Nehru's Secularism Was An Aberration; Modi's Islamophobia is the Norm For India

As India and Pakistan turn 75, there are many secular intellectuals on both sides of the border who question the wisdom of "the Partition" in 1947. They dismiss what is happening in India today under Hindu Nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi's leadership as a temporary aberration, not the norm. They long for a return to "Indian liberalism" which according to anthropologist Sanjay Srivastava "did not exist". 

India Pakistan Border Ceremony at Wagah-Attari Crossing

American historian Audrey Truschke who studies India traces the early origins of Hindu Nationalism to the British colonial project to "divide and rule" the South Asian subcontinent. She says colonial-era British historians deliberately distorted the history of Indian Muslim rule to vilify Muslim rulers as part of the British policy to divide and conquer India. These misrepresentations of Muslim rule made during the British Raj appear to have been accepted as fact not just by Islamophobic Hindu Nationalists but also by at least some of the secular Hindus in India and Muslim intellectuals in present day Pakistan, says the author of "Aurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India's Most Controversial King".  Aurangzeb was neither a saint nor a villain; he was a man of his time who should be judged by the norms of his times and compared with his contemporaries, the author adds.

After nearly a century of direct rule, the British largely succeeded in dividing South Asians along religious and sectarian lines. The majoritarian tyranny of the "secular"  Hindu-dominated Indian National Congress after 1937 elections in India became very apparent to  Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of All India Muslim League. Speaking in Lucknow in October 1937,  he said the following: 

"The present leadership of the Congress, especially during the last ten years, has been responsible for alienating the Musalmans of lndia more and more, by pursuing a policy which is exclusively Hindu; and since they have formed the Governments in six provinces where they are in a majority they have by their words, deeds, and programme shown more and more that the Musalmans cannot expect any justice or fair play at their hands. Whenever they are in majority and wherever it suited them, they refused to co-operate with the Muslim League Parties and demanded unconditional surrender and signing of their pledges."

Fast forward to 2021, a Pew survey in India found that 64% of Hindus see their religious identity and Indian national identity as closely intertwined. Most Hindus (59%) also link Indian identity with being able to speak Hindi language. The survey was conducted over two years in 2019 and 2020 by Pew Research Center. It included 29,000 Indians.  

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu Nationalist BJP party's appeal is the greatest among Hindus who closely associate their religious identity and the Hindi language with being “truly Indian.” The Pew survey found that less than half of Indians (46%) favored democracy as best suited to solve the country’s problems. Two percent more (48%) preferred a strong leader. 

Indian anthropologist Sanjay Srivastava sums up the current situation as follows: 

"Our parents practiced bigotry of a quiet sort, one that did not require the loud proclamations that are the norm now. Muslims and the lower castes knew their place and the structures of social and economic authority were not under threat. This does not necessarily translate into a tolerant generation. Rather, it was a generation whose attitudes towards religion and caste was never really tested. The loud bigotry of our times is no great break from the past in terms of a dramatic change in attitudes – is it really possible that such changes can take place in such few years? Rather, it is the crumbling of the veneer of tolerance against those who once knew their place but no longer wish to accept that position. The great problem with all this is that we continue to believe that what is happening today is simply an aberration and that we will, when the nightmare is over, return to the Utopia that was once ours. However, it isn’t possible to return to the past that was never there. It will only lead to an even darker future. And, filial affection is no antidote for it".

Acknowledgement: Charts and data in this blog post are sourced from 75 Years Economic Journey of Pakistan published by Pakistan's Ministry of Finance. 

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

Muslims Worse Off Than Dalits in India

Disintegration of India

Dalit Death Shines Light on India's Caste Apartheid

Caste Discrimination Rampant Among Silicon Valley Indians

Rape: A Political Weapon in Modi's India

Hindutva: The Legacy of the British Rulers "Divide and Rule" Project

Will Modi's Hindutva Lead to Multiple Partitions of India?

Riaz Haq Youtube Channel

PakAlumni: Pakistani Social Network

Are Pakistan's Pandering Politicians Part of the Problem?

Latest polls show that Nawaz League's nexus with Punjab-based anti-Shi'a terrorist outfit Lashkar-e-Jhangvi has not hurt its popularity in Punjab during the last several months.

