Inteview: Jamaat-e Islami Amir on Terrorism in India

By Yoginder Sikand Muslim India

Syed Jalaluddin Umari * is the President (amir) of the Jamaat-e Islami Hind, one of the largest and most influential Islamic organizations in India . In this interview with Yoginder Sikand he talks about the recent wave of terror attacks in India , attacks on Muslims and on moves to set up a Muslim political party in the country.

Q: What do you have to say about the recent wave of bomb blasts across India , which the media and the intelligence agencies have sought to blame Muslims for?

A: Soon after the deadly state-sponsored anti-Muslim pogroms in Gujarat in 2002 there was a sort of lull in communal violence and disruptive acts, but now, over the last year or so, suddenly blasts are happening in various parts of the country, causing widespread death and destruction and indiscriminate arrests, mainly of Muslim youths. The state agencies, the police and the media have sought to blame Muslims for all these disruptive acts, but, as the recent revelations about the role of Hindutva groups in the Malegaon and Modassa incidents clearly shows, this accusation appears to have little merit. In the wake of blasts across India , scores of Muslims have been targeted, picked up by the police and tortured, and the law has not been allowed to take its proper course. All that we have, in the vast majority of cases, are confessions probably forcibly procured by the police from those arrested, and this cannot be adduced as proof in any court of law. Yet, the media takes these confessional statements extracted under duress as gospel truth and has been engaged in a concerted campaign to brand Muslims as terrorists.

Q: So, do you mean to say that Muslims might not be responsible for these various blasts, contrary to what the media and the intelligence agencies allege?

A: I am not saying that there might not be even a single Muslim who could engage in disruptive activities. But I strongly feel, and this some sections of the media are themselves now saying, that these blasts might have been perpetrated by fiercely anti-Muslim groups, by radical Hindutva outfits or their activists, who seek, along with the media and the intelligence agencies, to blame Muslims for them so that Islam and Muslims get a bad name. They want to thereby divide the people of India against each other, widen communal polarisation, create anti-Muslim hysteria and consolidate a Hindu vote-bank, particularly keeping in mind the coming elections. Anyone with a bit of commonsense must certainly wonder why Muslims would engage in such activities when they cause grave harm and damage to Muslims themselves, because after these blasts it is inevitably Muslims alone who are arrested or gunned down in fake encounters and who have to suffer increasing suspicion and hatred from other communities. And then several of these blasts have taken place in Muslim localities, even in mosques, dargahs and Muslim graveyards, where those killed and injured have been wholly Muslims. Why on earth would Muslims target their own people? Why are the police and the media not coming out in the open about the evidence of militant Hindutva groups and activists being involved in several terrorist attacks and bomb blasts? Why is this not being branded or described as terrorism?

I must also state here that all Indian Muslim organizations and notable leaders have openly and forcefully condemned all these disruptive acts, no matter who their perpetrators might be. These activities harm our country, kill innocent people, Hindus, Muslims and others, and do the most damage to Muslims, because it is Muslims who inevitably bear the brunt of the wrath of the police, the intelligence agencies and the media in the aftermath of these incidents even when they are not behind them.

We demand a proper and fair investigation into all such incidents. But is this being done? I regret to say it is not. Take the case of the recent killing of two Muslim youth in Batla House in New Delhi . Muslim as well as secular human rights organizations are raising serious questions about the police's version of the story, and they are demanding a proper investigation of the incident. This is a purely democratic demand, but why is it that this is not conceded? Are the authorities afraid that such an investigation might reveal the police's version to be false? To claim, as those who oppose this sort of investigation say, that this would result in the lowering of the morale of the police is completely bizarre.

Q: What, then, do you think is the way out?

A: We want the law to take its proper course. We want the legal process to be allowed to properly function. Unfortunately, however, this is not happening in scores of cases. Muslims are being arbitrarily arrested and branded, by the police, intelligence agencies and the media, as terrorists, though the courts as yet have not delivered any judgment. Our point is that if any persons, no matter what their religion, or if any organization, irrespective of whichever community it is associated with, are proved, after proper investigation, to be indeed involved in these blasts, they must be punished according to the law.

Q: What do you feel about the charges about the banned Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) being behind these blasts? After all, at one time, the SIMI was the youth wing of the Jamaat-e Islami.

A: It should be clear that SIMI was never a wing of the Jamaat. Jamaat has its own wing, the SIO (formed in 1982). In 1992, the Iqdam-e-Ummat conference was organized by SIMI in Mumbai. There the SIMI activists used intemperate language. Then the Jamaat-e Islami Hind decided that henceforth no Jamaat representative would attend any SIMI meetings. This was done to emphasize the Jamaat's stand that the language used by Muslims must be proper and balanced. Prior to this, we had tried to make the SIMI realize that their immature approach was wrong, and under the circumstances it was unrealistic and impractical as well and not in accordance with the Islamic temperament.

However the ground reality is that even before the ban on the SIMI, its influence was rather limited. It was not the hugely influential movement that the media makes it out to be. Moreover as journalists such as Ajit Sahi of Tehelka have shown, no case of SIMI activists being involved in any illegal or disruptive acts has ever been proved in any court. If SIMI was really wedded to terrorism, as is being alleged, then why is it that when it was not banned it did not engage in such activities, and that after the ban, when its wings were clipped, its offices sealed, many of its activists arrested and others who had been associated with it closely watched by intelligence agencies, it was allegedly able to mastermind all these deadly blasts across the country? This question must be asked, but, of course, the media is not asking it.

Q: But surely the SIMI's radical rhetoric was inflammatory and pernicious. Its call for armed jihad, its visceral hatred for and opposition to democracy, secularism and the concept of the nation-state and its appeal for establishing a Caliphate in India naturally made it seen by many Indians, including Muslims, as very dangerous. In this sense, it was akin to some extreme radical Islamist groups in the Arab world. What do you have to say about this sort of approach?

A: Any immature approach is of course wrong and completely impractical and, moreover, it is counter-productive. However, you must realize that much of the SIMI's rhetoric was limited to raising slogans. Islamic movements across the world have increasingly begun to avoid empty rhetoric. They know that any immature action leads to harsh suppression. Islamic movements in various countries are clearly realizing that the only practical avenue before them is through peaceful mass movements which could engage in democratic politics and in elections to present their agenda and win public support. Well-known Islamic parties such as the Jamaat-e Islami of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the Ikhwan ul-Muslimin in Egypt, the Refah Party in Turkey and so on are routinely taking part in elections and seeking peaceful means to come to power. They de facto recognize the existing secular and democratic Constitutions, even though they may not be Islamic Constitutions. Seeking to gain public acceptance and support by participating in elections and using peaceful means is their method.

Q: So, are you suggesting that the radical approach of extremist groups such as Hizb ut Tahrir in the Arab world and Central Asia or the SIMI, which aimed to capture political power through violence to establish what they call an Islamic state, is wrong?

A: To shun peaceful mass movement and adopt coercion is entirely impractical and counter-productive, as I earlier mentioned. As I said, only through peaceful means one may seek to bring about the desired change. However your perception that SIMI aimed to capture power through violence is entirely wrong. Participating in democratic elections is certainly one possibility before the Islamic parties. It is a different matter that when in some countries an Islamic party wins the elections the West (which otherwise keeps harping about democracy) makes sure that such a party does not actually come to power. The instances of Turkey and Algeria can be seen in this context. But even if this happens, there is no practical alternative to the peaceful movement method. After all, how long can the West succeed in denying Muslim masses the regimes that they democratically wish to elect?

Q: In the wake of the terror attacks and bomb blasts across India and the growing hounding of Muslims, what political course would you personally and as head of the Jamaat-e Islami Hind suggest for the Indian Muslims to follow, especially with regard to the forthcoming Parliamentary elections?

A: I would advise Muslims to refrain from emotionalism and seek to struggle for their rights using all available peaceful and legal means. They must desist from any illegal or disruptive activity. In general, they should seek to create avenues of dialogue and build bridges with non-Muslims, including with the people in the media and in political field with genuine commitment to democracy and justice. The Jamaat, along with some other Muslim groups, has been trying to push a constructive agenda forward in the recent past. We have called a meeting that is to be convened soon of leaders of various political parties other than the Congress and BJP and social and human rights activists in Delhi to discuss such an agenda.

