Daily Times

The British colonial power terminated its rule in India following protracted negotiations with the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League. Hindus and other communities, including the Sikhs, stood by the demands of the Congress for the independence of united India. The overwhelming majority of the Muslim population fell in line with the Muslim League in demanding independence but at the same time sought a separate homeland for themselves. However, a section of the Muslim population saw the partition of India with trepidation because of Muslims being scattered all over India. They aligned either with the Congress or the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Hind in demanding independence but opposing the creation of Pakistan. The Hindu Mahasabha, an outfit of radical Hindus impervious to the interests of other communities, also fought for the independence of a united India. The Muslim League, at the end, won the battle. India was partitioned into two states.

During the independence movement the population was deeply polarised and relations between the Hindus and Muslims turned sour. The Hindu Mahasabha and its acolytes opposed concessions to the Muslims. The Congress, though sometimes sympathetic to the demands of the Muslims, could not ignore the pressure of the radical organisations. The Muslims lost exuberance in coexistence with the Hindus and resolved to create a separate homeland for themselves. Mohammed Ali Jinnah, once accredited as the ‘ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity’, was forced to demand partition due to the intransigence of the Congress leaders. The partition came with a huge cost. Thousands were killed and millions uprooted. Muslims in large numbers from Bihar, UP, Delhi, East Punjab, West Bengal and Assam moved to Pakistan. The Hindus in significant numbers migrated to India too. Those who migrated found it difficult to forget the miseries they had undergone. The Muslims left behind in India and the Hindus remaining in Pakistan did not know what awaited them.

Following independence, communal outfits like the Hindu Mahasabha and RSS gathered strength in the changed circumstances. They believed the Muslims had no legitimate right to make India their homeland. Frequent riots, backed by local administrations, placed the Muslims at the receiving end. Though Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was secular and disapproved persecution of the Muslims, his cabinet had hardliners like Sarder Patel who downplayed the killings of the Muslims in Delhi during the partition. The migration of populations on a large scale was fraught with danger to the governments of both India and Pakistan. They signed an agreement in 1950 known as the Liaquat-Nehru pact, pledging adequate security to the minority communities. To further promote communal understanding, Acharya Kripalany, the Congress president, was invited to visit Karachi to dissuade the Hindus from migrating to India. In public Kripalany told his community members to stay in Pakistan but in private he reportedly advised that their safety and prosperity rested in India. Kripalany’s advice was not without effect. The wealthy amongst the Hindus moved to India. Most of the zamindars (landowners) in East Pakistan were Hindus. They transferred surplus capital to India and sent their children to Calcutta for better education. Following abolition of the zamindari system in 1955, the Hindu zamindars relocated themselves to Calcutta, leaving behind the middle class and farmers. Hindu educationists remaining in East Pakistan formed the backbone of the education system and they upheld quality with great distinction. Hindu lawyers and physicians also served society with distinction. The 1964 communal riots in Dhaka, Khulna and Sayedpur, orchestrated by the ruling party, were condemned by the people in general. During the 1950s and 1960s, the communal forces in India prevailed over the provincial governments and the Muslims, especially from Assam and West Bengal, were uprooted in large numbers. The Central government of India could hardly keep the spread of communalism in check.

After the new state Pakistan came into being, power was monopolised by the Muslim League. The death of Jinnah in September 1948 and the vacuum thus created in leadership led to the formation of multiple political parties. The newly formed parties leaned towards secularism and adopted a broader identity in order to enlist the support of the non-Muslim population as well. The Awami League, National Awami Party, Krisak Sramik Party, Ganatantrik Dal, Republican Party tried to embrace people regardless of their religious affinity. In India, on the other hand, communal parties like the Hindu Mahasabha, RSS, Shiv Sena, etc, capitalized on the religious sentiments of the population and strengthened their base. In continuation of that campaign, the Bhartya Janata Party (BJP) emerged with a radical socio-political-religious programme ostensibly against the Muslim community. The BJP invented ‘Hindutva’, an outrageous doctrine, underlining Hinduism as the source of political and cultural orientation of Indian society and demanded people’s allegiance. The BJP listed a number of ancient mosques for demolition as it claimed these were inappropriately built on the sites of temples. The 16th century Babri Mosque in Ayodhya topped the hit list. The BJP equipped its acolytes and the mosque was razed to the ground in the presence of BJP heavyweights in 1992. This sparked communal riots and Muslims bore the brunt of it. In 2002 at the instigation of Chief Minister Narendra Modi, severe communal riots took place in Gujarat, and over 2,000 Muslims were killed. Modi’s complicity in the crime was widely condemned. The beauty of the Indian judicial system is that Modi never stood trial for his active role in the murders of thousands of Muslims who were indeed Indian citizens. The BJP has now picked Modi as its prime ministerial hopeful in the next general election.

Muslims in Indian cities: Trajectories of Marginalisation published in 2012 mentioned, “Muslims are as badly off, if not worse, socially and economically, than Dalits and tribal peoples. Almost 40 percent of Muslims in urban centres live below the poverty line. They constitute almost 15 percent of total population, but only 5.5 percent members of Indian parliament members are Muslims. Many of the biggest provinces do not have even one sitting Muslim representative in Indian parliament. Underrepresented in judiciary, Muslims form a meager component of police force. Muslims are routinely picked up after terrorists’ attacks in India and often paraded before eager television journalists, bearing the most conspicuous marks of their religion: beards, skullcaps and striped scarfs.” The book concluded, “Radicalisation of even a tiny fraction of 180 million Muslims would fatally undermine India’s increasingly unconvincing claims to democracy and secularism.”

Though Muslims constitute 15 percent of the total population, their representation in the government services remains disproportionately low. Their poor induction in public services has made them disadvantaged to stand against the perpetrators or make demands for justice out loud. The Muslims for a long time placed confidence in the Congress who in turn drew dividends from the ‘Muslim vote bank’. Congress never made serious attempts to enhance Muslims’ participation in public service or representation in the central and provincial legislatures. Muslims were let down by successive governments in New Delhi.

Communalism has made a very powerful resurgence in Indian politics through the BJP. In the neighbouring countries with the advance of knowledge and education, communalism has taken a nosedive. However, in India under the banner of democracy, communalism has flourished. The BJP provided the much needed patronage and political platform. The resurgence of communalism in India has far reaching impact, transcending geographical boundaries. The communal mindset of Indian politicians and bureaucrats has influenced its external policy. Indian refusal to share water resources, building dams on the common rivers, pursuing an imbalanced trade policy and meddling in the internal affairs of neighbouring countries have made India a regional monster. Secularism, once nurtured by Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru and Maulana Azad stands severely weakened in India today.

The author is a former official of the United Nations