Ayodhya verdict & our secular conscience: Part Two

The three members Bench of Justice D.V. Sharma, Justice S.U. Khan and Justice S. Agarwal has ruled by a 2-1 majority that all the parties in the title suit, i.e. Bhagwan Shree Ram Lalla represented by his sakha (close friend) Triloki Nath Pandey, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Waqf Board will have one third equal share each of the disputed property and declared the litigants joint title-holders. Justice Sharma has disagreed with the decision of the majority that one-third of the disputed land should be given to Muslims for construction of a mosque. Dismissing the suit filed by the Sunni Waqf Board for a declaration and possession of the site so that Muslims can rebuild the demolished mosque on the same spot, the Bench has allotted the portion right below the central dome of the demolished Babri Masjid to Bhagwan Shree Ram Lalla Virajman with a caution that the defendants should not obstruct or interfere the area in any manner. The areas covered by the structures of Ram Chabutra, Sita Rasoi and Bhandar in the outer courtyard were allotted to the Nirmohi Akhara. The two Hindu litigants will share the remaining unbuilt area within the outer courtyard “since it has been generally used by the Hindu people for worship at both places.” The Bench has allotted the rest of the area where the Babri Masjid stood, including part of the inner courtyard and if necessary also some part of the outer courtyard to the Waqf Board stating that “the share of Muslim parties shall not be less than one third (1/3) of the total area of the premises”. To alleviate the progress of such a three-way division, the Bench has advised to use some parts around the disputed land presently under acquisition of the Government of India. The judges also ordered that the prevailing status quo which is currently under state control shall be maintained for a period of three months.

Ayodhya verdict & our secular conscience: Part One

In a large and diverse country like India, there is never a dearth of issues that stimulate the citizens to talk, argue and fight. But the credulous public mind, overexposed and debilitated by artificial trends and a plethora of confusing information are often been hypnotized by the shining pendant of a forged present and a delusional future. Moreover, a vague vision of history compels them to acquire comfort by mirroring a general trend of forgetfulness. In this spurious atmosphere, even a detrimental agenda can easily capture public imagination and receive popular support. Incapable to ponder much of its gravity, people tend to offer themselves as cannon fodder in socio-political conflicts waged against their own interests. The six-decade-old Ayodhya dispute over the ownership of 2.77 acres of “holy” land is such a thorny issue that has sharply polarized a devout Indian society along quasi-religious lines. Flaring up from time to time, the dispute has instilled a stream of dangerous ideas deep inside the country’s psyche. Acknowledged as one of India’s most divisive and contentious issues, the dispute with its high hegemonic potential has shaken the very foundation of the country’s collective identity as a nation and gradually grown into a symbol of subjectivity. Looking into the chronology of events including the wide network of relations and sectoral interests in and by which the dispute is situated and sustained for such a long time will provide us a necessary linkage to the Ayodhya verdict which was recently delivered by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.

The Lifetime Achievement of L. K. Advani

Lal Krishna Advani, the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is generally believed to be a Hindu hardliner politician largely liable for polarizing India on communal lines. Leaving behind trails of blood and communal passions, his infamous Rath Yatra had created a sort of hysterical upsurge of the Hindutva forces during the Ram Janmbhoomi movement that lead to the eventual demolition of the Babri Masjid. His Rath Yatra is also credited to be the pivotal force behind the speedy and almost smooth rise of BJP as an alternative of the Congress Party in different parts of the country. Advani believes that the shrewd construction of the Hindutva hysteria is one of his most important contributions to the country and its people. Though the Hindutva card along with its chief architect has apparently lost its original shine and luster, the revered television media group New Delhi Television (NDTV) has considered giving him a face-lift by bestowing a Lifetime Achievement Award in their fourth ‘Indian of the Year’ award ceremony this year (see video here). Keeping aside NDTV founder and chairman Dr. Prannoy Roy, the juries of the award selection committee comprising Fali Nariman, Shashi Tharoor, Anu Agha, Rahul Bajaj, Harsha Bhogle and William Dalrymple reportedly did not select Advani. They were actually unaware that such an award was going to be bestowed on Advani in the function. According to the media watchdog Hoot, two of the juries were uncomfortable about the choice and particularly one among them later said that ‘he would not want to be associated with any award which gave prizes to communal hatemongers.’ Clarifying the selection process, Prannoy Roy later said that NDTV always reserves the right for its editors to select and present one or more non-jury awards. This clarification made it crystal clear that Advani’s selection was done by none other but entirely by the NDTV coterie.

Founded on 1988, NDTV started out with just one weekly programme called The World This Week in the state owned Doordarshan channel. Later in 1998, it bagged the ‘prestigious’ contract to produce a 24-hour news channel for Rupert Murdoch's Star Network. Today it is the largest independent private television production house in India. Its flagship news channel NDTV 24x7 holds the biggest market share among English news channels in the country. It is the only Indian channel which broadcasts in Pakistan, has launched a 24 hour NDTV Arabia for Middle East and North Africa and broadcast programs in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives, Nepal, Middle East, Mauritius, South Africa, Europe, US, Canada & New Zealand.

