One Has to Try Hard to Go to Hell. People Leave Religion Because of Religious People. Dr Shabir Choudhry,

 One Has to Try Hard to Go to Hell.

People Leave Religion Because of Religious People. 

Dr Shabir Choudhry, May 2026, London

A friend once told me about a young boy who was playing football when he suddenly realised it was time to go to the mosque for his religious lesson.

Without going home to change, he ran straight to the mosque wearing his football kit.

The Imam looked at him with anger and shouted:

“Is this how you come to the house of Allah? If you come dressed like this again, Allah will send you to hell!”

The boy lowered his head in humiliation and quietly walked away.

When he reached home, his mother noticed the sadness on his face and asked what had happened.

With tearful eyes, he replied:

“The Imam Sahib said Allah will send me to hell because I went to the mosque in my football clothes.”

The mother remained silent for a few moments. Then she gently placed her hand on her son’s head and said:

“My son, Allah does not look for excuses to throw people into hell. Allah is Most Merciful. Human beings are the best of His creation.”

She continued:

“Tell the Imam Sahib tomorrow that children are not sent to hell for wearing football clothes. To go to hell, a person has to work very hard.”

Then she explained what truly hardens the human heart:

• Killing innocent people
• Abusing girls and boys who come to mosques to learn Islam
• Deceiving people, especially in the name of religion
• Spreading lies and hatred
• Denying people their rights
• Stealing from the weak and the poor
• Seizing the property of orphans
• Creating division, extremism, and violence
• Treating neighbours with cruelty
• Using religion to humiliate and control others

And then she said something even more powerful:

“Even after committing terrible sins, if a person sincerely repents, Allah may still forgive him. His mercy is greater than our sins.”

That mother understood Islam better than many who preach it.

A few years ago, another incident deeply moved me.

It was a Thursday evening. After Maghrib prayers, there was to be a religious lecture at the local mosque. A well-known scholar from the city had been invited to speak.

That same evening, my friend’s husband received a phone call from their son, Ahad.

Months had passed since they had last heard from him properly.

“Assalamu Alaikum, Abu…”

There was hesitation in his voice.

His father immediately sat upright.

“Wa Alaikum Assalam, son. Is everything alright?”

After a few moments of silence, Ahad quietly asked:

“If I come with you tonight to listen to the lecture… would that be okay?”

His mother later said she began to cry in the kitchen the moment she heard those words.

For years, Ahad had drifted away from religion and religious people.

He had long hair, and tattoos covered parts of his arms. Also, a small stud shone in his ear.

Late-night gatherings, motorbikes, reckless company — and behind all of it, a deep emptiness that nobody seemed willing to understand.

People in the neighbourhood had already labelled him:

“A spoiled boy.”

Whenever he passed near the mosque, some people would look at him with contempt.

“Look at today’s youth…”

“Astaghfirullah, just look at his appearance…”

But the truth was very different.

Inside, he was a soft-hearted young man who had simply lost his way.

His father warmly replied:

“Come, son. Come exactly as you are.”

Then Ahad asked a question that broke his parents’ hearts.

“What should I wear?”

It was not really a question about clothes.

It was a question born from fear. A fear of rejection.

A fear of humiliation. A fear of being told that he did not belong in the house of Allah.

His father replied softly:

“Come as you are. You do not need to become an angel before turning towards Allah.”

That night, when Ahad arrived, his mother noticed something painful.

Despite the warm weather, he was wearing a full-sleeved shirt.

He was trying to hide his tattoos.

Not from Allah.

From religious people.

During the drive to the mosque, silence filled the car.

Then Ahad quietly asked:

“Abu… what if people stare at me?”

His father paused before replying:

“My son, when someone comes to the house of Allah, it is Allah who looks at him first — not people.”

When they reached the mosque courtyard, people sat in groups talking while waiting for the lecture to begin.

