Musharraf: Excerpts from an Interview in NYT

Reported by Dawn:

``At least 39 killed, 100 wounded in bomb blasts in Multan: MULTAN, Oct 7: At least 39 people were killed and around 100 wounded when two bombs ripped through a gathering of Sunni Muslim radicals in Multan today, police and a doctor said. ``The death toll has risen to 39,`` chief medical officer of Nishtar hospital, doctor Imran Rafiq, told AFP. More than 100 people were hurt, district police chief Sikandar Hayat said. The explosions occurred at around 4:30 am. Police believe at least one blast was caused by a car bomb. (AFP) (Posted @ 09:15 PST) ``

This situation will continue to aggravate till the Pakistanis expiate for the sins of 1947.

hindvi:
If you want to get an idea of the elite hindu reaction of that time to the shah bano case, you should go to some good library and see letters to the editors of any english language newspaper or magazine like India Today. I did and I know that they were full of outrage. As for the muslim reaction, I happened to be visiting India then and was in a small south Indian town of Vellore at that time. I saw an angry demonstration of muslims in that town; if I had not witnessed it personally, I wouldn`t have believed that south indian muslims were capable of such religious passion.
I agree with you however that it is an issue that affects almost exclusively muslims. I said ``almost`` because there is that why-have-our-personal-laws-been-changed-and-not theirs question raised from time to time.
On the VP-Devi Lal confrontation, I would suggest you again to go back to the news sources of that time and see the time line of the events. Devi Lal was successfully weaning away the farmer-jat constituency with the disastrous loan-forgiving schemes and VP had to dust up the Mandal commission recommendations which, as you may be aware, all parties had paid including the BJP had paid lip service to.

Dost mittar

Kerala and west bengal are communist ruled states and their dynamics are totally different. Kerala was a progressive state since the beginning of last century and bengal has a hoary history of reform movements, there was no chance of such movements or communist govts in the gangetic heartland. Maharashtra too had a long history of reform and dalit movements, ambedkar was strongest there, and they had large reservations long ago, thackeray`s father was involved in those caste movements.

Madhya Pradesh has seen some positive movements you are right, but that is very recent, thanks to diggy raja`s development program and world bank loans and scheme. In UP and Bihar, VP wasnt responding to devi lal, he was too miniscule to threaten VP, he was responding to pressurise by the yadav chieftains (one of whom is Lohiate and the other a JP follower)and by the dalit brigade - Kanshi ram, Paswan etc all of whom are socialists this mandal commision had been in the works for long congress had been delaying it for over a decade even though they had approved of it themselves. VP was always commited to social justice, but he didnt baragain himself that it would lead to such divisions. still you wouldnt meet a single dalit or obc who doesnt favour it, because it has improved their lot (especially of the OBCs) immeasurably in the gangetic planes. it has though damaged the muslims, because even though they belong to the same castes they are not eligible for it, except a very tiny minority who are included in the SC/ST list.

The Raja of Manda contributed to the BJP`s rise but not because of mandal, the election of 89, was basically an anti congress wave and to a lesser extent a pro VP one as he rode around in his Jan Morcha motorcycle, he didnt need to do an agreement with BJP, it had just 2 seats in 84, but by doing so he gifted them 89 seats. Nor did the BJP raise the tempo because their vote was being split (they hardly had a base) they had started raising the tempo from 89 itself not 90 when Mandal was implemented. and they raised it further as the elections of 91 approached because of the success of the strategy.

VP never benefitted from mandal politically, but BJP reaped and continues to do so from the ramjanambhoomi controversy.

dost mittar

The Shah bano controversy was shameful, what with political mullahs protesting against an honorable judgement by the supreme court asking the old lady`s husband to pay her alimony beyond the pittance of the iddat period, where he was defaulting on even that as he took a younger wife. Hindus, muslims and all liberal people should be legitamitely peeved at that. But when the actual controversy happened in 1987, apart from the press most hindus and muslims were unconcerned, none of my fathers freiends, all of whom are hindus, were bothered, most people were unaware of what the issue was, infact even today most people have no idea what the controversy was about other than that it was muslim appeasement. and at the grass roots even today most dont know about it.

But by repeating it again and again the BJP has popularised it as an example of muslim appeasement and it is often quoted by the class that frequents chowk. where as it in no way impinged upon hindu rights. and that is the reason they ignored it in 87, as an internal matter of muslims.

Infact even the attitude of most hindus towards the common civil code was that it was an internal matter of muslims since it didnt affect anybody elses rights. so too with polygamy, Farzana is right on atleast this, that hindus have a higher percentage of polygamy/bigamy than muslims.

So what happened then? well as you said biases always existed on both sides, but when the Ram Janambhoomi campaign got going hindus were reminded of what some muslim invaders had done in the mideival times (this was often exagerated by the rss pracharaks, govindacharyas and sadhvi rithambras and uma bharatis), this had earlier been a hush hush topic under the congress which had never dealt with it openly, with increasing development there was also a growing search for identity, there was associated urbanisation and rootlessness and the hindu felt both aggrieved at the real and imaginary humiliation of the past and wanted a proud identity in the modern world, hence garv se bolo hum hindu hain.

the bjp said Muslims had been appeased too long, hindus are second class citizens in their own lands and all the above issues of muslim personal law got wrapped up in the juggernaut suddenly after 1990 we started hearing about how the bjp was terribly concerned about the plight of muslim women, even as it raped them and butchered their sons and husbands, how a gravve injustice was done to shabano, how muslims have 4 wives and multiply like rabbits. they are intransigent and refuse to have a common civil code, people forgot that educated muslims had been saying for decades that the civil code must be reformed.

Hitler always said if you repeat a lie many times it becomes the truth, advani took that lesson to heart, Modi isnt the only one who admires him.

hindvi:
I am an admirer of VP because he stood for honesty and integrity not only at the Centre but also as a chief minister when he refused to give up his fight against the dacoits even when they killed his brother. But I did not like his dividing the hindu society along the caste lines. I think that one is a hypocrite when one raises one`s voice against the evils of the caste system of the hindu society and then goes on to aggravate those divisions in the name of empowering the powerless. I have seen that in West Bengal, Kerala, South, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and other states, the dalits and OBCs have been empowered without dividing politics rigidly along the caste lines as is being done in places like UP and Bihar.
I would like India to be strengthened by bridging the hindu-muslim differences rather than by weakening the hindus by accentuating the caste divisions. Unfortunately, the lead players in trying to end the caste-based divisions are the sanghis, although their motivation in doing so is negative and not positive.

#188

Hindvi may be petulant and I am sure there are many more like him specially among the
expat muslims. For instance see the press releases the britain based Indian muslim organizations release. But you must understand these were the very people who could have brought change in their community, could have explained how blocking traffic affects everyone. But with every Gujarat and Modi we push this process back another 10 years. Suspicion and anger among middle class muslims again rises manyfold, another generation of progressive muslims is lost amongst the despair (yaar, nothing will ever change ...). Walk a mile in their shoes and then think again.

About the misuse of hindu tolerance. We confuse the congress style pandering to obscurist muslim leaders as tolerance. I dont think there is real tolerance among Hindu`s, but dont take this negatively we dont need any great tolerance to just stop killing each other. Similarly I dont believe Islam is any religion of great tolerance either (whatever TAhmed may say), but I say it doesnt matter, all we need is to stop violence and that is a rather minimal standard of tolerance.

I personally dont think there is anything wrong with the American style ``fruit salad`` society. But in India its a rather inconcievable model of society for most people.

#180, Boondongs: You have to realize that a nation`s life is a function of all its component populations. It is true that there are some communalistic Hindus and I would be the first to condemn them. However, a large section of Indian Muslims have been playing on Indian (Hindu) tolerance for a long time. India has been so accomodating to them that they stop traffic on roads, at places, so that they can perform prayers in Masjids that are often breeding grounds for communal violence. Part of this is due to the fundamentally intolerant and violent nature of Islam. Hazarat and his cohorts killed hundreds in 37 battles that are recorded in Islamic History. At numerous places, Koran specifies only one solution to non-Islamics and that is death. Osama bin Ladin is respected in Muslim world like a reincarnation of Hazarat Mohammad.

Look at the interactions of concerned1 and hindvi and you will see the insidious nature anti-Indian, Pakistani Indian Muslims.

They never look at anything good in India but are always vocal in supporting Pakistan - see#172 which was in response to hindvis comments that I would like you to read.

NOW DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND ME. I DO BELIEVE THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE NOT ALIKE. (Furthermore, read my profile.) A CLEAR EXAMPLE IS TAHMED32. But it is the petulance of hindvi-type that has aggravated the communal problem in India.

