Why the BJP has no incentive to stop the lynching of Muslims in India. By Sushil Aaron
NB: The brutal nature of RSS politics and the Modi government has never been so clear as today. This is a government that openly sympathises with and protects hooliganism in the name of religion and 'patriotism'. The Indian Constitution and Article 21 - which protects a citizen's right to life - has been rendered a joke by this regime. If we do not protest this galloping criminalisation of India we will have ourselves to blame for what happens next - DS
There is no doubt that
a form of medieval madness has taken over India in the shape
of Islamophobia and regular lynching of Muslims in different states. The
situation has moved quickly from not renting out homes to Muslims to refusing
to tolerate their presence in public spaces. Muslims are being taunted on
trains and streets, fights initiated and lynched. The lynchings have become so
common that we do not know which one to respond to. Should we weep for Mohammad Naeem in Jharkhand or Hafiz Junaid in Haryana? How many
remember the details of Pehlu Khan’s murder in Rajasthan? Mohammad Akhlaq is now just another
milestone in this steady journey of wanton death. Many on social media who were
horrified by Srinivas Kuchibotla’s murder in the US in
February are strangely muted about the lynching of Muslims in India.
There is scarcely a
word of condemnation from the BJP’s leadership. Forest fires in Portugal get
more notice from this government than the ravaging of India’s social fabric
that has taken centuries to nurture. Rather than express concern – let alone
enforce the law – the Union Cabinet and BJP leaders found a way to signal to
gau-rakshaks that they are on the same side. They skipped President Pranab
Mukherjee’s iftar reception at Rashtrapati Bhavan in an unprecedented flouting
of convention and political grace. The politicians are essentially conveying to
the vigilantes that they too have such contempt for Muslims that they’d rather
not be seen in public breaking bread with them.
The striking thing
about vigilantism now is that there is no incentive for the BJP to make it
stop. The Opposition is powerless, the police are bystanders, courts have not
shown interest, the ruling party feels that it will no longer lose elections
and so it has no dread of the hustings. There is also notably
no fear of violent retaliation. Muslims in India are effectively hostages in
their own land, unable to take on a section of the majority that is fortified
by a State that looks the other way in the face of gratuitous violence.
Vigilante violence also tests the bonds of transnational Muslim solidarity.
Ordinarily, Pakistan and Pakistan-based terror groups would use violence or the
threat of violence as leverage over the Indian government to bargain on Kashmir
or relax anti-Muslim policies elsewhere. (The 1993 Mumbai blasts were a
reaction to the riots that targeted Muslims in December 1992 and January 1993.)
But Congress and BJP governments react very differently to terror attacks. The
Congress is weakened by them while Hindu nationalists are bolstered by them. In
the current climate attacks can provide the excuse for more bloodletting and
subsequent consolidation of Hindu identity. That’s the bind Hindu vigilantes
put Islamabad and the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) in.
There is thus a
deterrence at play here for the vigilantes to exploit. But deterrence breaks
down sometimes, which also works for the BJP. The Pakistani army and the LeT
may have a measure of geopolitical reason, groups like Islamic State may not
(which is why we are hearing more about IS as a threat to India lately). When
terror attacks happen in India or where there is a spike in militancy in J&K as is expected they
can quickly change the direction of the debate and harden middle class
attitudes towards Muslims in general.
To get a sense of
this, consider what happened in Kashmir over the last year. Security forces
reacted excessively to the outpouring of grief following Burhan Wani’s killing
last July, firing live ammunition and pellets at civilian protestors that left
about 100 people dead, blinded many and partially blinded hundreds. The debate
has now moved away from the high civilian toll to a representation of
stone-pelting youth as terrorists. This was achieved through sheer repetition
in the public sphere, with no quarter given to Kashmir’s complex past or its suffering. Over the last month, the government has come under criticism over Major Leetul Gogoi tying Farooq Ahmad Dar to a
jeep, but suddenly a crowd in Srinagar lynches deputy superintendent of
police Ayub Pandith – an act widely condemned by Kashmiris – and now
it becomes difficult to get the focus back on State action. In other words, one
act is enough to draw an equivalence and gloss over a lengthy, bloody past and
turn the debate in the direction the government wants.
We are likely to see
more Ayub Pandith moments in Kashmir and other states of India. No one
outrageous act will be allowed to build up for too long; there will either be
another distraction, another outrage - either by design or the logic of
circumstances. Paresh Rawal’s tweet on Arundhati Roy ensured
that attention was diverted from pictures of Naeem drenched in his own blood. Lynching not only acts
out hatred for Muslims, it also serves to generate support, acquiescence and
fear among the different constituents of the Hindu middle class. The key
sources where this cohort picks up independent, contrarian views –
universities, media, writers, filmmakers and artists – are being tamed. Throw
in the spectre of open violence on the street and its compliance is assured. It
is very easy to silence people when there is no rule of law. A troubled
conscience unsure of peer support is often no match for a frenzied and
organised political force.
Many will flit between fear and helplessness (about
lynching) and rage (about violence in Kashmir). It’s a condition geared to
produce moral flight and political apathy, which suits the BJP as it seeks to
quickly consolidate Hindu identity. Sunil Khilnani famously wrote in The Idea
of India that “in a fundamental sense, India does not merely ‘have’ politics
but is actually constituted by politics.” Right now the possibility of politics
is being threatened by organised fear.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/see also
India's ruling party is sponsoring an assault on the Indian state // Tavleen Singh - Is this Hindutva
What is to be Undone
The law of killing - a brief history of Indian fascism
The emperor's masks: 'apolitical' RSS calls the shots in Modi sarkar
The Supreme Court, Gandhi and the RSS
The law of killing - a brief history of Indian fascism
The emperor's masks: 'apolitical' RSS calls the shots in Modi sarkar
The Supreme Court, Gandhi and the RSS
