From Assam to Uttar Pradesh to Kerala, the vote-hungry Congress has pursued a policy of minority appeasement that now threatens the country's very security and identity
Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar has thanked Prime Minister Manmohan Singh “from the core of my heart”, as he put it, for the latter’s remark certifying and endorsing the JD(U) leader’s “secularism”. Apparently, Mr Nitish Kumar has outsourced the certification business in the debate on who is secular and who is communal to the Congress.
Yet, none of these leaders who gratefully exhibit the Congress endorsed secular/communal label, thinks of the implications of such a perverse exercise. Implied in the Prime Minister’s certification of Mr Nitish Kumar as ‘secular’ is the accusation that the Bihar Chief Minister was ‘communal’ so far. Why do the likes of Mr Nitish Kumar ignore the consequences of outsourcing the differentiation between secular and communal to a party that has its own kebabs on the fireIJ
When it comes to the secular versus communal debate, it is the Congress’s record that is the most suspect. Who should have preference in Government funding for development projectsIJ The natural answer should be the poorest of the poor. But the answer that Mr Singh gave sometime back was the most communal one. He said, “Minorities” (read: Muslims). If there is any more doubt about the communal nature of his Government, one only has to look at the so-called 15 point programme for minorities that was introduced by the Congress-led UPA regime.
Among other ‘certified’ secularists is the Chief Minister of West Bengal, Ms Mamata Banerjee, whose Government is now paying salaries to Muslim clerics. Such self-proclaimed secularists not only tolerate the religious extremism and political irredentism of a section of clerics, politicians and intellectuals from the minority (read: Muslim) community but also placate and even genuflect before them. Think of how West Bengal Government did not allow famous author Salman Rushdie to land in Kolkata or permit Taslima Nasreen to live in West Bengal.
Back at the Centre, the UPA Government is now recognising ‘matriculation’ certificates given by madarssas as equivalent to those awarded by accredited education boards. This is despite the fact that most madarssas peddle the most communal of education.
In fact, the madarssas generally teach a convoluted view of Indian history that looks down upon Indian civilisation as it existed before Muslim invasion. The institution of the Caliphate, that the Turks themselves overthrew, is eulogised. Young Muslims are thus bonded to medieval times even though they live in a rapidly modernising world.
Most madarssas’ approach to education is Saudi Arabia-centric. Several scholars of West Asia working at prestigious American universities have attributed the mindset that breeds radical Islamist thought to such education. Meanwhile, most children belonging to other religious minority communities in India are exposed to inclusive and secular education.
The Government of India is supposed to fight terrorism. But how can it succeed when it encourages narrow-minded, religious teaching and considers it as equivalent to secular, science and rationality-based educationIJ
Consequently, in one country there are now two education systems which in turn means that all Indians no longer have a shared worldview or understanding of the country, it’s history and its ageless pluralistic culture. Those educated in madarssas find it difficult to identify with the aspirations of the rest; thus, they become victims of a mindset that is natural to an insular and insecure community.
The refusal of the Congress-led Government in Kerala, for instance, to prosecute PDP leader Abdul Nasser Madani even though he has been accused by the State’s police of involvement in 2005 Tamil Nadu bus burning case, is yet another instance that reflects on the Congress’s pseudo-secular credentials. The same Madani was later found to have planned the 2010 bombing of Bangalore’s Chinnaswamy stadium.
It was left to the BJP-led Government in Karnataka last year to arrest the PDP leader despite all the hurdles placed before it by the Congress-led Government in Kerala. Instead of treating the extremist the way he deserves to be treated, the latter has been working to ensure Madani’s well-being in prison, all the while interfering in the work of the Karnataka Government.
During the last State Assembly election in Uttar Pradesh, Congress leaders competed among themselves to raise the percentage of reservations they were promising to Muslims. But the Samajwadi Party finally trumped the Congress in the appeasement game. It comes as no surprise then that the the Samajwadi Party-led Government has since wanted to release people accused of planning and executing serial bombings. Mercifully, the Allahabad High Court intervened and stopped the freeing of the accused.
In Kerala, the Muslim league which is part of the UDF Government, gets excessive representation and even blocks a top Congress State leader from entering Government because he is a Hindu and has been backed by the two most important Hindu organisations. In Andhra Pradesh, ever since the Congress came back to power in 2004, there have been repeated attempts to provide special benefits to the Muslim community — moves that the Andhra High Court has rejected.
In any nation, the laws personal conduct, including marriage and family, should apply equally to all citizenry. But we have the secularists exempting members of one specific community from these laws, thereby, laying the foundation for demographic aberrations and social unrest. For example, some claim to have converted to that religion only to take a second wife even when the first is living — a practice not allowed by the general law on marriage.
In Assam, infiltration from Bangladesh continues unabated right under the nose of the State’s Congress-led Government as laws that call for identifying and sending back illegal immigrants are observed only in the breach.
The Congress succeeded in including ‘secularism’ as one of the Directive Principles of State Policy during Emergency. But ‘secularism’ has not been defined, leaving the Congress and others to interpret it according to their political requirements. The idea that all Indians are entitled to non-discriminatory access to public benefits has now been effectively thrown out of the window. Respecting the constitutional basic of equality before law is ‘communalism’ in the eyes of pseudo-secularists while discriminating in favour of religious minorities when it comes to access to Government benefits is considered to be ‘secularism’.
Hopefully, the future will see a decisive shift in Indian politics from the secular-communal discourse to an agenda that focuses on uniform access to development for all.