top
Anti-War
Anti-War
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Marketing Fascism As Hindutva

by RSS=Fascism
"Islamic fundamentalist" is a familiar cliche, one that has haunted the American imagination ever since Iran, 1979. In contrast, the word "Hindu" calls to mind lightly-clad figures dancing about with flowers and finger-cymbals.

So "Hindu fundamentalist" may seem odd -- but they are here. Indeed, with 720,000 Indian troops massed at the Pakistani border, and democracy in a kind of patriotic suspension since this round of fighting over Kashmir began, India is beginning to resemble a fascist state.


Marketing Fascism As Hindutva

— Shamsul Islam

The former Prime Minister and socialist leader, Chandra Shekhar, while participating in the debate over Gujarat violence in Lok Sabha on April 30, 2002, said, "Parliamentary democracy appears to have reached its nadir. The Nazis also similarly misused Parliament." He was specifically referring to the fascist outburst in the House of Ms. Uma Bharati, Union Minister and a storm trooper of RSS since early 1990s. He said Uma Bharati’s speech reminded him of the manner in which Hitler and his troopers manipulated the German Parliament. He seemed quite prophetic when he said, "This type of language will be calamitous for the health of the nation. It resembles a speech by a Nazi volunteer rather than a Hindu sanyasin. You are deliberately playing into the hands of those who want to fracture nation". Uma Bharati while reacting to these comments of Chandra Shekhar said, "If Chandra Shekhar compares me to Nazis it means he does not understand either the Nazis or me".

44new.1.jpg"It should surprise nobody that RSS and Fascism-Nazism have old fraternal ties. In fact, any student of Indian Politics, specially of communal politics, knows the historically close ties which bind Uma Bharati’s RSS and totalitarianism of German and Italian varieties. Can Uma Bharati and her tribe deny the facts with which archives of RSS must be full?

RSS was the brain child of K.B. Hedgewar, V.D. Savarkar and B.S. Moonje. All of them, including M.S. Golwalkar who became chief (sarsanghchalak) of RSS after Hedgewar, were great fans of Fascism and Nazism. The Italian researcher of Indian politics, Marzia Casolari (‘Hindutva’s Foreign tie-up in the 1930s — Archival Evidence’) has done pioneer work in tracing the fraternal links between RSS founders on the one hand and Fascism and Nazism on the other. "The existence of direct contacts between the representatives of the  (Italian) fascist regime, including Mussolini, and Hindu nationalists demonstrates that Hindu nationalism had much more than an abstract interest in the ideology and practice of fascism. The interest of Indian Hindu nationalists in fascism and Mussolini must not be considered as dictated by an occasional curiosity, confined to a few individuals; rather, it should be considered as the culminating result of the attention that Hindu nationalists, especially in Maharashtra, focussed on Italian dictatorship and its leader. To them, fascism appeared to be an example of conservative revolution"

Moonje had a personal audience with Mussolini on March 19, 1931 at 3 p.m., in Palazzo Venzia, the headquarters of the Fascist government. The meeting has been recorded in the diary on March 20 in the following words: "I shook hands with him saying that I am Dr Moonje. He knew everything about me and appeared to be closely, following the events of the Indian struggle for freedom…Signor Mussolini asked me if I have visited the University. I said I am interested in the military training of boys and have been visiting the Military Schools of England, France and Germany. I have now come to Italy for the same purpose and I am very grateful to say that the Foreign Office and the War Office have made good arrangements for my visiting these schools. I just saw this morning and afternoon the Balilla and the Fascist Organisations and I was much impressed. Italy needs them for her development and prosperity. I do not see anything objectionable though I have been frequently reading in the newspapers not very friendly criticisms about them and about your Excellency also. ‘Signor Mussolini: What is your opinion about them?’ ‘Dr Moonje: Your Excellency, I am much impressed. Every aspiring and growing Nation needs such organisations.’ ‘Signor Mussolini – who appeared very pleased – said – Thanks but yours is an uphill task. However I wish you every success in return.’ Saying this he got up and I also got up to take his leave." 44new.2.jpg"

Once Moonje was back in India, he kept the promise made in his diary and started immediately to work for the foundation of his military school and for the militant reorganisation of Hindu society in Maharashtra. He openly made reference to the Italian and German examples: "In fact, leaders should imitate the youth movements of Germany and the Balilla and Fascist organisations of Italy. I think they are eminently suited for introduction in India, adapting them to suit the special conditions. I have been very much impressed by these movements and I have seen their activities with my own eyes in all details".

On March 31, 1934 Moonje, Hedgewar and others had a meeting, the subject of which was again the military organisation of the Hindus, along Italian and German lines. Moonje told the gathering: "I have thought out a scheme based on Hindu Dharm Shashtra which provides for standardisation of Hinduism throughout India... But the point is that this ideal cannot be brought to effect unless we have our own swaraj with a Hindu as a dictator like Shivaji of old or Mussolini or Hitler of the present day in Italy or Germany." Moonje also wrote Preface to ‘The Scheme of the Central Hindu Military Society and its Military School’ where he declared: "This training is meant for qualifying and fitting our boys for the game of killing masses of men with the ambition of winning victory with the best possible causalities (sic) of dead and wounded while causing the utmost possible to the adversary". One can see how this ‘mantra’ was meticulously applied in the cleansing of Muslims in Gujarat recently.

The other great mentor of RSS, V.D. Savarkar also had great liking for Hitler’s Nazism and fascism of Mussolini. While delivering the Presidential address to the 22nd Session of Hindu Mahasabha in 1940 at Madura he said, "There is no reason to suppose that Hitler must be a human monster because he passes off as a Nazi or Churchill is a demi-God because he calls himself a Democrat. Nazism proved undeniably the saviour of Germany under the set of circumstances Germany was placed in…"

S 44new.3.jpg"avarkar had chided Nehru for opposing Fascism and Nazism in India. According to him, "Who are we to dictate to Germany, Japan or Russia or Italy to choose a particular form of policy of government simply because we woo it out of academical attraction? Surely Hitler knows better than Pandit Nehru does what suits Germany best. The very fact that Germany or Italy has so wonderfully recovered and grown so powerful as never before at the touch of Nazi or Fascist magical wand is enough to prove that those political "isms" were the most congenial tonics their health demanded". Savarkar had supported Hitler’s anti–Jewish pogroms and on October 14, 1938, he suggested the following solution for the Muslim problem in India: "A Nation is formed by a majority living therein. What did the Jews do in Germany? They being in minority were driven out from Germany".

M.S. Golwalkar, ideologue of RSS who came to head the organization after Hedgewar, naturally, inherited love for Fascism and Nazism from his seniors. He continued to idealize the Nazi cultural nationalism of Hitler, which was nothing else but ‘ethnic cleansing’, in the following words (from We Or our Nationhood Defined), "German Race pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by".

Golwalkar unhesitatingly wanted to model his Hindu Rashtra on Hitler’s totalitarian and fascist pattern as is clear from the following words of his in the same book: "It is worth bearing well in mind how these old Nations solve their minorities problem. They do not undertake to recognize any separate element in their polity. Emigrants have to get themselves naturally assimilated in the principal mass of the population, the National Race, by adopting its culture and language and sharing in its aspirations, by losing all consciousness of their separate existence, forgetting their foreign origin. If they do not do so, they live merely as outsiders, bound by all the codes and conventions of the Nation, at the sufferance of the Nation and deserving no special protection, far less any privilege or rights. There are only two courses open to the foreign elements, either to merge themselves in the national race and adopt its culture, or to live at its mercy so long as the national race may allow them to do so and to quit the country at the sweet will of the national race. That is the only sound view on the minorities problem. That is the only logical and correct solution. That alone keeps the national life healthy and undisturbed. That alone keeps the nation safe from the danger of a cancer developing into its body politic of the creation of a state within a state. From this stand point, sanctioned by the experience of shrewd old nations, the foreign races in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, 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 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. There is, at least should be, no other course for them to adopt. We are an old nation: let us deal, as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races who have chosen to live in our country".

