Oh Kashmir!

Let me begin this post with my head bowed to the Lord Almighty who made a Darshan of the Holy Cave and Bhawan a reality for me!

Early this month, I went off to the state of Jammu & Kashmir for the primary purpose of having a Darshan of the divine manifestation of the Lord at the Holy Cave at Amarnath. The purpose achieved, I spent a day each at Srinagar and Gulmarg (apart from the stay at Sonmarg), before proceeding to Katara for the Darshan of Mata Vaishno Devi on Trikuta hills. For me, this was the first experience of the land of Jammu & Kashmir, and of course, the first prime view of the people who inhabit those lands.

It was my first experience of a city under curfew and was made aware that curfew does not mean a complete absence of civilians from road, nor necessarily a complete cessation of economic activities. The journey to Sonmarg from Srinagar required our driver to halt at a few places, i.e., the travel agency, a tyre repair shop and a yatra halt, wherefrom we proceeded to Sonmarg alongwith other yatra vehicles in a convoy. Curfew was much more relaxed in Ganderbhal and subsequent areas once out of Srinagar. Outside a J&K Bank ATM, numerous Kashmiri youths came up to me asking about the situation in Srinagar and expressing their pain on the happenings asking as to why is it that only Kashmiri stone pelters die when stone pelters in any other part of India are only lathi-charged? Except for mildly responding that deaths are unfortunate but that we don’t really know the situation under which the forces fired, I held back from arguing. Similar tales of Indian brutality got narrated all across, at Sonmarg, at Baltal, at Panjtarini, at Srinagar and at Gulmarg.

Overall, I captured the following impressions in the course of my stay in Kashmir:

• Kashmir is not seen as a part of India

• Kashmiris despise the Omar Government and the entire Abdullah clan. At the same time, Kashmiris have fond memories of the Mufti Government saying that it was the only one which understood and met Kashmiri needs

• Srinagar is quite an affluent city with people none the poorer for the lockouts

• Lots of money seems to be coming in to the valley. The entire stretch of the town of Kangan on Srinagar – Sonmarg route had new swanky houses coming up in place of old poor buildings. What is the source of this sudden and universal prosperity?

• People are inconvenienced by the curfew and demonstrations but see them as integral to their ‘struggle’ against India

• There seems to be an absolute belief that the loss of tourism on account of Kashmir’s imminent ‘independence’ would be more than made up by tourists from Pakistan and other parts of the world. In fact, the opinion seems that disturbances on account of the state being controlled by India has held back tourism growth

• Text message service seems active for local Kashmiris. While my post paid Airtel connection had its sms service barred in Srinagar, I both heard and saw the caretaker of my houseboat receiving a text message on his cellphone. Which network was it?

• The valley seems to be a willing customer to rumour mongers. One evening, the driver of our cab, the shikarawallah, the houseboat caretaker and another Kashmiri on Dal pier told us that eight people have been killed in firing at Ganderbhal. We had traveled the same route the same very evening and did not find any sign of any such event. Further, there was no mention of this supposed event anywhere in any news item, not even on Kashmiri newspaper websites.

• Kashmiri communal amity is a myth. Their mosques are centers of anti India propaganda. Likewise, another myth being propagated is Kashmiri support for the Amarnath Yatra! Support to yatra is a pure economic activity and does not have any other aspect for the local populace. In fact, Kashmiris are furious that the yatris are being allowed to go ahead in spite of the curfew in which their movements are not free. While we personally did not face any hostile mob, our co-guests at the houseboat had their convoy  of vehicles  stoned. Other yatris had similar stories to share. The conduct of the pony-wallahs, the sundry store owners at camps cannot be termed as amicable by any stretch of imagination. Another yatri was almost roughed up by pony-wallahs when he innocently proclaimed that Kashmir is also India!

• Muslims from Poonch are not necessarily pro India and anti Kashmiri, as some sections of the media would like us to believe

• It is only on account of the massive security bandobast that the Amarnath Yatra goes on. Had it not been for them, there wouldn’t be any yatra except probably for a handful of local Kashmiri Hindus making the pilgrimage to the Holy Cave.

• Even for the Government of India, the yatra seems to be more than a religious event and  is probably designed to showcase the security control over the valley. To borrow someone else’s words, the Yatra, with pilgrims from all across the country, though more so from Punjab, is the muscular symbol of India’s presence in the valley

It is disturbing to accept that the overwhelming majority of a part of your country does not want to be with you. As a democrat, the first instinct is to let them secede. Even as a materialist, one would say that Kashmir has been a drain on India’s resources right from 1948. Forget the money, it has taken so many precious young lives of my countrymen. Rather than having such thankless people as a millstone around our neck, it would probably be the best solution to leave them to their desired fate.

