this period of time was hugely influenced by familial ties and having relatives in the UK who could provide the migrants with a home before they became financially stable enough to look after themselves (Brown, 2006; Trovão, 2012). These ties of kinship allowed for a smooth transition for the older generation, from being a British subject, to becoming a British citizen. This comfort and sense of being settled contributed largely to the intergenerational differences this research has uncovered. The older generation in comparison to the younger generation, was much more secure in their British identity, and this can be attributed to their possession of no other identity, the sense of welcome they felt upon arrival to Britain, and the fact that they were less impacted by discrimination than the younger generation, owing to the fact that they did not spend their formative years in a country that viewed them as outsiders (Smith, 2009), meanwhile the younger generation were exposed to these attitudes through schooling and the start of their careers.
In recent years, issues of race, ethnicity and identity have come to the fore of political and activist circles alike, resulting in a rethinking of these issues. Simultaneously, a revisiting of Britain’s colonial past has occurred, resulting in a new understanding that Britain’s colonial past impacts contemporary British, and international, society (Sanghera, 2021). These discoveries and issues, however, usually encompass a wide range of identities and colonial histories, lumping together the entire imperial project and its aftermath upon decolonisation, and what this meant in terms of post-colonial migration patterns (Patel, 2021), rather than a direct focus on individual diasporas and communities. The East African Indian community has been particularly neglected in this revisiting of history, and thus in this dissertation I have delved deeper to tell and share individual stories, with a specific focus on the Kenyan Indians in an attempt to do justice to their experience. My work highlights the fact that colonialism, decolonisation, and resettlement are not experienced in the same way by all members of a single, specific community, let alone all ethnic minority groups.
What this dissertation does not acknowledge, is the crisis that was to follow the mass exit of the Kenyan Indians from Kenya, which was the exodus of the Ugandan Asians against the backdrop of Uganda’s independence. The Ugandan Asians came over in much larger numbers, resulting in strain being placed on the state and the services it could make available, and increasing hostility towards immigrants amongst the British population (Bailkin, 2018). Thus, this dissertation does not consider the growth of the East African Asian community in Britain with the arrival of the Ugandans. However, the responses of my interviewees hint at what this meant for relationships within the community, and how they related to one another on the basis of their shared East African history, irrespective of which East African country they came from.
This dissertation provides an opening to look at and answer broader questions of ethnic minority identity, how these identities impact political affiliation or voting patterns, and what this means for contemporary multicultural Britain.
Bibliography
Primary Sources:
Archives:
CK 3/47, Kenyan Asian Survey: Conducted through the Community Relations Councils. The National Archives: Kew
CO 822/1859, Asian Politics in Kenya. The National Archives: Kew
DO 175/92, Immigration of Asians from East Africa. The National Archives: Kew
DO 213/45, Asians in East Africa. The National Archives: Kew
DO 232/109, Kenyan Asians. The National Archives: Kew
FCO 41/790, Political Aspects of Applications for UK citizenship of East African Asians to European Commission of Human Rights. The National Archives: Kew
FCO 53/25, Nationality Entry into the U.K. The National Archives: Kew
HO 376/125, Immigration: Asian Immigrants from East Africa. The National Archives: Kew
LAB 8/3409, Employment Situation of Kenya Asians in Great Britain. The National Archives: Kew
Interviews:
Interview conducted on 03/12/2021
· Interviewee A
Interview conducted on 16/12/2021
· Interviewee O
Interviews conducted on 03/01/2022
· Interviewee J
· Interviewee K
· Interviewee L
· Interviewee M
Interviews conducted on 04/01/2022
· Interviewee C
· Interviewee E
· Interviewee I
Interview conducted on 12/01/2022
· Interviewee G
Interview conducted on 13/01/2022
· Interviewee F
Interview conducted on 14/01/2022
· Interviewee D
Interview conducted on 19/01/2022
· Interviewee B
Secondary Sources
Aiyar, S. (2015) Indians in Kenya: The Politics of Diaspora. London and Cambridge, Massachusetts
Bailkin, J. (2018) Unsettled: Refugee Camps and the Making of Multicultural Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Ballard, M. (2008) ‘Inside and Outside: Contrasting Perspectives on the Dynamics of Kinship and Marriage in Contemporary South Asian Transnational Networks’, in R. Grillo (ed.), The Family in Question: Immigrant and Ethnic Minorities in Multicultural Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp.37-71