In the year 2002, NDTV (then the producer of Star News) had invited the ire of Hindutva forces particularly for its coverage of the Gujarat riots. Though widely credited for airing un-biased, courageous, insightful, and comprehensive news that had unmasked the State Government’s role in the pogrom, Star News was severely criticized for ‘indulgence in gossip’, for insisting that the Army’s deployment was unduly delayed during the riots and for interviewing the Ahmedabad police commissioner in an ‘arrogant and hectoring tone’. The channel “carried some graphic footage and interviews in the thick of the riots – in Ahmedabad and along the Vadodara-Godhra highway where a number of industrial establishments and trucks were burnt” and also broadcasted an extremely moving interview with the intrepid activist of communal harmony Professor J.S Bandukwala – whose house was attacked and torched by vicious Hindu mob in Vadodara during the riots. Star’s behind the news stories by correspondence Shikha Trivedi portrayed the “trauma and alienation of the Muslim communities and individuals who returned to their villages on sufferance, and in the ways in which tribal communities have been co-opted into the Hindutva fold”. (Subarno Chattarji: Media representations of the Kargil War and the Gujarat riots, Sarai Reader 2004) Obviously, pro-Hindu outfits and under the cloak communalists from the affluent middle class harshly condemned the coverage as biased and ‘full of white lies’. Its ace reporter Barkha Dutt’s car was surrounded on a Gujarat highway by fanatics armed with swords and asked “what’s your religion?” NDTV crew had to cry ‘Jai Sri Ram’ before their vehicles were allowed to move. (Editors Guild Fact Finding Mission Report on Gujarat Riot, May 3, 2002) Barkha Dutt’s reporting on a violence hit 90 km rural stretch where not even a single police constable was found to be present infuriated the authorities at Gandhinagar and New Delhi. Accordingly, orders were issued by the Gujarat government to district headquarters to block the Star News channel. On March 2 the channel was blocked for several hours. Lal Krishna Advani was then the home minister of the country. The coverage of Star News was termed by his party as ‘pseudo secular’.

It is therefore almost bizarre to see that the same NDTV which in 2002 had helped to expose the Gujarat pogrom perpetrated by Hindutva fanatics under a fully supportive state BJP government and a partly supportive NDA government at the center is honoring the ‘one and only’ Advani in 2009 with a Lifetime Achievement Award for his work in the field of politics! What would have changed in these seven years that obliged NDTV to hand over the award to Advani is a perplexing question to answer. One of the supposed reasons is that the award was bestowed to Advani to make sure that he attends the award ceremony. But this cannot be the only reason.

After receiving the honor, the ‘intelligent, thinking and unpredictable’ Advani (as Prannoy Roy has described him) said that “One of my positive experience, which many in the country seem to see as a negative, was my Rath Yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya. I really think that by that Rath Yatra, I was able to convert the nature of the debate that was taking place before those years, which was that my party is communal and other parties are secular. I just converted the debate to genuine secularism versus pseudo secularism.”

Public memory is short and needs to be refreshed time after time. From NDTV’s award ceremony dais Advani was in fact bloating about his original Rath Yatra of 1990 that began from September 23 to ‘unite Hindus’ on an anti-Muslim agenda. The decision to launch the Rath Yatra was Advani’s anxious response to the threat of the then Prime Minister V. P. Singh’s decision to implement the Mandal Commission recommendations and was obviously attempted to grasp the influential but drifting voters of the backward classes. Jointly planned with the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) leadership, the Rath Yatra eventually caused deep polarization of the Indian society by inflaming communal passion and had incited people to trigger brutal and violent communal outbursts. Until it was stopped at Samastipur by the then Chief Minister of Bihar Laloo Prasad Yadav on October 23, thirty-nine places through which Advani’s Ram Rath had passed were affected by communal violence. Nearly 275 people were killed in these clashes.