All this while, Muslims have been treated as a captive vote-bank of the Congress Party, but, as the ongoing repression of Muslims even in many Congress-ruled states shows, this party has done little for Muslims. In the wake of the disruptive acts and the consequent large-scale persecution of hapless Muslims, the Congress has taken no positive measures at all. It maintains a studious silence, for fear of losing Hindu votes to the BJP. It could have, if it had wanted to, prevented the targeting of Muslims, but it did not do so. Now it is making some feeble attempts to regain Muslim votes before the coming elections by talking of the Hindutva terrorists who are said to be behind the Malegaon and Modassa blasts, but all this while it has remained silent on the ongoing repression of Muslims. Because of this, many Muslims think that as far as Muslim issues are concerned there is little difference between the Congress and the BJP.

My advice to Muslims, and this is also what I think most Muslims would themselves do on their own, is that in states where there is a realistic alternative available to both the Congress and the BJP, Muslims should prefer this alternative, and where there is no such credible alternative they might consider the Congress. This would not be because of any great enthusiasm for that party's record but simply a matter of compulsion.

Q: In this regard, what do you have to say about ongoing talk about setting up of a Muslim political party in India ? According to some sources, the Jamaat-e Islami Hind is also thinking of entering politics.

A: We feel that in today's national and international context, particularly in the face of mounting anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim prejudice, when even legitimate grievances of Muslims are ignored, there is a pressing need for Muslims to make their presence felt in the political realm as well. This can take the shape of a lobby, an opinion-building group or a political party, and through this sort of effort Muslims might be able to talk more effectively with various political parties and present their views and concerns. As to the exact shape this effort will take, we do not really know for sure at the moment. It may well be in the form of a political party with its own agenda. It will work out how best to relate to other parties and to marginalized communities. I don't think such a party may emerge before the coming Parliamentary elections early next year because the time left now is too short. I think that till then the Jamaat will continue with its present policy of seeking to present its views and concerns to various political parties. It will work for the cause of genuine democracy, for equal treatment by the state of all citizens, for social justice for all marginalized communities, such as Dalits, Christians, Sikhs as well as Muslims, and for countering communal fascism.

Q: All these years the Jamaat has stayed aloof from politics. How and why is it that now it wants to become actively politically involved?

A: It is not true to say that we have remained aloof from politics. We understand Islam to be a code of life, which talks about not only prayer and fasting but also about all social and collective affairs, including economics and politics. It is a question of how far existing conditions allow us to organize activities representing the collective aspects of Islam. In any case we have been always been open to change in the face of changing political and social conditions. We have always encouraged our members to seek to particularly interact with secular and democratic parties and convey the Jamaat's views. In view of the mounting anti-Muslim prejudice and attacks on the community and of concerted efforts by powerful fascist groups to practically turn Muslims into second-class citizens by destroying their religious identity, Muslims need to be politically more active. This could take the form of a separate political party which the Jamaat might wish to help form.

Q: What sort of issues would this party take up?

A: As I said, we have not discussed this in detail so far, and it would take a while for things to finally crystallize. The main agenda for the party, if it comes into being, would be working for social justice and genuine democracy, not for Muslims alone but of all communities and sections who might be facing various forms of persecution. This party would not be associated with the Jamaat alone. In any case, the Jamaat would continue to engage in its primary work, of education, propagation and social change. We would like other Muslim groups and organizations to join the party if it comes into being, based on a common minimum agenda, although the Jamaat might have to play a leading role in establishing and guiding it.

__________________________________

* Maulana Syed Jalaluddin Umari, is an Islamic scholar, leader, thinker and reformer. He is a prolific writer and has written many books covering a wide range of Islamic topics.

He is the chief of Indian Islamic Movement, the Jamaat e-Islami Hind and heads a number of social, educational, religious academic and reformist institutions situated in different parts of the country.

An orator part excellence , he attracts large crowds at his Juma cermons and other public speeches.

Maulana's topics are as versatile as his personality. But he is particularly considered an authority on Islamic perspective on Gender and family related issues.

Just The Tip Won't Do: Expose The Whole Iceberg

By Kavita Krishnan, 29 October, 2008 , Countercurrents.org             Muslim India

"Most importantly, are we really to believe that the Governments at State and Centre did not know all along about the activities of the Bhonsala Military Academy, and the fact that it was openly holding arms training camps for Bajrang Dal goons from all over the country? Blasts aside, how come such training camps for communal outfits were not deemed illegal and banned even as Bajrang Dal brigades repeatedly conducted anti-Muslim and anti-Christian violence?"

"We demand a thoroughgoing investigation into the involvement of Sangh outfits and so-called god-men and god-women, the Army connection, and the BJP in terrorism. And we demand a ban on the Bajrang Dal, VHP and other Sangh outfits against whom there is prima facie evidence of involvement in terrorism and communal violence (including activities like abduction ('rescue') of women who have eloped)."

No longer can the Sangh Parivar and BJP ever disown its role in terrorism.

A former firebrand ABVP leader and so-called 'sadhvi', Pragya Singh Thakur, has been arrested for her role in the Malegaon blasts of September 2006 as well as in the more recent Modasa blasts. Even more ominously, two ex-Army officers are implicated in the blasts, and it has come to light that an institution called the 'Bhonsala Military Academy' in Nagpur has been imparting arms training to the Bajrang Dal.

The Sangh Parivar has reacted by disclaiming its links with 'sadhvi' on the one hand, and on the other, by suggesting that it is inconceivable that a 'sadhvi' could be a terrorist. BJP spokesperson Venkaiyya Naidu has reminded us that according to the rule of law, the sadhvi is innocent till proven guilty, and the BJP has objected strongly to the term 'Hindutva terrorism.'

For a minute, imagine if the story were the same – with just one detail changed: replace the 'sadhvi' with a 'maulvi.' Then imagine the righteous roars that would be voiced by the BJP, demanding blood. In the Jamia Nagar blasts case, the BJP would not allow teenage boys the benefit of 'rule of law;' they castigated the Jamia VC for arranging legal aid, and in UP, Sangh cadre have beaten up lawyers taking up cases of blast-accused. Muslims accused of terrorism, it seems, are guilty even if proven innocent, and are certainly not entitled to the opportunity to prove themselves innocent!

There is ample proof that the sadhvi has campaigned for the BJP in elections, and has appeared in public gatherings with BJP President Rajnath Singh and MP CM Shivraj Singh Chauhan. Under POTA, as under the Chhattisgarh Special Security Act, those who are associated with or have known the accused can be prosecuted as 'conspirators.' Will the BJP tell us why Rajnath and Shivraj should not be prosecuted as 'conspirators' according to the principles espoused by the BJP itself? Surely there is more ground to prosecute Rajnath or Shivraj of conspiring with saffron terrorists than there is to prosecute Dr.Binayak Sen for links with Maoists?

What were Pragya Thakur's known activities? Her role in the communal pogrom in Gujarat 2002 is indicated: in fact, she campaigned for the BJP in Surat in 2002 and again in 2007. Her father, defending her, offers proof of some of the noble work she was known for: "Pragya and her organisation Jai Vande Matram would rescue girls who eloped with boys of another community, sometimes bring them back to their parents." So, like the notorious Babu Bajrangi, Pragya was involved in terrorising, kidnapping and coercing women who had married of their own accord outside their community. Pragya is proof positive of the fact that the same forces who openly indulge in communal pogroms and obscurantism violence against women could in fact be secretly involved in terrorism.


This said, it is also important to ask why the above facts were kept hidden from us for the past two years. Soon after the Malegaon blasts, in nearby Nanded, Bajrang Dal activists were accidentally killed by their own bombs, and investigation had revealed fake beards and 'Muslim-looking' clothing in their home. In other parts of Maharashtra and the country – Parbhani, tenkasi, Kanpur, Faizabad – there have been leads linking saffron forces to bomb blasts. Had these leads been pursued, is it not possible that some subsequent terrorist incidents could have been avoided? The state and ruling establishment is criminally guilty of ignoring these vital leads.