Dost mittar

I dont think Fareed Zakaria, indulges in islam bashing at all, I think all his criticism is fair, i am no fan of either islam or islamic regimes. he does tone down his criticism of Israel, but then he has to do that keeping in mind his background, otherwise he might be labled antisemitic, and he moderates US criticism, which is a more complex issue, for he is what is called in international affairs theory a realist, he compares US behaviour with all previous hegemons, i.e. the british empire, the roman empire etc and finds their behaviour to be far superior and liberal, he doesnt hold their behaviour up to a defined uniform standard as the idealists would do.

And the difference between him and the BJP muslims is that he doesnt have photographs taken with icons of the christ or the madonna behind him, or mouth the bible. He hasnt left the darkness of one religion to embrace another. he is a liberal agnostic, and I would love it if all muslims in India became such, or even better if all over the world they did so, but the rest of the world`s muslims are not my concern.

Neither are the democrat and republican parties of today have ideologies such as those propounded by the RSS, BJP, VHP etc. the equivalent would be if he joined the southern confederates.

I would love to see all muslims (and for that matter all indians) in india become liberal, all I want is they feel physically secure, improvement in their economic situation and preservation of their language and culture i.e. urdu.

dost mittar

I am an admirer of VP singh because I and my family have seen the changes in UP. When my grand father was in the provincial civil service, once a case came before him in which a dalit boy refused to harvest the field of two upper caste farmers for free as they had always expected. So to teach the boy a lesson they burnt his genitals. my grand father gave them the maximum sentence that he could, they were not satisfied and took the case to a higher court, the judge chiding my grandfather for being leniant gave them an even stiffer sentence.

This was one of the few cases of caste oppresion that went to court the large majority never make it their or are withdrawn. some particularly heinous ones like Phoolan Devi`s also result in reverse atrocities.

But after VP`s mandal brigade from which arose Mayawati, Laloo and Mulayam this situation has changed, we are no where near equality the dalits are still oppressed by the cultivators, but in many districts the dalits and others walk more confidently than before, Mayawati is terribily corrupt, but the power of the colonial era administrative setup is such that in many districts she responds to any large atrocity against dalits at once, they look upon her as a protector and are full of glee when the DM, and SP/Thanedar salute her or run behind her. So important is the caste equation that even the BJP chief ministerial candidate, Kalyan Singh, is a lodh.

with the rise of mulayam the yadavs have also become quite assertive. in the village the muslims, who are converts from the lower castes, continue to remain scared. that is partly due to the upper caste jaats and partly to the police, which they actually fear more, since instead of protection its lower ranks act as a partisan agent. but their situation is also better with the rise of mulayam, i remember in the 80s a bunch of travelling sadhus camped near the Ram Ganga, had kidnapped some muslim women and the villagers couldnt do much.

In Bihar the situation is different here caste lines are even more strongly drawn. the cause as well as effect of this being that land reforms were ineffective here, either circumvented or not undertaken. In UP in many areas they were undertaken and in some they were circumvented part of the reason being that much of the land was held by muslim Zamindars and with the depletion of their political power post partition the bargaining clout of the Zamindars and talukdars as a whole weakened, though there are large land holding stills in the hands of some thakurs as the infamous Raja Bhayya testitifies too.

But in Bihar despite limited land reforms the Bhumihars and rajputs continue to hold sway, their armies are extensive and now even the dalits have formed some. the situation was such for even an obc yadav like laloo that as a young boy he says he would often be told by upper caste boys to get off his buffalo and do their work. but now the situation is different for the yadavs, for the dalits its not much better better because the OBCs had themselves been the agents of oppression of these castes. But Lalloo has cleverly managed to pack them along with the muslims and obcs, he is not as good as mayawati for them but is far better than the earlier era. infact his reputation rests on providing a measure of physical security to the dalits and muslims.

unlike in UP in bihar the muslims are largely in rural areas, and bihar had been an extremely communally charged state, the last major riot that took place in Bhagalpur in 1989 was a massive affair, muslims were wiped out of certain villages, an investigative reporter wrote of how their corpses were buried in the fields and gobi etc were planted over them to hide the evidence. infact in one village the muslim women and children and a few men had had barricaded themselves in a village mosque on a raised ground, and refused to open the door until the police came. When they did they coaxed them out, and as soon as they came out they were set upon by the mob along with the police. unlike UP rapes etc happened in Bihar, Fernandes wasnt lying when he said in parliament that Gujrat is not the first time this happened. But this was before lalloo came to power, his achievement since 1990 has been to prevent a major riot for the past 14 years. this is a remarkable achievement in a state as communally charged as Bihar. just goes to show that if the state wants it can prevent any riots.

But the cast equations are different in gujrat etc, and hence the BJP has been able to create a different situation their.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

hindvi,

[…you seem to be genuinely concerned about muslims in Britain…]

and how exactly do you come to that conclusion?

[…they are doing much better than indian muslims both in absolute terms and also relative to the general poulation…]

sure. play the numbers game…

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/relrpt/stories/s597373.htm

from which…(and this is just one report)

“If you are a Muslim in the UK today, you are two-and-a-half times more likely to be unemployed than a non-Muslim, you are three times more likely not to have a phone in your house, and you are twice as likely to die in childbirth”

[…i am not claiming that it is all the govts fault…]

no. your claim is that it is ALWAYS somebody else’s fault.

[…these flaws lie in the inherent structure of subcontinental society where a large percentage of the population was kept depressed at subsistence level for milenia by virtue of their birth, and since the muslims in the india of today consists overwhelmingly of converts from these lower castes they suffer from the same problems...]

but of course, it had to come to this. yeah, i know…those damn ‘caste hindus’ (incidentally i heard this term for the first time in my life on chowk) are the ultimate oppressors. works like a charm everytime.

[…Salman Khurshid…loses his seat invariably from UP, he has to be put up from safe seats, or nominated to seats, some times he just sits out and does party work…]

manmohan singh also lost from delhi, yet he is the pm.

[…and pal spare me the hindu tolerance speel give it to those in naroda patiya, gulberg society, best bakery etc…]

i will, if you spare us the ‘innocent oppressed hapless muslim who never indulges in terrorism’ speel…give it to those in radhabai chawl, godhra, akshardham, etc.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_2-11-2003_pg3_3

Daily Times, Lahore, Pakistan
Tuesday, November 04, 2003

Pakistan and South Asian Muslims
By Prof. Ishtiaq Ahmed
Ishtiaq.Ahmed@statsvet.su.se

..... Apart from East Punjab where ethnic cleansing was almost complete, several of the staunchest protagonists of the Pakistan demand, among them Raja Sahib Mahmudabad, Hasrat Mohani, Begum Aizaz Rasul, Nawab Mohammad Ismail Khan, Raja of Pirpur (author of the Pirpur Report of 1937) and Mohammad Asadullah of Assam, chose to stay in India. Some left for Pakistan later but others who had gone to Pakistan returned to India. Why? I don`t know, but it is something on which more research needs to be done. On the whole it was primarily the upper middle-class and the salariat that immigrated to Pakistan.

Pakistan came into being in those areas where Muslims were in a majority. Such areas did not need as much protection from Hindu Raj as those in which Muslims were in a minority. Most of them were converts from Dalit and other depressed sections of society. They needed more help than anyone else in coming to Pakistan, but they were advised to become good and loyal Indians. I am sure the Biharis stranded in Bangladesh also come from the poorest sections of society and therefore they too have no takers in Pakistan.

Separate electorates and the Pakistan Movement were all predicated on the argument that one-man-one-vote democracy is unsuitable for a pluralistic society like pre-partition India.

Shrill complaints against the ``tyranny of the majority`` was the foundation of the Pakistan Movement. But it is as ironic as it is apt, that in post-partition era, Jinnah`s Pakistan continued to be plagued by the very same premises that gave it birth, namely, that one-man-one-vote democracy is unsuitable for a pluralistic society.

West Pakistan`s ruling elite which had once inveighed against the Hindu majority in
pre-partition India, found themselves inveighing against the Hindu-tainted majority of East Pakistan. ``Separate Electorates`` and ``Parity`` were the neo-shibboleths to neutralize the majority voters in East Pakistan from having a significant say in Pakistan`s affairs.

Pakistan`s ruling elite could not live under the ``tyranny of the majority``. So even in independent Pakistan it took to insisting on living under ``tyranny of the minority``!!!

Today, it is Pakistan`s military that has emerged as the crown jewel of Pakistan`s ruling minority.

TIME magazine had this to say in an obituary some 55 years ago - in a write up titled, ``Mohammad Ali Jinnah created Pakistan out of oratory and blood`` TIME wrote in September of 1948:

``Out of the travail of 400 million in the Indian subcontinent,`` TIME wrote in September 1948, ``have come two symbols - a man of love and a man of hate. Last winter the man of nonviolence, Gandhi, died violently at the hands of an assassin. Last week, the man of hate, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, at 71, died a natural death in Karachi, capital of state he had founded.``

Jinnah was certainly not above pandering to religious hatred to achieve his political objective. And he did that even after he had seen the massive ethnic cleansing in the aftermath of the partition.