In an interview with The Sunday Times of October 14, 1990 Advani characteristically remarked that “I am sure that everyone knows that it (the Rath Yatra) has provided a healing touch; it has not caused any tensions or has not inflamed passions” (Emphasis added). The jubilant Advani then went on saying that his Rath Yatra has ‘manifested and articulated’ the sentiments of the Hindus in ‘a powerful fashion’. The following media reports will undoubtedly prove this manifestation and articulation of the ‘Hindus’ Advani was so proud about. An editorial in the October 5, 1990 issue of The Times of India remarked that, “Communal riots have already broken out in Baroda and Banaskantha. It is difficult not to see the connection between the Rath Yatra and the Ram Jyoti campaigns on the one hand and the heightening of communal tensions in different parts of the country… If Mr. Advani is concerned about the unity and integrity of the country and stands for the defence of law and order, he should reconsider his course.” An article in The Sunday Observer, dated October 14, 1990 had reported instances of mounting tensions in Mysore, Mangalore, parts of Bangalore city and North Karnataka. It had also expressed deep concern that communal violence has ‘succeeded in penetrating the villages’ like in Chennapatna where an entire hamlet of Muslim farmers were burned and in Kolar district where “Muslim houses in several villages have been reported to have been attacked by unknown outsiders.” The report also stated that, “There is no doubt whatsoever, that the Muslim community bore the brunt of the rioting, both in terms of lives lost and property damaged – of the 17 dead, 13 were Muslims.” The Telegraph dated October 14, 1990 reported about the Rath Yatra impact on Uttar Pradesh stating “…even before Mr. Advani’s rath has entered the state, the death toll in communal clashes has gone up to 44.…When the rath moved into Maharashtra from Surat, the armed Bajrang Dal activists were less prominent – but the speeches of the BJP leaders were as full of venom…” The same report described how at Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh, “… Mr Pramod Mahajan, the BJP leader in the course of a fiery speech asked the Muslims to either have faith in Lord Ram or else leave the country. Mr. Advani all the while nodded in acquiescence and the hundreds of youths who surrounded the podium brandished their swords and trishuls and hailed the speech. The result, of course, was inevitable: communal clashes broke out in Raipur” (Emphasis added). On November 2, 1990 The Independent reported that the pre-planning of the communal riots in Indore were “…evident from the large haul of stored arms and weapons from several houses …” On the October 28, 1990 issue, The Telegraph reported how communal flare-up rocked Jhalda in Purulia district of West Bengal “…claiming 9 lives, is a direct fall-out of the rathyatra of Mr. LK Advani which passed through the town on October 20.” (Source: Communalism Combat, April 2001) These are some of the fantastic examples of ‘genuine secularism’ for which today Advani is swollen with pride.

The champion of Hindu communalists, the lauh purush (ironman) of BJP has recently assured his henchmen that “the party had not forgotten Ram”. The Indian Express reported from Nagpur that Advani asked his party men: “Ram ke janmasthan mein Ram ka mandir kyon nahin banna chahiye (why should there not be a temple at the birthplace of Ram at Ayodhya?)” This reveals the true face of Lal Krishna Advani – communal to the core and notoriously devious. His entire intellectual jargons including terms like ‘pseudo-secularism’ or ‘minorytism’ are in fact not his invention at all but copied from the lexicon of the parental Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangha (RSS). As pointed out by A. G. Noorani, “Advani can never be original. He needs intellectual crutches.” His essentially manipulative vocabulary is deceitful to its core and is extremely dangerous to trust.

What truly sickening and disgraceful to see was how a culpable crime committed against the pluralistic Indian society has been publicized as a ‘positive instance’ from the ceremonial dais of a media house that distinguishes itself as a champion of secularism.

Image courtesy: www.hinduonnet.com

The BJP and the ‘Hindu Terrorist’

It is not surprising to see the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in dispute with the term ‘Hindu Terrorist’. The term has been introduced by the Indian media after the recent arrest of five activists of the Hindu Jagaran Manch (HJM), an Indore-based Hindu extremist group and Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, a former national executive member of BJP’s students wing Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP). The arrested persons were allegedly part of the September 29 bomb blasts in the Muslim localities of Malegaon in Maharashtra and Modasa in Gujarat. In an obvious attempt to mislead the investigation, the perpetrators in Malegaon had placed bombs in a motorcycle and parked it below the now-defunct first floor office of Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) while the motorcycle used in Modasa had Islamic stickers on its seat. The terror attack is still under investigation by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS).

The arrest of the Sadhvi has particularly embarrassed the parent body Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its political wing BJP. Photos and video clips of the Sadhvi, seen with prominent BJP leaders including party president Rajnath Singh are widely circulated in the media. As a damage control measure, the RSS and BJP have started to blame the arrests as an ‘ultra-secularists’ ploy, voraciously defending the ‘malicious’ attempt to ‘assail the majority community’ with the terrorist tag. At the same time they have neatly washed off there hands by denying any link with the Sadhvi. However, expelled BJP heavyweight leader Uma Bharati has sprung to the Sadhvi’s defense saying she was shocked to see the BJP disown the Sadhvi and quipped: “they had no problems in using her when they wanted to”.

*****

One of the most virulent forms of terrorism in our times seeks the cover of Islam. It calls its murderous campaign ‘jihad’, thereby trying to justify itself in the eyes of pious God-fearing Muslims. – L. K. Advani, My Country, My Life

The biggest threat the country is facing today is ‘jihadi terrorism’ – Rajnath Singh

It is our adversaries, and not us, who are misrepresenting that the fight against terrorism is fight against Islam and the Muslim community. – L. K. Advani

I want to assure the people that if they vote the BJP led NDA to power at the centre then we will bring a strong law against terrorism to crush the morale of the terrorists who seek to operate in India. – Rajnath Singh

*****

Relating to the choice of words, the BJP has started blaming the media for ‘double standard’. However, along with ‘Hindu Terrorist’ the media is also frequently using the term ‘Islamic Terrorist’ and ‘Islamic Terrorism’. The internet space is flooded with this term, prominently in the pro-Hindutva websites and blogs, even in the ‘reader’s forum’ pages of RSS mouthpiece Organiser. The conscience of the BJP leaders never felt the obligation to openly register a protest against it and was more than happy to relish this media service as it was creating a negative public opinion concerning the Muslim community. How come the media is blamed now for ‘double standard’? Is it not in fact the BJP’s ‘double standard’ tactic to remain mute about ‘Islamic Terrorist’ and proactively oppose the term ‘Hindu Terrorist’?