However, some harsh reality check throws up the following even more disturbing aspects to the issues in Kashmir:

• Public opinion is fickle and two decades a very small period in the history of a Nation. These very Kashmiris did not want to accede to Pakistan in 1947-48, today they do and who knows of what they will desire tomorrow? Can the destiny of a Nation be entwined to such fickleness? Further, more mature democracies of UK, USA, Spain etc, historically, have nipped all attempts at secession in the bud. Are we a more mature democracy that we allow secessionist voices to gain victory?

• What happens to the rights of the original inhabitants of the land of our sages and Rishis? Or is it that this persecuted minority has no right to the land of their forefathers? Forget about the cleansing of Hindus from Pakistan, we have seen Kashimiriyat in all its glory in 1931, in 1950, in 1986, in 1990, in 1992, in numerous village massacres. Lest someone claim that such instances belong to the hoary past, let that person be aware of the temple burning in Anantnag, (July 2010) and attack on Sikhs in Awantipora (July 2010). It is more than clear that non-Muslims don’t have any place in Kashmir. Are Kashmiri Pandits doomed to exile status for following the call of their Shaivaite faith?

• What happens to the Hindu access to Amarnath, to Kheer Bhawani, to Awantipora, to Martand and the numerous temples and shrines which make up Kashmir?

• If Kashmiri ‘angst’ is not on account of religion, then why are mosques their centers of intrigue, of propaganda and they call for war? Why is the ‘struggle’ against ‘Indian occupying forces’ seen as a Jehad? Why is Anantnag called Islamabad or why has the Shankaracharya Hill been christened as Takht-i-Sulieman by the locals?

• If Kashmir does indeed separate from India, is it not again a reaffirmation of the fact that Hindus and Muslims are indeed a separate Nation? Will it not further give impetus to the fact that the strongest proponents of Pakistan, i.e., Muslims from United Provinces have very much remained in India, even after gaining their desired ‘Land of the Pure’?

• Elections are routinely rigged all across the country. In fact, states like West Bengal and Bihar have rarely seen a complete ‘fair’ election process. Why is it that these states don’t want to secede from India?

• The vanquished in the allegedly rigged elections of 1987 wanted to impose Shariat in Kashmir and wanted to use the Assembly to pass a resolution of independence. Supposedly, Syed Salahuddin and Yasin Malik picked up the gun when they were failed by rigging. Does listening to the Kashmiris mean listening to cries of ‘freedom’?

• If Kashmir indeed does separate, how will the state be divided? Kashmir becoming independent/going to Pakistan and Ladakh and Jammu remaining with India or even the latter two being divided on religious lines? If the latter happens, all we would be left with would be Leh and some three and a half districts of Jammu

• If we are indeed an occupying force, then why to allow so many anti Nationals, both in Kashmir and in mainland India to campaign against India?

• Has not the Kashmiri ‘alienation’ been fed by the special status accorded to that state? How can any reasonable person expect that people being told that they are different from us, start believing that they are indeed one of us?

The answers to the issues plaguing Kashmir are obviously not easy. Only, let not the fear of our own demons or the exhaustion of holding on to our historical lands overwhelm us so much that we take the easiest way out!

Return of the 'Prodigal'

Over the past few days, view disseminating machines are agog with news of yet another homecoming, of that of a semi mustachioed guy with a deep baritone, who had been unceremoniously sacked from the BJP less than a year back. What has changed in the intervening period is anyone’s guess, ditto for what was lost when this guy was sacked or for what would be gained if he is taken back!

Jaswant Singh had been among the leading lights of the BJP for years. In fact, Jaswant was among the few frontline leaders of the BJP who could give ‘rootless wonders’ of the Congress a run for their money, even on a bad day. No matter if he lost the general elections, he could rely on his friendship with M/s Advani & Vajpayee to secure him important portfolios, even if it meant displeasuring the RSS. No matter that he would have lost a Panchayat election had he contested independently, he could count upon central support to destabilize Vasundhara Raje’s Government in Rajasthan. A person who would have scarcely bought a vote to the BJP had the standing that he could openly criticize BJP’s involvement in the Ayodhya movement. However, to give him his due, he was not a bad minister, though not an outstanding one either. But does that count a contribution enough for all the honours that the BJP bestowed upon him? Once expelled, Jaswant was like a woman scorned and no expletives were mild enough for his party of thirty years.