We are everyday asked to believe as gospel whatever is peddled as 'fact' by the police via the media in a terror investigation: to question is to be branded 'anti-national.' It is worth recalling that on November 26, 2007, less than two months after the Malegaon blasts, Director General of Police P S Pasricha had claimed to have 'solved' the case. Several Muslims were arrested and paraded, the names SIMI and Lashkar were bandied about, involvement of Pakistan and training received by the 'masterminds' in Pakistan pointed to. The police over the next two years have confidently given us detailed 'facts' about how the 8 arrested conceived of and executed the blasts. Those arrested were also linked with the Mumbai train blasts, according to the police. The ATS has prima facie "ruled out the involvement of Hindu fundamentalist groups in the Malegaon blasts" claiming that "RDX is only available to Islamic terrorist outfits." (TOI, 12 September 2006) Three of the accused were said to have "confessed" to the crime.


Now, we are told that the motorbike used in the September 29 Malegaon bomb blasts was registered in Pragya's name, and this led to her arrest. Are we to believe that the police took two years to find out the registration details of a bike involved in the blasts? The same police that just have to take one look at a bomb site to tell us confidently the exact nationality and organisational affiliation of the perpetrators? Is there any material at all – including RDX – that ex-Army men cannot easily have access to? Will the police explain to us how the 'confessions' of three Muslim men were secured (will they admit to torture)? Who will restore freedom, and apologise for character assassination and torture, to those who for the past two years have been blamed for blasts they did not do? Most importantly, are we really to believe that the Governments at State and Centre did not know all along about the activities of the Bhonsala Military Academy, and the fact that it was openly holding arms training camps for Bajrang Dal goons from all over the country? Blasts aside, how come such training camps for communal outfits were not deemed illegal and banned even as Bajrang Dal brigades repeatedly conducted anti-Muslim and anti-Christian violence?

The recent revelations in the Malegaon blasts put every ongoing blast investigation under a cloud and a question mark. Clearly, the police suppressed all the trails that led to Sangh outfits and BJP leaders – allowing these terrorists to roam free and contest and campaign in elections – while misleading the nation by framing innocents of a minority community. Is it not all too possible that this is happening in every single blast investigation?

It is not just BJP leaders, however, who are linked with the terrorist sadhvi. Pragya is a disciple of Swami Avadheshanand Giri: and her fellow disciples include Union HRD Minister and celebrated 'secular' figure Arjun Singh and his son Ajay. Ajay, head of the Congress campaign panel for the upcoming state polls in MP, rushed to deny Avadheshanand's links with Pragya.

The Congress and UPA Government is hoping to let the state machinery 'leak' out a tiny part of the truth about the involvement of Sangh outfits in terror, in order to get the upper hand in the elections. But we won't be satisfied with such scraps. We demand a thoroughgoing investigation into the involvement of Sangh outfits and so-called god-men and god-women, the Army connection, and the BJP in terrorism. And we demand a ban on the Bajrang Dal, VHP and other Sangh outfits against whom there is prima facie evidence of involvement in terrorism and communal violence (including activities like abduction ('rescue') of women who have eloped).

www.countercurrents.org

Terror, Batla House and the Indian Police

by K S Subramanian *, 27 October 2008          Muslim India

Reports on the anti-terror action by the ‘Special Cell’ of the Delhi Police in the Batla House area of Jamia Nagar, New Delhi, on September 19 are shocking indeed. The ‘Special Cell’ had come into adverse public notice on several occasions in the past. The serious human rights violations by the Cell in connection with the Parliament attack case in December 2001 are well known. The corrupt and high-handed head of the Cell, Rajbir Singh, was done to death not very long ago by one of his own victim-collaborators. Any operation by the ‘Special Cell’ would thus have to be viewed with some disbelief. In the present case, the puzzling, major question of how Inspector Sharma leading the team into the operation got killed has led to several contradictory explanations. The uncritical acceptance of the police version in the case by some sections of the media appears hasty and uncalled for.

There are better ways in which the ‘Special Cell’ could have achieved its purposes in the Batla House case. Nothing prevented it from surrounding the suspected premises and with the help of the local police station staff and the local people in the congested area, getting the inmates to come down and surrender to the police. This would have helped the police elicit valuable further intelligence on terrorist activities but also saved the life of Inspector Mohan Sharma and avoided injuries to others. On the face of it, the police action appears hasty, premature and botched. Highly skilled and professional training is required to carry out such operations delicately and successfully. The world has seen how the London Police not long ago shot dead a foreign national on suspicion of his being a terrorist in a public place and had to pay a heavy price for it when the police action turned out to be a mistake. This is despite the fact the London Police are far more professional than ours. Sophisticated training and respect for human life rather than keenness to obtain recognition and rewards are to be the objectives of police action in such cases.

That some blunders had occurred in the course of police action in Batla House is acknowledged by senior policemen in private. These can be placed on record only by a proper judicial probe. Saving the life of Inspector Sharma and those of the suspected terrorists was more important than desire for quick results. Following the operation, politicians, bent on vote-banks, have rushed to make a martyr out of the dead Inspector Mohan Sharma. They did not bother much about the families of the slain ‘terrorists’, their relatives and the extremely worried local population of their village Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, who live in inter-communal harmony.

One report hints at professional rivalry behind the clumsy operation conducted by the Delhi Police at Jamia Nagar. The operation is said to have been the outcome of a lead provided by the Mumbai Police, who had advised a watch on the suspected premises. However, the Delhi Police are said to have gone on an overdrive to carry out the ‘encounter’ even before the Mumbai Police could proceed further with their intelligence gathering. The Delhi Police’s attention-grabbing ‘encounter’ is said to have annoyed the Mumbai Police who felt compelled to release their own list of alleged ‘masterminds’ as against the one released by the Delhi Police!

The British had said that the Indian Police were ‘all but useless’ in the prevention of crime and ‘sadly inefficient’ in its detection. ‘Unscrupulous’ in the exercise of their authority, they had a ‘generalised reputation for corruption and oppression’. This assessment holds true today since the centralised paramilitary and repressive command structure of the Indian Police borrowed from the Irish colonial experience, has been retained intact in independent India. The author of the borrowed Irish model was Sir Charles Napier, then Governor of the Sind Province in undivided India. His name does not figure at all in the police reform discussions!

Not just the police structure but also the legal structure of India is colonial and repressive not in tune with the recent legislations relating to Panchayati Raj, human rights, Right to Information et al. The Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the Police Act and the Evidence Act put in place a legal framework and a police force equipped to maintain in India British rule by force. The IPC prioritises offences against the State and maintenance of public order. It begins consideration of traditional crime only from Section 299 in Chapter XVI onwards. The CrPC begins with the ‘arrest of persons’ and the ‘maintenance of public order and tranquillity’ before getting into criminal procedure with regard to investigation and trial of cases. The Police Act, despite its preamble, prioritises collection and communication of intelligence relating to public order and peace. The prevention and detection of crime is included among the duties of the police only in Section 23. The Act further provides for ‘punitive policing’ at the cost of the local people in the event of ‘disturbances’ and for the appointment of private persons as ‘special police officers’. Thus, structural reform of the police must go hand in hand with far reaching legal reforms.

Some police chiefs have held that the job of the officers of the elite Indian Police Service (the British called it the ‘Indian Police’, reserving the term ‘service’ only for the ‘Indian Civil Service’) is essentially to control, if not eliminate, the inherited oppressive conduct of the subordinate police and prevent them from misusing the law against the public. The District Magistrate, belonging to the ICS, was placed in firm command over the district Superintendent of Police belonging to the IP. While being posted in a North-Eastern State in the early 1970s, I came across a district police chief who was scrupulous in controlling the illegalities of the subordinate police to such an extent that the local press called him a ‘terror to the police’! A newly-appointed District Magistrate insisted on visiting him at his office rather than the other way round and in justification said that he had heard of the police being a ‘terror to the public’, but never of a police officer being a ‘terror to the police’!


