Pseudo-Secularism

Hindu dharma is implicitly at odds with monotheistic intolerance. What is happening in India is a new historical awakening... Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

The UPA’s divisive agenda

By Shyam Khosla

The Congress party that is never tired of shouting itself hoarse about its “secular” credential is notorious for pursuing communal policies for petty electoral gains. Muslim appeasement has been one of its distinct features even in the pre-Independence era. It wooed Muslims in the mistaken belief that by offering concessions to Muslims even if these were unreasonable will help in bringing them into national mainstream and persuade them to join the freedom movement.

Hindu nationalists were totally disillusioned with this weak and rabidly communal policy as they could see through the game plan of colonial ruler and Muslim leadership. They tried without much success to convince the Congress leadership that Hindu-Muslim unity couldn’t be achieved by bowing to unreasonable and communal demands of the Muslim leadership. Unfortunately, a large section of Hindu society condescended with the Congress party’s Muslim appeasement on the premise that no price was too high to get freedom from the exploitative colonial rule. Barring a handful of Muslims who joined the freedom movement, a large section of the community kept aloof and supported the demand for a separate homeland for Muslims.

The 1946 elections to the Central Assembly proved it beyond any shadow of doubt when almost the entire Muslim community voted for Muslim League that sought votes on its demand for Pakistan and the Congress won handsomely in Hindu constituencies on the one-India platform. Rest, as they say, is history.

The party doesn’t seem to have learnt any lessons from its disastrous appeasement policy. The UPA Government’s decision to amend the Foreigners’ Act is a case in point. Sonia Gandhi has left no one in doubt about the Government’s intentions in proposing amendment to the Act. She told a public meeting in Assam recently that tribunals to be set up under the amended law would give the same protection to “alleged Bangladeshis” as was available under the IMDT Act. It is now crystal clear that the Congress-led Government wants to ensure that infiltrators from Bangladesh are duly protected from prosecution and deportation so that they continue to live in India.

The question that needs to be answered is who was behind the Congress-led Government’s flawed, dangerous and blatantly communal move. Was it Prime Minister’s brainchild or he constituted the committee on orders from the de facto Prime Minister?

The Congress party’s desire is to protect infiltrators who constitute its vote bank in Assam where assembly elections are due knowing fully well that Bangladesh is emerging as a hub of Islamic fundamentalists and exporter of terrorism. It is doing a great disservice to the society, as the impact of its policy would be devastating for national security. The Government’s decision to declare Aligarh Muslim University that is funded by the public exchequer a minority institution falls in the same category. Equally disturbing and questionable was the decision of the Congress-led Government in Andhra Pradesh to make reservations for Muslims in government services. But for judicial intervention the Congress would have got away with these utterly communal acts.

The survey ordered by the Union Government for a head count of Muslims in the military is the worst kind of communalism. The Prime Minister appointed a high powered committee headed by a rabid “secularist” Justice (retired) Rajendra Sachar to study the social, economic and educational status of Muslims in what the Government claimed was part of its efforts to promote “minority welfare”. The Sachar Committee sought information about the number of Muslims and their status in the armed forces. The army resisted the move saying it would send wrong signals to the soldiers but the Committee and the PMO insisted that the military conduct the survey and furnish the data. Army Chief’s efforts to seek Defence Minister’s intervention didn’t help. He too insisted that the military should carry out the survey. Army Chief J.J. Singh resisted the move with all the authority at his command by pointing out that the Indian armed forces are “apolitical, secular and professional” and the survey would do no good to the army.

There was a massive public outcry against the Government’s rabidly communal approach once The Indian Express exposed the government’s move. Many a retired General voiced their protest and in a rare gesture some of them took to the streets demanding a reversal of this politically motivated move. They averred that the move had the potential to affect the morale of the military and destroy its non-communal character. Although military personnel are deeply religious, they don’t discriminate on caste and religious consideration. Their admirable role in dealing with communal riots and natural calamities leave no one in doubt about their commitment to ethical and moral principles. The UPA Government’s move outraged the civil society to no end. The BJP-led NDA wanted to know if the survey was a prelude to religious based quotas in the military. Its leaders called on the President who is the Supreme Commander of the armed forces to request him to use his moral authority to stop this communal exercise.

Acutely embarrassed by the stringent criticism of the controversial Muslim headcount and presumably because of the speculation that the President might seek clarification from the Government on the issue, the Union Government backtracked. The Defence Minister came up with the assurance that the data received from the armed forces would not be shared with the Sachar Committee. Good, so far as it goes. However, the core issue is why in the first place the military was asked to collect and submit this data? Was the information sought to rectify the “imbalance”, if any, by introducing religion-based quotas in recruitment to armed forces.

Since the data has been collected and is in the possession of the PMO, there is reasonable doubt in public mind and the military brass that it may be used to introduce communal element in the defence forces. Interestingly, besides the Congress party, it is the Imam of Delhi’s Jama Masjid Syed Ahmed Bukhari who came out in support of the survey. The Imam asserted that the Muslim headcount was necessary for the benefit of the community and that it was the responsibility of the Government to recruit Muslims in all services according to the population pattern of the community. It confirmed worst apprehensions in public mind about the real purpose of the exercise. What is the Government’s intention? Does it propose to provide religious-based quotas in government services, including armed forces? It is for the Prime Minister to ally these apprehensions by making a statement in Parliament that is in session.

The question that needs to be answered is who was behind the Congress-led government’s flawed, dangerous and blatantly communal move. Was it Prime Minister’s brainchild or he constituted the committee on orders from the de facto Prime Minister? Equally important is to know the identity of the author of the questionnaire sent to the military. Was it the PMO or the Sachar Committee? The Congress party’s intentions are not above board. It doesn’t appear to be genuinely interested in welfare of the minorities. It is obsessed with winning back its Muslim vote bank that it had lost to regional parties in the Hindi heartland.

Labels:

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home




Home | Syndicate this site (XML) | Guestbook | Blogger
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments, posts, stories, and all other content are owned by the authors.
Everything else © 2005 Pseudo-Secularism