West Pakistan had been cleansed of Sikhs and Hindus within months, nay weeks, of partition. An overwhelming majority of the country`s Hindus were in East Pakistan. The rulers from West Pakistan soon realized that they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by demonizing the Hindus left in Pakistan. If nothing else, it was the means to disenfranchise a significant section in East Pakistan and turn East Pakistanis into a minority. It was this evil urge to contain the perceived threat, from Pakistan`s majority wing in any democratic setup, that led rulers in West Pakistan to talk of ``parity`` and of ``separate electorates.``

On March 21, 1948, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan and its first Governor-General, while on his first and only visit to East Bengal, declared in Dhaka University convocation that while the language of the province can be Bengali, the ``State language of Pakistan is going to be Urdu and no other language. Any one who tries to mislead you is really an enemy of Pakistan.``

The use of the phrase ``enemy of Pakistan`` was deliberate. It was a loaded phrase, particularly mischievous in view of the massive ethnic cleansing in West Pakistan in the last seven months.

Jinnah`s demagoguery was deplorable but not surprising. He was merely repeating what Liaqat Ali Khan and his cohorts had been saying in the Constituent Assembly for the last one month. On February 23, 1948: Dhirendra Nath Dutta, a Bengali opposition member, had moved a resolution in the first session of Pakistan`s Constituent Assembly for recognizing Bengali as a state language along with Urdu and English. Non-Bengali Assembly members, led by Liaqat Ali Khan, had immediately pounded on Mr. Dutta`s religion to denounce the claim of Bengali as nothing but a Hindu conspiracy. Many a snide remark was made on the ``Hindu`` character of the language that was the mother tongue of the majority of Pakistanis.

But, fortunately, most East Pakistanis were not fooled. They realized that these non-Bengali members had deliberately chosen to forget that a language may have grammar but it has no religion. Any competent language is capable of expressing a gamut of religious beliefs. It is as easy to translate the Geeta into Arabic as it is to translate the Koran into Sanskrit. There was absolutely no basis for denouncing Bengali as a Hindu language. If anything, it was a Muslim language because a majority of the Bengalis were indeed Muslims.

But the ruling class in West Pakistan had its own agenda. And it certainly did fit that agenda to denounce Bengali as a Hindu language and to look down on East Pakistan`s majority as less than ``good Muslims.``

It is not surprising that, during the genocide in 1971, the Shaheed Minar was one of the first targets of Yahya Khan`s barbaric army. Nor was it surprising what they did to Dhirendra N. Datta. He was an octogenarian by that time. The barbaric soldiers chose to drag this old man out of his house in Comilla and to summarily execute him in front of his neighbors and family. It was, thus, that West Pakistan`s ruling elite punished Mr. Datta for having proposed Bengali as a national language of Pakistan some 23 years ago.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

hindvi:
Yes, about the caste-based politics and things GEnerally make sense if muslims are thought of as just another caste. Yes, Farid Zakaria is likely to go places but he is no in-your-face muslim. In fact, he is doing exactly what the BJP muslims are doing in India, including marrying into the majority community and even going further as he is also indulging in islam bashing.
You keep referring to the change in the eighties following Ayodhya but never mention the shah-bano case which turned the hindu middle class against the muslims. How come that the BJP went from 2 seats to 89 between 1984 and 1989 even before the Ayodhya episode? One of my most admired politicians is also the one you admire, V.P. Singh but he is also the one who bears the ultimate responsibility for the rise of the hindutva movement. His use of the Mandal report, partly out of conviction but largely to manage an internal party crisis, left the BJP with no option but to bring out the `kamandals` to retain its hindu vote bank (Advani and Surjeet had no problem working together with VP until then in supporting his govt) . You also forget that in the immediate aftermath of the Babri demolition, there was such shock and indignation among Indians that all BJP state ministries were dismissed the following day with hardly any protest. The BJP was able to come back because it cleverly exploited the general dissatisfaction with the ruling party, presenting itself as a party with a difference and, above all, capitalising on the PErceive ``minortyism`` of the earlier govts.

[BTW, do we know you from an earlier incarnation? If so, bring back some of the old humour sans insults:-)]

Concerned

you seem to be genuinely concerned about muslims in britain so having lived there let me tell you they are doing much better than indian muslims both in absolute terms and also relative to the general poulation. Indian Gujrati muslims are very well off and even the majority who came in as labourers from pakistan (largely mirpuris), in the 50s and 60s, (because that is the only kind England wanted then), are doing very well, who do you think is supporting the Kashmir insurgency?, where do you think the hurriyat collects money from? certainly not bihar and UP. and this is despite the fact that there are mirpuri drug dealers in prison too.

This example of yours was mistaken, but your over all point has some merit i am not claiming that it is all the govts fault. these flaws lie in the inherent structure of subcontinental society where a large percentage of the population was kept depressed at subsistence level for milenia by virtue of their birth, and since the muslims in the india of today consists overwhelmingly of converts from these lower castes they suffer from the same problems. Discrimination which increased due to the bitterness of partion worsened it. the govt is generally indifferent doesnt open schools or maintain them in poor areas due to corruption and sometimes there is also discrimination in allocation of funds.

also the fact that reservations in india are not based on economic criteria but rather on caste criteria hasnt helped muslims. so where as the other depressed castes have been able to improve their situation through political mobilisation, weak muslim political clout due to depleted numbers post partition has prevented them from getting reservations. Also any political mobilisation for muslim even on economic grounds is considered seperatist. and now with the strength of the sangh Parivar in parliament has become even more distant.

as regards muslims own efforts at education, i can only talk of UP with which i am familiar, at the level of rickshawpullers which constitutes the bulk of muslims its low just as with other depressed castes, but above that level they try very hard i have seen them sacrifice a large percentage of their meagre incomes to send their children to schools, and hence there has been a slight improvement in recent times.


you also said:

``my simple point is that for a muslim to be prime minister he would have to have a general image/personality/actions built over a period of time, that appeal to a majority of indians. can you tell who that person could be amongst the muslim politicians available today?``

let me mention one from UP he is not charismatic but he is symptomatic, his name is Salamn Khurshid he is married to a nonmuslim (i think christian) all his sisters are married to hindus and he is the son of a famous muslim nationalist, yet he loses his seat invariably from UP, he has to be put up from safe seats, or nominated to seats, some times he just sits out and does party work. he is one of the most well educated people i have met, very well spoken and as secular and nationalist as you can get.

and pal spare me the hindu tolerance speel give it to those in naroda patiya, gulberg society, best bakery etc

#179 Inquirer

The idea is that we are (at least attempting be) ``democratic secular`` and not another Iran, Saudi or Libya. Why should we measure ourselves by the lowest denominator?

#173, hidvi:

``Inquirer no doubt pakistan contributes to the problem``

But do they condemn the Pakistani atrocities????

Instead when concerned1 (#169) points to them the day in and day out equalities, they ignore him!

Not worthwhile seeing the truth!

Yes, these ``they`` are Indian Muslims.

hindvi,

[...i will ignore your insults...]

surely you are reading someone else`s posts rather than mine. first you see `insinuations about your patriotism` and now `insults`...maybe you can explain where both of these occur in my two posts to you. (inquirer, that is what i meant by `comprehension`)

i don`t know why you are telling episodes about kalam/his loyalties, etc...my simple point is that for a muslim to be prime minister he would have to have a general image/personality/actions built over a period of time, that appeal to a majority of indians. can you tell who that person could be amongst the muslim politicians available today?

[...And I thought we were talking about, prime ministers, defence, home and finance ministers, where did businesmen and filmstars come in?...]

so unless we have a muslim prime minister, defence minister, home minister and finance minister (more than once, and for more than 11 months mind you, otherwise it won`t count), the tolerance of hindus is just a figment of imagination. right? at least that seems to be the impression from your comment that prompted me to interact with you (...Indian muslims have been given ceremonial positions in indian govt but there has never been a single muslim home, finance or defence minister leave alone prime minister, so much for tolerance...)


[...if you are implying the state of a community...etc...]

there is plenty of material available on the net for the reasons behind the general state of muslim community in india...you are free to subscribe to any of the thoughts...i know india is a favorite punching bag for many. let me finish by asking - what explains the dismal situation of indian muslims in, say, UK? surely intolerant hindus/rss/bjp are not oppressing the hapless muslims there. are the brits responsible for that?

Dost mittar i admire your positive hopefulness, but it is difficult for me to imagine a muslim PM. Just 2 or 3 years ago my cousin was looking for a room in noida to rent. it proved very tough, as soon as he would reveal his name otherwise available houses would become unavailable. he was considering taking it under an asumed name or asking a hindu friend for help. in polling in western UP districts, with which i am familiar, you should see how closely its done on caste and community lines, in Jat dominated areas its impossible for any one else to win, there laths do the talking. the rise of mayawati has been important in breaking the upper caste hegemony in some areas but in the jat dominated districts, she chickens out too. the muslims who stand are Jat converts themself like Shahnawaz Rana.