Ahad sat beside an elderly man named Haris Sahib, a member of the mosque committee. He had a white beard and simple clothes. But a heart large enough to see pain beyond appearances.

A few minutes later, Haris Sahib noticed part of Ahad’s tattoo visible beneath his sleeve.

His father became nervous because he expected criticism, perhaps an unwelcome lecture. Perhaps humiliation, which was not required.

Instead, Haris Sahib smiled gently and asked:

“Did you design these yourself?”

Ahad looked surprised. “Yes”, he replied.

“You must be an artist,” Haris Sahib said warmly. “Allah has given you talent.”

That was all. Just one sentence, but sometimes a single kind sentence can bring a person back from very far away.

For the first time in years, Ahad’s father saw innocence return to his son’s face.

Then the lecture began. During the speech, the scholar suddenly said:

“Sometimes the person closest to Allah is the very person whom society considers the greatest sinner.”

Ahad slowly lifted his head and listened carefully.

Then the scholar added:

“If a broken person has finally gathered the courage to take one step towards Allah, do not push him away. Perhaps it took him years to reach this door.”

That night, Ahad quietly cried.

After the gathering ended, he sat silently in the mosque courtyard for a long time.

Then he asked his father:

“Abu… does Allah really forgive people like me?”

His father’s eyes filled with tears. He replied:

“My son, sins do not take people far away from Allah as much as hopelessness does.”

That night teaches us an important lesson.

Many people move away from religion not because they hate Allah, but because the behaviour of religious people wounds them.

A harsh word can push someone away from faith for years.

A kind word can bring someone back to Allah.

If a broken person comes towards the mosque, do not judge:

• His hair,
• Her clothes,
• Their past,
• Their tattoos,
• Or their mistakes.

Because perhaps his mother has spent years crying in Tahajjud for his guidance.

And perhaps Allah loves that struggling soul more than those who sit in judgment over others.

Guidance enters hearts more through compassion than condemnation.

Religion without mercy becomes a prison.

But faith combined with kindness becomes a path back to Allah.

 

For wise women, author Diane Walls.

 

For wise women, author Diane Walls.

 

A woman arrived in a store wearing clothes that showed her body all too well. The shop owner, a wise older man, took a good look at her, asked her to sit down, looked her straight in the eye, and said something she would never forget for the rest of her life.

“Young Lady, everything that God has made valuable in this world is covered up and hard to see or find."

For example:

1. Where can you find diamonds?

• In the ground, covered and protected.

2. Where are the pearls?

• Deep in the ocean, covered and protected in a beautiful shell.

3. Where can you find gold?

• Underground, covered with layers of rock, and to get there, you have to work very hard and dig deep.

He looked at her again and said, "Your body is sacred and unique to God."

You are far more precious than gold, diamonds, and pearls; therefore, you must be covered, too.

He then added, "If you keep your precious minerals like gold, diamonds, and pearls deeply covered, a reputable mining organization” with the necessary machines, will work for years to mine those precious goods.

* First, they will contact your government (family),

* Second, sign professional contracts (marriage),

* Third, they will professionally extract those goods, and tenderly refine those precious goods. (marital life).

But if you let your minerals find themselves on top of the Earth's surface (exposed to everyone), you will always attract many illegal miners to come, exploit, illegally, and freely take those riches and leave you without the precious goods God gave you!

WOMEN, YOU ARE VALUABLE!! 

 

--

Dr Shabir Choudhry

 Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) said: "Say what is true, although it may be bitter and displeasing to people."

International Kashmir Conference, 19 May 2026. “The Jammu and Kashmir Conflict and the Role of the British Government”.

 International Kashmir Conference, 19 May 2026.

“The Jammu and Kashmir Conflict and the Role of the British Government”. 

Dr Shabir Choudhry

Organised by the United Kashmir Peoples National Party

British Parliament, Committee Room 9, Westminster.

Distinguished Members of Parliament, respected scholars, human rights defenders, political colleagues, members of the media, ladies and gentlemen,

Assalam-u-Alaikum and good evening.