Why are the BJP so upset by the development?

The first reason is purely ideological. As per their core RSS teaching, the BJP believes that the word ‘Hindu’ is synonymous with the nation. Therefore, the use of the term ‘Hindu Terrorist’ is a direct ‘insult and abuse’ to the Indian Nation and therefore anti-national. This view is best reflected when the BJP spokespersons say that no Hindu can ever be an extremist.

Secondly, the BJP predicts that the development might hinder their meticulously crafted grassroot propaganda (with the muscle of RSS machinery) that all Muslims are potential terrorists – the party blueprint to incite Hindu sentiments on the eve of the next Lok Sabha polls. They are worried that their political opponents now have got a potent weapon against them. Also, in the minds of a vast majority of India’s plural society, the development has reconfirmed their assertion that one of the major cause of terror attacks which has sprung up in different parts of the country is the reaction to a malicious brand of politics practiced in India in the name of ‘nationalism’– the politics of hate.

BJP leaders are therefore proactive to voice their pristine view on terrorism and terrorists. According to them, irrespective of his/her religion or cast, a terrorist is simply a terrorist. Then why link terror with a particular religion? As always, the BJP is emulating their characteristic rhetoric of a calculated ambiguity. They are intensely opposing the ‘Hindu’ tag but not explicitly opposing the words ‘Muslim’ or ‘Islamic’ tagged with terrorism. Not a single statement issued by the party has specifically said that they are also against the term ‘Muslim Terrorist’.

BJP’s five point defense strategy is simple:

1. Not to use the term ‘Muslim Terrorism’ directly from public platforms. Instead, use ‘Jihadi Terrorism’ or ‘Islamic Jihadi’.

2. To proclaim with determination that no Hindu can ever be an extremist.

3. To intensely counter the term ‘Hindu Terrorist’ from all forums with the pretext that BJP have always believed that terror has no religion.

4. To be clamorous about homegrown jihadi cells; ‘terrorist factories’ of Azamgarh and SIMI. Link all terror attacks with Pakistan (which the Parivar considers to be a terrorist state) and Bangladesh, and constantly harp on about Bangladeshi infiltration. Talk about bringing a robust law (even stronger than POTA) against terrorism to crush the morale of the terrorists if BJP led NDA is voted back in power.

5. Diminish all secular voices by calling them ‘pseudo secular’ or ‘ultra-secular’. In response to all political adversaries, constantly go on saying that they are all ‘appeasing’ the minority community just to gain the minority votes.

The BJP leadership has strategized that persisting on these five points will facilitate a duel purpose. In one way it will help the party to craft a pan-Indian image, comfortable to various political partners and the section of the Hindu public who are not yet prepared to sanction a militant Hindu programme. Simultaneously it will also keep its cadres assured that the core Hindutva schema – building the Hindu Rashtra, is preserved as a hidden agenda which will be exposed in proper time.

This moderation to channelize its core Hindu nationalist and anti-Muslim position through a more agreeable ‘patriotic’ and ‘anti-foreign enemy’ (Pakistan, Bangladesh and jihadi terrorism) approach is largely due to the BJP’s coalition building compulsion. In his detailed study 'The BJP at the Centre', the French scholar Christophe Jaffrelot has noted that, “The moderation of BJP does not follow a linear trend but represents merely a phase reflecting its capacity to alternate moderation and extremism”. (Emphasis added) Party strategists think it to be a more pragmatic approach by which the party will build an acceptable mask in front of the public at the eve of the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. As famously disclosed by the former BJP theoretician K.N. Govindacharya that Atal Bihari Vajpayee was presented as a mukota (mask), today, the whole party is in the finishing stage of a process to conceal behind a mask covering its Hindutva face.

One thing is for sure – this strategy is not to persuade the Muslims of India. It is actually intended for a different audience – the millions of (pseudo!) secular minded Hindus of India who still condemn the hateful ideology and agenda of the BJP. To bring them into their fold through its coalition allies, the BJP with the approval of RSS had already dropped contentious issues like Ram temple construction, abolition of Article 370 and imposition of a uniform civil code from its ‘national agenda’. This is why the 1999 election manifesto of BJP led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) promised a ‘moratorium on contentious issues’. While justifying this new discourse and change of their political line, the top leaders of BJP had brought into play big words like ‘commitment to good governance’, ‘responsible party, alive to the interests of all section or society’ and ‘no place for an ideological party in India today’. A steady supply of skillfully practiced ambiguous words and more words has become a definite characteristic of the party.