Subcontinental society has always been prejudiced irrespective of the country, but there has been a qualitatively different radicalisation since the eighties. Under these circumstances i would be satisfied with even a cabinet minister. Fareed Zakaria, the former editor of foreign affairs, current editor of newsweek international who is the son of a former union minister in indira gandhi`s govt. Dr rafiq zakaria, stated a few years back that after a nehruvian honeymoon india has returned to its authentic roots.

thats why he married an american lady after getting his harvard Phd in international affairs, those who are in the know believe he will be the US`s first Asian/muslim Secretary of state, lets see whether your dog catcher thesis comes true (even though muslims in america are only 2 %).

#175, dost-mittar:
WHAT DO YOU THINK A NON-SUNNI CAN BE IN ALL MUSLIM COUNTRIES EXCEPT IRAN WHERE WHAT CAN A NON-SHIA BE????????????????????

Stop apologizing to hindvi.

hindvi:
You may be right. Tibbia College might merely be a large college and not a university.
On the other topic, I think that you sell India and hindus short by saying that a muslim cannot become a prime minister. I remember that last year, a friend who knows Manmohan Singh said that he could never become PM because he is a sikh.
However, for a muslim to become prime minister, he will have to be acceptable to hindus, including those who vote for the BJP. This does not mean that he would have to quote Geeta or hang Sarswati paintings but he would have to be someone for whom India comes before his religion, someone like the late M.C. Chagla, a protege of Jinnah.
But I agree that a in-your-face muslim does not have a high chance of becoming a prime minister of India; btw he wouldn`t have much chance of being elected as a dog-catcher in the USA either.

Inquirer

i will preserve this post for future references.


``The more you give the more they demand!!! Being President of India is not enough!!! They require as proof of secularism, the Delhi Sultanate!!!!!

They never acknowledge the qualitatively better treatment they get compared to what they give in Pakistan to Hindus.

Where was their loyalty?!!!!!!!!!!!!! ``

So for you the pakistani and indian muslims are the same? wow!

take care Sarsanghchalak.

Concerned
I will ignore your insults and i would urge you to look at the issues objectively. I am not saying Kalam is not loyal but my father has served under Kalam i am not talking through my hat, he purposely used to invite journalists into his house for interviews to show them his sitar and saraswati paintings, he was known for his political savvy with which ever party was in power. how many heads of the DRDO or principle scientific advisers to the prime minister do you know who do that?

i am not saying he is not patriotic Infact my father on behalf of Kalam was approached by a gulf state for help, they said to my father ask him to name his price. my father laughed the suggestion away. i am sure Kalam himself must have been approached himself. But keep in mind perception is not always reality.

And I thought we were talking about, prime ministers, defence, home and finance ministers, where did businesmen and filmstars come in? if you are implying the state of a community dont look at individuals (as journalists in india say muslims are over represented in the three professions films, underworld and prostitution) pick up the income distribution figures from the census or those of Govt. representation.

If the excuse is lack of educational attainments in muslims dont look at class I officers i.e. IPS/ IAS, there is anyway little bias there as I have said below. just look at the constabulary or clerical staff. these dont require graduate degrees. I have been in small mofussil towns in UP and seen how recruitment is done in RPF, PAC etc.

#169, concerned1: Totally agree with you except the comprehension part.

The more you give the more they demand!!! Being President of India is not enough!!! They require as proof of secularism, the Delhi Sultanate!!!!!

They never acknowledge the qualitatively better treatment they get compared to what they give in Pakistan to Hindus.

Where was their loyalty?!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Inquirer no doubt pakistan contributes to the problem, but Pakistan existed before the 1980s too and india was chugging along and neither can we physically control pakistan.

these are complex processes to do with the rise of the RamJamambhoomi movement, the BJPs reaping this for electoral profits, spread of sangh schools, economic competition for resources, development/modernisation associated search for identity, urbanisation associated alienation due to breaking of old village ties, decay of the old Indian /congress culture and values in an increasingly materealistic society. Asish nandy, sunil Khilnani, dipankar gupta gyanendra pandey, mushirul hasan, sugata bose have all written about this.

dost mittar I tnink you mean the new Jamia hamdard university in Tughlakabad, which was earlier only a college, its original location musta have ben tibia college. Jamia Milia University in Okhla has been in existence as a college since 1920s and a central university since the 50s.

hindvi,

[...insinuation about my patriotism ...]

your english compreshension skills must be better than mine...

and v p `mandal` singh was the most progressive pm since nehru?

[...but one swallow does not a summer make...]

yeah, i know. every successful muslim is just a token muslim and/or an exception. whether it is chief ministers, governors, cabinet minsiters, government posts, businessmen, professionals, actors..all tokens/exceptions to fool the world about `hindu tolerance`. your remarks on kalam are also on expected lines.

hindvi:
I was referring to the new Jamia Milia University (unless I am getting the name wrong!).

#161, Dost-Mittar and all others:
Neither Hindus can nor Muslims should - both in India and Pakistan - ignore the goings-on in Pakiatan.
Indian secularism is not some theoretical thing; it is fully impacted and crafted by Indo-Pakistani interactions.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Dear Jang

The days of antulay are long gone, even then Antulay was an exception, I dont know of another muslim chief misister outside kashmir. even in those days antulay used to cleverly use his his last name I never knew AR stood for abdul rehman until much later.

i am not as knowledgeable about the vernacular schools in bombay, so i am unable to comment, though I did attend Dune`s institute at Lions gate from LKG to 2nd grade. that Bombay is gone though I nver felt like I was a muslim. In delhi i attended a services school.

muslims are reluctant to study at saraswati mandir`s and Shivaji schools (shivaji being another symbol Hijacked by the saffron brigade despite the fact that he was no communalist) because they are in a minority they fear being swamped which they are in day to day life as Farzana points out, if their numbers had been substantial say 50, 40 or even 30% they might not have, just like the hindus and sikhs in united Punjab. Also there is the issue of things like Vande matram, a very moving song but its context has to be seen, things are more complex than they seem, its writer also wrote a play called anandmath a terribly communal piece of litreature, in which the hindu hero butchers all the muslims and then when he is about to turn on the british he is told to stop by the author (in the voice of his master) since the enemy is dead and from the british we can learn something so his time has not come. This is apart from the idolatory in the song.

dost mittar Jamia millia is an old institution it was founded in the 1920s by the muslim congressmen. you may mean jamia hamdard but it is located in tughlakabad. Tibia College must have been the mother institution

DM

``India will be truly secular only when muslims can get elected from largely hindu ridings. ``

difficult but possible, and this alone is not sufficient: there are many dalit office holders from mayavati to jagjeevanram, does not mean that dalits are well off. also, getting a hindu elected from nagpada MLA constituency will be an achievement (even if its an SP Yadav MLA).

Abdul Rehman Antuley was a fairly strong CM of maharastra, was not challenged for being muslim, and continues to win his parliament seat from a mostly Hindu Konkan region. However, that does not make india secular (or better).

hindvi

the ghettoization in urban areas has always intrigued me. i grew up in mumbai and mumbai is pretty much formed by ghettos of ghatis, tamils, muslims, gujjus, bound by the glue of multi-ethnic slums. even in cosmopolitan ares like lokhandwala in Andheri, there are muslim buldings and others. govt or public sector quarters are an exception, but muslims are in small numbers there. I grew up in a mixed neighborhood, with one muslim family out of 54, but they were not real muslims, but bohras (somehow seemed very different even then, before i knew about differences). also, muslims and other kids dont mix enough in ``secular`` schools. many schools are organized by vernacular origins, so Dadar Parsee Union is full of Gujju kids, most jewish kids go to marathi schools etc. lack of mixing in school at vernacular level, ghettoization will continue. however konkani muslim schools (marathi parents) tend to shy away from marathi schools, i dont know if they are shooed away or names like saraswati mandir, shivaji school, or tilak highschool make such schools a non-palatable option. since a large size middle class gets its schooling in such vernacular schools, and muslims are not integrated for whatever reasons, the rift will continue. these schools are feeders to future citizens. they have govt. grants though formed by ethnic educational trusts, and ``seculars`` shoudl push for better participation. future beurocrats, bank employees, and police officers come from these schools..you see the value.

all religions seem to have no problem in attending the don bosco inspite of religion, so why the name sarswati mandir or raja shivaji ought not to be problem considering the benefits.

You are right about delhi Dost mittar and you are also knowledgable about the muslims there. But Muslims in the rest of India were never in as bad a situation as those in Delhi and the border states. And by the 70s infact interms of physical security, other than some hot spots such as ahmedabad, Bhiwandi near bombay, Moradabad, Kanpur etc had achieved a fair degree of assuarance there was very little open communalism, though discrimination in Jobs etc and politics continued. bias in the hearts of hindus and muslims ofcourse continued to exist.