Are you listening, great sanyasin, Umaji?


Home

 

Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by BJP=RSS=Nazis
Given the history of the RSS and their connections with the BJP should anyone have been surprised by the massacres in Gujarat? Why did the West remain silent and let the BJP get away with mass murder?
TRUTH ABOUT GUJRAT CARNAGE -CONCERNED CITIZENS’ TRIBUNAL’S REPORT ON GUJRAT
by Asghar Ali Engineer 7:13am Wed Dec 4 '02

(Secular Perspective December, 1-15, 2002)
The communal carnage in Gujarat early this year had shaken the whole world. The
country had never witnessed such carnage before and after independence. Day
after day for more than three months Muslims were massacred most brutally, toll
unofficially mounting to more than 2000 though officially admitted deaths do not
exceed one thousand. Heinous crime of rape was committed by the VHP provoked
hoodlums against several women. In one case Kausar Begum from Naroda Patia, an
eight month pregnant was raped, her womb split open and child extracted and
thrown into fire. The chief Minister Narendra Modi justified all this as equal
and opposite reaction to an action based on Newton’s law.

http://www.india.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=2434&group=webcast

by Gautam Shi
False and baseless claims. They are to malign the national movement.

BJP is equal to all. RSS welcomes minorities. Muslims, Hindus and Christians of India are the same race therefore RSS/BJP cannot be Nazis as Nazis were against all races except the German Super Race. RSS/BJP simply want all indians to love India first. Then they are hindu/muslim/sikh etc.

Sadly islam does not teach this. Hence the problems all over the world of islamic terrorism.
These lyes are baseless and usually made up by communists in India in order to undermine the nationalist movement.

RSS/BJP are purely nationalist. So called "secular" in Indian politics are abound with caste divisionalism and religious favouristism to minorities.

RSS and BJP both see Indians as Indians only. They openly welcome muslims and christians into their ranks.

To compare with facism is inorder to blind and misinform people inorder so no real analysis of the RSS/BJP positon can take place.

It has been the facist and mazi streaks of islam that has partitioned india into pakistan and causing the terror in kashmir. It is they who are facist and nazi like in their campaign to exterminate non believers.

BJP-NDA governemnet of India is headed by a Muslim president. If they are Nazi's then why did they nominate a muslim and indeed openly welcome muslims into their ranks.???

Satya meva jayate- --- The Truth will always triumph
by RSS=Indian Nazi Party
Indian Groups in US Provide Terror Funding: Investigation Demanded
A Foreign Exchange of Terror: US Asked to Investigate
Indian Muslim Council
Updated on 2002-11-24 09:08:55


SAN FRANCISCO, United States: Nov 24 (PNS) - US Justice Department and State department urged to investigate US based Tax-Exempt relief organization with links to extremist groups .

Indian Muslim Council-USA (IMC-USA), a Washington Based human rights advocacy group for activism against rising fascism is calling on the US Justice Department and State Department to investigate a US Based, India Development and Relief Fund (IDRF) a Tax-Exempt relief organization for allegedly being a conduit to funnel Tax-exempt donations to fascist groups in India. This comes on the heels of a damning report "A Foreign Exchange of Hate (FEH)" released by Sabrang Communications Private Limited (India) and The South Asia Citizens Web (France). The FEH report offers incontrovertible information on the involvement of IDRF in funneling Tax-Exempt donations to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) an extremist group with fascist ideology. The conclusions are apparent, IDRF contributes significantly to the creation of infrastructure and promotion of an ideology that promulgates hate.



This report further corroborates the assertion of many human rights and secular groups that millions of dollars are being sent from the United States to the extremist groups in India, like the VHP (a.k.a World Hindu Council) and the RSS. These tax-exempt charitable donations are being sent to groups that spread hate, indulge in ethnic cleansing and genocide of minorities in India as recently as March 2002 when over 2000 Indians were killed, many burnt alive, hundreds of women and young girls raped and burnt. The VHP has been at the forefront of the recent carnage in Gujarat and The VHP working president, Ashok Singhal called it "a successful experiment, which will be repeated all over the country". The same groups are responsible for anti-Christian violence in India. Between January 1998 and February 1999 alone, there were 116 attacks against the Christian community in India. The South Asia Human Rights Documentation Center report states: "Most of these attacks have been perpetrated by individuals connected to the Sangh Parivar, which is comprised of rightwing Hindu fundamentalist organizations including elements from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (World Hindu Council), Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Bajrang Dal and Hindu Jagran Manch. These cells with strong leanings to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal are teaching young minds hate and bigotry. Communal feelings are spreading among the Non-Resident community in the U.S., you can almost feel it in the air." [Aditi Desai, a sociologist from New York and a former lecturer at Delhi University and a consultant for the U.N.]





IMC-USA is also calling United Way and major corporations including CISCO, Sun, Oracle, HP and AOL Time Warner to drop IDRF from their list of charities so that their foundation dollars are not abused to promote the fascist ideology in India and also in the U.S.

[Indian Muslim Council may be contacted at: http://www.imc-usa.org]

http://www.paknews.com/specialNews.php?id=1666&date1=2002-11-24
by BJP=RSS=massacres in Gujarat
"In Gujarat, I heard echoes of the RSS view that minorities in India must "earn the goodwill of Hindus" even from those who assured me that they were Congress supporters. "

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/xml/comp/articleshow?artid=30985609

See Also http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/12/1549801_comment.php for more on RSS/BJP ties to the Nazi Party and racism
by George Iype
Having decided to put up Colonel Laxmi Sehgal as its presidential candidate against the National Democratic Alliance nominee A P J Abdul Kalam, the Left parties have launched a campaign to expose what they claim are the missile scientist's 'links' with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

Leaders of the Communist Party of India -- Marxist seem to be on an overdrive in Kerala holding press conferences and conducting street corner meetings proclaiming that Kalam is not the right choice as the President of India.

Some CPI-M leaders privately claim that Kalam got the presidential nomination as a result of a deal the RSS struck with the Bharatiya Janata Party leaders and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

"Ever since the nuclear tests of 1998, RSS leaders have been ardent Kalam supporters. The RSS publications across the country have been proclaiming Kalam to be the true Indian," a senior CPI-M leader pointed out.

CPI-M has also dug up Kalam's 'poetic connections' with the RSS. Communist leaders said that a poem written by Kalam found its first expression in Kesari, a vernacular Malayalam RSS mouthpiece published from Kozhikode.

In the poem published in Kesari's annual issue in 2000, Kalam explains the progress of missile development in India and his dreams about the future of the country. Kesari had also published a number of articles on Kalam hailing him as a visionary whose mission it said 'is an article of faith for the RSS in the country'.

According to CPI-M leader V S Achuthanandan, the very fact that Kalam decided to publish his poems in Kesari does not augur well for the presidency and for the country.

"It is not the CPI-M's job to investigate whether Kalam had any links with the RSS. But it was not proper from his part to publish his poems in RSS magazines. I hope he does not continue this once he becomes the President," the CPI-M leader told rediff.com.

Achuthanandan said that ever since the nuclear tests of 1998, the Hindutva leaders have been hailing Kalam 'as their man'.

"I do not know if Kalam has any definite links with the RSS and other Hindu organisations. But it is certain that the BJP and RSS people very much wanted Kalam to be their presidential candidate after the nuclear tests," Achuthandan said.

CPI-M leaders said that a number of RSS publications across the country have been publicly hailing Kalam as the 'driving force behind the Hindutva brigade'. They point out that Kalam's pictures and posters have been gracing the offices of BJP and its affiliate Hindu organisations across the country since 1998.

