Paper No. 5577
\nDated 09-Oct-2013
![\"jama](\"https:\/\/patriotsforumindia.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/09\/jama-masjid.png\")
<\/a>By R. Upadhyay
Since no honest effort was ever made in secular India to bridge the
\ngap of communal mistrust between the two major religious communities that was
\nprimarily due to historical wrongs, one should not be surprised that communal
\nriots continue to occur frequently.
The repeated
\nblame games of all the political parties over this social menace as seen
\nrecently in Kistwar of Jammu and Kashmir state and in Muzaffarnagar and its
\nadjoining districts of Uttar Pradesh without tackling the issue in all its
\naspects gives the impression that the parties are only practising political
\ngimmickry!
Medieval Legacy:
Is it not an irony that in post-British India, the country\u2019s
\npolitical leadership in pursuit of votes and vote banks is carrying forward the
\nviolent medieval legacy only for their political interests and dividends that
\ncome from such riots?
The pre-medieval invaders of
\nIndia generally settled in Indian soil and merged in the cultural cauldron of
\nthis land. But the Islamic conquests were different. The conquerors indulged in
\nmass killings, forced conversions with the superimposition of an alien
\nArab-Turk-Perso culture all in the name of religion. This created a permanent
\nconflict between the two major religious groups. The creation of Pakistan in the
\nname of religion and the failure of post independence Indian rulers to bridge
\nthe gap between the two communities have only exacerbated the distrust between
\nthe two communities.
Praising their faith as God\u2019s
\nfinal and perfect religion, these conquerors declared that it was their divine
\nright to conquer the non-Muslim world and to superimpose their culture on the
\npeople of the conquered territories. This mindset of the invaders clashed with
\nthe spiritual beliefs of the conquered people and thus created a permanent
\nchasm. One cannot but agree that this was not just a conflict of religion but a
\nconflict of civilization between the ruling class and the ruled.
The invaders had earlier succeeded in their mission in
\nPersia and other gulf countries and rejected Judaism and Christianity as
\ndefective variants of Islam but the response of the natives in India was
\ndifferent and the ruled continued their resistance all through. Since then, the
\nsocio-cultural division between the two communities had remained a permanent
\nfeature of Indian society.
Nobel Prize winner V. S.
\nNaipaul in his book Half a Life observed that \u201cIslam has had a calamitous effect
\non converted peoples. To be converted you have to destroy your past, destroy
\nyour history. You have to stamp on it, you have to say \u201cmy ancestral culture
\ndoes not exist, it does not matter\u201d.
The British
\nRule and its narrow objectives.
After the end of
\nthe imperialistic Islamic rule in 1857 and shift of power from the Muslim rulers
\nto the British, there was a marked change in the attitude of the Hindus also
\ntowards the former as well as the new ruler. While \u201cthe Hindus looked upon the
\nBritish rule as deliverance from Muslim yoke, and considered English education
\nas a blessing, the Muslims in their eagerness to preserve their religion and
\nreligious views rejected English education\u201d. (Muslim Politics and Leadership in
\nSouth Asian Sub-continent by Yusuf Abbasi, page 13).
The British ruler did not like to resolve the conflict between the
\ntwo communities. They looked at the whole issue as a law and order one and
\nemphasis was on communal harmony to prevent a break down in law and order and
\nnothing more.
The post-Mogul historians repeatedly
\nwrote about the Indo-Arab composite culture of this land but ignored the wounded
\npsyche of the natives. Though the Hindus and Muslims were living together for
\nmore than a millennium both the groups always remained in social isolation from
\neach other. At the instance of Mahatma Gandhi, the Hindus joined the Khilafat
\nMovement launched by the Muslims against the British for restoration of Ottoman
\nEmpire but this unity was also a temporary one.
Partition & thereafter:
The Indian
\nNational Congress had opposed the two-nation theory tooth and nail but its
\nleaders succumbed to the pressure of Muslim League leaders who gave a call for
\nDirect Action in 1946 that led to widespread communal riots in the
\nsub-continent. These riots were said to be one of the immediate causes of
\nPartition.
When India emerged as an independent
\ndemocratic and secular republic, the then ruling Congress only tried to
\nphilosophise the Hindu-Muslim issue by repeating the same Marxian theory of
\ncomposite culture by ignoring the fact that the \u201cpang of toothache cannot be
\nborne by philosophical speculation\u201d. Of course the term secular was not
\nincorporated in the constitution at the time of its framing, its spirit was
\nsecular. But instead of formulating a practicable policy to resolve the
\nhistorical communal conflict, the ruling political party carried forward the
\nsame policy of the earlier rulers. Ironically, the Marxists and Left-liberal
\nintelligentsia also supported them.
Revival of the
\nMuslim League politics by the Muslim leaders and their parties:
This resulted in the Muslim League reviving the
\nmovement for the separate identity of the Muslims on the basis of religion which
\nwas nothing but a fight for a shared political power on the basis of a separate
\nreligious identity. For them, democracy and secularism were alien to their
\nfaith. \u201cDemocracy is a concept completely alien to the Muslim psyche to the
\nextent that there is no equivalent terminology for it in Arabic or other
\nlanguages spoken by Muslims (Understanding Mohammad \u2013 A psychobiography of
\nAllah\u2019 Prophet by Ali Sina, a Canadian Muslim of Iranian descent). They ignored
\nthe concept of common national identity as accepted by other minorities like
\nJews, Christians and Zoroastrians (Parsis) who hardly had any communal conflict
\nin this secular country.
