Colonial reparations

SIR – Narendra Modi, the Indian prime minister, has endorsed the call for Britain to pay reparations for 200 years of colonial rule in his country (report, July 25).

There is no need for this. The Raj was not an embodiment of evil; it was a force for good.

India was colonised, wholly or partially, not just by the British but also by the Turks, Persians, Afghans, Portuguese, Uzbeks and Mongols.

Why does Mr Modi single out Britain – which, incidentally, has already paid reparations in terms of allowing so many people from the Indian subcontinent to come and settle in Britain – while letting off other colonisers whose rule did far more damage to India’s cultural heritage?

Randhir Singh Bains Gants Hill, Essex SIR – It seems to have evaded Mr Modi’s attention that, although there were no doubt abuses in the occupation of India by the British, the vast amount of good that came out of the Raj far outweighs the harm.

The greatest of these positives was the transport system of roads and railway, the legal and civil service and, of course, the English language, which opened the Indian subcontinent to global trade.

Raith Smith Basingstoke, Hampshire SIR – Indian opposition MP Shashi Tharoor claims that India’s share of the world’s economy dropped from 23 per cent to 4 per cent between Britain’s arrival and departure.

Could this have more to do with the Industrial Revolution and the rapid expansion of the US and European economies than Britain’s maladministration of India?

John Davy Grayshott, Hampshire SIR – We have been paying reparations for decades in the form of foreign aid.

Ted Shorter Hildenborough, Kent