Bhabha, H. (2004) The Location of Culture. Oxon and New York: Routledge
Bhachu, P. (1985) Twice Migrants: East African Sikh settlers in Britain. London: Tavistock
Brah, A. (1978) ‘South Asian teenagers in Southall: Their perceptions of marriage, family and ethnic identity’ Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 6(3): pp.197-206
Brah, A. (1996) Cartographies of Diaspora: contesting identities. London: Routledge
Brah, A. (1999) ‘The Scent of Memory: Strangers, Our Own, and Others’ Feminist Review 61(1): pp.4-26
Brown, J.M. (2006) Global South Asians: Introducing the modern diaspora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Collings, R., and Powell, J.E. (1991) Reflections of a Statesman: The Selected Writings and Speeches of Enoch Powell. London: Bewell Publications
Cosemans, S. (2021) ‘Undesirable British East African Asians. Nationality, Statelessness, and Refugeehood after Empire’ Immigrants & minorities (volume and issue number unavailable): pp.1-30 [Online Access: https://doi-org.ezproxy01.rhul.ac.uk/10.1080/02619288.2021.1967752] [Date Accessed: 03/02/2022]
Crines A., Heppell, T., and Hill, M. (2015) ‘Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ Speech: A Rhetorical Political Analysis’ British Politics 11(1): pp.72-94 [Online Access: doi:10.1057/bp.2015.13 ] [Date Accessed: 17/12/2021]
Dickinson, J. (2015) ‘Chronicling Kenyan Asian Diasporic Histories: ‘Newcomers’, ‘Established’ Migrants, and the Post-Colonial Practices of Time-Work’ Population, Space and Place 22(8) [Online Access: https://doi-org.ezproxy01.rhul.ac.uk/10.1002/psp.1951] [Date Accessed: 03/02/2022]
Edgar, D. (1977) ‘Racism, fascism and the politics of the National Front’ Race and Class 19(2): pp.111-131 [Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1177/030639687701900201] [Date Accessed: 27/01/2022]
El-Enany, N. (2020) (B)ordering Britain: Law, Race and Empire. Manchester: Manchester University Press
Gorman, D. (2002) ‘Wider and Wider Still?: Racial Politics, Intra-Imperial Immigration and the Absence of an Imperial Citizenship in the British Empire’ Journal of Colonialism & Colonial History 3(3): page numbers unavailable [Online Access: doi:10.1353/cch.2002.0066] [Date Accessed: 06/12/2021]
Hansen, R. (1999) ‘The Kenyan Asians, British Politics, and the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1968’ The Historical Journal 42(3): pp.809-834 [Online Access: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3020922] [Date Accessed: 25/01/2022]
Higgs, M. (2016) ‘From the street to the state: making anti-fascism anti-racist in 1970s Britain’ Race and Class 58(1): pp.66-84 [Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396816643040] [Date Accessed 27/01/2022]
Mangat, J.S. (1969) A History of the Asians in East Africa, 1886-1945
Mishra, V. (1996) ‘The Diasporic Imaginary: Theorizing the Indian Diaspora’ Textual Practice 10(3): pp.421-447 [Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1080/09502369608582254] [Date Accessed: 16/12/2021]
Qureshi, K. (1968) ‘Kenyan Asians and the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1968’ Pakistan Horizon 21(2): pp.134-146 [Online Access: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41392920] [Date Accessed: 03/02/2022]
Rahemtullah, O.S. (2010) ‘Interrogating “Indianness”: Identity and Diasporic Consciousness Among Twice Migrants” Anthurium: A Caribbean Studies Journal 7(1): pp.1-12
Said, E.W. (1994) Culture and Imperialism. London: Vintage
Sanghera, S. (2021) Empireland: How Imperialism has Shaped Modern Britain. International: Viking
Patel, I.S. (2021) We’re Here Because You Were There: Immigration and the End of Empire. London and New York: Verso, 2021
Smith, A.M. (2009) New Right discourse on race and sexuality: Britain, 1968-1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Spencer, I.R.G., 1997. British Immigration Policy Since 1939, London: Routledge.
Tabili, L. (1994) ‘The Construction of Racial Difference in Twentieth-Century Britain: The Special Restriction (Coloured Alien Seamen) Order, 1925.’ The Journal of British studies, 33(1), pp.54–98 [Online Access: https://www.jstor.org/stable/175850] [Date Accessed: 06/12/2021]
Tomlinson, S. (2017) ‘Enoch Powell, empires, immigrants and education’ Race Ethnicity and Education 21(1): pp.1-14 [Online Access: https://doi-org.ezproxy01.rhul.ac.uk/10.1080/13613324.2017.1365055] [Date Accessed: 03/02/2022]
Trovão, S. (2012) ‘Comparing postcolonial identity formations: legacies of Portuguese and British colonialisms in East Africa’ Journal for the Study of Race, Nation and Culture 18(3): pp.261-280 [Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.2012.661996] [Date Accessed: 01/02/2022]
Werbner, P. (2003) ‘Theorising Complex Diasporas: Purity and Hybridity in the South Asian Public Sphere in Britain’ Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 30(5): pp.895-911 [Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183042000245606] [Date Accessed: 03/02/2022]