India Votes for Stability

Re: # 466
"Pakistan or Bangladesh with its record of Army rule/dictators have a better record of treating its minorities than India? I’d be very surprised if you would answer in the affirmative."

I say yes, Pakistan and Bangladesh have a better record than India. You can not point to any organized pogroms like Guhjarat 2002, nor can you find any examples of the destruction of equivalent of historic Babri Masjid led by a major political party and its leaders, in either BD or Pakistan.

As a U of Washington researcher puts it, there is a "riot system" in India that organizes massacres of Muslims. Neither BD nor Pak have such a system.

There is also segregation of where people are permitted to live based on religion. Even Shabana Azmi couldn't find a place of her choice to live in Mumbai, and she talked about it. (http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/17/stories/2008081758971000.htm).

The real estate agents in major Indian cities routinely sell "no Musla" as a plus for a building or a neighborhood.


Here's the Shabana Azmi story:

New Delhi: In a stinging attack on the country’s polity, film actress-turned-social activist Shabana Azmi has accused it of being “unfair� to Muslims, making only “token gestures,� instead of addressing the real issues.

She also targeted the Muslim leadership, saying it had not bothered to “clear the air about what Islam actually is� and contended that Muslims should change the image of their religion and community.

Asked on Karan Thapar’s ‘Devil’s Advocate’ show on CNN-IBN whether the country’s politics had been “unfair� to Muslims, Ms. Azmi replied, “yes.�

On whether it was individual politicians, the system or political parties that were to blame, she said, “I think there is not enough understanding of the fact that in a democracy how you treat the security of the minority must be an important part of its success.�

“You can’t make only token gestures and actually let them be in the state that they are as the Rajinder Sachar Committee report shows. So what happens is that token gestures are made, but real issues are never addressed.�

Asked whether she would say that Muslims were “victims of discrimination,� she said she could not buy a flat in Mumbai “because I am a Muslim.� She said she had read that the same had happened to actor Saif Ali Khan.

On what being a Muslim meant to her, Ms. Azmi said: “I’ve been raised in a very liberal, bohemian family in which religion has not played any part at all. For me, being a Muslim really was about Urdu, about eating biryani and wearing shararas on Id. So the cultural aspect of me was Muslim otherwise, because I am not religious, the religion did not matter. After the riots following the Babri Masjid demolition, I suddenly had people saying, you are a Muslim and hurling it as an accusation … it was a self-consciousness that I have never before experienced … [what] it made me do is say ‘yes, I am Muslim and what do you want to do about it?’ That, I can say, is increasingly happening, particularly in the western world. A lot of young kids today are wearing the burqa, are taking on an identity which really they don’t feel. Just because when you push somebody against the wall that’s what they come up with�

Ms. Azmi, who is a five-time National Film Award winner, emphatically said that Muslims did not need their “own leaders� and to press her point she cited that Jawaharlal Nehru was “a leader for Muslims and that’s the way it should be.�

She accused the politicians of promoting a stereotypical image of the Muslim community and not allowing moderate, liberal Muslim voices to be heard.

“You look at all the politicians, whether it is Atal Bihari Vajpayee, whether it is Indira Gandhi, whether it is anybody, the minute it is a Muslim question, you will get the ‘dariwaralas’ and only all the Maulvis to speak,� said the former Member of Parliament.

Ms. Azmi observed that the moderate liberal voice was witnessing a resurgence in the country unlike in the past.

Ms. Azmi said she viewed “with exasperation, anger, hurt and bewilderment� the way the West looked upon Islam as a threat and treated Muslims as figures of fear and hate.

Talking against the backdrop of violent protests in Jammu and Kashmir over the Amarnath land transfer row, she cautioned that it could create differences between Hindus and Muslims elsewhere in the country and said the crisis should be brought to an end.

“Yes, and if our politicians haven’t woken up to it yet they really don’t know what’s happening,� she said when asked whether the situation in that State was a challenge to the country’s integrity and future.