This was a great achievement of nehru, gandhi and other congress leaders (despite the presence of communalists like Rajendra prasad and Pant, patel has been quoted by you in this context but Patel was a far more complex man, sadly he has been hijacked by the parivar) along with the wise leadership shown by muslim congressmen like azad, zakir hussain, Kidwai etc.

they were also helped by the fact that the rest of the country had good hindu muslim relations which has been the tradition of India in general. But we must also remember that the rest of India was not partitioned, for Hindu muslim relations had been good even in bengal and punjab previously.


After the Halcyon days of the 60s and 70s India has actually seen a regression in its secularism and muslims (and some christians) in their safety since the 80s. initially with the rise of communalism within the congress and then drastically with the rise of the BJP and the sangh.

modernisation and development has often led to a search for identity in many countries but in India this has been multiplied by orders of magnitude thanks to the schools and shakhas of the sangh parivar and the whole Babri masjid controversy.

As regards Shourie you can easily purchase his last few books of the net on Ambedkar, christians and muslims. you shall see his ideology. for him they are all unpatriotic subverters. he doent ignore complexity for he researches his topics well, as you have stated but he selectively and purposely misrepresents them. And he never chooses a Hindu figure, implicitly stating that all hindus are patriotic, despite the fact that the bigest damage to indian society and national fabric has come from them in recent times. he has been amply rewarded for this by the sangh parivar.

But shourie is the least of my concerns. What concerns me is when people like you praise Vajpayee, somewhere you or maybe someone else stated that Vajpayee and Advani are ex members of the RSS, this is not true, they are all current members and so were almost all BJP ministers (including Modi, who i think was a sarsanghchalak) with the exception of jaswant Singh and maybe Shourie. This is important because you have to only read the personal manifestos of those who lead the RSS for most of its history, i.e. Golwalkar, Hegdewar and those they admire like Savarkar, to know that this is a facist organisation as defined by Asish Nandy and he doesnt use this as a term of abuse.

the manifesto of the BJP too had to be read to be believed until recently, but remember even the Nazi Party manifesto of 1933 didnot reveal what it was about to do, it continued to play along with its coalition partners, it was only when it came to office on its own did it implement the Mein Kampf.

Vajpayee and not just advani has been personally involved in inciting riots, when out of power (a massive one at that numbers range from 2000 all the way to 5000) and calmly looking the other way when another was commited over a period of several months, nothing in the History of Independent India equals that in length. This is apart from the fact that they are tearing apart India`s fabric by indoctrinating children in their schools and shakhas and changing syllabi.

hindvi:
you are preaching to the convert. But having lived in and visited Delhi since the partition, I can safely say that there are a lot more visible muslims working and plying their trades in localities such as Karol Bagh, Pahar Ganj and Patel Nagar from where they were practically forbidden in old days.

Inquirer:
I think that Musharraf has restored joint electoral system. More importantly, India made a choice to tread a different path, so it cannot use Pakistan as a bench mark.

#146,hindvi: Instead of name-dropping you should quote the relevant supporting paragraphs. each one of us has his sources. And mine are not restricted to serials and stories as you allege. Look at the Constitutions and the records of fact. I assume you have to be a Pakistani to be so ignorant of Indian Democracy`s universally acknowledged achievements. Even US, Britain and France can learn about democracy from India - if you are interested I can point out in which area. I grew up in Allahabad`s Tagore Town where even a curfew was rare in 1946-47.
It is nice of you to note my profile but what we need to do here is not stand on our achievements but present factual data and present our arguments without emotionalization.

Dear Concerned

i shall ignore your insinuation about my patriotism and you are right Mufti was the home minister for 11 months under India`s most progressive Prime Minister since Nehru, but one swallow does not a summer make, what i am saying is not hidden or new. The head of the least communalised institution that is the Indian Army, Field Marshall Manekshaw himself stated that he wanted to make two muslim officers Lt Gen but was turned down by defence ministers Swaran Singh and Jagjivan Ram. check the article out www.flonnet.com/fl2021/stories/20031024000707800.htm

As regards Kalam if we are to go by the people who have worked under him in DRDO and the Secretariat he is anything but charismatic and popular, they regard him as self seeking. And as regards his being muslim enough hey I dont hold it against him, whatever gets him ahead. infact publicising his hindu personality and suppresing his muslim one is what got him this far under the sangh parivar.

India`s most charismatic muslim leader abul Kalam azad never made it past the education portfolio.

Dost mittar

The above is unimportant for me as is representation of muslims in services or election of muslim candidates from hindu majority districts, i just stated it as a symptom of a greater malaise. Even braking of mosques is not important, if people want they can always be rebuilt even if the land is taken as in Gujrat, they can be moved.

What is important is the physical safety of muslims, the round the clock insecurity and suspicion has a far more detremental effect. the fear is pervasive because of which the muslim cannot live in mixed localities is increasingly ghettoised even in cities where he was previously not, is unable to take normal business decisions with out factoring in riots, and no loger trusts the state. Thus the number one priority is reform of the police and administrative set up and reduction of communalisation of the lower judiciary and police.

as IG VN Rai says riots can be stopped easily if the state so desires: http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/articleshow?art_id=8691178

Despite commnalism of the lower ranks, many, but by no means all, officers of the all india services are still secular the problem is that Politicians directly control the IAS/IPS officers and hence if they seek to do their duty they can be immediately transfered to an equal but unimportant post or out of the region, so even those who have the courage do go against the Minister of the day do not do so because of its futility. Several Police reform commissions have made reccomendations for increased autonomy for the police and similarly for the IAS but have been rejected by the politicians so as to maitain their priviliges.

the day a muslim will be elected prime minister is very far off, muslims have low expectations of basic security, which all political scientists since hobbes consider the first requisite of civilised life and the first task of a state but even these are not being met.

#157, Dost Mittar:
Irrespective of hidvi`s fault finding, you are if anything a compromiser for Muslims. I accept this as normal as you hail from what was India once. But:

``In my opinion, India will be truly secular only when muslims can get elected from largely hindu ridings. ``

That would happen ONLY when Pakistan gives AT LEAST joint constituency with equal voting rights to all Hindus in Pakistan.

hindvi:
No, I haven`t read Shourie`s books; only his articles/reports in Indian Express and India Today and a review of his book (Fatwas something!) by Asghar Engineer or Rafique Zakaria. From what I have seen, he is a diligent researcher though he may not always be objective. Who is?
I do agree with your observations on Kashmir. The Kashmiri grouses are genuine and I would suggest you read my two articles on this topic (`The Beginning of the End` and `Adam Smith`s Invisible Hand`) to get my complete views instead of looking at piecemeal interacts. But this does not change the fact that the basic problem is of religion, even the slogan of separatists that I have heard on TV is religious and very similar to `Pakistan ka matlab kya?`. The Kashmir elections were rigged because the pro-Indian forces did not trust the Kashmiris. The worst election-rigging was by Sheikh Abdullah in 1951 when, I believe, the entire slate of his candidates were declared elected without any opposing candidate. No, I am not an admirer of Vajpayee although I did admire his hindi oratory during his earlier days, his reaction to the the babri masjid demolition and his bold moves to bring peace in Kashmir and with Pakistan. His handling of Gujarat was pathetic. Nor am I an admirer of the BJP for whose defeat I wrote an article in favour of Sonia Gandhi during the recent elections; but you will be doing India and especially IMs a disfavour if you do not try to understand why the party appeals to the hindus, especially its elite.

Jang#133:
Just saw this post. Here is my 2-cent contribution from common knowledge.
-exodus from Delhi may have been more than 30%. In addition to those pushed out, Delhi also had a large salariat class which was the backbone of Muslim League and opted for Pakistan. This included Jinnah, Liaqat Ali and the newspaper Dawn which was their spokesman. Incidentally, the popular Urdu language publications Al Jamiata and Shama continued to publish, as did the muslim insitution Hamdard Dawakhana, the makers of world famous Rooh Afza, part of the family of Hamdard and Shama went to Pakistan and started the same institutions there as well. If I remember correctly (not sure), the head of Hamdard was recently murdered in Karachi in a sectarian killing.
Ajmal Khan Road continues to be monopolised by the Panjabi hindus and sikhs, except for Tibbia College, founded by Hakim Ajmal Khan, which I believe is the seat of the new university of Jama Millia.
-the ethnic cleansing in Punjab was complete except for Maler Kotla which is still a muslim majority district.
-The non-punjabi speaking Mewat area of Haryana (including Pataudi) was also spared. Maulana Azad chose this area to fight election as even he could not risk contesting from a largely hindu riding in 1951 and 1956. In my opinion, India will be truly secular only when muslims can get elected from largely hindu ridings.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

hindvi,

[...Indian muslims have been given ceremonial positions in indian govt but there has never been a single muslim home, finance or defence minister leave alone prime minister, so much for tolerance...]

for all the knowledge that you seemingly display, you are not beyond rhetoric and ignorance. ..does the name mufti mohammad sayeed ring a bell? you know the `healing touch` guy who essentially ignited the insurgency in kashmir by releasing hard-core terrorists to get his daughter released was india`s federal home minister.

to have a muslim prime minister, you would have to have a charismatic indian muslim politician who comes across as representing all indians and not just muslims. kalam would fit the bill, but then he may not be muslim enough for you.

dost mittar
i dont know if you have read any of the books Shourie has written, he ignores anything that is positive about his target, which include ambedkar, all he sees is the negative in minorities and dalits. despite his so called liberal education.

anyway, coming to kashmir there are many solutions between partition with cleansing and population resettlement. I have outlined them in the post below addressed to stuka. I dont agree with the statement that Kashmiris dont have legitimate grouses other than religion. India repeatedly rigged elections and has broken both the substance and semblance of autonomy. Did you know that the Hizb ul mujahideeen leader Salahudin, stood for elections in 87, but after he was defeated in those rigged elections he turned to militancy. Just pick up victoria Schofield`s book.

