Whether it is Muzaffarnagar or elsewhere in the country, the problem is to do with the politics of appeasement. Issues are decided not on the basis of constitutional and legal propriety, but on grounds of religious affiliation
Who is responsible for the death of over 50 innocents, the maiming of hundreds of others, displacement of thousands and destruction of property in Muzaffarnagar and its neighbouring areas in western Uttar PradeshIJ The answer to that in one word is: Sham secularism.
The popular expression to describe this unique Indian political phenomenon of pandering to radicals in minority communities in the name of secularism is, of course, ‘pseudo secularism’. The word ‘pseudo’, however, has an implied or feigned tribute to the original thought as well. In the relentless race for vote-bank politics, self-proclaimed secularists have dropped even the fig leaf of pretension. For want of a better expression, one may call it sham or counterfeit secularism. Suggestions from readers in this respect are welcome.
Here is a brief chronicle of the Muzaffarnagar incident. The violence was triggered by the State Government’s outright partisan response to an incident of eve teasing of a Hindu girl by Muslim boys. In a fight that followed the eve teasing, Mohammed Shahanawaz of Kawal village was murdered by two cousins — Sachin and Gaurav Singh — of nearby Malikpur village. These two Hindu boys were first lynched by a Muslim mob and later had their throats slit.
Mr Akhilesh Yadav, Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and a flag-bearer of the sham secularism school of thought, was quick to express his concern over the murder of Shahanawaz but said nothing about the brutal killing of the two Hindu boys. Following the trend set by his political masters, Additional Director General of Police Arun Kumar visited Kawal on August 28 but had no time to go to nearby Malikpur. WhyIJ
The sham being played in the name of secularism was on open display in dealing with these unfortunate murders. While Uttar Pradesh Police registered a case against unidentified people from Kawal for killing the Singh brothers, they registered a case against members of the Singh family for the killing of Shahanawaz, even though they were not present at the spot when he was attacked.
The blatant injustice obviously left the Hindus stunned and then galvanised them into action. On September 7, a mahapanchayat was summoned and there was a rally to “save daughters and daughters-in-law”. While the rally was dispersing, the unarmed participants were ambushed, fired upon and several of them lost their lives. Scores of tractors and trolleys, that they had used to get to the rally, were torched. Policemen, though present in strength at the scene, refused to intervene for want of orders.
The attack on those returning from the rally was not sudden but pre-meditated. leaders belonging to ‘sham secular’ parties were working over-time to make a political killing out of the sordid incident of August 27 at Kawal. BSP Member of Parliament from Muzaffarnagar Kadir Rana and his party MlAs Noor Salim and Jameel Ahmed from Charthawal and Meerapur constituencies respectively held meetings on August 30, but only with Muslims. Mr Rana held another meeting on September 5 and called upon the crowd to show aggression. Throughout this crisis, only one community and its sentiments mattered to the ‘sham secular’ parties.
And the administration, taking cue from its political masters, neglected its duty. For the police, it was not the gravity of the crime, but the religion of the criminal that mattered. The Akhilesh Yadav Government had already been frozen after it punished a young IAS officer for doing her duty in demolishing an illegally constructed wall around a mosque in Greater Noida and her zeal for enforcing the law against the sand mafia. The message from this Government to the local administration has always been: Close your eyes where the ruling party’s interests are concerned.
When the Chief Minister wears his communalism on his lapel, his administration too has to decide everything from the communal angle. Mr Yadav with the skull cap is the man and the message rolled into one. Why blame the officers when the head of the Government wants partisan enforcement of the lawIJ
It has been widely pointed out that since the Samajwadi Party Government came to power, some 50 communal incidents have sullied the image of Mr Yadav, hailed at the time of his swearing-in as a young Chief Minister with a fresh vision. But soon after his regime was installed, there was a huge cry about how it was allegedly ignoring Muslim interests without specifying what those interests were. Interestingly, it all began with a rift between a Muslim cleric from Delhi and the Samajwadi Party’s Muslim face, State Cabinet Minister Azam Khan. The latter even put his wrath on public display by absenting himself from his Cabinet duties.
After this rift surfaced, the young Chief Minister sought to escalate the demonstration of his appeasement of “Muslim interests” to save himself from the competitive communalism between the Delhi cleric and Mr Khan.
Across many towns and major villages, small incidents involving only a handful of people began to be magnified into communal clashes (not caste clashes — just to remind Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav). Why the Chief Minister did not take action to nip the mischief in the bud is for him to explain. But most observers know where the rot lies. And more importantly, the administration knows where the political sensitivity of the Chief Minister lies.
The Durga Shakti Nagpal incident only defined it in more explicit terms when the Chief Minister let the administration know that no Government officer would escape the wrath of the man at the top of the heap if his sensitivity is ignored. Justice is not what the law says but which community the Chief Minister wants to genuflect to. And that is the message that the officers in this key city in western Uttar Pradesh followed resulting in a huge conflagration.
But to be fair to the Chief Minister, why should one only blame him for defining secularism as appeasement of fundamentalist MuslimsIJ There are other so-called ‘secular parties’ which lead State Governments that are no less keen on the competitive politics of appeasement.
Whether it is Muzaffarnagar or elsewhere in the country, the problem is simply this appeasement. Issues are decided not on the basis of what is constitutionally and legally right but which community the accused belong to. The entire event, that has caused many Muslim families to flee from their village, would not have occurred if the State Government had acted impartially. Both Hindus and Muslims who suffered in these riots, are victims of sham secularism.