The BJP leaders and spokespersons have mastered the art of twisting political jargon according to the demand of the situation and blending them in an ambiguous manner into their rhetoric. The one word ‘pseudo’ is a most endearing word in the Sangh lexicon and the users have almost turned the word into a cliché. It is been freely used against any person who disagrees to the ideology or opinion. The hydra-headed Parivar affiliates are even using the word within the brotherhood to tweak each other. The great Atal Bihari Vajpayee was also not spared and called a ‘pseudo Hindu’ by Acharya Giriraj Kishor, the senior vice-president of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) the religious and proselytization wing of RSS, when the Vajpayee led NDA government did not give priority to facilitate building the Ram temple in Ayodhya. BJP’s cerebral makeup has been perfectly exposed by the lawyer and constitutional expert A.G. Noorani: “Deceit and deception are integral to the RSS-BJP strategy”.

The leadership of BJP considers the Indian public as fools.

This blogger in a previous post has argued that terrorism primarily emerges from socio-economic reasons that create a feeling of frustration and grievances within a section of the society. This frustration and grievances lead towards aggression and is modified into a political tactic when the section starts believing that no other means will affect the kind of change they desire. Its method and strategy generally follows a similar line of committing acts of violence but with variable causes and targets that depends on whose point of view is being represented.

Terrorism is a deeply complex subject and cannot be connected with religion alone. The BJP is deceitful while propagating the same thing today. It remains as a fact that equating Muslims with terrorism is totally a RSS-BJP making – an integral part of their wider Hindutva agenda.

Indian Muslims and terrorism: a short discourse

The majority section of Indian society, the ‘concerned’ Hindu citizens are demanding that the Indian Muslims must immediately start to speak out and take counteractive steps against the terrorist attacks instigated by fundamentalist and anti-national Muslim groups. They are outright critical about the attitude of common Muslims and Muslim organizations of the country for not doing enough to voice their protest and instead preferring to remain mere spectators of the spiteful events. They have raised a ‘valid’ question: is this not the ideal time for Indian Muslims to prove their loyalty to the Indian state? If they are honestly against these felonious acts of homegrown terrorists, if they genuinely feel that terrorists are demeaning the entire Muslim population and in the name of Islam destabilizing the Indian society, then why are they not coming out in flocks to express their concern? A lot of voices have been built up in favor of the above view. Therefore, it is worth probing the elements of this complicated topic in detail.

During the Partition of India in 1947, a substantial number of Muslim families decided to live in secular India instead of migrating to Islamic Pakistan. It was a difficult but cognizant decision, based largely on the official stand of the new Indian Government which wanted to be recognized as a secular state. The important part played by a significant section of their Hindu neighbors and friends must also be mentioned, those Hindus who did provide the required confidence and solace to their Muslim brothers and sisters to reside beside them. At that time it was not an easy decision for the compassionate Hindus either in front of large-scale killing and violence. Communal elements were present in both communities, feeding each other on an agenda of hatred and intolerance. The Partition dusts settled down in time but left a deep scar on the face of the newborn nation. Today’s younger generation of Muslims were born and brought up in a secular-democratic India and has little or no mental connection with the Partition period’s assault of communal violence on their ancestors. They live and share the democratic milieu of this country equally with their Hindu counterparts.

Is it then beyond question that by having an equal stake in the system with their Hindu counterparts, the present day Indian Muslims should have no basis to be apathetic to the country’s democratic values? To find an answer to that we should look into the actual conditions wherein majority of the Indian Muslims live.

As per 2001 census estimates, India has roughly 150 million Muslims, constituting 13.43 per cent of the Indian population. They represent the second largest Muslim population in the world, behind Indonesia (190 million) and just ahead of Pakistan (about 140 million). The Indian Muslim community is larger than the entire population of Arab Muslims (about 140 million). Despite such a huge presence, Indian Muslims by and large are living in appalling socio-economic conditions. All post-independence commissions set up by the Indian government in an effort to find out the social, economic and educational status of Muslims – from the 1983 Dr Gopal Singh Commission to the 2006 Rajinder Sachar Commission have shown a dismaying portrayal of the community. The latest report by Rajinder Sachar Commission has established the following disturbing statistics:

1. 48 per cent of Muslims older than 46 years age can't read or write. In the age group of 6 to 14 years, 25 per cent of Muslim children are either dropouts or have never attended school. As far as enrolment ratio in schools are concerned, the share of Muslim children is lower compared to the schedule caste and schedule tribes.

2. Primary, secondary and higher secondary – at every level the dropout ratio is the highest among Muslims. Only 3 per cent of Muslim children attend the madrasa. Out of the total Muslim population of around 14 crore, only about 4 crore Muslims have received some education — 192 lakh are educated till primary level, 105 lakh till secondary, 73 lakh till higher secondary and 24 lakh till graduate level. A large section among the Muslims is Urdu speaking, but the infrastructure to teach Urdu is miserable.

3. 52 per cent of Muslim men and 91 per cent Muslim women are unemployed. Representation of Muslims in government jobs is far below their proportion in total population. They hold only 7.2 per cent of government jobs and only 3.2 per cent of the jobs in the country's security agencies (namely, CRPF, CISF, BSF, SSB etc). In some states like Delhi, Tamilnadu, Bengal, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh, the percentage is even lower.