First of all, I would like to thank the organisers, the United Kashmir Peoples National Party, for arranging this important conference here in the heart of British democracy. I also thank all distinguished guests who have joined us to discuss one of the oldest and most painful unresolved conflicts in the world — the Jammu and Kashmir conflict.

We are gathered here not to spread hatred, not to inflame tensions, and not to encourage violence. We are here to promote dialogue, historical understanding, justice, peace, and the democratic right of people to determine their future peacefully.

Our struggle is peaceful and political. We reject terrorism, extremism, sectarianism, and religious hatred in all forms. We believe that violence has only deepened the suffering of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and has strengthened the hands of those who benefit from instability and militarisation.

Ladies and gentlemen,

The tragedy of Jammu and Kashmir did not emerge in isolation. It is deeply connected with the end of British colonial rule in South Asia in 1947. Therefore, when we discuss the Jammu and Kashmir conflict honestly and responsibly, we must also discuss the historical role and responsibility of the British Government.

The partition of the Indian subcontinent was one of the largest and most painful political upheavals of the twentieth century. Millions were displaced. Hundreds of thousands lost their lives. Communities that had lived together for centuries suddenly became enemies.

In this hurried and poorly managed transfer of power, Jammu and Kashmir was left in a dangerous and uncertain position.

The British Government, under immense political pressure and strategic calculations, left behind unresolved territorial disputes, weak transitional arrangements, and a legacy of division that continues to haunt South Asia today.

Kashmir became one of those unresolved disputes.

The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was geographically connected to both India and the newly created Pakistan. It had religious, cultural, linguistic, and regional diversity. Yet, instead of ensuring a carefully negotiated and peaceful transition, the issue was effectively left to competing political forces, military pressures, and conflicting interpretations.

The consequences have been devastating.

Since 1947, generations of Kashmiris have lived under conflict, uncertainty, division, militarisation, political repression, displacement, and fear. Families have been divided by the Line of Control. Thousands have lost their lives. Many more have lost opportunities, dignity, and hope.

And yet, despite being the principal stakeholders, the people of Jammu and Kashmir themselves have often been excluded from meaningful decision-making processes.

Ladies and gentlemen,

When we speak about the role of the British Government, we are not here to engage in blame alone. History cannot be changed. But history can and must be understood honestly.

Britain played a central role in shaping the political structures, borders, and constitutional crises of post-colonial South Asia. Therefore, Britain also has a moral and political responsibility to support peaceful conflict resolution, human rights, democratic dialogue, and regional stability.

This responsibility does not mean interference or taking sides with one state against another. Rather, it means supporting principles of justice, peace, and international law.

It means encouraging India and Pakistan to move beyond hostility and militarisation.

It means recognising the suffering and aspirations of the people of all regions of Jammu and Kashmir.

It means supporting democratic freedoms, human rights, freedom of expression, and peaceful political activity.

It also means rejecting the dangerous politics of religious hatred and extremism that have poisoned the region for decades.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We must also recognise an uncomfortable truth: the Jammu and Kashmir conflict has often been exploited by powerful political and military interests on all sides.

Instead of becoming a bridge of peace between South and Central Asia, Jammu and Kashmir became a battleground for nationalism, ideology, and strategic competition.

Ordinary Kashmiris paid the highest price.

Young people were pushed towards anger and hopelessness. Entire generations grew up surrounded by troops, checkpoints, suspicion, propaganda, and fear.

Violence produced more violence.

Extremism produced counter-extremism.

Hatred produced more hatred.

This cycle must end.

Our message today is clear:

The future of Jammu and Kashmir cannot be built through guns, militancy, military domination, religious extremism, or hatred against any community.

It can only be built through dialogue, democratic participation, respect for human dignity, and peaceful coexistence.

We believe in a political and peaceful struggle based on democratic values and human rights.