Had the ruling
\nestablishment been bold enough and abandoned the concept of minority and
\nmajority in framing the constitution, the Indian Muslims like their counterparts
\nin other non-Muslim majority democratic countries of the world would have
\nresigned themselves to being equal citizens. They would have either opted for
\nPakistan or accepted the concept of common law for all. But our constitution
\nmakers ignored the hard historical fact of religion which was the main reason
\nbehind Partition and again divided the people into majority (read Hindu) and
\nminority (read Muslims) on the basis of religion by incorporating some articles
\nwhich provided special privileges to the latter. This generated a communal
\nconsciousness in both the communities and also revived the secreting historical
\nwounds in the psyche of the majority community particularly when the ruling
\nestablishment remained more concerned with the communal demands of the
\nminorities. Emergence of other communal organisations could not be prevented.
Vote Bank Politics to the Fore:
In between Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to Manmohan Singh, a number of
\ncommissions and councils like National Integration Council, Minority Commission,
\nRangnath Mishra Committee, Sachchar Committee were set up by the Central
\nGovernment but such efforts could hardly resolve the communal conflict in the
\ncountry. These exercises rather prompted almost all the political parties to go
\nfor competitive bidding to go for \u201cvote banks\u201d in the elections. Distribution of
\ncommunal sops to the minorities particularly in pre-election year by the so
\ncalled secular parties only accelerated the identity politics played by the
\nminority religious leaders.
By and large only the
\nvote-seeking political parties are blamed whenever there is any communal riot.
\nBut the so called secular media should be held equally responsible for not
\nagitating against the vote bank politics being played by the political parties.
\nIf only the government had not interfered with the Shahbano case, things could
\nhave been different today. But it was not to be as vote bank politics appeared
\nto be more important and crucial for survival of some of the political
\nparties.
Keeping alive the communal issues like
\nover a decade old Gujarat riots, arrest of Muslim suspects in terror cases,
\narrest and conviction of Batala House encounter in 2008 and 2013 respectively
\nsuggest that the Muslim leaders have made it a strategy to flex their muscle on
\nany issue which goes against the Muslims.
The Batla
\nEncounter
Within a month of the Batala House
\nencounter in September 2008, various Muslim organisations organised a meeting in
\nJama Masjid Delhi on 14th October and condemned the arrest of Muslim youths who
\nwere suspected as accused in this encounter. It may be mentioned that Shahi Imam
\nof this mosque in his invitation letters had highlighted the \u201cbomb blasts, blame
\ngame, illegal arrests, and torture of Muslim youths\u201d and also alleged: – \u201c the
\nhighly discriminatory actions of State police forces and central intelligence
\nagencies have let loose a reign of terror to which Central government has turned
\na blind eye\u201d. He felt that \u201cif we don’t unite by closing our ranks to meet this
\nchallenge, history will never forgive us\u201d. The meeting made this encounter a
\npolitical issue which is still persisting.
Surprisingly, even the then Jamia Milia Islamia Vice Chancellor
\nMashirul Hasan a widely acclaimed campaigner of \u2018moderate and tolerant Islam\u2019
\njoined the communal polarisation move and offered to provide legal assistance to
\nthe two arrested students of the university. He even led a street march in
\nsupport of the Islamists.
Thus, with a sustained
\ncampaign the Muslim leaders succeeded in convincing the community members across
\nthe country that their community members killed in the police encounter and
\narrested were innocent and not terrorists. They went to the extent of preaching
\nthat the death of Mohan Sharma was caused by the bullet fired by his own
\ncolleague either deliberately or by accident.
Revisiting Pre Partition Scenario:
The
\nincrease in communal riots since the beginning of the new millennium on the eve
\nof election years namely 2004, 2009 and 2013 shows that India is revisiting the
\npre-partition challenge of the communal flame engulfing the country. But the
\nmost unfortunate part of the scenario is the role of political parties,
\n\u2018secular\u2019 intelligentsia, journalists, writers and academics in running down the
\nimage of the country in the world.
If the people of
\nthe country in general and ruling class in particular do not take lessons from
\nthe historical wrongs committed by Indians who brought defeat and dishonour to
\nthe nation either to save their throne or skin, we are bound to fail in bridging
\nthe gap of communal mistrust in the society. The prevailing dissatisfaction of
\nthe Muslim community and consequent unrest is a dangerous sign for both the
\ninternal and external security of the country.
The
\nanswer lies in a strong political will of both the state and central leadership
\nto shed their politics of vote bank and one sided approach in handling the
\ncommunal riots as otherwise the country will continue facing the challenge of
\nthe medieval legacy. Muzaffarnagar riot will not be the last and we will only
\nsee more riots in future.
(He can be reached at
\ne-mail ramashray60@rediffmail.com)
Tags:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Communal Riots in Secular IndiaPaper No. 5577 Dated 09-Oct-2013By R. UpadhyaySince no… more