4. In towns that range in population between 50 thousand and 2 lakhs, Muslim per capita expenditure is less than that of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.

5. Although they make up only 13.43 per cent of the total population, 40 per cent of the prison populations in India are Muslim.

Except if one utterly believes the Hindutva apologist’s propaganda that the Sachar Commission report is ‘full of prejudices’ and ‘politically motivated’, there should be little doubt from the above data, that the condition of common Muslims in India is not at all promising and needs a drastic change. Muslims in India have fallen behind the rest of the population, especially in employment opportunities and education. Large section of this Muslim populace is living under extreme poverty. In urban areas most of them are raised in ghettos near to posh neighborhoods, lacking the basic infrastructural facilities like clean water supply, sewage or sanitation system, banks and schools. In almost every three Muslim dominated villages, one does not have a school. Nearly 40 per cent of the Muslim dominated villages do not have proper roads, drinking water and health facility. A large section of ordinary Muslims are low status or downtrodden. A sizable section among them is former dalits, converted to Islam. Their conversion over the centuries has not helped them to realize any noticeable socio-economic uplift.

The Hindutva apologists obviously have very strong disagreement to this report as it has bluntly shatter their circulated myth about Muslim ‘appeasement’ by the ‘pseudo secular’ political class of this country. On the other hand, the report has also exposed that since independence, the main political parties have mostly ignored elevating the community in socio-economic terms. Time and again these political parties and leaders shed crocodile tears and in the excuse of ‘helping’ Muslims, compromise with the most reactionary elements among them. Time and again it was observed that these leaders and political parties erase out the community from their mind without actually carrying out any enduring benefit to them once their political goals are achieved.

From the education perspective, the situation of Muslims in India is rather depressing. From a very young age, Muslims who attend the madrasas (although only 3 per cent as per the Sachar report) receive orthodox religious teachings and throughout their lives earnestly follow it. The normal teaching trend in the madrasas is to minimize the intellectual and rational sciences and stress on purely religious orthodox disciplines, the dos and don’ts of Shariati laws and so on. The conditions of the dropouts or those who have never attended school (25 per cent as per the Sachar report) are even pathetic. They are the most wretched and deprived in the community, their outlook and values of life develop straight from their downcast and conventional social upbringing. The psyche of a larger section of young Muslims are shaped by these conventional and orthodox lessons of Islam, most of the time interpreted by the ulemas in such a way that learners are bound to incline towards a dogmatic approach in life, always suspicious to modern liberal values. The religious beliefs and practices form a blind faith on religion and thus it becomes easy for conservative minded religious Muslim leadership to draw the community's agenda in strictly religious terms, neglecting the importance of socio-economic empowerment of the community. Modern rationalistic approach towards life is absent in this rigid religious atmosphere. As a result, it becomes obligatory for the inhabitants to learn Urdu, the women to adopt veil, children to receive Islamic orthodox teachings and to grow up with all sorts of conservative values.

The role of Islamic organizations in India is also not beyond criticism. These organizations are less concerned about social and educational reforms but instead spend most of their energy and resources to organize the community in religious lines. By stressing on an identity related threat, they try to segregate the minds of common Muslims from secular lenience to religious fanaticism.

The increasing communal polarization of the Muslims has aggravated after the speedy growth of Hindutva ideology in Indian society following the Babri Masjid demolition on 6 December, 1992. This event and the subsequent communal propaganda set off by the hydra headed Sangh Parivar was responsible for strengthening the anti minority bias in all sections of Indian society and was successful to manage a parliamentary victory in the national elections for its political wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Upbeat after the electoral victory, the Parivar and its offshoots started to systemically unleash sporadic attacks on the minorities in many parts of the country and forced them to gradually segregate from the mainstream. While under direct or indirect communal attacks, the socially alienated ordinary Muslims cling more towards religion for comfort and support. Communal elements among the Muslim community have also added fuel to the fire. These elements equally contributed the increasing communal polarization and have stirred up a widely shared perception among the community that their identity is being undermined by the systemic propaganda and actions of Hindu communal forces. The degraded conditions of the ordinary Muslims were bit by bit gathering all the right ingredients for extremist Islamic ideology to spread its root among them.

Just when the Gujarat riots happened.

Immediately after the terrible incidence of Godhra train burning on 27 February 2002, Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi called it “a one-sided collective terrorist attack by one community”. The following day, his speech was broadcasted on Ahmedabad Doordarshan where he remarked, “…we will set an example that nobody, not even in his dreams, thinks of committing a heinous crime like this.” From 28 February onwards, in the pretext of the ‘terrorist’ label, Hindutva communal fanatics with the active support of the state police unleashed an unprecedented collective violence upon the entire Muslims in the state. The pogrom was like a moral compulsion to the perpetrators that their robust action was the right reaction to Godhra train burning and was essential to cleanse the Indian society from the evils of radical Islam – to ‘defend the Hindu religion’. Numerous Muslim houses, shops along with people were gutted; mosques and shrines were damaged or destroyed and in the place makeshift Hindu temples were built. The largescale violence did not spare women and children; wealth and status could not shield the victims. The chief minister, instead of controlling the situation justified the pogrom by saying “it was a spontaneous reaction of the people against the terrible events of Godhra”. According to official estimate, 1044 people were killed in the violence – 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus (including 58 victims of the Godhra train fire). 1,50,000 were left homeless.