One of the pamphlets that the CPI-M local leaders released on Monday quotes from RSS publication Panchajanya: "Indianism is Hindutva. This does not mean that Muslims should convert to Hinduism or Christians should go to temples. What it does mean is that you can be what you like, but share the same vision of Abdul Kalam. This vision is the driving force behind the RSS."

"If the RSS says that their driving force is Kalam, then there is reason to believe that he is not be the right choice as the President of India," the pamphlet added.

The pamphlet distributed across Kerala also said the person occupying the post of President, which is the highest Constitutional office, must be able to grasp and respond to the political developments in the country. It added that Kalam does not possess these 'presidential qualities'.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/jun/18prez3.htm
by milligazette
The RSS resolution makes it clear in no uncertain terms that Muslims in India can only live at the mercy of extremist Hindu groups, says Zafar Agha

One can hold Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) responsible for the killing of Muslims in Gujarat. It was, after all, the VHP that had given a strike call in protest against the barbaric killings of kar sevaks on the Sabarmati Express in Godhra. But one has to be aware that Modi and the VHP are responsible only to the extent that they carried out the orders of their masters and implemented their instructions of in letter and spirit. And the orders for "retaliatory strike", it seems, came from none other than the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)-the spiritual guru and mentor of the BJP and VHP.

Finally, the RSS let the world know that they were behind the Ahmedabad killings. The RSS announced that if Muslims dare to do what they did in Godhra on March 27, they should be ready to face many more Ahmedabads in this country. If one has any doubts about the RSS' intentions, one should read the resolution that its executive committee passed on March 17 in Bangalore.

The RSS resolution, released by key RSS functionary Madan Das Devi on Sunday warned Muslims that unless they earned the "goodwill" of the Hindus, their safety could not be guaranteed in India. "Let the Muslims understand their real safety lies in the goodwill of the majority," it said. To leave nothing ambiguous, the RSS functionary Madan Das Devi clarified to the Muslims telling them, "Winning goodwill means respecting, tolerating and cooperating with the majority community."

In other words, the RSS has laid down the parameter of Muslims' safety telling them: you live in this country at the mercy of the Hindus and Hindus alone. If you do not behave, we will engineer many more Ahmedabads in this country.

What has happened to this country, which has a rich tradition, whose sole guardian the RSS claims to be? Can this be the language and tone of a civilized body claiming to be the representative of millions of Hindus? This is the language of fascists who believe only in violence and mayhem.

The RSS, through its resolution, was baring not only its fangs but was also giving a sample of its psyche and ideology that propels its front organizations like the BJP and the VHP. The RSS has now decided to make public its agenda of ruling the country through Muslim hatred. It is no more hesitant of even letting the world know that Muslims would be butchered if they don't behave.

What does the RSS demand from the Muslims of this country? Can the RSS write off the numerous contributions made by Muslims to this country? Can it deny Maulana Abul Kalam Azad's commitment to the unity and integrity of India? Can it erase the contribution of scientists like Abdul Kalam to the Indian nuclear bomb? Can India ever forget how Abdul Hameed sabotaged Paton Tanks during the 1965 Indo-Pak war laying down his life for the sake of country? No Indian has forgotten the contribution of men like Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi to Indian cricket. One cannot forget the voice of Mohammad Rafi or the great ragas of Ustad Amjad Ali Khan, who entertained millions of Indians. Was it not A R Rahman who lent his voice to the RSS's theme song Vande Matram?

No, the RSS is not interested in India. Its sole interest is in a Hindu Rashtra. India is a multi-religious and multi-cultural tapestry that RSS falsehood can never alter. Indian Muslims belong to this tapestry as much as Hindus do. If the RSS wants to alter it through the kind of violence it unleashed in Gujarat, it will only harm India. Those who died in the Gujarat carnage were not just Muslims, they were Indians. It is time the RSS is told in no unambiguous terms that Indians will not allow any set-up to let it bleed the nation. (tehelka)

http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01042002/0104200256.htm
The Gujarat Massacres: a 'Spontaneous Reaction'?

by Lochlinn Parker
University of Sussex

On the 27th of February, 58 Hindu people, mainly women and children, died in the petrol bombing of a train on its way back from the disputed site of a Hindu temple in the town of Ayodhya, Northern India. Since then communal violence has erupted in the state of Gujarat, with large-scale raping and murdering of the Muslim population. Many Muslims have been burnt alive after being brutally mutilated. As many as 2000 people may have been killed.
Why are people continuing to die in Gujarat, over two months after the Godhra Train Incident? Why were those arrested in connection with the train massacre charged under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and those accused of attacks against Muslims charged under ordinary criminal law? Is this extraordinarily brutal reaction, called 'spontaneous' by the Chief Minister of Gujarat, part of a wider plan for the extermination or expulsion of the Muslim population of the state, or a political exploitation of the 'war on terrorism' through the creation of the 'other'?
Responsibility for the extent of the violence has been firmly laid at the door of the Gujarati Government. Human Rights Watch has just completed a preliminary report in which it states that the violence was 'planned well in advance of the Godhra incident and organised with extensive police participation and in close co-operation with officials of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) state government.' To understand how this could be, we need to know something about the origins of the BJP.
The Sangh Parivar or 'Family' of Hindu Nationalist groups, who include the BJP, were spawned by the National Volunteer Corps (RSS). The RSS started organising under British rule, in order to 'reawaken' Hindu consciousness and create a unified mass movement. It was one of their followers who murdered Ghandi shortly after Independence for 'pandering to minorities.' The RSS then, if not now, was simply a paramilitary vehicle for Hindu fundamentalism. They are popularly known as the Khaki Wallahs for their love of khaki uniforms, eerily reminiscent of the Nazis. After years in the political wilderness they formed a political wing, the BJP. The BJP are an exception among national Indian political parties in having a well-publicised fraternal link to the RSS. For a long time this ensured that they remained a minority party, but in the last decade their power and influence have increased dramatically, thanks to a combination of organisation, chameleon-like tendencies and opportunism.
A milestone in the rise of the BJP was the Ayodhya incident of 1992. Ayodhya is the site of the disputed Babri Masjid, a Muslim Mosque dating back to the Mogul period, built, according to some, on the site of the a temple dedicated to the Hindu God Ram and marking his birth place. The dispute over the site goes back centuries but in 1992, after a concerted campaign by the Sangh Parivar, including the BJP, the Mosque was overrun and razed to the ground by 200,000 Hindu activists, triggering rioting across India in which more than 3000 people died. Since then the BJP has distanced itself from the incident, allowing it to present itself as the thinking man's Hindu nationalist party while continuing to appeal to extremist sentiment.
In 1998 the party won the national elections, backed by a wide range of mainly right-wing state parties. The support of the newly enlarged middle classes, both urban and rural, and the continuing and slow internal destruction of the Congress Party ensured victory and gave Hindu nationalism a new-found respectability that raised questions of India's commitment to secularism. At the core of BJP's early thinking was the notion that those Muslims who would not submit to a Hindustan - a state grounded on the principles of Hinduism - should be transferred to Pakistan. Although its line has moderated with increased power, the BJP continues to preach a message of Hindu nationalism with the aim of imposing a monoculture and establishing Hindu dominance over the minority groups in India.
Since September 2001 the national BJP government has been capitalising on the global 'war on terrorism', using it to legitimise their calls for national (Hindu) unity, and implicitly, to suggest that Muslims are the source of domestic problems in India. This makes it essential to ask questions about the role of the BJP-controlled Gujarat state government in the anti-Muslim rioting that broke out after 27th February. The Human Rights Watch report accuses the Gujurati government of a massive cover-up of the sources of the killing, by putting pressure on the police not to arrest local leaders of the BJP and the VHP (World Hindu Council, another member of the 'Sangh Parivar'), who were named as instigators or participants in the attacks in the initial crime scene reports filed by eyewitnesses. The criminal investigation into one of the worst incidents, in Ahmedabad, has been entrusted to an officer hand-picked by the VHP. The police have been at best passive observers in the rioting, and at worst have helped organise or lead the charge into Muslim areas, where acts of savage violence have been perpetrated. One former Member of Parliament, Ahsan Jafri, desperately tried to call the police, senior bureaucrats and contacts in Delhi for over four hours before the mob outside stormed in, with no effect. The entire colony in which he lived was set on fire by a mob of over 10,000.
Despite allegations that Gujarat's Chief Minister Narendra Modi encouraged and gave his blessings to the massacres, he has not been sacked. Modi received his training through long years as an activist with the RSS, and his links seem to have served him well. Senior VHP leaders are believed to have persuaded Prime Minister AB Vajpayee to let him stay. Modi is also known to be one of the favourite protégés of the hard-line Home Minister LK Advani, a former RSS leader. We will probably never know for certain whether the Godhra train incident was just the pretext that Hindu nationalists in Gujarat were waiting for to start a campaign to remove the Muslim population, but what we do know is that the violence that followed the train burning was planned well in advance by the Hindu right. Computerised lists of Muslim homes and businesses were circulated, and the violence was co-ordinated using mobile phones directing organised mobs to Muslim areas. It is also clear that the violence had the tacit support of the police and authorities - reports that fleeing Muslims were rounded up by police and taken to the mobs are widespread - and that the central government was not quick enough to act. The investigations into the rioting will surely have serious political ramifications. However, forces in the Sangh Parivar working behind the scenes appear to be keeping the central government in check, and until that changes the suspicion is that massacres like those in Gujarat will not stop.

