From my Substack:
Aatish Taseer begins his new essay collection A Return to Self: Excursions in Exile (Catapult 2025) by recounting the Indian governmentβs 2019 cancellation of his Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI). The pretext for this decision was that Taseer had concealed the Pakistani origin of his father (the late Salman Taseer, a former Governor of Punjab who was assassinated by his own bodyguard after calling for Pakistanβs blasphemy laws to be amended). However, Taseer believes that the real reason that his OCI was canceled was that he had written a critical article about Prime Minister Modi entitled βIndiaβs Divider in Chiefβ. He writes: βIn one stroke, Modiβs government cut me off from the country I had written and thought about my whole life, and where all the people I grew up with still lived.β
Later in the βIntroductionβ, Taseer describes the impact that this decision had on him and how it led to the essays contained in the book under review:
If these essays feel like a return to self, it is because they represent the return of my natural curiosities and, dare I say it, cosmopolitanism, after the long night of cutting away parts of myself in order to better fit back into Indian life. They are a response to the illusion of the idea of home. The strand of elation that runs through them is the simple joy of being out in the world, free of the pressures of belonging. Perhaps there could not have been any other response, given that my country, my material, my world in India,had been snatched from me. I grew up in what felt to me like the crucible of all anxieties related to belonging. Those anxieties run through these essays, but they are also a tribute to the individual. After all the wringing of wrists, the stewing over questions of place, of feeling myself forever betwixt and between, I woke up one day to find the bars of my prison had magically disappeared, and, far from being scared, I felt a new vein of intellectual curiosity had opened for me. With the idea of home gone, I stepped out into the world again.
The book contains eight essaysβ all of which were initially published by T: The New York Times Style Magazine between 2019 and 2024. Of these essays, I personally found the strongest ones to be βThe Ghosts of al-Andalusβ and βPilgrimagesβ. In the former, Taseer visits Spain in search of traces of the Muslim past. He writes:
There are, I want to say, three societies in the worldβSpain, the Balkans, and Indiaβthat have known this particular kind of history, namely centuries of Muslim rule among large swaths of an unconverted population. Each of these places has experienced periodic cycles of religious violence and ethnic cleansing, whether it was the Balkans in the 1990s or the bitter partition of India in 1947 that left more than a million dead and caused the largest peacetime migration in the history of humanity. What makes Spain unique is that here the aims of ethnic cleansing were fully realized.
In βPilgrimagesβ, Taseer travels through Bolivia, Mongolia and Iraq. I was particularly struck by the portion in which he describes his visit to Najaf during Ashuraβcommemorating the martyrdom of Prophet Muhammadβs grandson Hussain at Karbala. He writes:
If the metaphor of pilgrimage remains as potent as it does today,it is because it speaks to our undiminished need for awe, risk, adventure, and, most of all, a release from the mundanity of our daily lives in order to commune with something sacred. We channel these impulses into modern travel, filling it with expectation and dwelling on its shortcomings. In fact it is we, with our fixed ideas of what travel should give us, who fail the journeys we undertake. The pilgrim spirit is one that wanders away from the comfort and safety of home secure in the knowledge that the transformation the pilgrim will undergo over the course of his journey is the destination. The shrine is a mere decoy. Pilgrimage is above all an inward journey, free of external ideas of outcome: To be disappointed in oneβs aims only reinforces faith. This is what separates a pilgrimage from a business trip, say. The true lesson of pilgrimage in a secular context instructs us to set out into the world with a questing spirit that is unafraid of looking without finding, allowing curiosity, sympathy, and self-improvement to do the work of faith.
Taseer is a wonderful essayist (incidentally a much better essayist than a novelist). Each of the essays contained in the book reveal a distinct writerly voice and are a pleasure to read. Asides from Spain and Iraq, various essays take him to Uzbekistan, Morocco and Sri Lanka. As he describes his experiences, he reflects on ideas of identity and exile. It is this preoccupation with identity that gives the book a coherent shape uniting what were otherwise disparate pieces of travel writing.
In conclusion, I would highly recommend A Return to Self to those interested in travel writing. I look forward to reading what Aatish Taseer produces next.

There is a perception that jat relationships in particular and Punjabi relationships in general are on a higher level than other relationships. Atish is neither here nor there.
I find Aatish Taseer fascinating precisely because he’s half Pakistani and half Indian. He has written in great detail about his difficult relationship with Salman Taseer. He still considers himself to be an “Indian writer”.
Politics aside, his travel writing is definitely worth reading.