The public and political outcry against the police action in the Batla House case, the discrepancies and contradictions in the police version of events surrounding the ‘encounter’, the puzzling death of Inspector Sharma, the findings of civil rights agencies on the event and so on have been clear. The revelation of many and contradictory names as ‘masterminds’ behind recent terrorist incidents by policemen in Delhi, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh has added to the public dismay. Some former policemen have said that the differences of opinion among policemen on this issue are due to professional rivalries, lack of proper communication, and the desire for publicity. None of them mentioned deficiencies in intelligence collection. Such deficiencies prevent intelligence officers, mostly policemen, from grappling with the nature and complexity of the problem of terrorism in India. Muslims are poorly represented in the Indian police. The Indian Police lack reliable sources of information from the Muslim communities. They lack the ability to penetrate and smash terrorist networks. Speculative, unreliable and contradictory information rules the roost. There is pervasive prejudice and suspicion of Muslims even in the higher reaches of the administrative structure. A former Secretary of the Union Home Ministry, the first ever Muslim to hold the post, once complained to me that the IB did not show its reports to him! He was the formal boss of the organisation! Police forces in large parts of India are heavily communalised and politicised. Politicisation of the police at its worst was seen during the religious terrorism against the minority community in Gujarat 2002, for which no one has been held politically accountable leave alone establishing criminal responsibility! Such lack of accountability and impunity is a potent source of retaliatory terrorism. With rare exceptions, the Hindu-dominated police tend to view the Muslim community as a whole as terrorist-inclined. Police officers in India are “preoccupied with politics, penetrated by politics and participate in it individually and collectively,” said David Bayley in 1983. The process has only worsened since then. The Union Home Ministry, in overall command of the police forces in India, has failed to introduce steps to depoliticise and humanise the Indian Police force.

Intelligence officers do their work in closed, secret organisations with hardly any public contact. They fail to develop a feel for the complexity of ground realities, which they view in simplified categories. Working with one-track minds, they focus wholly on loosely defined concepts such as ‘terrorism’ and ‘national security’. Their mindset is predisposed to magnification, exaggeration and simplification of perceived ‘security threats’ and to perceive them where they do not exist. When a fire accident took place in the Police Lines of a North-Eastern State, a senior officer just returned from a long stint in the claustrophobic environs of the IB in New Delhi was asked to look into incident. He produced a report which found an ‘international conspiracy’ behind the event, noting that the State had a porous border with a foreign country. It was, however, established later that the fire had been caused by a minor act of negligence on the part of the chief of the Police Lines!

With regard to the Naxalite movement, regarded as ‘terrorist’ in intelligence and police circles, it may be noted that the State Police and the Central IB (manned entirely by the police) are dominated by the cult of secrecy and their reports, often faulty and misleading, are not subjected to proper scrutiny. The Research and Policy Division (R&P) of the Union Home Ministry was set up by a former Union Home Secretary who was unhappy with ‘over-classification’. In its first report in 1969, the Division had stated that the Naxalite movement was as an outcome of agrarian tensions, which called for far-reaching agrarian reforms. The Division was wound up later. At present, the Ministry relies entirely on classified information provided by the IB and the State Police forces on Naxalite activities. These reports are not questioned within the Ministry. Any attempt to query them is frowned upon as a violation of security concerns. These reports are often biased, self-serving and misleading and contain factual inaccuracies.

A serious information gap has thus arisen in the Union Home Ministry with regard to the analysis of the Naxalite and other similar movements. A comparison of the information emanating from public sources on the Naxalite activities in, say, the Central Tribal Belt with the information produced by intelligence sources reveals a huge gap. Public sources focus on information from the victims of violence but intelligence sources focus on State security and stress police requirements in terms of fire power, mobility and manpower. Human security is lost sight of with the emphasis placed on law and order rather than on law and justice. Human rights violations and police brutality are overlooked or justified. This leads to further alienation of the government from the people, ironically lending credence to Naxalite theories on the nature of the Indian State!

A former Union Home Secretary had suggested the setting up of several multidisciplinary study and action teams of scholars, social activists and civil servants to go into conflict situations in different parts of the country and prepare policy papers. The suggestion was not taken seriously. The Ministry, which had a developmental role with regard to Dalits and adivasis and received special annual reports from State Governors on the security and safety of these deprived and marginalised communities, has now lost it and has become virtually a para-military agency. The Naxalite movement is now handled on military lines and the developmental approach downgraded. IB reports, while stressing Naxalite violence, fail to take note of the increasing violence against Dalits and adivasis, who are the backbone of the Naxalite movement. The displacement, disorganisation and destitution arising as a consequence of official development processes, which strengthen the Naxalite movement, are not addressed. Though a recent report on the development challenges in extremist-affected areas prepared by the Planning Commission interestingly adopts a developmental approach, it is likely that the Union Home Ministry will find it difficult to accept and change its prevailing repressive approach to the Naxalite movement.
__________________________
About the Author: The author, a former member of the Indian Police Service and Director of the Research and Policy Division of the Union Home Ministry, is currently Visiting Professor in the Jamia Millia University, New Delhi. He is the author of Political Violence and the Police in India (Sage Publications, New Delhi, 2007).

Mainstream Weekly

Hate as a history lesson

by Shobhan Saxena, 27 October 2008          Muslim India

When bands of lumpen goons, armed with knives, guns, kerosene cans and shouts of "Jai Sri Ram" rule the streets, hunting those who belong to other faiths, they strut like warriors re-living a historical role. Serial bombers, who maim and kill anyone and everyone within the range of the pellets packed in their crude bombs, celebrate death and destruction in the belief that Islamic history is on their side.

The anatomy of religious hate, which is becoming stronger by the day across the country, has a core - our past. It is this that gives the hooligan a sense of purpose and a place in, what he believes to be, the larger scheme of things. But where does the religious-minded goon learn the "history" that fills his mind with enough hate to commit irreligious acts of violence? Perhaps, the answer lies in our educational system, or lack of it. The history textbooks, used by thousands of schools across the country, mix myth and legend with facts in a way that makes it difficult for students to distinguish between them. Often enough, schoolteachers present myth as history and debunk history as myth.

The Sunday Times spoke to students at a Saraswati Shishu Mandir in west Delhi, run by the RSS, and found that they perceived Indian history to be nothing but a conflict between Hindus and Muslims. A casual conversation with students at a Saraswati Bal Mandir in south Delhi unveiled an image of India as the oldest civilization in the world and the source of all knowledge and culture. Meanwhile, the young children studying at a madrassa in Delhi’s Okhla area don’t recognize names such as Ashoka, Buddha and Chandragupta. These historical figures are alien to them. It’s almost the same story in many of the more than 1,000 madrassas operating in the national capital.

But, the madrassas are changing. It is getting harder to get into college and secure a job, so madrassas are increasingly opting for courses in English , computer science and the natural sciences. But these Muslim religious schools still remain allergic to the social sciences, particularly history. Years in a madrassa classroom may leave a student with barely any knowledge of some of the most important events in Indian and world history. A former student of Varanasi’s Jamia Salafia, a leading madrassa run by the socio-cultural organization, Ahl-i Hadith, says, "We are so cut off from the external world that students have no idea of the important trends and events in other parts of the world. When you step out of the madrassa and go into the real world, you are lost." The young man, now enrolled in a history course in a Delhi college, adds, "I don’t have much of a problem with what they teach, but I have a problem with what they don’t teach, particularly history and political science."

But the teaching of history is not enough to create a balanced picture of our multi-religious and multi-cultural country and our changing world. At Saraswati Bal Mandir in Nehru Nagar in Delhi, children are taught history from NCERT books. The school is affiliated to the CBSE, but its small campus is also filled with religious symbols and imagery - Bharat Mata in the principal’s office and Rama, the warrior, by the blackboard.

Most class XII students believe Rama was a historical figure. "The scientific investigation of the old bridge between India and Sri Lanka has proved that it was built by Rama," says a student, who is unaware of details of the Sethusamudram project case currently in the Supreme Court. Many of the school’s students present the Ayodhya temple as proof that Rama existed. Their history teacher offers the final bit of evidence: "The Ramacharitmanas proves that Rama was a historical figure. What further proof do you want?" When asked to state when exactly Rama walked the earth, the teacher retorts: "It’s a matter of people’s faith and belief."

Therein lies the problem. Schools run by religious bodies - be they Hindu or Muslim - teach "matters of faith and belief" as historical fact. It could end very badly, says Aditya Mukherjee, professor of history at Jawaharlal Nehru University. "We will end up producing morons," says the professor, who has written a book on the issue along with colleagues Mridula Mukherjee and Sucheta Mahajan. Their book, The RSS, School Texts and the Murder of Mahatma Gandhi, analyzes history textbooks used by schools in the cow belt. Mukherjee says, "They are putting poison into young minds by distorting the truth." The book lists some of the more bizarre ‘facts’ taught as history, including bitter condemnation of Ashoka’s philosophy of ahimsa or non-violence, which is alleged to "make cowards of Indians". The textbooks also eulogise Hitler for his nationalism, cast Muslims as invaders and nothing else and claim that Iran and China’s first settlers were Indian kshatriyas.