We believe that no solution can succeed unless it includes the genuine participation of the people of Jammu and Kashmir from all regions, religions, and political viewpoints.

Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, and others have all suffered from this conflict in different ways. Therefore, peace must belong to everyone, not just to states or elites.

Ladies and gentlemen,

The British Parliament is an appropriate place for this discussion because Britain presents itself as a defender of democracy, parliamentary traditions, and human rights.

We urge British parliamentarians, policymakers, academics, and civil society organisations to play a constructive role in promoting peace and dialogue.

We ask them to support initiatives that encourage:

• Human rights and civil liberties.
• Cross-Line of Control contact between divided families.
• Academic and cultural exchanges.
• Demilitarisation and reduction of tensions.
• Protection of minorities and vulnerable communities.
• And meaningful political engagement involving the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Most importantly, we ask the international community to listen to the voices of ordinary Kashmiris — not only to governments, military establishments, or geopolitical strategists.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Peace requires courage.

Hatred is easy.

Violence is easy.

War slogans are easy.

But reconciliation, compromise, tolerance, and coexistence require wisdom and moral strength.

Our region has already suffered too much.

South Asia cannot move towards prosperity and stability while two nuclear powers remain trapped in permanent hostility over unresolved disputes.

The people of Jammu and Kashmir deserve schools instead of fear, opportunities instead of militarisation, and dignity instead of perpetual conflict.

Before I conclude, let me say clearly:

We oppose terrorism.
We oppose religious extremism.
We oppose sectarian hatred.
We oppose violence against civilians by any actor.
And we equally oppose the denial of democratic rights and peaceful political expression.

Our struggle is for peace, justice, dignity, and the right of people to live without fear.

Many of us rightly criticise Pakistan, India, and Britain for their roles in the tragedy of Jammu and Kashmir. However, I also believe that the leadership of Jammu and Kashmir must share some responsibility for our present situation. 

At critical moments in our history, serious political mistakes were made. Some leaders aligned themselves entirely with either India or Pakistan instead of prioritising the interests and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Sadly, some also promoted policies influenced by extremism, violence, and religious hatred rather than advancing a pro-people, democratic, and peaceful vision. This, too, has contributed to our suffering and divisions.

Finally, I would like to remind everyone that history should not only be a source of pain, but also a source of lessons.

The mistakes of 1947 must not continue forever.

The responsibility of our generation is not to deepen divisions, but to build bridges.

Not to create new enemies, but to create conditions for peace.

Not to inherit hatred, but to leave behind hope for future generations.

Thank you very much.

Peace be upon you all.

 

--

Dr Shabir Choudhry

 Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) said: "Say what is true, although it may be bitter and displeasing to people."

China-US Relations After Trump’s Visit: Cooperation, Strategic Competition, and the Emerging New World Order

 

China-US Relations After Trump’s Visit:

Cooperation, Strategic Competition, and the Emerging New World Order

Dr Shabir Choudhry, 16 May 2026, London

The evolving relationship between China and the United States remains one of the most decisive factors shaping the future global order. Donald Trump’s renewed engagement with China—whether viewed as diplomatic pragmatism, strategic bargaining, or economic necessity—has once again highlighted a reality that neither side can escape despite deep rivalry, the world’s two largest powers are too interconnected for outright confrontation.

The future of China–US relations will therefore likely be determined not by total conflict or total friendship, but by a difficult balance between cooperation and competition.

This emerging balance will influence major global questions, including Taiwan, trade, artificial intelligence, Iran, the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, India, and Jammu and Kashmir.

From “Strategic Rivalry” to Managed Competition

During recent years, the dominant narrative in Washington has portrayed China as America’s principal strategic competitor. Trade wars, sanctions, restrictions on semiconductors, military alliances in the Indo-Pacific, and tensions over Taiwan intensified mistrust between the two powers.