Who were beside the victimized Muslims when Gujarat was burning? It was some Muslim voluntary groups and few social activists. On ground, not a single political party dared to confront the killers or has protected the traumatized Muslims. Literary critic and activist Ganesh Devy at that time had bitterly remarked, “There is no political or ideological divide in Gujarat on the Muslim question; even the Congress hates Muslims.” The government looked the other way when its healing touch was required the most. Under brutal attack perpetrated by the religious majority, the hapless Muslims cocooned into grungy relief camps for years and were fixed more ardently to their faith. This is a perfect time for fanatic ideas to creep in. There is always an immense possibility that extremist radical thought could infiltrate and influence the victims and their kith and kin, mostly youths, when they find their whole surroundings including the civil society, government agencies and the hate factories of vernacular media are totally against them only because they belong to a particular religion. A compassionate social attitude and a concerned government could have arrested this risk but it was an absurd expectation from a society completely polarized on religious line, where a mere 9.1 per cent are Muslims. Gujarat riots of 2002 were a slap in the face of a country which proclaims to be the biggest secular-democratic state of the world.

Gujarati Hindus are arrogantly proud for what they have done in the post Godhra days. ‘Gujarati Asmita' (Gujarati pride) was finally been legalized when the first part of justice G T Nanavati Commission report was made public recently. The report supported the chief minister’s claim that Godhra was a ‘terrorist conspiracy’. It also hinted to give a clean chit to the Gujarat government when it says that there was no evidence of any lapse on the state government’s part, “in providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of communal riots or in complying with the directions given by the National Human Rights Commission.” The Nanavati Commission exclusively adopted the version of the Gujarat government’s investigating officer Noel Parmar’s report in the Godhra train burning case. Interestingly, Parmar’s same report was earlier not accepted by the Supreme Court which on March, 2008 has ordered a fresh investigation of the post-Godhra violence. Earlier, two riot cases were transferred outside Gujarat to Maharashtra by the Supreme Court because the court understood that it is impossible for Muslim riot victims to get justice from the judiciary of Narendra Modi’s Gujarat.

No one in Gujarat now talks about or recalls the 2002 riots as if nothing of that sort has ever happened there. The events are supposed to be too ‘sensitive’ to talk about. The collective Gujarati mind has been shaped so perfectly by the Sangh Parivar’s systemic propaganda that even a mention about the riots is confronted with stiff resistance from the common people of Gujarat today. Even the most effected Muslims have adjusted with the situation and try hard to ‘forget’ about the carnage they faced. Instead, their keen effort now is to motivate themselves by the vibrant Gujarat dream.

Apart from the Muslims, India also comprises other minority groups like Christians, Sikhs and Zoroastrians (Parsis). In 1999, a missionary Graham Steins were burnt to death by Bajrang Dal goons along with his two minor sons in Orissa. The Christians were also targeted in Gujarat where similar incidents of church burning and brutal killing took place precisely like what is happening today in Orissa, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh. And why not? Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Guru M. S. Golwalkar had marked out Muslims and Christians as ‘internal enemy No. 1 and 2’. Are they not ‘foreign invaders’ aimed to annihilate Hindus? The charge against Christians is for forcibly converting people. In the contrary, the census figures show that the number of Christians in India has dropped from 2.5 to 2.3 per cent. Guru Golwalkar had put in plain words that:

"The foreign races in Hindusthan must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e. of the Hindu nation, and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or [they] may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment — not even citizen's rights." (M. S. Golwalkar: We, Our Nationhood Defined, 1939)

Today Guru Golwalkar’s loyal disciples, the VHP and the Bajrang Dal are just complying with this treatise. Minorities can live in India but only at the mercy of the Hindus. If they speak out about their grievances, their concerns and aspirations, they will be dubbed as ‘anti-national’ or humiliated as being ‘appeased’ too much. When Professor Mushirul Hasan, the Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia University offers legal aid on behalf of the University to the students accused for terror acts, he is harshly blamed for ‘supporting’ terrorists. At that point the accusers completely close their eyes to the fact that it is a constitutional right of the accused students as citizens of India to be entitled for legal help until their crime is proved in a court. When the same Professor Hasan was targeted by Muslim fundamentalists when he took a stand against banning Salman Rushdie's controversial book Satanic Verses – the same people has hailed him for taking a courageous position.

Who is a terrorist? Those who meticulously plan and blast bombs in crowded public places, attack temples with automatic weapons and brutally kill innocent lives in the name of Islamic jihad or those who butcher innocent lives, violently evict the victims from their homes and turn them into refugees, rape the women, destroy mosques and burn churches in the name of Hindu nationalism? Both are dangerous, both are malicious. Both are foreign funded, both have their own versions to justify their acts. Both are terrorists.