PML (N) Popularity:

In fact, it appears that PML(N) has successfully exploited Sunni majority's bigotry against the Shi'a in Pakistan, particularly in its home base in Punjab. Sharif brothers' PML (N) is now the most popular party in  Punjab with 59% approval and nationally with 41% approval rating  in Pakistan, according to the latest Gallup Pakistan poll. Pakistan People's Party (PPP) is second nationally with 17% and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) third with 14% approval.

Exploiting Hate:

To put PML(N)'s popularity in perspective, let's look at the history of how politicians have exploited such feelings of hatred against minorities. Adolf Hitler rose to power in Germany by riding a wave of resentment against European Jews. In India, Narendra Modi solidified his popularity in Gujarat by approving of Muslim massacre in 2002. Ten years later, Modi continues to be the most popular chief minister in India.  While India's ruling Congress party governs only 8 states,  BJP's anti-Muslim rhetoric continues to help it retain power in ten of India's 28 states. Most Israelis continue to vote for politicians who maintain brutal military occupation of Palestine.

Militancy in Pakistan:

 In Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto caved in to pressure from right-wing religious parties and passed a law declaring Ahmedis non-Muslim. This self-serving act did not save Bhutto. Anti-Bhutto riots gave Gen Ziaul Haq the opportunity to remove Bhutto from power. After grabbing power, Zia collaborated with the religious right to take advantage of average Pakistani's religiosity to consolidate his own power. Zia exploited the strong anti-communist sentiments after the Soviet invasion of neighboring Afghanistan. He collaborated with the United States and Saudi Arabia to give birth to religious militancy in Pakistan, eventually leading to the creation  of Al Qaeda and the Taliban who, along with their allies and affiliates such as LeJ, continue to carry out terrorist attacks in Pakistan and elsewhere. Nawaz Sharif, too, is a creation of the Zia era.

Civil Society's Role:

Most politicians in democracies are followers, not leaders. They respond to sentiments of their constituents, even hate-filled and violent sentiments. Most of Pakistan's politicians and political parties have their militant wings or alliances with various militant groups who carry out attacks against those who disagree. Such venal politicians are part of the problem, not part of the solution to rising violence in Pakistan. 

Given the venality of the politicians, the only possible solution to this problem is to build public opinion against violence in all its forms. Once the people decide to reject bigotry and violence, the politicians will follow.

Who has the power to shape public opinion in democracies? It's the civil society consisting of the mass media, non-governmental organizations, religious scholars and other powerful public advocacy groups.

Why Should Civil Society Care?

 It's in civil society's best interest to create an enabling environment for peaceful coexistence for freedom, music, arts, literature, culture and economy to flourish. Such freedom is necessary to promote creativity and ensure prosperity of the society as a whole.

Why Should Mass Media Care?

The media are owned by corporations who should care because a safe and secure Pakistan is the best way to increase their profitability. These media magnates should have a clear editorial policy to discourage incitement to violence. They should tell their anchors to stop spinning conspiracy theories designed to distract the attention of people from Pakistan's real threats which are mostly internal. They should encourage the people to take personal responsibility for their actions.

Why Should Politicians Care?

The politicians should care because they have to govern after winning elections. Here, they can learn from Indian BJP leader Narendra Modi.  Modi is still a bigot but he knows that he can not afford to alienate the whole world, particularly businessmen and investors who need security and stability to invest in Gujarat. Modi has used his anti-Muslim rhetoric to get votes but he has not allowed mass killings of Muslims after 2002. The lack of violence and continuing stability have attracted massive investments which have made Gujarat's economy among the fastest growing in the world.

Summary:

It's in the best long-term self-interest of Pakistani politicians and civil society  to work to reduce militancy and promote peace and tolerance in the country. This will help bring stability and economic opportunity to Pakistan's current and future generations.

Here's a video discussion on sectarian violence and upcoming elections:

Abbas Town Massacre from WBT TV on Vimeo.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

Gangster Politicians of Pakistan

Shia Massacres Undermine Pakistan

 Blowback From Drone Attacks in FATA

Rising Tide of Intolerance Threatens Pakistan

Fighting Agents of Intolerance in Pakistan

Muslim Scholars Must Fight Hate in Pakistan

South Asian Christians Celebrate Christmas in Fear

Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah's Vision

Pakistan Must Defeat Agents of Intolerance 

Celebrating Quaid-e-Azam M.A. Jinnah's Birthday

Bigotry Bedevils Silicon Valley's Indian Eatery

Tamil Hindu operators of Vaigai, a South Indian restaurant in Sunnyvale, CA, that serves the ever popular dosas, are facing charges of anti-Muslim bias brought by two Muslim cooks.