This is precisely the only man whose summary expulsion from the party was welcomed by all and sundry, except for those who wish BJP’s complete demise. Not a case like that of Kalyan Singh or Uma Bharati or the moving away of Babulal Marandi, Jaswant was an exit for which a few tears were shed, if at all. Even if for argument’s sake alone, we accept that Jaswant’s expulsion was incorrect, does it automatically imply that his return will set that wrong right? The BJP may do well do ask itself the following questions before it does take Jaswant back:

1. Is the BJP accepting that it was at fault when it expelled Jaswant?

2. Or is it that Jaswant has accepted that his conduct in promoting his sectarian view was wrong?

3. While Jaswant does have a lot to gain by coming back to the BJP, what does BJP have to gain by getting this ‘prodigal son’ back? A single vote, maybe!

4. What message is it sending to those who have stayed on in this party for decades, working behind the scene without getting any rewards?

5. What does it say about the importance of ideology in the BJP? That there is no ideology and whims and personal eccentricities of its senior members define ideology?

6. What next? What will Jaswant do or what would BJP do with Jaswant?

7. What would be the impact of these decisions on the party’s image? The NDA anyways remains a lodge where anyone can walk in and leave at will; the party too seems to be taking purposeful strides towards becoming a mirror image of the NDA

8. Finally, what harm would befall the BJP if Jaswant remains outside? Or is it that Jaswant’s return is a personal endeavor of a man who is perpetually ashamed of having led the greatest mass movement in Independent India; a man who can stand everything but adverse comments of those who would never vote for him?

While it is elementary to accept that defeat weakens self belief, it numbs the mind to see a once surging party bending over backwards to support individuals like Jaswant, Mallya and Jethmalani. No wonder that its so-called allies and its opponents treat it like dirt

Riots after Riots

In course of a conversation with a friend today, we meandered to the topic of our youth’s awareness and concern for events which impact us. While both of us were in agreement that this generation of high school – college going youth seem more concerned with good things in life, my friend opined that this indifference towards more profound events or history is actually good for the world. Logically, we fight only for what we hold dear. If we come to a state where we don’t care about issues which seem important to us now, there would be less and less to fight for. Truly speaking, I cannot find much fault in this logic. That said, it leaves me with a niggling feeling of discomfort. There would certainly be less to fight for – if people all around get indifferent almost at the same. However, if only one group adopts indifference as its mantra, doesn’t it leave the group vulnerable to attacks of more powerful ‘others’? Isn’t history, both distant and not so distant , replete with instances of a peaceful and prosperous but inward looking and decadent civilization falling prey to committed and organized hordes of barbarians? By this practiced indifference, are we coming to state where we would be similar to Delhi of 18^th century or Paris of early 20^th century?

A basis of my belief that this phenomenon of changing thought process of the youth of our country being restricted to the majority community alone is the changing pattern of communal riots in our country. A very welcome change which has happened over the last few decades is that the number of communal incidents in the country has come down. Yes, it has indeed come down irrespective of what the secular evangelists would like us to believe. Home ministry records are a testimonial to that. More than that, any observer of Indian modern history would know, triggering riots in India were amongst the easiest things to do. Particularly in the pre-partition India, the whole of North India was a communal tinderbox, with minor and major riots happening across cities and towns, over issues as minor as band playing before a mosque while a religious procession was on,  or to the much more serious issue of mass slaughter of cows. This tendency to riot continued well after India became independent, though with lesser vigour and started witnessing a drop 70’s onwards. Other than the changing mindset of Hindus in particular, in which religion was seen as archaic and a well of superstitions, the political support of religious identity witnessed a withdrawal. For one, late sixties onwards, the Bharatiya Jan Sangh, which used to be at the forefront of pro Hindu activities, got in multiple alliances with socialists of various hues, in effect diluting its ideology. Second, with Indira’s victory in 1971, the conservative wing of the Congress, or whatever had remained of it after Nehru’s continuous purges, was left without power; a forgotten bunch of people who had completely been sidelined due to people's fascination with Indira’s pro-poor image. Indira, completely the socialist messiah at that time, assiduously cultivated the minorities then and all these left little institutional support for those professing Hindu interests. Thirdly, with the decisive defeat of Pakistan in the 1971 war, Muslim separatism in India received a body blow and underlined that those dreaming of an Islamic sultanate in India would remain dreamers only. This in turn, tempered the ingrained bellicosity of Muslims in the country and resulted in lowering communal temperature in the country.  It is noteworthy  that there weren’t any major riots in the country in the decade of 1970s.