However, despite harsh rhetoric, both sides gradually realised several important realities:

• The American economy remains deeply connected with Chinese manufacturing and supply chains.
• China still depends on access to global markets and financial stability.
• Global crises—Ukraine, Iran, energy security, climate change, AI governance, and global trade—cannot be managed without cooperation between Washington and Beijing.

Trump’s engagement signalled that even hardline American policymakers understand that permanent confrontation with China would damage the global economy and potentially destabilise the international system itself.

Thus, a “new model of great power relations” may slowly emerge—one based not on ideological friendship but on controlled strategic coexistence.

Taiwan: The Most Dangerous Flashpoint

Despite talk of cooperation, Taiwan remains the single most dangerous issue in China–US relations.

For China, Taiwan is not merely a territorial dispute; it is linked to:

• National unity
• Historical legitimacy
• Internal stability
• The end of the “Century of Humiliation”

For the United States, Taiwan has become central to Indo-Pacific strategy and the containment of Chinese military expansion.

China’s leadership appears determined to avoid immediate war if peaceful reunification remains possible. However, Beijing also believes that any permanent movement toward Taiwanese independence crosses a red line.

Washington officially follows the “One China Policy,” yet increasing military and political support for Taiwan has raised tensions.

The future likely depends on whether both powers can maintain strategic ambiguity:

• China is avoiding military escalation
• The US is avoiding formal recognition of Taiwan
• Taiwan is avoiding an outright declaration of independence

If this balance collapses, the consequences could reshape the entire world economy.

Trade, Technology, and the AI Revolution

The future struggle between China and the United States is increasingly technological rather than purely military.

China’s upcoming 15th Five-Year Plan reportedly focuses heavily on three transformative pillars:

1. AI Plus
2. Advanced Software Systems
3. Quantum Technology and Security

China understands that future global dominance will depend on:

• Artificial intelligence
• Semiconductor independence
• Cybersecurity
• Quantum communication
• Data infrastructure

Chinese planners reportedly envision an economy in which AI becomes integrated into nearly 90% of economic sectors, including:

• Manufacturing
• Logistics
• Defence
• Finance
• Healthcare
• Education
• Governance

This transformation reflects China’s belief that technological sovereignty is essential for national security.

“Data from the East, Consumption in the West”

One of China’s major strategic concepts involves relocating large-scale data centres and computational infrastructure to western and inland regions while consumption and commercial demand remain concentrated in the east.

This “East Data, West Computing” strategy serves several purposes:

• Reducing pressure on eastern coastal cities
• Expanding development into interior provinces
• Enhancing energy efficiency
• Protecting strategic infrastructure
• Strengthening digital resilience during geopolitical crises

Data has become the new strategic resource of the 21st century—similar to oil during the industrial age.

The nation that dominates:

• AI models
• Quantum encryption
• Data infrastructure
• Cloud systems
• Semiconductor ecosystems

will possess immense geopolitical influence.

Iran, China, Russia, and India: A New Diplomatic Triangle

The Iranian Foreign Minister’s visits to India, China, and Moscow reflect Tehran’s effort to navigate an increasingly multipolar world.

Iran seeks:

• Economic survival under sanctions
• Strategic balancing
• Recognition of its regional role
• Peaceful nuclear technology rights

China and Russia largely support Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy under international safeguards, while opposing Western attempts at regime isolation.

India, meanwhile, faces a delicate balancing act:

• Maintaining relations with the US
• Preserving energy ties with Iran
• Managing competition with China
• Protecting regional strategic autonomy

Iran’s growing ties with China and Russia may accelerate the emergence of a Eurasian geopolitical bloc less dependent on Western financial and security systems.

The Persian Gulf and Future Regional Administration

The Persian Gulf remains one of the world’s most strategically sensitive regions because it affects:

• Global oil supplies
• Maritime trade routes
• Energy prices
• Military balances

China increasingly prefers stability in the Gulf because:

• It depends heavily on Gulf energy
• Regional conflict threatens Belt and Road investments
• War disrupts global trade

Unlike the United States, which historically maintained military dominance in the Gulf, China appears to favour a model of shared regional security and economic interdependence.