The utter hypocrisy with a section of our so called ‘concerned’ and ‘patriotic’ middle class is that they consider all secular voices as pseudo secular and thinks that condemning both Islamic and Hindutva fanatics is like ‘falling in a trap’. They are severely critical against jihadi homegrown Muslims but covertly supportive to the fanaticism of the vicious Hindutva forces. After independence almost seven decades has passed but still they never miss a chance of Muslim bashing by relating them with the 61 years old Partition day mayhem of 1947. However, these very same people carefully ignore the 16 year old Babri Masjid demolition of 1992 and purposely forget the only 6 year old Gujarat pogrom days of 2002. It has also become their obligation to glorify the headship of Narendra Modi as the potential savior of India. Their perception of democracy is selective. Muslim terror in the name of Allah is loathsome, Hindu terror in the name of Ram is explicable.

Ordinary Muslims should realize that only a fresh liberal outlook acquired from modern education can elevate them from their misery and disorientation. The reasons behind their socio-economic backwardness in large parts of this country are primarily due to this social stagnation and educational marginalization. The Muslim youths today who have been motivated as jihadi and opts the terrorist path are truly misguided. The solution to homegrown terrorism mostly depends on how the state and society as a whole, efforts to do something about the grievances of common Muslims and thus prevent their youths to be misguided by lethal influences. The state and society should also realize that until provocation is barred and the rule of law is evenly established, the problem will persist and keep India susceptible to more serious damages in future.

The terror attack in Ahmedabad

It is a matter of extreme worry and grief about what happened on Saturday in Ahmedabad. The terror attack was another deliberate and brutal attempt against the innocent populace of this ill-fated country. The nation was glum to observed the empty and feeble stares from the swollen eyes of a gravely wounded little child Yash Vyas, his lips quivering in unbearable pain. The blood tainted hospital floors and patient trolleys, scattered human bodies and body parts, lamenting fathers-mothers-sisters of the poor victims are some of the several images of deep agony flashed live from Ahmedabad. The most alarming part is, for the first time public hospitals were under the attack where hapless victims were rushed for emergency treatments.

As pointed out by a Times of India report, there was a clear design behind the blasts that indicates that the Muslim extremist group planned the malevolent act as revenge to the Gujarat riots of 2002. The bombs were planted in selectively chosen areas those are notably related with Chief Minister Narendra Modi, the Gujarat assembly Speaker Ashok Bhatt and VHP leader Pravin Togadia, the three main faces alleged for stimulating the post-Godhra genocide. Gujarat and its Hindu leaders were always on top of the list of probable extremist targets. The attack was also another terrible failure of the country’s security agencies and the concerning central and state governments. Particularly when a similar attack took place the previous day in Bangalore and the whole country was supposed to be under high alert.

A surprisingly stupid and baseless confidence was prevailing among the government authorities, the ruling party, and the general public in Gujarat that the extremists will not dare to strike a major assault to this state. What was the basis of this confidence? It was the result of a perception widely propagated by the Hindutva forces that in Mr. Modi’s Gujarat, Muslim ‘menaces’ are dealt with an iron hand, whoever may try to break the rules of the Hindu order is appropriately ‘paid back’ here. Gujarat under Mr. Modi is therefore the safest haven for Hindus in India where minorities can survive only when they agree to obey the superior Hindu diktats. This fascistic believe of might was shattered by the weekend blasts which confirmed again that jingoistic method and ideas could never prevent the long reach of terrorism. In the contrary, it subsequently fuels the possibility in a greater extent. This fact has being proven again and again all through the world and now in Ahmedabad, the vibrant Gujarat city.

Who did mastermind the serial blasts in Ahmedabad? A local front for the international Jihadi groups called ‘Indian Mujahideen’, arrogantly describing themselves as "radicals of Islam” has claimed the responsibility through an e-mail send just before the blasts to some television channels under different ID’s. In this e-mail, they have challenged the security agencies to try to foil their future terrorist plans. Earlier this group had similarly claimed responsibility for the serial bomb attacks in Bangalore, Jaipur and Uttar Pradesh and in all the cases their modus operandi was alike. Their rages are particularly aimed against a multi headed socio-cultural nationalist organization of this country. No matter what may be their raison d'être, this group must be immediately nabbed and sternly punished for their horrendous crime against humanity.

Whatever advance security measures are essential to tackle this terrorist surge in India, should be demarcated and immediately acted upon. This is a specialized job and therefore must be handed over to the experts from the respected fields to deal with. Our politicians must ensure to constrain themselves from unnecessarily interfering them. Instead, they should focus more on the social aspects of terrorism. A discriminated society is the perfect breeding ground for terrorism. Would it be possible to resist terrorism by keeping a large number of religious minority people segregated from the mainstream and by treating them as second-class citizens? Certainly not. Our politicians therefore should be more on the go to abolish the dividing wall and work on building social harmony. To ensure peace, unity among the masses is essential.

If the present political bosses of Gujarat and their socio-cultural associates realize this truth, it will be the only positive outcome of the Saturday blasts.

Image courtesy: NDTV.com