In a lawsuit filed in late January in Santa Clara County Superior Court, Abdul Rahuman, 44, and Nowsath Malik Shaw, 39, both of San Jose, allege they were harassed for being Muslim by Vaigai's two owners, a manager and a top chef — a violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act, according to a report in the San Jose Mercury News.

According to the complaint, restaurant personnel regularly used ethnic slurs such as "Thulakkan," a pejorative term for Muslims in Sri Lankan Tamil dialect, to harass the two Muslim cooks. Also according to the complaint, restaurant staff were encouraged to call the plaintiffs by names such as "Rajan" or "Nagraj" under the pretext of not wanting to upset customers who might stop patronizing the restaurant if they heard the men referred to by their Muslim names.

The complaint also states that the plaintiffs were forced to participate in a religious ceremony despite telling the owners it was against their Islamic beliefs. The complaint alleges that the restaurant owners insisted on their participation and proceeded to smear a powder on their foreheads, making the religious marking known as a "tilak."

Named in the complaint as defendants are: co-owners Vijay Anand (who also goes by Vijayanand Krishnan) and Shridar Nataraj, Manager Sudakar Jothinathan, and Chef Balaguru, whose first name is never mentioned.

"These incidents clearly violated the Muslim workers' rights and the treatment they received speaks of a level of intolerance that is deeply disturbing," said CAIR-SFBA Programs and Outreach Director Agnes Chong. "There is a need for communities to be respectful of similarities as well as differences of other faiths, and it is all the more important in the workplace."

As in many other Indian states, Tamil Nadu, the southern state the restaurant owners originally come from, has also seen instances of increasing bigotry and violence against Muslims in recent years. In a piece titled "Terrifying Testimonies", Indian writer Yoginder Sikand has documented cases of imprisonment on trumped up charges and police violence against Muslims in many parts of India. One of the cases he talks about is that of Yakoob Khan and his friend, Tamil Muslims in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. Sikand writes as follows:

"27 year-old Yakoob Khan from Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, was arrested at the age of 17, accused of being involved in the Coimbatore blasts in 1998, a charge that he vehemently denies. 'On the day of the blast I attended class at the Industrial Training Institute where I was enrolled, and when I was returning home I heard about the blasts'. In the wake of the blasts, the police went on a rampage, indiscriminately picking up Muslim youth. Some days later, Yakoob found himself in prison, where he was to spend almost the next ten years, much of it in solitary confinement in a small cage- like cell. 'I was accused of being in possession of explosive material, and of being associated with the Islamic group Al-Ummah, although I had never even heard its name.' In addition to routine torture, while in jail he was often abused for his religion. 'I would be beaten up if I wanted to say namaz. My torturers would tell me to face them while praying, rather than the Kaaba. They tore my Quran, and while beating me they would scream "Bharat Mata ki Jai"'. 'They ruined ten precious years of my life, my youth, falsely branding me as a terrorist', he says."

"Yakoob Khan's friend, 34 year-old Shiv Kumar, alias Abdul Hamid, is a Hindu convert to Islam. He eked out as livelihood selling old newspapers and utensils for recycling. He was accused of being involved in the Coimbatore blasts, a charge that he denies. The police forced him to sign a blank piece of paper which they later filled out themselves, threatening him that if he refused to do so they would arrest his family as well. He was remanded to the Coimbatore jail on the basis of this forced 'confession' and his repeated applications for bails were rejected. Because he was the sole earner in his family, his wife was forced to beg in order to survive. He was finally acquitted only recently, after almost ten years in incarceration. 'I was mercilessly tortured in prison. I was constantly told that if I had not become a Muslim and had remained a Hindu I would not have been beaten like this', he says."

The Mercury News quotes Mani Manivannan, former president of the Bay Area Tamil Manram, an association of 500 members who hail from Tamil Nadu as saying, "Tamil Nadu used to be one of the most secular states in the Indian union. They went out of their way to make sure people were treated the same. Muslims used to feel like full citizens."

Unfortunately, Manivannan added, the growing rift between Hindus and Muslims in India, has now spilled outside the country.