These ’facts’, which do not withstand independent scrutiny, are taught in an estimated 30,000 schools run by the Vidya Bharti, an apex all-India organization of the RSS. More than 80,000 teachers convey these ’truths’ to three million children every year. It is hardly better in thousands of madrassas across the country, where the syllabus remains virtually unchanged from the original prepared during the Mughal period and modified in the late 19th century. "Students of these institutions are developing a world view that’s narrow and sectarian. We have so much religion in the country that they don’t see anything odd with it," says an official of the ministry of human resources development. He adds that "political reasons" meant "we have failed to detoxify the curriculum of these schools. It’s really dangerous. We will pay a heavy price for ignoring primary education."

Historians such as Aditya Mukherjee rue the fact that "nobody is bothered about the state of primary education in the country". With government schools either non-existent or not functioning, poor people in rural areas and urban pockets depend on these schools to educate their children. Religious groups, pushing narrow agendas, have grabbed the space left vacant by the state.

Historical fact explains why. In Nehru’s time, India was focused on creating and sustaining centres of higher education, such as the IITs, IIMs and central universities. For all that Nehru believed that words such as dharma and mazheb were "dangerous" and should be kept out of the "temples of learning", primary education was ignored during his tenure. Now, it has become worse. Today, with the Right to Education Bill (2005), which guarantees free and compulsory education to every child in the 6-14 age group, stuck as the UPA government has failed to introduce a new draft in Parliament, primary education seems destined still to suffer at the hands of hate politics.

Hate and history are related. Each time history repeats itself, the level of hate goes up.

The Times of India

‘Gender-Blind’ Peacekeeping: Blue Helmets as the Perpetrators of Human Rights Violations

By Caglar Dolek * Muslim India

“In certain villages bordering conflict zones, young girls have admitted that armed men come in at night – these girls are used as sex workers – they are not allowed to protest – they are not allowed to lock their doors and the whole community tolerates this because these armed men protect the community – so it is a trade-off.” (The Report of International Committee of the Red Cross, 2005)

The above stated observation of the International Committee of the Red Cross clearly demonstrates how the UN peacekeeping operations fundamentally lack a gender dimension which would ensure and secure the women’s human rights in the conflict-torn countries. In cases like Bosnia, Kosovo, Cambodia, Congo and many others, the acts of sexual abuse by the UN peacekeepers have been reported causing serious debates on the contradictory nature of the peacekeeping operations.

The presents study tries to critically evaluate the ‘gender dimension’ of the UN peacekeeping in order to uncover the contradictory nature of the UN operations. For that aim, the paper firstly provides an insight for the transforming nature of conflict in the post-Cold War era which has ‘necessitated’ the novel approach to the peacekeeping operations. Secondly, the paper makes a critical analysis of the peacekeeping operations with special emphasis on the problem of sexual exploitation of women and children by the peacekeepers. Arguing that the peacekeeping should have a ‘gender dimension’, the paper scrutinizes in the third part the formal and institutional mechanisms of the UN to address the issue. Then, the paper ends up with the argument that without a gendered approach to peace operations and with the endurance of patriarchal codes of subordination, the UN operations are likely to remain as the ‘perpetuators’ of the human rights violations in the conflict-torn countries, rather than the other way around.

‘New Generation of Peacekeeping’

The United Nations officially came into being on 24 October 1945, having a fundamental purpose of maintaining international peace and security. Such a purpose is summarized in the Article 1(1) of the UN Charter, which states that the primary aim of the UN is “to maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.”

Generally speaking, the UN performs this duty through three different, but closely interlinked, ways and/or processes: peaceful settlement, collective security and peacekeeping. As a matter of this paper, the peacekeeping has experienced a radical transformation both in terms of purpose and nature especially since the end of the Cold War. This transformation has been largely conditioned by the alteration of the traditional notion of sovereignty in the wake of the new categories of conflicts experienced in many developing countries.

This transformation was first reflected in the policies of the UN in early 1990s, with a document called ‘An Agenda for Peace’ prepared by the Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali. The document opened a new phase in the UN peacekeeping operations by making a novel definition of sovereignty and by altering the nature of peacekeeping.

An Agenda for Peace provided that there emerged novel types of conflicts ranging from ethnic clashes to the humanitarian disasters with the end of the Cold War. Rather than the inter-state security matters, it was observed, the internal problems of the individual countries have become the major concerns for security. Moreover, the report made it clear that an approach based on the traditional notion of sovereignty, as centered on the nation state, was not sufficient to resolve the problems arising in the form of humanitarian disasters. It was argued that the judicial sovereignty, which had been the basis of the international system for centuries, was no longer justifiable in the wake of severe human rights violations committed by the ‘sovereign’ states in their domestic affairs. Then, the notion of empirical sovereignty was advocated in order to emphasize the point that the individual state should now act in accordance with the basic standards of human rights as recognized in the international treaties and documents.

This transformation in fact indicated a radical alteration of the philosophy of intervention by the UN. Prior to this time, the UN peacekeeping operations had been conducted in accordance with the provisions provided by the Chapter VI of the UN Charter, entitled as the Pacific Settlement of Disputes. During the Cold War, the UN conducted various peacekeeping operations but with the aim of containing the conflict within its geographical context. Otherwise, in an environment of Cold War, the small-scale conflicts might cause much serious ones in the international arena with the natural exacerbation of the ideological rivalry. Having based on such a rationale, the UN peacekeeping functioned as the buffer zone between the conflicting parties, engaged in non-use of force (with the exception of self-defense) and required the consent of the parties to the conflict. That is, because the post-1945 settlement greatly embraced the notions of non-intervention and sovereign equality as embodied in the domestic jurisdiction clause of Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, the UN peacekeeping operations did not carry out any acts inconsistent with the fundamental principle of the sovereignty.

However, as discussed above, the end of Cold War brought a fundamental transformation of the peace operations under the mandate of the UN.[1] This transformation has gradually brought the peacekeeping operations under the umbrella of the Chapter VII of the Charter. With reference to that chapter, the peace operations became to be conducted without the consent of the host countries, and large-scale military force began to be utilized. One of the earliest examples was the First Gulf War justified by the US-led international forces on the grounds of ‘humanitarian intervention’. Then, the examples multiplied from Somalia to Bosnia to Rwanda in the 1990s.

Speaking in terms of the rationale behind the ‘new generation of peacekeeping’ operations, the notion of human rights played a central role behind all these operations. However, as discussed in the next section, the UN peacekeepers in time turned out to be the ‘perpetuators’ of the human rights violations because of the ‘gender-blind’ understanding of the peacekeeping.

UN Peacekeepers as the Perpetuators of the Human Rights Violations
It has been a widely accepted argument that the women and children constitute the most vulnerable parts of the society especially in times of conflict. With due regard, Rajoo successfully summarizes the sufferings of the women by stating that the women and children in times of conflict are further confronted by poverty, economic instability and ‘the ability to enjoy rights as women and as human beings is simply diminished.’Then, the writer continues: “The increasing lack of economic opportunities, their status as second-class citizens, the loss of their family networks, particularly the men, through conscription, displacement, detainment and even death, leaves women exposed to greater challenges of unemployment, poverty, insecurity and violence notwithstanding bereavement and the psychological scars they must still endure. For their survival, women are forced to seek new methods of coping to not only help sustain themselves but their surviving families as well. The vast majority of internally displaced persons and refugees across conflict-ridden Africa are women. Without access to employment and the reality of unequal gender relations, they do not have adequate food, shelter, money or goods, and are forced into or become easily exposed to prostitution and rape, using their bodies to acquire these items for their survival.”

Thinking within this context, one should read the issue of sexual abuse of women and children by the peacekeepers as a manifestation of a much larger socio-economic problem exacerbated in times of conflict. Then, the issue of peacekeeping inevitably relates to the question of gender.