http://www.sussex.ac.uk/affiliates/eclipse/issue8/gujarat.htm
by Shana
Check in to the background of the creators of this website, and authors of these articles. You will find anything but independent. You will find hidden agendas. India is a great nation, under siege for hundreds of years by those intent on converting the world of kafirs, by the sword, by the suicide bomber, by misinformation such as is found here.
by ............
Maybe, but I really don't think the University of Sussex has some 'hidden agenda' unless you're into vague conpsiracy theories .....
Therefore I take it the posting from the U of S is 99% likely to be factual ...
by ..............
Here are some other sites carrying the story:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2263365.stm
http://asia.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/05/06/india.gujarat/
http://in.news.yahoo.com/020514/43/1o01r.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/comp/articleshow?art_id=7098542
http://www.worldpress.org/Asia/565.cfm
http://www.worldvision.org.uk/presscentre/pressreleases/4mar02gujaratviolence.asp
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/05/02/india.gujarat/?related

etc etc etc.

CNN reports:

"NEW DELHI, India -- Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's troubled government has done an about-face, joining the opposition in condemning recent religious violence during a debate over a censure motion in parliament's upper house. "We have never said we are absolved of our responsibility," External Affairs (foreign) Minister Jaswant Singh told the upper house on Thursday.

"The government shares the anguish expressed in the motion," Singh said, adding "we should pass the motion unanimously and work together to meet the challenges.""

So are you saying it never happened, Shana, or what exactly is your position here? The whole world, including the governments of Pakistan and India, and every conceivable media outlet in the entire world, are all lying - and we should believe you, on hearsay, that it's all a hoax?
by British
<sarcasm>
The British wouldnt have any interest in lying about India.
</sarcasm>
by ...........
Yeah - but what about the entire rest of the world and all media, left and right, mainstream and otherwise, and the governments of both India and Pakistan? Oh wait - everyone's lying, every single person on the face of the earth, except you, Oh Golden-Worded One...
by history
"The Muslims also did not draw up proper strategy for their own advancement in secular India. Their leaders, as pointed out before, cared more for religion and identity-related problems than the education and economic progress-related ones. These leaders always looked to the past then to future. They negotiated deals with political parties mainly the Congress to preserve their past heritage than to build future for the Muslim masses. Now it is dawning on Muslims that apart from preserving their Islamic identity they also have to carve out their niche in democratic secular India."


ISLAM AND MUSLIMS IN INDIA- PROBLEMS OF IDENTITY AND EXISTENCE
Secular Perspective, March 16 - April 15, 2001)

Introduction

Islam entered into India almost in the lifetime of Muhammad the Prophet of Islam. Generally it is thought that it came into India by way of invasion by Muhammad bin Qasim, a young general sent by Yusuf bin Hajjaj, the governor of Iraq during the Umayyad period in the later part of the 7th century A.D. But this is not true. Islam entered India through Kerala on the west coast through the Arab traders in a peaceful manner. The region called Malabar in Kerala is Indianised form of ma`bar which in Arabic means passage. Since the Arab traders passed through that region often it came to be known by that name. The Arabs, in fact, had been trading since pre-Islamic days and then embraced Islam after the Prophet began preaching. They married the local women in Kerala and their offspring spread in different parts of that region. Also, later they were accompanied by sufi saints who converted many local people, mainly from lower classes to Islam. Thus this was the real entry point of Islam into India.

However, as far as north India was concerned Islam entered into India through invasion of Muhammad bin Qasim and it has become the sore point in relations between Hindus and Muslims. The invasion by Qasim was followed by many other invasions, including those of Shihabuddin Ghauri and Mahmud Ghaznavi and the later demolished the temple of Somnath which rankles in the memory of upper caste Hindus. This is projected with prominence in the textbooks of history which perpetuates the bitter memory of hostility and animosity. Such events are not projected in proper context and are ascribed to Islam as hatred of Hindus and Hinduism. However, such hostile projections are product of colonial period from nineteenth century onwards. It is not true that the Muslim rulers simply hated the Hindus and humiliated them throughout their rule. It is later construction. The Hindu and Muslim rulers had mutual alliances as well as hostilities depending on struggle for power.

In fact many Hindu rulers invited the Muslim invaders including Babar in order to settle scores with local rulers. Also, one ruling Muslim dynasty fought against another ruling Muslim dynasty. When Babar, the first Mughal ruler invaded India, Ibrahim Lodhi was ruling over India and he was invited to defeat the Lodhi ruler by Rajput rulers who were, by themselves, unable to defeat the Lodhi dynasty. Still Babar is projected in contemporary school textbooks as invader and strongly condemned for his invasion of India. These constructions and re-constructions of medieval history are done to cater to contemporary political needs. The period between 10th and early 19th century is often described in these textbooks as Muslim period and the period before as the Hindu period . The historians maintain that these periods cannot be described by religious denomination of the ruler, as there were serious differences, hostilities and conflicts between the rulers following the same religion. Muslims fought against Muslims and Hindu ruler against Hindu ruler.

It is important to note that neither Muslim nor Hindu community was homogenous one. Both the communities were highly stratified horizontally as well as vertically. Medieval societies were hierarchical along caste and class lines and the lower rungs of the community did not exactly harmonise with the upper rungs. Even the upper caste upper class Muslims hated their brethren of lower castes and class. There was greater harmony between Hindus and Muslims of lower castes than between lower and upper castes of the same community. Common customs and traditions and mutual influences among these lower castes and classes amply demonstrate it. However, it is totally ignored in the contemporary history writing especially at school levels. These history textbooks have become breeding ground of communalism and communal hatred between these two communities.

The British rulers initiated this kind of history writing in order to divide their subjects so that they could rule without serious challenge to their colonial power. They also deliberately or innocently homogenised the two communities ignoring all differences and as if their interests were uniform. The Indian National Congress, which was an umbrella organisation of freedom fighters wisely adopted political philosophy of secularism as its foundational philosophy. It helped bring the elite of two communities together to fight for freedom. When Mahatma Gandhi appeared on the scene he involved the masses of people in the freedom movement by championing their causes. He also tried to weld Hindus and Muslims together by taking up religious issues like the Khilafat issue after the first world war when the British sought to dismember the Turkish empire. The Muslims responded enthusiastically to Gandhiji s call and even traditional Ulama fraternised with him on the issue and supported the Indian national Congress and its concept of secular composite nationalism.