"That disease has spread to the U.S. as well," said Manivannan, a Hindu who had not heard about the case until called by the Mercury News. "Not a lot. But enough people get influenced by the news in India."

Still, Manivannan said there are plenty of Hindus and Muslims who get along. He pointed how everyone he knows, no matter their background, is extremely proud of AR Rahman, a Muslim from Tamil Nadu who made history by becoming the first Indian to win two Oscars for his music in the movie, "Slumdog Millionaire".


Related Links:

Slumdog Millionaire

India's Guantanamos and Abu Ghraibs

Muslims--India's New Untouchables

Is "Muslim" a Derogatory Epithet in America?

“Are you now or have you ever been a Muslim?” Has this question ever been asked in America? The answer, so far, is NO. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that such a question would ever be asked by high-level US investigators? It seems far fetched but let's examine such a possibility in the US historical context.

There have been periods in the US history when we have used a broad brush approach to demonize entire groups of people based on their ethnicity, skin color, religion or national origin. During the second world war, the US citizens of Japanese origin were called "Japs" and imprisoned in camps with the approval of the US Supreme Court. During the cold war in 1950s, the US was in the midst of the "Red Scare" where people saw "Commies" hiding in all corners of America. Sen Joseph McCarthy held congressional hearings and subpoenaed many people and asked the question: “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” Aided by the FBI, under the direction of J. Edgar Hoover, McCarthy conducted his search for Communists. People were hauled before Congress to testify about their loyalty to the US government. They were asked to name names and report their friends, neighbors and family. Many Americans were convicted of being communists and some were executed for being Russian spies.

Lately, the Democratic Party presidential candidate, Senator Barack Obama, has been under "suspicion" of being a "closet Muslim". He and his campaign have denied it and rejected the "Muslim" label as though it were an unflattering epithet. In fact, some of the Obama staffers have become so sensitive to this "charge" that they refused to seat hijab-wearing Muslim women supporters behind Obama on stage in front of the cameras at a recent rally in Michigan. Instead of ridiculing the lies about Obama, the latest New Yorker magazine cover has in fact served to reinforce the rumors and innuendos about Muslims and his Muslim connections.

In spite of vociferous rejections of the "Muslim" label and repeated denials by Barack Obama, a significant number of Americans continue to believe Obama is Muslim. Based on recent polls, about 10-12% of the Americans believe Obama is a Muslim. Another 12% believe he took oath of office for the Senate on the Quran. A whopping 39% believe he attended an Islamic madrassa in Indonesia as a child.

Given our history, the rise in bigotry against Muslims should be a cause for alarm for all American. The best way for all of us to ensure a peaceful world is not by demonizing all Muslims or by using "Muslim" as a negative epithet or a synonym for "terrorist". Instead we should work toward marginalizing the tiny minority of Muslims who are engaged in terrorizing the world to advance their own hateful ideologies. Only by marginalizing such "terrorists" can we isolate them and rid the world of their terror and bigotry to live in peace.

Has the Lawyers Movement Gone Awry?

"If they demand that the Afghan refugees be returned to Afghanistan, we demand that they (the Urdu-speaking Karachi-ites) be sent back to India" so says Mr. Latif Afridi, the President of Peshawar Bar Association. This outrage from Peshawar followed the clashes between the lawyers in Karachi which were triggered by the violence of the lawless lawyers of Lahore earlier.

The lawyers movement started well and helped bring about a positive change in Pakistan as a manifestation of the rise of the middle class considered the backbone for any democracy. However, it seems that this well-intentioned movement has been hijacked by unscrupulous elements in the legal community who are willing to engage in bigotry and violence against any one who disagrees. The inflammatory rhetoric by Mr. Latif Afridi captured on video by GEO News is particularly shocking.

One of the most alarming trends in Pakistan is that the various factions of lawyers movement in different parts of the country have allied themselves with regional parties such as the MQM in Karachi, PML(N) in Lahore and Islamabad and ANP in Peshawar and Quetta. Unless the top leadership of these lawyers stop and reflect on this dangerous situation and alter their divisive rhetoric and inflammatory actions, it is within the realm of possibility that the very forces helping shape a democratic Pakistan may lead to its demise as a single nation. Democracy requires a lot of mutual tolerance, necessary compromises and great patience. It can not be nurtured or sustained in an environment of violence, bigotry and intolerance.