Also it is not out of concern for indian muslims that the GOI is holding on to Kashmir, their is overwhelming support for it among the public.

I have often looked at issues from the perspective of hindus but somehow I am unable to see it from the BJP`s perspective. Even Vajpayee whom you have praised several times has personally incited a riot in assam in nelie in 1983 killing between 1500 to 3000 women and children. His earlier speeches in parliament also leave little doubt about his inner convictions. the only reason the BJP was not able to implement all its agenda was because it was not in a complete majority by itself

All said and done, the carnage in 1947 stopped only when Pakistan`s religious minorities were reduced to insignificance thru mayhem and expulsion. India, on the other hand, continues to this day to have more Muslims than Pakistan.

In newly independent India, Nehru envisioned a secular India. Jinnah, on the other hand, remained ready to take it out on the religious minorities even after West Pakistan had been suitably ``cleansed.`` Thus, when East Pakistanis proteseted the imposition of Urdu on the nation, both Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan promptly blamed the Hindus for this ``impertinence`` of the East Pakistanis. Hindus were threatened with dire consequences and Bengali was denounced as a ``Hindu language`` These leaders forgot that a language doesn`t have a religion other than grammar. The Koran can be translated into Bengali as easily as the Geeta can be translated into Arabic. Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan were quite willing to precipitate a Punjab-style carnage in East Pakistan for the purpose of Punjab-style ethnic cleansing.

Even after the shocking carnage that had taken a mind-boggling toll on Punjab in 1947, Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan were both willing and eager to have a repeat performance in East Pakistan by scapegoating the Hindus. Fortunately, East Pakistanis were able to see thru the intention of these leaders, and prevailed in their determination to gain Bengali the recognition as one of Pakistan`s national language.

In this context, it would be worthwhile to mention the name of Dhirendra Nath Datta who was a member of Pakistan`s Constituent Assembly. He was the first to challenge the government on the floor of the Assembly to protest the imposition of Urdu on Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan, an ex-UPite, who had found a place in the Constituent Assembly thru East Pakistan, promptly accused Dhirendra Nath Datta of being a Hindu agent of India on the floor of the Assembly itself.

Yes, Pakistan finally had to yield to the just demands on behalf of Bangla but only after the efforts of Liaqat Ali Khan, Jinnah et al to scapegot Hindus on the issue had failed. But Pakistan`s ruling class never forgave Dhirendra Nath Datta. It managed to have the last laugh in 1971 when Dhirendra Nath Datta (by then an octagenerian) was drageed out of the house by Pakistan`s soldiers and shot to death in front of horrified relatives and neighbors.

And of course the genocide continued in 1971. Pakistan`s ruling elite had long preached that the East Pakistanis were not good Muslims. So the army embarked on a campaign of rape and murder in 1971 to punish East Pakistanis for their religious failings!!

In Remembrance of 21st February
By Shahidur Rahman

Pakistan`s language problem became an acrimonious issue even before the country came into existence. Dr. Ziauddin, the Vice Chancellor of Aligarh University, had proposed Urdu as Pakistan`s national language on 21st July, 1947. Bengali intellectuals under the leadership of the famous philologist, Dr. Mohammed Shahidullah, immediately issued a reasoned counter proposal to make Bengali the national language.

But Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan were determined to impose Urdu on the nation at the behest of the Muslim aristocrats of the United Provinces and the Muslim mercantile class from the Bombay Presidency that had emerged as Pakistan`s ruling class on 14th August, 1947. In November of 1947, Urdu became the defacto national language when the central government, without any formal declaration, started using the language on moneyorder forms, postcards and railway tickets. In the same month, Urdu was declared a subject for the civil service exam but Bengali was pointedly ignored.

On 25th February, 1948, Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan declared on the floor of the Assembly that Urdu, the language of the Muslims, is the only language qualified to be the national language of Islamic Pakistan. Jinnah backed his Prime Minister to the hilt by denouncing the supporters of Bengali as hired agents of Hindus.

On 20th March, Jinnah visited Dhaka for the only time after partition. At a public meeting, he was booed when he declared that Urdu alone will be Pakistan`s national language. He fared even worse on 24th March during the convocation address at Dhaka University where he was unable to finish his speech when he was shouted down by the angry students.

Jinnah never again set foot in East Bengal. The ``Qaid-e-Azam`` announced that he had ordered the government to take any action it deemed necessary to suppress the language movement. In an angry speech in Karachi on 28th March he blamed the Hindus in East Bengal for his trouble. It was this that led many, including my late father, to appreciate the greatness of Mahatma Gandhi across the border. The Mahatma had been felled by an assassin`s bullet, just two months earlier, for speaking up for the Muslims of his country. The ``Qaid-e-Azam``, on the other hand, was determined to sacrifice the Hindus of East Pakistan to push the agenda of the ruling class in Karachi. Nothing else could have better contrasted the two leaders.

Jinnah died in September of 1948 but the ruling class in Karachi continued on the course that he had set. It never occurred to either the ``Qaid-e-Azam`` or to his blind followers that a language can have grammar but no religion. Bengali continued to be derided as a Hindu language and any Muslim who supported Bengali was denounced as an immoral atheist or a crypto-Hindu.

The language movement continued to gain ground. The climax was reached nearly four years after Jinnah`s humiliation at Dhaka University. On 21st February, 1952, the students of the Dhaka University defied Section 144 to bring out a huge procession. Police tried to break up the procession by indiscriminate firing. When the firing stopped, four students lay dead and seventeen others were gravely injured. But their sacrifice was not in vain when the ruling elite in Karachi finally agreed to recognize Bengali, in addition to Urdu, as Pakistan`s national language.

21st February was declared the ``Martyr`s Day`` in 1956 and observed as a public holiday for the first time. But this holiday was abrogated by ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan in 1959. It was revived as a public holiday in 1969 when the ``Field Marshal`` was forced to retreat in the face of public fury against his dictatorship. To this day, 21st February is the most important national day in Bangladesh and ranks higher in importance to the public than even the Independence Day (26th March) or the Victory Day (16th December).

hindvi:
``all i can ask you is to introspect and look at your prejudices put yourself in the shoes of a muslim or a dalit that a Shourie or jagmohan targets. and please do not advocate radical solutions to kashmir / partition problems.``

I am glad we are moving towards issues now. I do exactly what you say, i.e, put myself in the shoes of a dalit or a muslim. This is why I think that I am one of the few Indian interactors who understands where Farazana Versey is coming from; it would be helpful if you can also understand where the hindus are coming from. I had advocated reservations from muslims in my proposed action plan for the UPA govt. I do that without any need to sanitise the communal history of India. We have to think of the future and the future of India cannot be bright without the full integration of muslims -social, economic as well as emotional- with the land which is as much theirs as those of the hindus, sikhs, christians and others who inhabit that country (btw that excludes me:)). The hypothetical swap I mentioned was regarding the academic `what ifs` of history which has nothing to do with the contemporary reality. I am a firm believer in the Indian constitution, which I regard as one of the best legacy of India`s first prime minister Nehru and Law Minister Ambedkar. As for Kashmir, it may be politically incorrect to say so but the fact is that there is no valid reason for Kashmiris to seek separation from India except for their religious sentiments. And I do believe that India is paying too high a price to keep Kashmir in India. It is not worth it except for the potential adverse consequences for Indian muslims.

#137 by Inquirer

*****
NO DOUBT THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE WAS THE PRESENCE OF ENLIGHTENED LEADERSHIP OF NEHRU AND MAHATMA GANDHI.
*****

---

``In the Punjab we have 55 thousand soldiers and large scale rioting on our hands. In Bengal our forces consist of one man, and there is no rioting. As a serving officer, as well as an administrator, may I be allowed to pay my tribute to the One Boundary Force`` - Lord Mountbatten on 26th August, 1947 paying tribute to Mahatma Gandhi for his mission of peace in Calcutta.