The peacekeepers’ involvement in the acts of sexual exploitation of women and children was first reported in early 1990s in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo by media and human rights groups. Later, the UN peacekeepers came into the world agenda with same acts in Mozambique, Cambodia, East Timor, Sierra Leona and Liberia. The most dramatic allegations have been coming from the UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC). Only from February 2003 to October 2005, there were almost 250 investigations of sexual abuse of women and children (even 10 years old) by the UN military and civilian personnel.[4] Especially in the most-conflictual areas of Congo, the prostitution, rape and pedophilia are the widespread, if not the ‘common affairs’, of the day. The young female children in Congo are called as ‘One-dollar UN Girl’ because they are forced to sell their bodies to the UN personnel in return for money, without which they had no other way of survival.

These cases remind us the contradictory nature of UN peacekeeping operations. The post-Cold War task of peacekeepers has been to re-establish the rule of law, curb direct political violence, promote good governance and reconciliation and help the conflict-torn countries to recover from the trauma of the conflict and human rights violations. However, the Blue Helmets have acted without any consideration on these fundamental principles. In this regard, it seems important to evaluate the gender-dimension of the UN peacekeeping as expressed in many international documents.

‘A Gendered Approach’ to UN Peacekeeping and Peace building

It is obvious that women, men, boys and girls have different needs and difficulties in the times of conflicts, and so they need different approaches to tackle the problems they face with. In that sense, ‘a gendered approach’ to peacekeeping and peace building is of paramount importance to achieve the idealistically set targets of UN peacekeeping operations. However, as the examples of sexual abuse by the peacekeepers themselves clearly demonstrate, the UN operations have been simply ‘gender-blind’.[5] However, the last two decades has shown the increasing involvement of the UN in the gender-sensitive issues during the conflicts.

One of the most important milestones was the Fourth World Conference on Women held in Beijing in 1995. The conference documents explicitly declared that the establishment of long-standing and stable peace is inevitably associated with the equality between men and women. Then, the Beijing Conference strongly underlined the point that “Armed Violations of the human rights of women in situations of armed conflict are violations of the fundamental principles of international human rights and humanitarian law.”[6] Later in 2000, the UN Security Counil adopted the Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security in order to address the hazardous impacts of war-time conditions on women and to emphasize the women's contributions to conflict resolution and sustainable peace. In the Resolution, the UN Security Council expressed the concern “... that that civilians, particularly women and children, account for the vast majority of those adversely affected by armed conflict, including as refugees and internally displaced persons, and increasingly are targeted by combatants and armed elements, and recognizing the consequent impact this has on durable peace and reconciliation.” Moreover, the Resolution 1325 stressed on the responsibility of all the parties to the conflict to take special measures to protect women and girls from gender-based violence, particularly rape and other forms of sexual abuse, and all other forms of violence in situations of armed conflict. Apart from these two important documents, the 1998 Rome Statue establishing International Criminal Court recognized in 2000 that rape and other sexual violence, occurring within the context of war, as crimes against humanity.

These documents provide the general framework on which the peacekeeping operations would be based. However, the UN has tried to take more practical measures to address the issue especially due to the gradual intensification of the criticisms against the peacekeepers. Among the others, the Policy Planning Unit of the Department of Peacekeeping issued the Ten Rules-Code of Personal Conduct for Blue Helmets, which explicitly bans any exchange of money, employment, goods or services for sex and renders the perpetrators liable to disciplinary actions for serious misconduct.

The Article 4 of the Code specifically deals with the sexual abuse and states that the blue helmets shall not “... indulge in immoral acts of sexual, physical or psychological abuse or exploitation of the local population or United Nations staff, especially women and children”. All the troop-contributing countries recognize these ten codes of conduct as binding.

In addition to the general rules applied to all the peacekeeping operations, there are more specific rules concerning each peace operations of the UN. These country-specific codes of conducts have been designed to address the particular problems experienced during the particular missions of the UN. Among the others, the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC) has its own codes of conduct developed in 2003. The MONUC code of personal conduct strictly prohibits the sexual abuse and exploitation of local people by the peacekeepers.

Concluding Remarks

The changing notion of security has necessitated the novel approach to the UN peacekeeping operations, which has manifested itself in various conflicts since the end of the Cold War. The primary aim has been presented as the protection of fundamental principles of human rights. More particularly some of the international documents have explicitly recognized the linkages between women’s human rights and war-like conditions.

However, practically speaking, the UN peacekeeping operations have created a ‘secure environment’ for the perpetuation of the violations of fundamental rights of women and children. This issue can be evaluated with respect to the words of Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon who stated as a response to the recent allegations that the UN cannot punish the peacekeepers for crimes. The only thing the UN can do is to send them back to their countries.

The inability of the UN to put its peacekeepers into the trial is a fundamental question which relates to a systemic discussion of the place of international human rights in a world of still nation states. However, there exists another dimension of the issue. It is the ‘gender-blind’ approach taken in the peace operations. Even though the general or country-specific codes of conducts seem to deal with the gender-dimension of the issue, as the examples have shown, such an approach is limited both in scope and philosophy.

Caglar Dolek, ISRO African Studies
caglar_dolek@yahoo.com
___________________________
* This article is taken with permission from the Journal of Turkish Weekly.
About the Author: Caglar Dolek, is a member ofInternational Strategic Research Organization -African Studies, Turkey. He can be reached at caglar_dolek@yahoo.com

How Secular Is India Today?

by Asghar Ali Engineer *                Muslim India

There is always a big gap between theory and practice, theology and history. Indian constitution, no doubt, is one of the best in the world. It is truly secular in spirit so much so it was secular even when word secular was not added to it until 1975 i.e. during emergency. If it were truly implemented India would be an ideal country to live in especially for minorities, both religious as well as linguistic.

However, as we all know there is big gap between theory and practice, constitution and governance of the country. India was far more peaceful after independence for number of reasons. Firstly, nationalist leaders who had participated in freedom struggle and were instrumental in framing the Constitution were still around and despite various pressures, stuck to ideals and values to a great extent.

Secondly, due to idealism and nearness to spirit of freedom nation as a category and national identity was of great importance and often caste, linguistic and religious divisions mattered less. Thirdly, the process of economic development had just begun and yet people's demand for share in development on caste and communal lines was not very articulate and loud.

Because of all this identity politics was still subdued and Marathi versus non-Marathi, Tamil versus non-Tamil sentiments were not so prominent. Hindu versus Muslims feelings were not so subdued due to memory of partition but due to other factors communal violence was still limited and had not assumed proportions of ethnic cleansing or genocide like in Gujarat in 2002.

It all began with series of communal riots in sixties assuming great proportions in Ahmedabad in 1969 and Bhivandi in 1970. In Ahmedabad nearly 1000 people were killed in Ahmedabad in 1969 and around 400 people in Bhivandi. But then communal violence remained in check until 1977 when again some major riots took place in several places like Jamshedpur, Aligarh and Varanasi etc.

Again whole of decade of eighties was full of communal violence climaxing in Mumbai riots in 1992-93. The Ramjanam bhoomi movement once again polarized as on the eve of partition. Again there was lull in communal disturbances from 1992-93 to 2002 when Gujarat took place in 2002. Gujarat riots once again made communal situation quite fragile and weakened secular ethos in the country.

Now the identity politics soared quite high and national ethos considerably weakened. Today everyone prioritize once caste, communal and religious identity over national one. National rhetoric, as if, has almost disappeared and even Hindutva forces talk more of Hindu religion than of patriotism or nation. For them too Indian nationalism has been replaced by Hindu nationalism.

For Shiv Sena of course Maharashtra was always more important than the Rashtra (nation) and those Hindus too who spoke Hindi the Rashtrabhasha (national language) came under attack. Several Hindus from U.P. and Bihar were mauled by Marathi speaking zealots belonging to Maharashtra Navniram Sena (MNS), a splinter group from Shiv Sena.

Now recently Christians who were never targeted before by the Hindutva zealots have also come under attack. Christians, a mere 2.2 percent minority and which has contributed so richly to the country in the field of education and health services are being killed ruthlessly. What is going on in Kandhmal district of Orissa and some adjoining districts, is indeed hair raising.

More than 40 Christians have been killed, a nun mass raped, a woman burnt beyond recognition, more than 400 houses burnt and looted and 35 thousand have fled from their villages to relief camps. And what for? A myth has been spread by the powerful machinery of Sangh Parivar that all Christians convert. Remember RSS propaganda "All Muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims"?