However, soon after the Khilafat movement serious differences developed between a section of Hindus and Muslims mainly on power-sharing formula. The Motilal Nehru Committee was appointed to solve the communal question but both Hindu and Muslim leaders of communal dispensation opposed its recommendations vehemently and the report consequently drew a blank. Three round table conferences in early thirties also failed to work out any satisfactory formula to resolve the question of power sharing between the two communities. The last attempt to build a political alliance between the Congress and the Muslim League in 1937 also came to a naught. The Congress after the elections refused to take two ministers nominated by the League in its cabinet on the grounds that it had failed to win majority of Muslim seats. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who later became founder of Pakistan, was furious and vowed to teach the Congress a lesson. He propounded the two-nation theory and sowed the seed of partition of the country. Partition, justified or not, became the cause of animosity between the two communities in India. The upper caste Hindus never forgave Muslims for this.

It would also be wrong to blame all Muslims for the partition of the country. Indian Muslims were divided on the issue. The lower caste Muslims saw no benefit for them in creating a new homeland as it would benefit only upper class Muslims. In fact a section of lower caste Muslims represented by the Mu`min Conference. They demonstrated against the two- nation theory propounded by Jinnah on 23rd March 1940 in Lahore. The Muslim `Ulama too vehemently opposed it and declared their support for composite nationalism of the Congress and also justified it on religious grounds. Thus it shows clearly that all Muslims were not unanimous on the question of two- nation theory and that the theory was not based on Islam but on the political needs of the Muslim elite. Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, a prominent theologian and rector of the Darul `Ulum, Deoband, a premier Islamic seminary in India was on the forefront of the opponents of the two nation theory and he even wrote a book Muttahida Qawmiyat aur Islam (Composite Nationalism and Islam) to refute it. He also undertook a whirlwind tour of India to appeal to the Muslims not to be misled by Jinnah and his two-nation theory. This is clear proof of the fact that a section of Muslims strongly opposed creation of Pakistan. But it is strange irony of politics that the Indian Muslims as a whole are being held as guilty of dividing the country and paying the price for it.

II

Partition resulted in human massacre on both the sides of divide. More than a million people were killed and many more were displaced and cut off from their roots. The ruling classes in Pakistan mainly comprised the feudal lords, military and bureaucracy and never shared power with the masses. Its Islamic foundation also proved quite fragile and it broke into two in 1971 when the Bengali Muslims seceded from Pakistan and formed Bangla Desh. The Pakistani ruling elite led by Z.A.Bhutto refused to share power with the Bengali Muslims and tried to suppress their legitimate aspirations by sending army to former East Pakistan. Pakistan founded as it was, on the aspirations of Muslim power elite had often to resort to hate India campaign to divert attention of the Muslim masses from their real problems. Pakistan faces great challenges today in the form of ethnic and sectarian conflicts.

Partition as pointed out above, far from solving the communal problem in India, further aggravated it. The innocent Muslim masses in India continue to pay heavy price for creation of Pakistan. It created hatred in the minds of upper caste Hindus towards Muslims. These Hindus are even unable to distinguish between the interests of upper class Muslim elite who created Pakistan and the backward illiterate Muslim masses who were victims of partition. In many communal riots the fanatics raise the slogan Muslims jao Pakistan aur qabrastan (i.e. O Muslims go to Pakistan or to cemetery).

Thus partition neither solved the problems of Muslims in Pakistan nor those in India. It (i.e. partition), on the other hand, shattered the unity of Muslims in sub-continent who are now divided in three units India, Pakistan and Bangla Desh. Partition had sought to create homeland for Indian Muslims. Far from it; Indian Muslims are not only divided in three units but today, of all these three countries, number of Muslims is highest in India for whom the Muslim homeland was meant. The Muslim masses in all these three countries are facing problems of acute poverty, unemployment and illiteracy. If at all anyone benefited from partition it was the elite Muslims who created so called Muslim homeland in the name of Islam.

III

Indian Muslims faced problems of security and identity from the day one after India became independent. First partition riots made them terribly insecure. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims were killed during the partition riots in India as Hindus were killed in Pakistan. Thus independence brought a great calamity for both Hindus and Muslims in India. Moreover Indian Muslims were totally confused and did not know what to do. They lost even the sense of confidence. It was leaders of stature of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad who instilled sense of confidence and made them proud of their Islamic heritage in India. Maulana Azad s speech from the steps of Jama Masjid, Delhi acted as a balm and had a healing touch. However, Muslims had hard days to face after partition in India.

The Constitution was drafted and adopted on 26th January 1950 declaring India a republic. The Constitution declared all citizens of India equal in every respect without any distinction of caste, creed or race. The Articles 25 to 30 of the Constitution also gave special religious and cultural rights to minorities. The Article 25 thus declares: "Subject to public order, morality and health and to other provisions of this part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion." This article even allows the Sikhs "wearing and carrying of kirpans (a weapon) shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion."

Under cultural and educational rights of minorities articles 29 and 30 are very important. According to the Article 29 (1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same. (2) No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them."

The Article 30 is also of fundamental importance. This Article is entitled "Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.ö It says: (1) "All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. (2) the State shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions discriminate on the grounds that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion or language."

Needless to say, these provisions of the Constitution are of fundamental importance for preserving the religious practices and identities of minority communities based on religion or language and culture. The Indian Muslis and other religious minorities like the Christians, Sikhs and neo-Buddhists highly value these provisions of the Constitution of India. For the Muslims in particular who constitute the largest religious minority these provisions are of special significance. The Muslims have resisted and preserved this we will discuss in some more detail in the subsequent pages their personal laws or shari`ah laws under the Article 25 which allows all persons to profess, practice and propagate their religion. However, there are differences among legal luminaries whether State can regulate or legislate in respect of the personal laws or not in view of the Article 25. Muslims of course maintain the State cannot.

The Article 29 and 30 are also of great importance for preservation of minority languages and cultures and the Hindu communalists often attack these provisions and want them to be done away with. But it requires two-third majority in the Parliament to change the Constitution and hence the Hindutva forces have not succeeded so far in tempering with these important provisions. However, there are violations of these provisions in practice and there are numerous grievances in this respect. But it is another story altogether.

While incorporation of these articles in Indian Constitution instilled a sense of confidence among Indian Muslims in post-independence period their loyalty to India remained suspect in the eyes of most of the people of majority community, particularly of north India. As pointed out before, it is sociologically and politically wrong to homogenise any religious community, but Hindus and ‘Muslims' became political categories since the British days in Indian political discourse as if they were monolithic bloc without any political, religious, linguistic and cultural differences. Commonality of religion, as the two-nation theory also assumed does not lead to commonality of politics, nor does it lead to commonality of culture. The north and central Indian Muslims who spoke Urdu were distinctly different from Muslims from south who speak different south Indian languages. They have their own political inclinations and compulsions.

The Muslims from south were indifferent to the question of Pakistan right from the beginning. They did not support the partition with same enthusiasm as the Urdu speaking Muslims of north India. Communalism and communal violence remained centred right from the British days in the north. Even in the post-partition period south was relatively free from communal violence until late eighties. It spread in south only during late eighties. Until then there were hardly any communal riots in the south except in Hyderabad which has been centre of Urdu speaking Muslims and was under the Nizam rule. However, after late eighties the communal situation deteriorated very fast in some parts of South, particularly in the state of Tamilnadu.

IV Communal violence

In north India too there was relative communal peace during the fifties as the entire focus during this period was on linguistic re-organisation of states. In parts of India there were linguistic riots, particularly between Gujrat and Maharashtra on the question of inclusion of Bombay. However, an unending cycle of communal violence began from early sixties. The first major riot took place in Jabalpur in 1962 which shook the whole country. Jawaherlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, was also thoroughly shaken. He did not expect communal violence on such massive scale as he thought the communal question was ‘resolved' by partitioning the country on communal lines. His illusion was thus shattered. Communalism and communal violence was here to persist as partition had not changed the communal mind-set of some people. It had, on the other hand, aggravated it.