---

Yes, Inquirer has indeed hit the nail on the head. Religious cleansing was a policy of the Pak government and not of Nehru & Gandhi`s India. Nehru & Gandhi both risked their lives to prevent riots and stop the exodus of Muslims. Mahatma Gandhi, in fact, sacrificed his own life in the process. Such wasn`t the case with Pakistan.

In fact Liaqat Ali Khan (the ``Qaid-e-Millat``) deliberately engineered terror and mayhem. He had found himself without a constituency after partition and had to get himself elected to the Constituent Assembly via East Pakistan. He assiduously went on to make up for this deficiency by terrorizing non-Muslims of Sindh to leave their ancestral land and lured and rewarded his Urdu-speaking followers from elsewhere in the subcontinent with the evacuees` properties.

It is also instructive to note that the rioting in the wake of the partition stopped only when Pakistan had reduced its non-Muslim population to insignificance.

The saga of Suhrawardy should be very educational. In August of 1946, Suhrawardy (Bengal Prime Minister) had orchestrated what has come to be known as the ``Great Calcutta Killing`` to give teeth to Muslim League`s call for ``Direct Action``. But by next year, Premier Suhrawardy was a broken man. Khwaja Nazimuddin and Liaqat Ali Khan, with Jinnah`s support, had managed to marginalize Premier Suhrawardy to the point he didn`t even feel wanted in the Pakistan that was about to come into being. And, of course, he had burnt his bridges with Indian politicians by his complicity in the ``Great Calcutta Killing``.

Under such circumstances, Suhrawardy had no one to turn to but Mahatma Gandhi for ensuring the safety of Calcutta Muslims. And the Mahatma acted as only a Mahatma can:

---

The HINDU
Date: 13-08-1997 :: Pg: 11 :: Col: a
Gandhi: The last 200 days (Day 30) - A lesson in communal harmony

Wednesday, 13th August, 1947.

Mr. H. S. Suhrawardy felt himself caught in a cleft stick. The Muslims of Calcutta faced the worst dangers of communal violence, even as Hindus had in Noakhali. He had to do all he could to protect the Muslims. So he had to take instructions from this strange and wilful man, Gandhi. Which meant going to live in a ramshackle hovel in a miserable quarter of the grand city through which he had always strutted in peacockian splendour.

In fact Bapu had thrown him a hint already, ``You must stop being the old Suhrawardy. You must change your dress, discard your shoes,`` and so on. These requirements hurt in their very telling, and there was no option but to meet them! As directed by Mahatma Gandhi, Bengal`s Premier had consulted his aged father and also his daughter, before conveying his acceptance of the conditions to stay with Bapu under the same roof, in the epicentre of the worst riots.

The previous evening at his prayer meeting, Gandhiji had explained that Shaheed Suhrawardy and he would demonstrate together that a Hindu and a Muslim could live in one house as brothers. Only then could they carry conviction in spreading the message of peace. Words and speeches, Bapu believed, counted for little or nothing. On this very day, he had written, in an article for the Harijan, ``An ounce of practice is worth tons and tons of speeches and writings.`` What made sense was action and deed. And when thought, word and deed were launched as a joint effort by a dedicated team, the returns could not but be greater.

Gandhiji`s concept of truthfulness required that even the worst that could be said about any man should be uttered plainly without varnish in that very person`s presence. If that was not done, hypocrisy reigned, and cowardice. So he made no bones about telling his audience, ``I have been warned that Shaheed Sahib is a person not to be trusted.`` But then, Gandhiji pointed out that there were lots of people who had been saying the same thing about him (Bapu) too. Those tongues had not hesitated to paint him in even worse colours, as the worst possible enemy of the Mussalmans, and as the most consummate hypocrite in all human history! He did not allow such insinuations to bother him, Bapu said, and went on, ``People will say what they feel or are compelled to. But how are we to judge a person in truth? God alone is capable of looking into the heart of every man. Only He may judge. As for myself, I believe that God watches me in my heart, and so I speak and act the truth as I see it. I know Shaheed Sahib from more than twenty years ago, when we met in Faridpore for a session of the Congress; Saheed Sahib was introduced to me by Deshabandhu C. R. Das. I will trust Saheed therefore, just as I will expect everybody to trust me. We will live together and have no secrets from one another. All visitors will meet us jointly. I appeal to all citizens to support the mission Suhrawardy and I are undertaking, and bless us.`` Wednesday the 13th saw the Mahatma shift in the afternoon from Sodepur to the chosen residence, ``Hydari Mansion``, a mansion only in name, identified in the middle of Beliaghatta. It was an abandoned, dilapidated building, squatting in the midst of dirt and squalor, open on all sides to whoever came _ with friendly mind or carrying murder in a black heart.

Gandhiji wrote to Sardar Patel on what he was doing: ``I have got stuck here and am undertaking a grave risk. Suhrawardy and I are going to stay in this Muslim quarter. The future will reveal itself.`` Patel wrote back, ``So you have got detained, and that too in a quarter which is a shambles and a notorious den of gangsters and hooligans. And in what choice company too! But more than that, will your health stand the strain? I am afraid it must be terribly filthy there. Keep me posted about yourself.``

The Mahatma`s clean white khadi attire was in contest to the surroundings and floors of the house which had been hastily smeared over in patches of bleaching powder to mask the malodorousness of that hell-hole: the look was that of an ugly old harridan wearing tawdry make-up. As he arrived, Bapu was greeted by a highly irate crowd. Raving young men raucously shouted, ``Why have you come here? You did not come to help us when we were in trouble. Now, when the Muslims complain against us, all this fuss! Why did you not go spreading peace in places from where Hindus fled? Gandhi, we don`t want you here, just go back!``

When Suhrawardy`s car arrived shortly afterwards, even uglier scenes erupted. The car was surrounded by a mob threatening to pull out and manhandle him. Gandhiji had to sent practically all his aides to stay the hands so murderously raised. That gesture, and his personal request to the swelling crowds not to endanger his delicate mission, mercifully worked. The demonstrators quietened and sobered a little, and permitted the flustered Premier to enter Hydari Mansion.

Gandhiji met frenzy with poise. The hostile taunts and threats hurled at him he took head-on, offering smooth but firm submission as a shield of resistance in the best tradition of the non-violence he had learned from his mother`s gentleness and her rock-like faith in the support of Almighty God. His answers were simple and direct, his voice unruffled and soft, and his message rang gently clear like a rustle of angels` wings. What the Muslims had done in Calcutta in 1946 was utterly wrong, he conceded, but what would be gained by avenging retaliation? Those who answered brutality with brutality were only disgracing themselves and the religion they professed. With complete fearlessness Gandhiji said, ``I am going to put myself under your protection, that is all. You are welcome to turn against me, and do what you want. I have nearly reached the end of my life`s journey. I have not much farther to go. But let me tell you that if you again give way to madness, I will not be here to be a living witness to it. This same ultimatum I gave to the Muslims in Noakhali, and they heeded it. So I have earned the right to give it to you also.`` The talks went on till 8 p.m. The angry men were not fully converted. But they were tired. Gandhiji told them, `` It is late. Please go, and come again tomorrow``. ``Tomorrow`. With that word and in that manner, had Bapu`s living hero, Lord Rama, asked demon Ravana to come again, before the final vanquishment. The morrow, the 14th of August, was going to be significant.

---

http://dawn.com/2004/02/23/op.htm
DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
23 February 2004 Monday 02 Muharram 1425

..... In August 1947, Punjab, Bihar and Bengal, the three provinces on the Hindu/Muslim religious fault-lines, were burning. Human life had lost all sanctity in Gandhiji`s words: ``people had gone mad``.

In remote Noakhali in East Bengal, Muslim mobs in retaliation to the massacre of the Muslims in Bihar went on a rampage against the minority Hindus. The Mahatma agreed to go to Noakhali to cool tempers.

On August 10, 1947, he arrived in Calcutta en`route to Noakhali, where the Muslims (less than 25 per cent of the population) were trembling for their lives fearing retribution.
The British army had moved out and the law-enforcement agencies were paralyzed. Bengal Prime Minister (and later prime minister of Pakistan) Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy begged Gandhi to remain in Calcutta, to protect the Muslims.

Gandhi agreed provided Suhrawardy moved in with him at Hyderi House situated in the Muslim district of Calcutta. Gandhiji vowed to fast unto death unless he received assurances of communal tolerance from the leaders of both communities.

For nine days there was communal peace in Calcutta after Gandhi-Suhrawardy began their satyagarah in Calcutta. But, on August 31, a Hindu crowd broke into Hyderi House accusing Gandhi of his failure to protect the Hindus in Noakhali and elsewhere where fresh outbursts of frenzy had occurred; Hyderi House was wrecked and Gandhi was almost overrun himself. On September 1, he announced a fast unto death unless the carnage was stopped.

By September 4, he received written assurances of communal harmony from every political leader of Calcutta and people in the thousands gathered to give this assurance. Calcutta was relatively free of communal madness thereafter.