Orissa is another Gujarat both in brutalities and terrorization of minorities. When Christians and Muslims are being so brutally targeted the RSS Chief Sudarshan says that both Muslims and Christians convert and Muslims want every one to become Muslim and Christians want all to follow Christ and so Hindus must give fitting reply. And our rulers just look on.

When BJP was ruling over the country and whole country was communalized we were feeling suffocated and felt liberated when UPA took over and the BJP led Government defeated at the hustings. We celebrated UPA's victory specially because it was supported by the left which is the only hope for Indian secularism. However, left has withdrawn its support on nuclear issue and once again we are feeling suffocated in the communally surcharged state of affairs in India.

However, what is most worrisome is that it is happening under UPA Government which is supposed to be a secular outfit. Perhaps today there is more suffocation than even under the BJP-led NDA Government. The UPA has forgotten all its promises made to the country and is betraying minorities and jettisoning its secular commitment. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is more occupied with his pet nuclear pact with America than the communal explosion back home.

The communal forces are growing stronger and stronger everyday and the ruling coalition of secular forces is quite indifferent. The Home Ministry is functioning quite in a lackadaisical manner. It has given complete liberty to these forces and they are riding roughshod over our secular values and constitutional forces. They never got such license to function freely.

The NDA Government liberally recruited RSS inclined candidates in all key positions and they captured important academic positions too. Also, RSS trained teachers and journalists also were recruited on large scale. It is because of this that we find communally minded people in all walks of life. The media also has been communalised as never before.

Today be it communal riots or terrorist attacks most of the newspapers and T.V. channels publish police version unabashedly as if it is ultimate truth. No questions are raised and it appears as if investigative journalism has become story of the past. Media plays most important role in strengthening democratic values and democracy cannot survive without a critical and alert media. But it seems except for few papers and magazines media has been completely communalised.

Even a well-known Daily from south which was known for its strong commitment to secularism appears to have developed, of late, subtle communal slant. It is indeed very critical period for India. India is well known as largest secular democracy in the world. But first Gujarat and now Orissa has dented its secular image thanks to Hindutva forces. Manmohan Singh was faced with the most embarrassing situation abroad and he had to admit that what is happening in Orissa is 'shameful'.

But having described developments in Orissa shameful what has he done to redeem it? He is quite hesitant to ban Bajrang Dal and resisting demand of some of his own Congress party colleagues to ban it saying we are watching and waiting for reports from Chief Minister of Orissa. It is indeed more shameful than communal carnage in Orissa. Any truly secular government would have dismissed Navin Patnaik Government for its complete inability to control communal violence.

So far I never believed that Indian communalism could take form of fascism as many leftists had been saying all along. Today we see the footprints of fascism in India. The situation is very similar to that of Germany in the thirties. The unemployed hordes of lower middle classes have joined Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad in large numbers and hailing Hindutva leaders. Some of the text books in Rajasthan and Gujarat, both BJP ruled states are praising fascism and Hitler.

Also, the Central Government is appeasing these communal forces. It appears though the Government at the Centre is of secular UPA but agenda is of Sangh Parivar. The police appears to be taking orders from Sangh Parivar rather than from ruling Congress or UPA. Riot after riot be it in Orissa or Digras, Pusad or Dhule the police just looks on when mobs loot and burn even during curfew hours.

It is indeed very very worrisome situation. The UPA Government is assisting the Sangh Parivar in every way possible. The police is riding absolutely roughshod over minorities and latest example is Batla House 'encounter'. Though the print and electronic media abdicated its responsibility the human rights groups raised questions and pricked holes in the police claim of encounter of 'dreaded terrorists.

The situation is indeed very grave and unless secular forces unite and play determined role things can get far more worse.
_______________________________

* About the Author: Asghar Ali Engineer is a Muslim scholar and engineer. Internationally he is known for his work on liberation theology in Islam, the leader of the Progressive Dawoodi Bohra movement, and his work on (and action against) communalism and communal and ethnic violence in India and South East Asia. He is an advocate of a culture of peace and non-violence.

He has authored more than 40 books and many articles in various national and international journals, and is founding chairman of the Asian Muslim Action Network, director of the Institute of Islamic Studies, and head of the Center for Study of Society and Secularism in Mumbai. He has been awarded several awards, among which the Communal Harmony Award in 1997 and the Right Livelihood Award in 2004 (with Swami Agnivesh) for his 'strong commitment to promote values of co-existence and tolerance'.

Australia considers adopting Islamic banking

ABC Radio Australia, Posted October 23, 2008 21:32:58  Muslim India

Financial institutions and the government are considering introducing Islamic banking and its principles to the Australian financial system.

Industry experts say Islamic banking is one of the fastest growing sectors in the global banking industry, and is worth an estimated $US200 billion worldwide.

The Asialink Islamic Banking Colloquium, held in the Australian city of Melbourne, has heard Islamic banks have largely escaped the fallout from the economic crisis by adhering to Islamic principles of prohibiting interest and sharing of profit and loss between banks and borrowers.

A leading academic on Islamic banking, Professor Abdullah Saeed from Melbourne University, says there is potential for further growth in Australia.

"There is a significant Muslim community here, but its not just for Muslims in Australia," he said.

"A lot of conventional banks are interested in and a number of Islamic banks are actually moving into Australia so we're not just talking about a Muslim issue.

"It is one of the ways of dealing with banking and finance [which just] happened to be called Islamic."

Source: ABC Radio Australia
Australia considers adopting Islamic nanking

When Islam meets Bridget Jones

Shelina Zahra Janmohamed, first posted on Monday, 20 October 2008 at 10:44 GMT, UK Muslim India

A romantic telling of the life of one of the wives of Islam's prophet has caused controversy among some Muslims - and its publication has been indefinitely postponed in the UK amid fears of a violent reaction. But is The Jewel of Medina actually any good? Blogger Shelina Zahra Janmohamed is one of the few people in Britain to have read it. 

The Jewel of Medina is a chest-heaving, brassiere-busting book of outrageously tacky historical romantic fiction.

Some parts of the media are suggesting that this book is at the forefront of defending free speech. The author wants it to reach out to solve our global problems of intercultural dialogue. Between them they had me rolling around on the floor laughing.

Even if you feel that it is your duty to read it in the defence of freedom of speech, don't do it, I beg you - go out and enjoy the last sunny days of autumn, play with your children, watch paint dry - you'll thank me for it.

The book claims to tell the story of Aisha, one of the wives of the Prophet Muhammad, through her own eyes, from the age of six, through adolescence and into adulthood. But although she lives through one of the most dramatic periods of history, the narrative conveys little of the enormity of the changes of the era, and of which Aisha was a huge part.

Sherry Jones, the author, says she wanted her book to be "at once a love story, a history lesson and a coming-of-age tale".

In order to do so, she fabricates a storyline about a lover, Safwan, whom Aisha runs away with - but then decides to leave and return to Muhammad.

But this invented plot dominates, leaving barely any room for the real history and importance of her story.

Whether you believe her to be fact, fiction or fantasy, and Muslims believe her to be very real, Aisha is of great significance in global history. The one fifth of the world population who are Muslim regards her as the wife of the Prophet Muhammad and a "mother of the believers".

She is said to have been a leading scholar and teacher and recounted many of the traditions about the personality of Muhammad.

Muslims hold Muhammad, Aisha and other religious figures very close to their hearts, dearer to them than their own parents, and just as much to be respected, protected and defended.

Muslims believe they went through enormous hardship in order to keep the spiritual message of faith intact, and in return wish to honour their contribution.

This is to be carried out in a measured and peaceful manner, in keeping with the spirit of Islam that advises returning harsh words with good ones, and malice with mercy.

With this in mind, I would have ignored this book and let it fade into obscurity. Allowing the book to be remembered only for the lack of interest it generated would have been the ultimate poetic justice.

The original publisher pulled out - and those parts of the media who wanted to stir things up said Muslims wanted it banned.

So, in order to find out what the (manufactured) fuss was about, I found myself spending 12 dreary hours reading this cringe-worthy melodramatic prose.

Even if you feel that it is your duty to read it in the defence of freedom of speech, don't do it, I beg you. Go out and enjoy the last sunny days of autumn, play with your children, watch paint dry. You'll thank me for it.

Bodice-ripper

So let's deal with its literary merits. If you're a man, you'll probably hate this bodice-ripper. If you like well-written prose, then you should steer clear too.

What it does have going for it is pace and saucy pre-TV-watershed romance.

