|
Indian
nationalism cannot be anti-Hindu
Title: Indian nationalism
cannot be anti-Hindu
Author: Sandhya Jain
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: April 11, 2000.
Even as the Centre dithers over whether or not to bring out a
White Paper on ISI activities in India and whether or not to call
a halt to the Samjhauta Express and Lahore bus service which have
seriously compromised the country's security and the integrity of
its currency, Congress president Sonia Gandhi has once again
displayed a painful insensitivity to the nation' s travails. At a
public meeting in Rai Bareilly last week, organized to refurbish
her image in the aftermath of a serious setback in the recent
Rajya Sabha elections, Ms. Gandhi needlessly upped the ante on the
Uttar Pradesh government's Religious Places Bill which requires
the prior permission of the district collector before constructing
mosques, particularly along the state's long and sensitive border.
Claiming that the bill was aimed at curbing the religious freedom
of the minorities, she censoriously intoned "I had written to
the President not to give his assent to the Bill" (The
Pioneer, 9 April 2000). I may be prejudiced, but she certainly
made it sound as though the President, having received his
instructions, would lamely comply with her directive, ignoring the
innocent lives lost daily to terrorist activities and giving short
shrift to the serious concerns of the security agencies that are
struggling to grapple with the ISI menace. What is worse, Ms.
Gandhi has revealed that she has instructed the Congress
governments in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, which had previously
enacted identical legislations under similar compulsions, to
"amend the laws suitably if they are creating any hindrances
in the religious practices of the minorities."
It is, of course, too much to expect Sonia Gandhi, with her poor
grip over affairs in her own party, to understand the severity of
the threat from Pak-sponsored terrorism. But given her slavish
commitment to the politics of her communist friends, she could at
least have taken a leaf from the book of the ruling Left Front in
West Bengal. The Jyoti Basu government has recently reacted with
alarm to a secret survey that reports an "unreasonably
high" proliferation of mosques and seminaries along the huge
Indo-Bangladesh border.
The Border Security Forces are said to have recorded the existence
of an astonishing four hundred and four seminaries and three
hundred and sixty-eight mosques in one small town in Nadia
district alone (The Pioneer, 1 April 2000). Islamic fundamentalist
groups setting up bases in the border areas reportedly use these
buildings for shelter, and the West Bengal government has felt
sufficiently concerned to decide to implement a fifteen-year-old
law that forbids the unauthorized construction of places of
worship. This is a wise decision and needs to be commended.
Indeed, the state would do well to seriously investigate the
sources of the finances used for such an amazing number of
structures to come up in the first place. The services of the
income tax authorities could also be profitably utilized in this
respect.
Perhaps out of deference to Jyoti Basu's susceptibilities, Signora
Gandhi has maintained silence on his government's compulsions. But
she has delivered a body blow to the polity at large by projecting
the proliferation of mosques and seminaries intended as
sanctuaries for ISI's nefarious activities against the Indian
State and people, as an issue of the religious freedom of one
community. This horribly warped definition of secularism will
needlessly provoke minority communities into believing that their
religious freedom is co-terminus with virulently anti-Hindu
postures and activities, when there is no legitimate basis for
such a futile confrontation between the communities. This is an
issue on which all citizens and political parties need to
introspect with honesty and sincerity.
First and foremost, we need to face the fact that the territory of
Kashmir is not the crux of our problem with Pakistan. It is only
Pakistan's excuse for intervention in our internal affairs.
Secondly, we must admit that though the massacre of Hindus in the
valley leaves us unmoved, the recent butchery of Sikhs has left no
scope for doubt that what is happening in Kashmir is at par with
what the Dalai Lama (referring to events in Tibet) calls
"cultural genocide."
My point is that if the territory of Kashmir were the only dispute
between India and Pakistan there would not be any need for the ISI
to establish such a formidable presence in virtually every Indian
state. Yet it is nobody's case that the ISI operates only in
Kashmir. Its presence is agitating the state governments of West
Bengal, Assam, the entire north-east, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar
Pradesh, Punjab, Bihar, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and
distant Kerala. Even the Nepalese government has woken up to its
menacing presence along the Indo-Nepal border in the wake of last
year's hijacking of the Indian Airlines IC-814, which led to the
savage murder of a young man on his honeymoon, and the abject
surrender of three dreaded terrorists in lieu of the hostages'
lives.
Can any right-minded citizen say that India is not horrendously
encircled and infiltrated by this menace? And can anyone honestly
deny that we are under attack because the culture and civilization
we represent is anathema to those across the border? Contrast our
own somnolescence with the attitude of the Chinese government.
According to uncontradicted reports in the press, Chinese Muslims
receiving training in terrorist camps run by Pakistan were gunned
down in cold blood by soldiers of the Pakistan government, at the
instance of their Chinese counterparts. Obviously, for strategic
reasons, the Pakistan government has preferred to humour that
Government of non-believers (in any God), but India has no such
leverage with the Pakistanis.
We are fighting a war in which the bugles do not blow, but
nevertheless the blood runs. And more and more blood is being shed
each day. We cannot expect to turn the tide if we do not put our
own house in order. There is a need for all political parties to
rise above petty vote bank politics, and rather, to educate their
Muslim constituents to have no truck with anti-social elements
across the border. At a time when the nation is in such grave
peril, the least that mature politicians can do is to eschew a
definition of secularism that is obscene and narrow, and
encourages communities to view the nation in terms of 'us' and
'them.' Each political party owes it to the nation to enunciate
clearly its stand on the issue of ISI infiltration. Indeed, it
would be wonderful if an all-party consensus could be worked out,
but I would hesitate to recommend that the Vajpayee government
initiative a move in this direction, given the propensity of some
politicians to abuse the issue for petty gains.
Political commentators have performed as badly as politicians in
this regard, mindlessly raising the discredited bogey of the
enforcement of cultural uniformity on the minorities. The truth is
that the Hindu community has never imposed its way of life on any
community or people at any time in its history, and is not doing
so even today. It is true that a growing number of citizens feel,
quite legitimately in my view, that the nation's foundational
ethos should derive from its ancient and living civilization.
Perhaps this is not the time to settle this issue. One thing,
however, is certain. And that is that if India is to survive as a
nation, we can no longer endorse a definition of nationalism that
is constructed in anti-Hindu terms.
If
you enjoyed this article, please visit: http://www.hinduunity.org
|