If Iran, Gulf Arab states, China, Russia, and even India gradually move toward cooperative regional mechanisms, the Gulf may evolve from a zone of military confrontation into one of managed strategic coexistence.

However, this transformation faces major obstacles:

• US-Iran tensions
• Israel-Iran rivalry
• Sectarian conflicts
• Competition for regional leadership

Pakistan, India, and Jammu & Kashmir

China’s strategic partnership with Pakistan remains central to South Asian geopolitics.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is not merely an economic project; it has strategic implications involving:

• Trade routes
• Energy security
• Access to the Arabian Sea
• Regional influence

India views several aspects of CPEC with suspicion, particularly where routes pass through Gilgit-Baltistan, part of the wider Jammu and Kashmir dispute.

For Pakistan, Chinese support provides:

• Strategic balance against India
• Economic investment
• Diplomatic backing in international forums

For China, Pakistan offers:

• Access to the Indian Ocean
• Regional security cooperation
• Counterbalance to Indo-Pacific containment strategies

Meanwhile, India continues strengthening ties with the United States, Japan, and Western powers as part of its broader strategic calculations regarding China.

This triangular relationship—China, India, and Pakistan—will significantly shape the future of South Asia.

Jammu and Kashmir in the Emerging Global Order

The Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains deeply connected to broader regional power politics.

China’s interests in the region involve:

• Border security
• CPEC infrastructure
• Stability in Xinjiang
• Regional connectivity

India increasingly frames Kashmir as an internal matter linked to national sovereignty and counterterrorism.

Pakistan continues to emphasise:

• UN resolutions
• Self-determination
• Human rights concerns

As China rises globally and US-China competition intensifies, Kashmir may increasingly become connected to wider geopolitical alignments.

However, none of the major powers appears interested in a direct regional war between nuclear states.

This reality may eventually push all parties toward some form of long-term managed stability, even if a final political settlement remains distant.

Sadly, despite immense suffering, very few people seem willing to discuss the fundamental rights of the people of forcibly divided Jammu and Kashmir. Much attention is given to trade, resources, economic interests, and regional strategic considerations, yet the plight of families divided since 1947 is often overlooked.

This neglect and sense of injustice can, at times, push some hot-headed individuals toward acts of violence in an attempt to draw the attention of the international community. Such actions are then condemned as terrorism, leading concerned states to introduce even harsher security policies, which frequently make life more difficult for the ordinary suffering people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Toward a Multipolar World

The global order is clearly moving away from complete American unipolar dominance toward a more complex multipolar system.

Key emerging centres of power include:

• China
• The United States
• Russia
• India
• Regional coalitions in the Gulf and Eurasia

The future international system may not be based purely on ideology but on overlapping interests, technological competition, economic interdependence, and strategic bargaining.

China’s long-term vision appears focused on:

• Technological supremacy
• Economic resilience
• Internal stability
• Multipolar diplomacy
• Strategic patience

The United States still possesses enormous strengths:

• Military power
• Financial influence
• Innovation ecosystems
• Global alliances

Therefore, the coming decades will likely witness:

• Competition without total war
• Cooperation without full trust
• Economic integration alongside strategic rivalry

Conclusion

The future of China–US relations will define the political, economic, and technological direction of the 21st century.

Issues such as Taiwan, AI, quantum technology, Iran, the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, India, and Jammu and Kashmir are no longer isolated regional matters; they are interconnected elements of a rapidly changing global order.

The central question is no longer whether the world is changing—it already is.

The real question is whether major powers can manage this transition peacefully, or whether rivalry, mistrust, and geopolitical ambition will push the world toward deeper instability.

The answer to that question may determine the future of humanity itself.

Dr Shabir Choudhry is a London-based political analyst, author, and expert on South Asian affairs, with a focus on Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Kashmir. Email: drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com