I remember this OCI business quite well, his mother Talveen used her op-ed at IE to excoriate the govt over it. Aatish might write well and no doubt he has admirably expressed his pain over the Modi govt punishing him for criticising them.
Still, the whole argument is undercut by the fact that he doesn’t keep an Indian passport and experience all the inconveniences that go with it.
There has to be some intellectual honesty around these matters.
While I quite like Talveen’s editorials, you cannot abuse your position to make a very public appeal for your son and not lose some credibility for it.
He was born in the UK and was a British citizen from birth. Presumably it was his mother who decided that he didn’t need an Indian passport since children are obviously incapable of making these decisions.
It is very cruel of a government (any government not just India) to keep someone from seeing their dying grandmother or elderly mother. They don’t need to restore his OCI status but they could at least give him a tourist visa. I would tend to agree with him that PM Modi took the Time Magazine article very personally.
One thing I didn’t highlight from his “Introduction”, was where he asked if he was initially supportive of Hindu majoritarianism in 2014 because he was trying so hard to fit into mainstream Indian society (denying the Pakistani, Westernized and indeed gay parts of himself).
There is the story you tell and then there is the truth of the matter.
GOI cannot deny him an Indian passport, ju sanguis is inviolable. It is just too convenient to have a British passport (he’s gone and got an American one too), he can get one now if he so chooses.
His mother is very well connected and has been a long time insider of the Luytens journalist batch. I actually find it quite impressive that they are being inflexible. These are well heeled well connected people, for all our lives we have bemoaned the VIP system in India. I have little sympathies for the privileged using their soapboxes for themselves.
According to Aatish, his OCI was revoked after he had written an article called “India’s Divider in Chief” so it does seem like political victimization.
The pretext that he had concealed the details of his father’s citizenship falls apart since he had published an entire book about his relationship with his father. He (and his mother) were not hiding the fact that he is Salman Taseer’s son.
Wouldn’t his Pakistani father get in the way of his getting an Indian passport? (genuine question). I believe I read somewhere that if any of your ancestors migrated to Pakistan and acquired Pakistani citizenship then you are not entitled to Indian citizenship. Otherwise, I’d love an Indian passport!
I’m not 100% sure of Tavleen Singh’s ideology but my impression is that she is far more anti Congress than she is anti BJP (that may have changed recently).
Aatish is a naturalized American citizen upon marriage to an American citizen. That’s perfectly normal.
Many public examples (Sania Mirza’s children, Sajjad Lone), either parent will do. Doesn’t have to be remain Indian either.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/goa/minor-entitled-to-indian-passport-despite-moms-foreign-citizenship-hc/articleshow/112905476.cms
Indian courts tend to be pretty harsh on the GOI in these matters.
It is very understandable that Aatish doesn’t want to give up his American/UK passports.
GOI can also be petty and deny a visa for criticising the PM. I’m not saying it’s right and ideally the govt should be well above this sort of thing. (There is the outside possibility that the GOI is right and he did not fill in the visa form properly, it does ask about Pakistani heritage explicitly)
I just don’t appreciate the outsize coverage (there is a lot) it gets by everybody, it’s very much a privilege abuse.
Very nice post iGnoble Tarrif..
I canβt comment on a new post from
My phone otherwise I would have left a comment
His father was technically a British citizen. At least, that’s Aatish’s argument.
Anyway, it didn’t seem to be a problem for anyone until the Time Magazine article came out. So it does seem like political victimization.
When Aatish and Tavleen were team Modi everything was fine. As soon as they changed their opinions, things changed.
That’s just dumb. You can’t hand the govt an excuse to do exactly what they want. Even a court can’t support you in this matter.
Singapore can be incredibly draconian and heartless in the implementation of their laws, you barely see any reporting over it let alone outrage.
I remember a colleague of mine who had been jailed in Australia once in his childhood(a group arrest as a minor), he had to tick the immigration box and give an explanation everytime he entered the country (SG).
I don’t actually know who filled out the form–Aatish or his mother.
You can definitely argue that whoever filled the form out made a mistake. But the point remains that GOI didn’t care until that critical article came out.
So it does lead one to conclude that if he weren’t a critic of the regime, we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now.
Aatish is a wonderful man, I know him.
It is cruel, beyond measure, to deny someone to see his grandmother.
Absolutely.
He noted that his stepfather has had a stroke recently and he couldn’t visit him either. He is honestly worried that he will not be able to see his mother at her deathbed either (may she live long).
This action really smacks of authoritarian regimes. It’s petty.
but tbh sometimes worth modifying?
They should at least give him a visa to visit the country. Keeping someone away from their elderly mother is cruel.