Compared to the era till the late 80s, the decade of 90s and beyond have seen a transformation of the profile of riot participants. While previously, the Jan Sangh would certainly be at the forefront of riots in pockets in North India, riots then were seen as one necessary for the defence of the community and its participants would consist of players cutting across the political spectrum. Even till the late 80’s, people from all parties, with a very big chunk contributed from Congress, would be among the accused in riots. Think of Bhagalpur riots, where almost all accused from the majority community were either from the Police force or affiliated to the Congress. Anyways, since the BJS’s electoral presence was relatively limited, crediting it with participation in all riots had would actually effect in paying unnecessary homage to its limited powers.

What changed in the 1990’s was the BJP’s hijackingof the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation and more importantly, the unfortunate siding of all Hindu organizations with the BJP. All of a sudden, most political parties were bereft of support of akharas, dharmacharyas  and groups of religious fervered activists, all of who had hitched themselves to the BJP bandwagon. The flip side of this phenomenon, combined with aggressive media evangelization and advent of Sonia Gandhi, has been that Hindu interests and concerns have become anathema to most parties, with the belief that any such articulation of support of Hindu causes would only benefit the BJP while further damaging their minority votebanks. That the BJP itself wants to dissociate itself with its past completely is another topic of discussion altogether. As far as riots are concerned, they have become a pure Sangh Parivar phenomenon, where almost all Hindu accused in communal riots are affiliated to the Sangh, with barely any 'representation' from other public bodies.

While the merits / demerits of the above mentioned changes can be debated, what has become more ominous is the fact that Islamic belligerence has been on the rise in all the riots which the country has witnessed in the 2000s. Other than Gujarat riots of 2002, the country has witnessed Hindu Muslim riots at Jalna (2009), Malegaon (2002), Dhule (2008), Sangli (2009), Miraj (2009), Burhanpur (2008), Hyderabad (2010), Marad (2003), Mau,(2005) Aligarh (2006) and Bareilly (2010), among numerous others. The good part is that none of these riots had a large number of human deaths. The sad part is that each of them entailed a huge loss of property and that each of them seems to have been instigated by the Muslim community. At Miraj – Sangli, the riots followed attacks on Ganapati pandals, ostensibly against some posters of the historical event of Afzal Khan murder by Shivaji. At Dhule, riots followed Muslims tearing down a Navratri pandal, ostensibly on account of their reluctance to walk underneath a saffron coloured gateway. Hyderabad riots happened after Muslims rioted against replacement of their banners which they had put more than a month back. Bareilley riots happened when Muslims violated orders and took out their procession through a sensitive locality and attacked houses while they were doing so. Marad massacre was a simple unprovoked attack on a group of Hindu Araya fishermen who were collecting their catch of the day, on Marad beach. Mau riots happened following unprovoked attacks on a Ramlila procession while Aligarh erupted in riots following Muslims removal of Ram Navami decorations from a temple. Malegaon riots happened after a mob protesting US invasion of Afghanistan decided to turn its ire against the hapless Hindus. Burhanpur riots happened after Muslims stoned a Hanuman Rath during the Hanuman Mela after Dushehra.

A few features, common across all these riots have been:

• All of them happened in towns / cities having a significant Muslim population
• All of them were invariably triggered by Muslims
• All of them were of a short duration, resulting in huge damage to property, but thankfully, relatively lesser damage to life
• Hindus suffered disproportionately as victims, both in numbers and in damage to property
• Few people were arrested, though the number of Muslims rioters would run in thousands
• Few of these riots evinced any interest in the media. Contrasting this with the 24 X 7 coverage of Muslim angst manifest in riots at Kolkata (2007) and Vadodara (2006), against Taslima Nasreen and illegal madarsa demolition, respectively

A renowned BJP watcher and a mainstream journalist now, had told me that following the Gujarat riots, Muslim belligerence has decreased. I guess that BJP wallahs are happy living this delusion. The fact of the matter is that riots have become more organized and more dangerous today. Senior personnel in home ministry accept that small modules of goons have spread up across India in a systematic fashion. These groups are highly motivated and trained to inflict maximum damage in the shortest time. Hence, in any riots, these bunches of goons can assemble at the nerve centre of riots at a short notice, create damage and melt away while the curfew is on. Then, the usual PUCL type ‘independent’ ‘citizens’ ‘fact-finding’ committees can come and proclaim that Muslim involvement in riots was restricted to their being victims or otherwise being a tool of ‘outsiders’ or that the poor unemployed Muslim youth are being unnecessarily terrorized by the Police.