'Anyone who reads the book will see that it honours the prophet and his favourite wife.' Sherry Jones, Author

Open it randomly and you read churning phrases such as: "His eyes like honey flowed sweet glances over my face and body," or "Is your young bride ripe at last?" Grab a crumbling Flake and a pot of ice-cream.

The author claims she wants to humanise Aisha, to reach out to the Muslim world and to create debate.

I found the opposite of this spirit in the book. Muslims will not recognise the characters and stories here because they vary so wildly with recorded history. As the copyright note makes clear, this is a work of fiction.

Take, for example, the night of "Hijrah". This was the moment when the first band of Muslims left the hostile city of Mecca to move to Medina where Islam flourished - a turning point in Islamic history. But the book changes events to place Aisha at the house of Muhammad.

Jones changes the very essence of these individuals, so their characters are at odds with historical traditions.

Ali, the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet, as well as one of the great leaders of early Islam, is portrayed as conniving, hot-tempered and lascivious. The Islamic texts document him as a consistently staunch defender of truth and justice, an upstanding character.

So, if you drive a wedge between Muslims and others by fictionalising core characters, how can the book be a platform for debate?

Jones admits that she has introduced concepts that were absent from the period and place to help to create her story.

For example, Aisha is put into purdah , seclusion, as a child, but this is an Indian sub-continental idea then unknown to Arabia.

A huge focus of Aisha's energies is to become the hatun , the lead wife, and make all the other wives bow to her. But hatun is a Turkish concept - and bowing is contrary to all Islamic teachings.

What we end up with is an outdated Orientalist reading of an exoticised woman.

Aisha's angst is the angst of 19th Century western writers who couldn't understand the culture they were observing. And when they couldn't understand, they maligned the ideas they found unfamiliar, such as veiling of women like Aisha.

The result is an awkward unconvincing story, created to fit a pre-existing pre-determined idea of what life for Muslim women ought to be like. The cover art is The Queen of the Harem, a 19th Century Orientalist painting of a European-looking woman.

Sex, sex and more sex

The most irritating thing is its constant obsession with sex. The author sees it everywhere and in everything, and makes Aisha do the same. Her life is reduced to a parody of a smutty Bridget Jones diary.

I lost count of the references to "child bride". Even till relatively modern times, marriage for women in their early teens was completely natural and common in parts of the world, including Europe.

Many Muslims will indeed be offended by this book, and they should make clear why they feel hurt. If our society upholds the right to offend, then the right to be offended goes with it. But it is respect and empathy for their feelings that Muslims want, not fear.

What we need for debate and discussion are accessible histories of all the key figures in Islamic history. As Muslims, instead of honouring these individuals blindly, we will accord them much more respect by opening our eyes to their achievements through critical re-examination of their lives. This cannot be done in an atmosphere of fear and intimidation

Some Muslims oppose a style of writing and analysis that offers insights into the very human lives these individuals led.

I believe this opposition is misplaced, because that is what we already do with the words and deeds of the Prophet, known as the hadith: we read, empathise and re-apply the essence of those day-to-day experiences.

The crucial issue in creating positive understanding and dialogue through such writings is that they must be historically sound, and see the world through the experiences, morality and realities of the protagonists themselves.

Shelina Zahra Janmohamed's is the author of the Spirit 21 blog. Her book, Love in a Headscarf, will be published in February 2009. Jewel of Medina, by Sherry Jones, is available from international book-sellers - but not currently on sale in the UK.

Source: BBC: NEWS Magazine

When Islam meets Bridget Jones

Is it really Muslims whose credibility is at stake?

M.J.Akbar, first posted on 28, September 2008 at 0013 hrs IST    Muslim India

There is nothing more subversive than the alternative narrative. A parallel version of the Godhra incident and riots sabotaged the re-election of the NDA government four years ago. A subaltern variation of the police operation at Batla House, near the Jamia Milia Islamia University on 19 September, is undermining the credibility of the Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi government today. It cannot undermine the credibility of home minister Shivraj Patil because he has none.

The first doubts began to circulate even while Patil, wearing a very self-satisfied expression on his face, began to congratulate himself in front of television cameras for delivering bullet-justice to two young men living in a small apartment of this building. He had, he said, personally supervised the encounter, presumably without taking any break whatsoever for fresh laundry.

Ironically, doubt needs the support of evidence. If it is mere partisan belligerence, it will last no longer than a puff of acrid smoke. Some things did not quite add up in the official story. It was, to use a phrase familiar from the Sherlock Holmes oeuvre, the dog that did not bark that raised the first question. You rarely slip on hard concrete; it is generally the banana skin that turns a measured tread into a painful fall. The Rashomon effect, where the same event induces sharply different perspectives, can make for intriguing fiction; in real life, it can rip up communication lines carefully planted by a government trying to sell a fable.

The first question, followed by two photographs, began to dilute the triumphalism of the Delhi police even during the early phase of its self-glorification. The authorities noted, with satisfaction, that two 'terrorists' had been killed. They added that two had escaped from the rented urban cage where they lived, which was all they could afford. The deaths were explicable; the escape was not. The building had only one entrance, and hence only one exit. It was surrounded by policemen. How could the two escape?

When the murmur became a buzz, the police attempted damage control with a weak suggestion. The two could have escaped through the roof, hopping across rooftops. But it was daytime. The roofline was surely as closely monitored as the roadline. Neighbourhood eyes were tense and alert. Had anyone seen this acrobatic, even melodramatic, form of flight?

No.

Two pictures propped up two ends of a growing conviction of foul play. One showed Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma, who lost his life, walking towards something, presumably the car that would take him to hospital, supported by two colleagues (one in a tie, the other in a T-shirt). His gunshot wound was obvious. There was a heavy patch of blood on the upper part of one arm, and only a faint discoloring on the lower front of his bush shirt, near the abdomen. Police had said that Sharma had died from a bullet in the stomach. The picture proved that the bullet had not hit the stomach, and that Sharma was able to come down four flights albeit with help. A bullet in the stomach would have left him a stretcher case, and caused far more blood loss, particularly through the exit wound.

The official story changed. The self-acclamation had been blared over media, the change was released discreetly, through a plant that said that he died of a heart attack caused by blood loss.

The questions multiplied: was Sharma hit by what is known in military parlance as 'friendly fire'?

The police would have been far more comfortable about their theories if some intrepid photographer had not snapped Sharma. The second picture, however, was part of their public relations offensive. It showed three suspects, Zia ur Rahman, Saqib Nishad and Mohammad Shakeel. As is usual in the case of suspects being put on display, their faces were covered with cloth: the police are gracious enough to disguise the identity of suspects for they cannot be deemed guilty until a court has passed judgment. But there was significant departure from normal practice. These three had been shrouded by Arab-style headdresses (made famous by Yasser Arafat, and now a staple of Arab identity in countless TV images) instead of the anonymous black cloth used by police.

Who had decided that these three suspects should be given an "Arab" identity? Was this a not-so-subliminal message to even the densest in the audience about the nature of the "enemy", that the headdress was a signature of "Islamic terrorism"? Did this brilliant idea emerge from the home minister, now the hands-on commander, or did it emerge from somewhere lower down the food chain?

Indian Muslims did not need to open a political dictionary to gauge the meaning of this forced symbolism? They knew that it was an attempt to stigmatize the whole community and link terrorism in India with an international conspiracy, with an implied hint at Osama bin Laden, the most famous Arab terrorist.

If the purpose of the UPA government's officialdom was to intensify fear of Muslims among non-Muslims, then it succeeded. Indian Muslims are used to being fearful - of riots, police prejudice and arbitrary authority. They have learnt to temper their response with realism. They believed in the government of Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi, if only because they reassured themselves that they had been primarily responsible, through intense electoral mobilization, in adding the crucial 20 odd seats to the Congress that enabled it to become the largest single party in the last general elections. That perception has been shifting slowly, almost reluctantly, because Muslims had no other national political anchor. The Jamia incident has become a wake-up call. The growing perception is that the UPA government has deliberately killed innocent men to satiate the demand for action against terrorism.

Is that the truth? I have no idea, because the truth is privy only to those who control the guns - on either side of the divide. But this much I do know. In public life, perception becomes the operative truth.

Source: The Times of India
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Is_it_really_Muslims_whose_credibility_is_at_stake/