She emphasised that “the Indian Muslims were in a safer place because the Indian Muslim has a stake and space in Indian democracy.�

“It’s a very huge thing that we are a part of a democracy and Indian Muslims can aspire to become a Shahrukh Khan or an Irfan Pathan or the President of India and that makes the Muslims far more hopeful and far less in despair than in other parts of the world,� the actor said. — PTI
Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Re: # 451 Riaz:

- "Do you think they have much of choice? The choice Indian democracy offers is between really bad and worse". Why are you having ulcers to make such comments sitting in a far away land and having no connection with the Indian democracy. India is the largest democracy and everybody in the world knows about it. When Mumbai was attacked President Bush stated "As the people of the world’s largest democracy (India) recover from these attacks, they can count on the world’s oldest democracy (USA) to stand by their side.� Recently (on the 14th or 15th May) Richard Halbrook was so cautious / hesitant to comment anything about India in the Af-Pak policy as the Indian election and its result was underway. So much for the Indian democracy, while Pak gets views such as international migraine (Madeline Albright), epicenter of world terror, next 2 weeks are crucial for Pak survival, terrorism as a state policy against its neighbours etc. Better work on the real issues in Pak, rather than create non-issues of India.

- "Is it? Have you looked at the various indicators of progress? Social? Economic? Human? Indonesia is well ahead of all of South Asia". I have nothing against Indonesia (TAHMED32 ARE YOU LISTENING). Yes I have checked and most indicators are similar to that of India. India is definitely much ahead in terms of Total GDP, stock of forex/gold reserves. What these indicators do not show is that in late 1990s and the Asian economic crisis Indonesia was worst affected in entire SA, due to poor governance of almost 160+ companies that were state owned and held by the than Indonesian president and his family.

Riaz: I admire that you do not make personal attacks and bring lot of facts (having lot of internet/google time) to make an objective discussion, but if numbers could say everythig the statisticians would be the rulers of the world. But that is not so. Numbers have to be interepreted, in a context, which in my opinion you deliberately avoid.

You left unanswered a previous interact about India or Pak getting more external aid/debt in a different article. Similarly you have provided enough articles/links about Indian poverty or hunger etc. but I also read an article in HT about Indian govt having stock of 5 times the annual wheat requirement and 2 times the rice requirement. While I would not dispute your facts, but having followed your posts for past few months, they always show Pak in positive light and India negatively no matter what the topic. You do not display the maturity to accept comments opposite to your views. I apreciated your responses on Kashmir we exchanged in another article. Just my thoughts..nothing personal, ignore if you wish, just as I have started ignoring your long posts :) Probably this is the longest post I have written so far.

Riaz,

At least in Pakistan's case, I do know that economy grew at a much faster rate than under military rule.

So with a literacy rate significantly lower than India's and with the economy growing "much faster" under army dictators, in your opinion, I assume, democracy is a strict no-no for Pakistan too, right?

Riaz,

Re Modi. What you say cannot be denied. I think everybody knows Modi was culpable in 2002, even if not directly but by profiting from what happened with more than a touch of glee.

But why in the world do you think that democracy in India is to blame for Gujarat? For what it’s worth, a lot of BJP chaps blame Modi for the debacle in 2009. Chandan Mitra, a BJP intellectual of sorts, went on record saying that projecting Modi as PM was a mistake.

Countries in S Asia have a pathetic record in treating their minorities. However, it’s democracy that offers these minorities the best bet. Does Pakistan or Bangladesh with its record of Army rule/dictators have a better record of treating its minorities than India? I’d be very surprised if you would answer in the affirmative.

Re: # 460
It's not just Modi that's gotten away. His second and third lieutenants, too, have escaped accountability.

The situation is compounded by what B Raman, a hawkish security analyst, was moved after the many attacks to describe as the "inherent unfairness of the Indian criminal justice system".
Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Re: # 448
dm...
If you treat member of upper house as nominees from PM, then executive in India ( ministers etc...) can be like that USA. Our PM , Manmohan Singh, completed full term, without going to public,directly...

Re: # 459
Riaz Katue...
Let the police and court decide what Mr. Narendra Modi's fate...
It is not the job of the "katua"s to involve into civilised matter ( police /court etc. etc..) ...You can send your brother to carry out allahu kabooms against Modi or other infidels in neighbouring countries ( that anyhow is going on periodicaly)...But then, your other brothers will be paid back with bigger coin...do have the ability to withstand this?

Riaz Haq sahib,

Re: 453

Ayub's reign in Pakistan coincided with a strong global economy, Zia's economic growth was aided by American aid and strong remittances by NRPs (this period coincided with the Gulf boom). Growth in Mushy's period was also aided by strong US support post 9/11 and also much of this period coincided with a global boom. But in each case, the legacy was mixed.