However, Nehru was committed to secular politics. Shaken by the events in Jabalpur, he formed national Integration Council after Jabalpur riots and Chinese invasion of 1962. However, unfortunately the Council remained only a paper organisation and could not become an active agent of promoting secular values and communal harmony. Most of the Congressmen were communal at heart and never had commitment to secularism as Nehru had. Many congress leaders were known sympathisers of Hindu communal outfits. They were opposed to Nehru s policies both internal as well as external i.e. his policy of non-alignment. The Jabalpur riots shook Indian Muslims' confidence in Congress as well as in secularism.
It was commitment to secularism that had inspired minorities to stand by the Indian National Congress and thousands of Indian Muslims had supported Indian freedom struggle because of Indian national Congress adopting secular philosophy. Indian secularism of course was far from being atheistic or antagonistic to religion like secularism in the Soviet Union. Indian secularism guaranteed religious freedom to all and it was this concept of religious freedom which made Indian Muslims feel Islam was safe in India. However, their confidence was shaken with every major communal riot. During Nehru period too several large communal riots took place. The situation was greatly aggravated after his death.

Nehru's death in 1964 left a great void but Indian democracy proved to be vibrant enough to overcome this crisis. Lal Bahadur Shashtri took over as Prime Minister but did not live long and died of heart attack after signing peace treaty in Tashkant after 1965 war between India and Pakistan. On his death Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi became Prime Minister and to strengthen her position she tried to win over minorities by strengthening secular forces in the country. Thus she succeeded in winning over minorities who were feeling quite unsafe after series of communal riots in the country since Jabalpur riot.

However, Indira Gandhi had to face enormous challenges from her opponents both from within the Congress and outside it. The Congress bosses opposed to her split the Congress and Indira s faction became the ruling Congress. To make her position shaky all those ranged against her engineered a communal holocaust in 1969 in Ahmedabad in Gujrat (western India) where the Congress faction opposed to her was ruling. The Ahmedabad communal riots spread to other parts of Gujrat State and were much worse in intensity than the Jabalpur riots. The Jan Sangh which was the Hindu rightist and communal outfit was actively propagating against Muslims and doubting their loyalty to India in those days. It passed a resolution for Indianising the Indian Muslims as if they were not Indian enough. Its president in those days was Balraj Madhok who was known to be extremist in his views. The print media played up the resolution and some papers like The Times of India even editorially supported the resolution.

The Indian Muslims were feeling terribly insecure and felt their very existence was in danger. And it was in this suffocating atmosphere that Ahmedabad holocaust occurred in which more than thousand Muslims were killed in Ahmedabad City alone. And the Ahmedabad riots were followed with equally ferocious communal riot in Bhivandi in 1970. Another communal outfit called Shiv Sena came into existence in Maharashtra in late sixties and some senior Congressmen of Bombay were supposedly behind it. These Congressmen who were nursing grievances against Nehruvian leftward policies lent their discrete support to a Marathi demagogue Bal Thackaray. Mr. Thackaray aroused both strong regional as well as communal feelings among the Maharashtrian youth. Bal Thackaray was also staunch enemy of communists and it was at his instance that a communist activist Krishna Desai was murdered by Shiv Sainiks.

It was Shiv Sena which was behind the Bhivandi riots of 1970. Bhivandi is around 40 miles from Bombay city and is centre of power looms mostly owned by Muslims. It has Muslim majority. It is reported that more than 400 persons, mostly Muslims, were killed in these riots. What was worse which made Muslims more insecure was the biased role of the police in these riots. In all these riots there were instances of unabashed partiality of the police towards the Hindu communal elements. However, it must be said that only a section of Hindus took communal positions and showed anti-Muslim bias, not all Hindus. Many Hindus, perhaps a great majority, either remained neutral or stood on the side of Muslims or fought communal forces in their own community. Shiv Sena in Maharashtra was backed either by communal elements or by those Congressmen who were nursing grievances against Indira Gandhi.

The period between 1970 and 1977 was comparatively peaceful and there were no major communal riots during this period for various reasons. It was during this period that the liberation movement in erstwhile East Pakistan started and Bangla Desh seceded from Pakistan through active intervention of Indian army. The attention of whole nation was in that direction. Mrs. Gnadhi s stature was boosted tremendously and she emerged as a great heroin of Indian politics. However, this proved to be quite short-lived and soon opposition gathered momentum. Jayprakash Narayan, a socialist leader of great stature in Indian politics, launched an anti-corruption movement against her and her prestige went down considerably. She also lost an election petition in Allahabad High Court and was unseated. She declared emergency in 1975 and large number of opposition leaders were arrested including Jayprakash Narayan. Most of the Jansangh and RSS leaders were also rounded up and there was complete political vaccum. Thus there was no one left to provoke communal violence.

However, emergency was lifted in 1977 and in the ensuing elections Mrs.Gandhi and her party lost heavily and the newly formed Janata Party formed the government of which the Jansangh was a constituent. The Jansangh ostensibly renounced its communal philosophy and pledged at Gandhiji s Samadhi (where his funeral ashes lay buried) to be secular and votary of Gandhian socialism. The north Indian Muslims who had greatly suffered during cleansing programmes in emergency overwhelmingly voted for the Janata Party knowing fully well that the Jansangh was part of it. It was the first and last time that the Muslims voted for the Jansngh in sheer desperation. They expected the Jansangh to reciprocate this gesture towards Muslims but were soon disillusioned. A series of communal riots followed from 1978 onwards. Major riots took place in Jamshedpur, Aligarh and Varanasi in north India. Many innocent lives were lost. The RSS which provides ideological direction to Hindu communal forces was quite unhappy at the Jansangh renouncing communalism and adopting secularism which is perceived to be anti-Hindu. The Jansangh members were forced, by their RSS mentors, not to renounce their RSS membership. All the top leaders of the then Jan Sangh were also members of RSS and the socialist leaders like Raj Narain in the Janata Party raised this issue known as the duel membership issue and asked the Jansangh members in the Janata Party to resign their RSS membership. The RSS made it plain to their members not to resign and planned several communal riots in Aligarh, Varanasi, Jamshedpur etc. to display its strength. The Janata party Government fell apart on this question in 1979 and replaced by the government led by Charan Singh which is also lasted for few months. In the ensuing elections in 1980 Mrs. Gandhi came back to power though with less popular vote.

The Janasangh after break up of the Janata Party took a new avatar now calling itself Bhartiya Janata Party and adopted moderate posture still claiming to be committed to secularism and Gandhian socialism. To symbolise its commitment to these ideals, a moderate leader like Atal Bihari Vajpayee was made its president. But this strategy soon came to naught as Mrs. Indira Gandhi, in order to compensate for her loss of Muslim votes, began to mobilise Hindu votes adopting Hindu communal postures from behind the scene. This upset BJP s apple cart and it lost its own ground. They faced threat from Mrs. Gandhi and lost heavily in the general elections of 1984 when they got only 2 seats in Parliament. The BJP was thus forced to rethink its strategy to keep its political base intact and seen to widen it.

Thus it began to adopt its earlier aggressive communal postures once again. Vajpayee was replaced by Shri L.K.Advani as president of BJP who is known for his strong Hindutva proclivity. In order to compete with the Congress soft communalism the BJP adopted hard Hindu communalism from the early eighties and even began to question the Nehruvian concept of secularism. Now a debate took place publicly whether Nehruvian secularism was at all relevant to India, it being a western notion. The BJP, under the leadership of Mr.Advani even dubbed Nehruvian secularism as nothing more than a policy of appeasement of Muslims . The only example the BJP could give of appeasement of Muslims was that of Muslim personal law under which a Muslim man could marry four wives whereas the Hindus cannot. They can marry only one wife. It greatly appealed to the Hindu middle class.