The Muslims of Calcutta are ever grateful for Gandhiji`s choosing to protect the Calcutta Muslims when his destination was Noakhali. .....

---

From ``Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy: A Biography`` By Begum Shaista Suhrawardy Ikramullah (niece of Huseyn Suhrawardy)
Oxford University Press, 1991

Joining Hands With Gandhi (pages 65-67):

The Muslims of Calcutta were mesmerized as if they were in a dream. ..... after the 3 June announcement, the heart had gone out of them. Muslims of the minority provinces had always known that they would not be part of Pakistan, but the Calcutta Muslims had not envisaged exactly what their position would be. They were in a daze. For not only would the Muslim League Government end, but the British Government would also cease to have power and they would be at the mercy of the Hindus. .....

..... This was the mood till the date of Gandhi ` s going to Noakhali in Eastern Bengal to be with the Hindus there. It was then that Shaheed Bhai made the most courageous gesture of his life. Gandhi was going to Noakhali to be with the Hindus, for there had been riots there during the Muslim League Government, and he felt that the Hindus of Noakhali needed succour and support. Gandhi stopped over in Calcutta for two days to apprise himself of conditions in that city. He arrived in Calcutta on 10 August, Shaheed Bhai was in Delhi discussing the final details of the partition of Bengal with the Muslim League Working Committee and Quaid-i-Azam. On his return to Calcutta on 12 August he went over to see Gandhi at Sodepur to ask him to give up his visit to Noakhali and stay in Calcutta, for as Shaheed Bhai said to him, `You are needed here.` A conversation, something along these lines, took place between Gandhi and Shaheed Bhai. `Why are you going to Noakhali? Your place is here.

`I`m going to Noakhali to be with the Hindus, there has been a riot there a little while ago, and they are afraid that now, when there will be a full-fledged League Government, they may suffer.` Gandhi replied.

`They will not suffer, I give you my word, but you must stay here.`
`If I stay here you will have to stay with me, and live as I live,` said Gandhi.
`1 will do that,` replied Shaheed Bhai.

And after some more conversation along these lines, Gandhi agreed not to go to Noakhali but to stay in Calcutta and try and help bring back peace and goodwill between the two communities. Shaheed Bhai agreed to stay with him, in a dilapidated house in Beliaghata, one of the poorest slums of Calcutta. The evening they reached this place, there was a menacing crowd around the house, and as Shaheed Bhai got down from his car following Gandhi there were hisses and derisive calls of hate, `Kill him, attack him`, they shouted as they lunged forward.

`You are responsible for the killings,` the mob shouted.

`We are all responsible,` replied Shaheed Bhai, in a level tone, as he stood and faced them. There is something very powerful in the courage of one man against heavy odds. The ugly crowd receded muttering and growling.

Shaheed Bhai stayed in Beliaghata, as long as Gandhi stayed there. I think it was for about two and a half months. ..... he went with Gandhi. Wherever they went, they talked to the people both Hindus and Muslims, listened to their grievances and begged them to give up the idea of revenge, so that the dawn of liberty and independence in both the domains should not be marred by violence and bloodshed.

Slowly, very slowly the atmosphere changed. Shaheed Bhai slept on a mat on the floor as Gandhi did, he ate the same food as Gandhi-and every one knows what Gandhi ate. He was a regular faddist in the matter of food, and poor Shaheed Bhai, who was something of a gourmet, had to put up with it.

I think this was the hardest part for Shaheed Bhai, much more than the danger. Whenever he made a fleeting visit to me during this period, I asked, `How is it going?` `It`s going fine but the food is awful! ` he would say, and make a wry face. But it was worth facing the dangers, worth putting up with the inconveniences, for slowly, very slowly, the atmosphere changed and the miracle took place. The Hindus and Muslims of Calcutta came together, even though only for a short period, so that the dawn of freedom came in an atmosphere of peace. From early morning of 15 August trucks and lorries went round the city of Calcutta with young Hindus and Muslims shouting slogans of peace and goodwill, such as Hindustan zindabad, Pakistan zindabad, tun ko Azadi Mubarak ho, Hindu Muslim bhai-bhai. In the city of Calcutta where blood had flowed just a year ago, there was rejoicing unmarred by communal tension. It seemed incredible and miraculous, but a miracle had taken place. .....

---

#145 by Inquirer

“INDIA SAFEGUARDS THE MINORITIES AND PAKISTAN DRIVES THEM OUT!!!!!!``

Like in Gujarat and tons of other places. Read Hindvi`s several post on this thread.

Where do we get these nutcases?

Please don’t yell and scream there is no need for that!

Dost mittar

i too donot wish to discuss individuals, and i agonized over whether I should take up these things, but my dissapointment got the better of me. hence I didnot take this up on a busy board. all i can ask you is to introspect and look at your prejudices put yourself in the shoes of a muslim or a dalit that a Shourie or jagmohan targets. and please do not advocate radical solutions to kashmir / partition problems.

``I have developed some kind of a reputation at chowk for being a balanced interactor. I believe this is so because I am able to see an issue from more than one perspective, both of which can be valid in their own way``

dost mittar only one perspective will do fine as long as it is a liberal and humanist one.

``Just as you have accused me of being a closet-saffronite, others have accused me of being a pseudo-secular and they can also, I am sure, find some interacts to support their contention.``

Having seen their character, those who call others pseudo secularists dont matter to me, as Vinod Dua says i am proud to be a pseudo secularist.

when you admitted that you were agnostic i had hopes from you, also when you recounted the trip to Choa Saiden Shah i thought you would feel the pain of the minority, all I can ask you is to read Locke, Hume, Burke, Mill, Russell and Nehru himself. put yourself in the other`s shoe and introspect.

to jang
I always thought being called a liberal was an honour, i am sorry for calling you a man.

HP and Jang:
WHEN WILL YOU LEARN THAT IN ANY NATION MINORITIES ARE NEVER IRRELEVANT AS BOTH OF YOU OPINE.

THAT IS THE CRUX OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN. BETWEEN 17 TH AND 21 ST CENTURY. BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL INTOLERANCE OF ISLAM AND TOLERANCE OF HINDUISM.

INDIA SAFEGUARDS THE MINORITIES AND PAKISTAN DRIVES THEM OUT!!!!!!

Dear inquire
You are older than me, and far more accompalished with a PHD, but your understanding of history, is based on movies and serials that you have seen, it is evident by the way you jumped to congratulate nakhok.

if you want to seriously analyse this issue please read Ayesha jalal, Gyanendra pandey, Sumit Sarkar, Mushirul hasan, KN Panikkar, AG Noorani. You will cease to make prejudiced statements like the one you just have: ``But Muslims have to stop taking for granted the toleration of Hindus and start giving equally in return``.

Pandey is teaching at Hopkins Baltimore campus and Khilnani at Hopkins DC campus why dont you just take a course with them or just photocopy the reading list and read it on your own. it will enlighten you about how Indian colonial and post colonial society operated. There was no tolerant and intolerant side, each one was equally tolerant or intolerant. Ihave read the Indian constitution but I would advise you to read it to the 10s of thousands of muslim victims of communal riots in India. Laws are judged by their implementation not by the nobelese of their formulation. Indian muslims have been given ceremonial positions in indian govt but there has never been a single muslim home, finance or defence minister leave alone prime minister, so much for tolerance. if you see india today despite all the atrocities being commited against muslims, thay have maintained their cool and have not yet indulged in terrorism because they have some faith in the state still.

And by the way Noakhali is in bengal, not in UP and Bihar. in bihar infact there was cleansing of half a million muslims. you must inform your self before jumping the gun. nobody doubts the personal commitment of Nehru as i have stated repeatedly or that of Gandhi, but again I repeat they were not patrolling UP or the rest of india, which were saved because they were not partitioned, and because of existing intercommunal relations.

#138 by hindvi on September 28, 2004 10:56am PT
``I am surprised that a liberal man such as yourself can even take the rumours floated by the Sangh seriously. ``

dont call me names like liberal and man :-)

thanks for correcting my perceptions, i was thinking of dilli as including old dilli, hazrat nijamudding etc areas. also, re punjab, i am not claiming that muslims have ``returned`` there, just that some muslims have migrated (bihari workers) there as is common among migration patterns in india.

regarding your being upset with DM specifically, and closet saffron well-wishers in general, surely you understand that most middle class non-muslims (and many muslims) are broadly saffron sympethisers but only a miniscule minority are RSS indoctrinated. this is a reality. by broad saffron sympathy i mean dislike of laloo-mulayam politics, ascribing bomb-blast type violence to dawood-mian, liking tough politicians like shourie-jagoo etc. so you see the problem? its nothing to do with RSS indoctrination. RSS is only a symptom. The general dislike of muslim is not necessarily taught in RSS pathshalas, but is wide general knowledge.

Dost mittar
dont get me wrong you are allright by average subcontinental standards i just expected more from an agnostic.

h