Ayub's period led to great disparity between the two halves leading to 1971.
Zia's boom caused by US involvement also led to radicalisation.
Mushy's boom was frittered away by conspicuous consumption (I suggest you dig out Zee sahib's article written sometime in 2005 or 2006) and increased involvement in WOT led to the current chaos.

In each case, what you have missed is that none of the so-called growth was sustainable. And at least in Mushy's period India's economic growth (despite being a democracy) matched Pakistan's.

Regards

Re: # 453 Riaz: "Pak economy grew at a much faster rate than under military rule. During Musharraf period, the gdp doubled in 7 years".

Doubled or tripled or halved, it has no meaning when you look at just after Musharraf, for past many months Pak is begging every month to its friends and IMF. All other things fade away against this ugly truth and its associated consequences. You better start getting the statics related to the drone attacks, largest(3.5Million) displacment and living in tents since 1947, Pak Army bombing its own territory, killing its own citizens to get more aid and meet the US benchmarks etc.

US has promised Pak of $1.5B aid each year for next 5 years and you are going ga-ga over it. In the IPL closing ceremony the South African President mantioned IPL revived the SA economy by pumping more than Rs5.7B in just one month. You better start wooing ShahRukh, Shilpa, Priety, Mallaya, MukeshAmbani, BCCI etc. Seriously these ladies gentlemen can solve all the Pak economic problems. It is so much easier, all fun&games, no drone attacks, only condition is no repeat of SriLanka team attacks. Choice is yours.

Riaz:

The problem is that everyone knows that Modi is a culprit but no one has been able to prove it in a court of law. In any case, the supreme court has appointed a special investigation unit and has ensured that it remains free from the influence of state govt. So, let's see if anything comes out. No, I am not expecting miracles.

Re: # 454
Dost,
Unlike Hitler, Modi has gotten away with mass murder, and he is still the most powerful man in Gujarat. The long hand of the law has failed to reach him.

AS Pankaj Mishra wrote, "To take one example, the names of the politicians, businessmen, officials and policemen who colluded in the anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat in 2002 are widely known. Some of them were caught on video, in a sting carried out last year by the weekly magazine Tehelka, proudly recalling how they murdered and raped Muslims. But, as Amnesty International pointed out in a recent report, justice continues to evade most victims and survivors of the violence. Tens of thousands still languish in refugee camps, too afraid to return to their homes." Predictably, Mishra says, the Hindu nationalists, most of them resident in the UK and US, inundated his email inbox, accusing him of showing India in a bad light. It's not just the Hindu nationalists that are in denial of the facts about Muslim deprivation and suffering in India, the Indian Muslim elite such as Fareed Zakaria, several Muslim image-makers and Bollywood stars promote the exaggerated image of India as a "peaceful, stable and prosperous" democracy.

Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

dost_mutter writes "...if Modi had dispensed with democratic institutions after election..."

When the time comes some emergency can be constructed to do that also, if it can happen in the US and Germany it can very well happen in India and much more easily given the sorry state of its 'democracy'.

Anil writes "Jinnah's vision was no different on this issue"

Here is a walking talking contradiction. He quotes romair giving a resaon that the cause of secularism was the belief that TNT was wrong and yet he attributes the same quality to the founding father of TNT- get your logic straight and your head out of Adam Smith's _______cks.

Other than that have a nice day,

TNITC masadi

Romair:

""....i think the current govt. level secularism and/or multi-religious identity is more due to the personality of nehru and the fact that the creation of india had a concept that tnt is wrong..."

That is indeed how it all started, and he stayed in power long enough to nurture institutions with this vision.

Jinnah's vision was no different on this issue, I think. He just did not last longer, and no one else among the founding fathers to Pakistan shared this Jinnah vision.

Romair#450:

"....i think the current govt. level secularism and/or multi-religious identity is more due to the personality of nehru and the fact that the creation of india had a concept that tnt is wrong..."

I think that this is the main reason. As for large minorities, if this reason was not there, the proportion of Muslims in India perhaps would have been not much different from those of the Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan.

It would be refreshing to see a Pakistani observer's take on Savarkar. My own thinking is that if the Hindus had put their faith in someone like Savarkar, the outcome of the negotiations with Jinnah would have been different because both would have understood and perhaps respected the other's viewpoint.

Riaz:

The analogy of Hitler with Modi would be valid if Modi had dispensed with democratic institutions after election. He couldn't and he can't, thanks to the constitution of India.