The BJP also aggressively propagated that the Muslims do not practice family planning and that their population is increasing much faster than that of Hindus and that the Muslim population will take over the Hindu population by 2050 and India will become part of Pakistan. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad, a member of the Sangh Parivar (The RSS, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal apart from the BJP constituted what is called the Sangh Parivar or the Saffron family) took much more militantly communal posture on this issue. It distributed pamphlets throughout out India showing a Hindu couple with two children and a Muslim man with four wives and host of children with the legend that we five our twenty five . Also, after conversion of a few Dalit families to Islam in Meenakshipuram (Tamilnadu) in 1981, the VHP launched an aggressive movement against conversion to Islam as currently it is attacking Christians for conversion.

All this greatly communalised the situation in the country and communal riots increased both in numbers and intensity. The Muslims naturally began to feel highly insecure and thought their Islamic identity is in danger. Secularism, needless to say, has been a great source of strength for minorities in India, particularly the Muslims. If secularism comes under attack, the minorities feel quite insecure. The militant attack by the Saffrom family on Nehruvian secularism and the VHP campaign against conversion and myth of multiplying population of the Muslims not only weakened Indian secularism but made the Muslims feel politically suffocated. It was under these circumstances that the Supreme Court delivered what has come to be known as The Shah Bano judgement regarding the maintenance of a Muslim divorcee.

The judgement upheld Shah Bano s contention under the secular law that she was entitled to maintenance for life and not for only the iddah (waiting period before re-marriage after the divorce which is three months) period. This judgement delivered in 1985 was thought to be another attack on Islam and Muslim identity in India. The Muslim leadership across the political parties and sectarian divide unitedly opposed the Supreme Court judgement and launched an aggressive movement to reverse it. This added to already aggravated communal situation and went a long way to further intensify hostility between two communities.

It was under these circumstances that the BJP launched a new agitation: to demolish the Babri Masjid and construct a Ramjanambhoomi temple in its place. The BJP maintained though without much justification - that Babar, the Moghul ruler, after whom the mosque in Ayodhya was named, had demolished the Ramjanambhoomi temple and constructed the mosque. So now that the Hindus were in political command, had right to demolish the mosque and reconstruct the temple dedicated to Ram and take historical revenge. This too greatly appealed to the Hindu middle classes and the BJP, which had a narrow political base among the upper caste Hindus earlier began to expand it among the middle and even backward caste Hindus in the name of Ram.

The Babri Masjid-Ramjanambhoomi agitation was not only historically unjustified, it launched a frontal attack on Indian secularism. The Muslims began to fear that it is beginning of the end of secularism in India and that the Sangh Parivar would demolish all historical mosques one after the other and that Constitutional guarantees are quite hollow. The Sangh Parivar had prepared a list of 300 such mosques and this was enough to frighten Muslims. Muslims were furthermore perturbed by the fact that the ruling Congress Government headed by Rajiv Gandhi could do nothing to stop the tide of Hindu communalism. Not only this Rajiv opened the lock over the Babri Masjid and allowed the Hindus to worship Lord Ram s idol planted there in 1948 by some RSS enthusiasts. This aggressive Ramjanambhoomi movement resulted in a series of communal riots in various parts of India in which hundreds of innocent lives were lost most of whom were Muslims. The 1987 riots in Meerut and 1989 riots in Bhagalpur sent shock waves throughout India making Muslims feel terribly insecure. The Babri Masjid was also demolished by karsevaks (voluntary workers) of the Sangh Parivar on 6th December 1992 when Narsimha Rao was the Congress Prime Minister of India. Many secular Hindus also felt that it was a terrible tragedy and it was not only destruction of a mosque through political hooliganism but also a terrible blow to Indian secularism. The demolition of Babri Masjid was followed by riots in Bombay, Surat, Ahmedabad, Kanpur, Delhi and several other places. Communal holocaust, as if, swept throughout the country. The Bombay riots of 1992 and 1993 were mainly organised by Shiv Sena, a regional fascistic and communal outfit led by Bal Thackaray who cried for the blood of Muslims. The Bombay riots in particular had international repercussions. They tarnished the secular image of India.

V Post-Babri Situation

Though as a result of Ramjanambhoomi movement the BJP gained tremendous political ground and ultimately succeeded in capturing political power as a major coalition partner, the communal situation eased in the post-Babri demolition period. The decade of eighties was the most dangerous communal decade in post-independence period. It witnessed the most aggressive form of communalism after the partition of the country. The Sangh Parivar went all out during this period to expand its political base by misusing religious and communal issues one after the other.
However, once it came to power at the Centre at the head of coalition it began to downplay communal issues. It wanted to maintain law and order situation under control and also wanted to give a message to Muslims that they will be safe only if the BJP is in power. It even promised to Muslims a riot-free India in its election manifesto of 1999 if it comes to power. Some politicians who made an alliance with the BJP even argued that to ensure riot-free India one should keep BJP in power and hence these otherwise secular parties legitimsed their alliance with it.

However, it would be knave to think that BJP can become secular if it is voted to power. BJP had been provoking communal hatred in order to get Hindu votes but as a ruling party obviously it cannot risk provoking communal violence. It will tarnish its political image. As a ruling party it has to ensure communal peace. But communal peace or absence of communal violence should not be mistaken for communal harmony. To spread communal feelings is the very ideological basis of Sangh Parivar. If communalism and communal ideology remains alive communal violence can be incited whenever needed. The BJP itself is not indulging in communal propaganda. The other members of the Saffron family RSS, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal fill this void. Of late the Christian community has come under attack for conversions.

The BJP for the time being is going soft on Muslims. It is even following Mrs.Gandhi s policies of early eighties in reverse. Mrs.Indira Gandhi who traditionally depended on minority votes tried to switch over to the Hindu votes to compensate for its loss of popularity among the Muslims. The BJP who is witnessing loss of popularity among the Hindus is now appealing to Muslims to come closer to it and repose confidence in it. The wooing of Muslims by the BJP thus can be compared with the wooing of Hindus by Mrs.Gandhi. these are political games which the politicians play to come to power. People of this or that community are used as vote-banks and object of rather than subject of politics.

Democracy should be an effective tool for empowerment of people but it is rather used for empowering politicians at the cost of the people. The Congress always used Muslims as vote-bank. The Congress in its long rule hardly did anything to solve acute problems of Muslims. Muslims in India are very poor and backward. Their main problems are economic and educational. But the ruling parties did nothing substantial in these fields. Only promises were made. The literacy rate among Muslims tends to be around 35% and among Muslim women it is even more depressing not more than 18 per cent. Their share in political power and in government jobs is also very dismal. Though the Muslim population is more than 12 per cent (according to 1991 census) and may touch 15% level in 2001 census, number of M.P.s (members of parliament) is usually around 5 per cent. In state assemblies also it is no different.

Even at the lowest level of government jobs class three and class four jobs their share does not go beyond 6 to 7% and at the level of higher administrative positions like the IAS it is no more than 3-4 per cent. It is true it is difficult to find qualified Muslims for various jobs and the Muslim leaders also have done near to nothing to disseminate education among the Muslim masses. But Union and State Governments have also done nothing to redeem the situation. They make all promises at the time of elections but except repeating these promises during next elections hardly anything happens. The Muslim grievances are quite justified. They hardly have any share in power as the largest minority in India. The share, if any, is woefully inadequate.

CONCLUSION

Thousands of Muslims not only participated in freedom struggle in India and made great sacrifices but also vigorously opposed creation of Pakistan. They dreamt of secular India hoping for creation of just society where they will be not only able to follow their religion but also share power on equitable basis. However, things did not go that way. Though Jawaherlal Nehru was committed to justice to minorities in independent India other Congress leaders were not. The majority in the Congress did not share Nehru s commitment. Also, creation of Pakistan marred to an extent, the future of Muslims in India. It created powerful prejudices in the minds of Hindus and Indian Muslims were seen as more loyal to Pakistan than to India and they generalised few such instances to reinforce the conclusion which they already had drawn.

The Muslims also did not draw up proper strategy for their own advancement in secular India. Their leaders, as pointed out before, cared more for religion and identity-related problems than the education and economic progress-related ones. These leaders always looked to the past then to future. They negotiated deals with political parties mainly the Congress to preserve their past heritage than to build future for the Muslim masses. Now it is dawning on Muslims that apart from preserving their Islamic identity they also have to carve out their niche in democratic secular India. Though still the emphasis is on building madrasas but more and more secular educational institutions are also coming up. More and more Muslims are realising that girl education is also very important for their progress. A new middle class is also slowly coming into existence which is increasingly championing the cause of modern education. Pressures are also building up from below for certain necessary changes in the status of women, particularly certain necessary changes in the shari`ah law as it operates in India.

Though still there is mass poverty among the Muslims, particularly among the lower caste Muslims, they have turned the corner and many of them are striving for upward mobility. However, they have far to go and many powerful obstacles to overcome. It is certainly convoluted way to forge ahead. Even the BJP has discovered that anti-Muslim tirade cannot yield more results and is negotiating a new political space which is likely to have some place for Muslims though it is not easy for it to do this. It s ideological mentor RSS may not allow it to do this. Much will depend on the response of its Hindu voters to this new orientation of the moderate section of the BJP leadership. It will be tested in coming elections particularly in U.P.

Whether the BJP forges ahead with its new Muslim policy or not the Muslims have to sink or swim in the Indian political ocean and from all available signs it appears Muslim masses have decided to swim even if the ocean is choppy. If right now the future of Muslims is not bright it is not dismal either. Given little more wisdom and pragmatic approach Muslims can succeed in shaping their future in democratic India even if its secularism is undulating.

http://newark.rutgers.edu/~rtavakol/engineer/muslims.htm
by .............
That's typical. Several thousand Muslims are viciously slaughtered in Gujarat and some right wing asshole posts a long article about how it's really the Muslims fault.
by that wasnt the point of the article...
It gives a reasonable background history and seemed pretty nonbiased for the most part...

"In fact many Hindu rulers invited the Muslim invaders including Babar in order to settle scores with local rulers. Also, one ruling Muslim dynasty fought against another ruling Muslim dynasty. When Babar, the first Mughal ruler invaded India, Ibrahim Lodhi was ruling over India and he was invited to defeat the Lodhi ruler by Rajput rulers who were, by themselves, unable to defeat the Lodhi dynasty. Still Babar is projected in contemporary school textbooks as invader and strongly condemned for his invasion of India. These constructions and re-constructions of medieval history are done to cater to contemporary political needs. The period between 10th and early 19th century is often described in these textbooks as Muslim period and the period before as the Hindu period . The historians maintain that these periods cannot be described by religious denomination of the ruler, as there were serious differences, hostilities and conflicts between the rulers following the same religion. Muslims fought against Muslims and Hindu ruler against Hindu ruler"

India was rarely if ever united so simplistic ideas of nationalism seem untied to real history
by bump
bump
to the top
by chief
hinduofpakistan.jpg
Hindus comprised nearly 30% of the total population in Bangladesh in 1947. After the exodus of minorities following the partition of India in 1947, the hindu population went down to about 22% by 1951. Due to unabated persecution, intimidation, and forcible conversion to Islam, the Hindu-Minority population kept on dwindling and now stands at a meager 10.5% of the total population in Bangladesh (1991 census).

Interesting to note that minority Muslim population in adjoining West Bengal (India) showed a positive growth rate and according to 1991 Census, stood at nearly 24% of the total population from only about 12% in 1947.

India and West Bengal Census Data

Source: Census of India 1991 (http://www.censusindia.net/), Data Source : 1991 Census of India

Table 29: Population of India since 1901 Census
Table 24: Three Main Religions in every state, (India, 1991)



Hindus 687,646,721 82.00 %

Muslims 101,596,057 12.12 %

Christians 19,640,284 2.34 %

846,302,688 (Total)

West Bengal (1991)



Hindus 50,866,624 74.7 % (1961 : 78.8%, decreased 4.1%)

Muslims 16,075,836 23.6 % (1961 : 20%, increased 3.6%)

Christians 383,477 0.6 % (1961 : 0.5%, increased 0.1%)



The vanishing minority population is understood from researching the census documents published the government. Fifty years ago in 1941, 28.3 per cent of the total population was minorities. The population of Hindu was 11.88 millions, while 588 thousand was other religious and ethnic minorities (Buddhist, Christian and animist). Evaluation of government statistics of 50 years, from 1941 to 1991, indicates a large drop in the figure for minorities. A comparative picture shows that the number of the Muslim majority increased 219.5 per cent while the Hindu community increased by 4.5 per cent. (Ref 3).

If normal increase rate prevailed, the number of the Hindu community in this country would have been 32.5 million, but the Hindu population in Bangladesh stood at 12.5 million in 1991 Census (State of Human Rights, 1994). Therefore the missing population is 20 million.

Ethnic Cleansing In Bangladesh

Ethnic cleansing of minorities by muslims in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) started in 1947. Over half-a-century has passed with no end is in sight. Minorities in Bangladesh, including women and children were subjected to extreme brutality and torture by muslims following the last National Election in Bangladesh held in October 2001, forcing many families to migrate out of their "Homeland of generations" for physical safety.

In the recent past, there have been several cases of brutal killings of prominent members of minority communities in the strategic Chittagong and its Hill Tracts, by armed gang of Islamic fanatics. Significantly, these tragic incidents were perpetrated in the wake of Santu Larma - Khaleda Zia high-level talks at Dhaka on April 20, for establishing permanent peace in the said region. That very day in Rangamati (CHT), an armed gang of Bnp-Jei backed ‘United People’s Democratic Front’ (Updf) attacked pro-Larma Chakma tribals resulting in the death of four Chakma Buddhists. Next day (April 21), at Vill. Hingla in Rouzan locality of Chittagong, Gyanjyoti Borooah (55 yrs), a locally popular Buddhist Monk, running an Orphanage / Monastery was brutally killed. Thereafter on April 28/29, another Chakma Buddhist named Gyandarshi Chakma was shot dead at village Babupara in Mahalchhari (Cht). One of his companion sustained bullet wounds. The same night, Madan Gopal Goswami, a Hindu Priest of was gunned down in Gachhabil area of Manikchhari (Cht). These cases of utmost brutality generated strong resentment among local Chakmas and Hindus.

Fig: A Hindu being beaten by Muslims in a mosque in Bangladesh. He was captured outside the mosque while going home. After Friday prayers were over, the Muslims came out and grabbed the first Hindu they could. Mr. Vimal Patak a Bangladeshi born Hindu was beaten to death with sticks as the Muslim mullas (priests) chanted "kill the Kafir!" (non-muslim). With folded hands he begged for his life and died a brutal death.
by ............
That's typical. Several thousand Muslims are viciously slaughtered in Gujarat and some right wing asshole posts a long article about how it's really the Muslims fault.
by chief
An you expect me to feel sorry for 'poor muslims" who killed millions over the years? Face it, the muslims shouldn't even be there in the first place, and now, they get what they dished out. How daft can you be to ignore the brutality of the muslims in india? Oh, I know how, because your a filthy muzzie yourself! I think banging your head against the graound 5 times a day has taken it's toll.
by Lochlinn Parker
I stand by what I wrote on state complicity in the slaughter of Muslims in Gujurat. read the Human rights watch report for further information. http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/04/gujarat.htm

Lochlinn
by bump
bump
to the top
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$120.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network