It certainly does not seem that indifference is spreading among the Muslim youth too. Even today, most of the Muslim rioters are young and the very young. Their terrorists are not a bunch of uneducated or hungry lumpen elements but educated and coming from privileged backgrounds. It takes only a single determined man to change the destiny of a Nation. Think of Mohd Ali Jinnah, think of Gautam Buddha, Martin Luther King or our own Mahatma Gandhi. Here we are faced with a determined community riding the wave of its demographic strength, seeking to alter the Indian Civilization in their own way. At the same time, following Bareilley and Hyderabad riots, our Home Minister assures that the minority interests would be protected!!! Where does that leave a decent, law abiding citizen who simply wants to carry on with his life without interference from others? Where would this indifference to all what is happening take us? Can indifference ever be the solution to what lies ahead of us?

The concluding part to this post would touch upon the changing demographic profile of the country.

Freedom of Expression or Societal Peace???

Buried in inner pages of today’s Times of India was a small news item, captioned, 'SC upholds ban on book against Islam'. It stated that the Hon’ble court has upheld Maharashtra Government’s ban on R V Bhasin’s "A Concept of Political World Invasion by Muslims". The two judge bench comprising of Justice P Sathasivam and Justice H L Dattu held that Bhasin’s Right to Freedom of speech, as guaranteed under the Constitution of the country was secondary to the need of maintaining peace in society.

The author of the book, Mr Bhasin had challenged Maharasthra Government's 2007 decision to ban the book, four years after its publication, on the ground that it perpetrated hatred against Muslims, promoted enmity between communities and on the apprehension that it would breach harmony in society.

At the first glance, there does not seem anything objectionable in the judgment passed by the court, which by itself was a reaffirmation of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court order upholding the ban on the book. Since the constitution has explicitly affirmed restrictions on the Right to Freedom of Speech and the fact that even instinctively, we all know that rights are not absolute makes the judgment seem completely logical and in the larger interests of society.

However, a little analysis of the facts of the case and a comparison of this present instance with court judgments / Government actions in similar cases can leave a person much discomforted on the arbitrariness behind judicial pronouncements and the posturing of ‘civil society’. The most recent of these is MF Hussain’s renouncing of his Indian Citizenship and the Muslim riots in Shimoga, ostensibly against writings of Taslima Nasreen. In the case of Hussain, the Hon’ble court has already dismissed a couple of cases against him, citing artistic license and freedom of speech. His supporters disingenuously point out that most of his controversial creations were 20 years old and that it is indeed the Hindi (emphasis added) magazine Vichar Mimansa, which is guilty of insulting Hindu deities as it had reprinted those paintings. Notice the similarity with Bhasin’s case.


Unlike in case of books like Salman Rushdie’s ‘The Satanic Verses’ or Ram Swarup’s ‘Understanding Islam through the Hadis’, which were banned almost immediately after their publication, the Government took four years to realize that it could disturb peace in society! By that logic, opponents of Hussain’s work, have all the more valid ground to agitate against Hussain. But yet again, only a couple of years back, the Delhi Tis Hazari court dismissed a petition seeking a ban on Swami Dayanand Saraswati’s ‘Satyarth Prakash’ for its criticism of Islam. In that instance, the court held that a book published more than 135 years back cannot be taken to be a threat to peace now.

In the case of Taslima Nasreen, FIRs were lodged against the Kannada newspaper Kannada Prabha’s publisher, the translator and Taslima herself for bringing a religion in disrespect and wilfully disturbing societal peace. Taslima anyways is controversy’s child. So, even at the time when she was physically attacked by MIM goons (including 3 MLAs) in Hyderabad in August, 2007, an FIR was lodged against her! The victim of a murderous attack!!

Then there is the ban on James Laine's, S'hivaji, Hindu King in Islamic India.' The book supposedly questions the legitimacy of Shivaji’s paternity and led to an attack on Pune’s Bhandarkar Institute. The ban followed the attack and was defended by the Maharashtra Government right till the Supreme Court after the Bombay High Court dismissed the ban. The court judgment anyways became immaterial as the book was withdrawn from print in India altogether.

The only common theme which we can notice in all cases of bans are that such restrictions have been imposed only where there have been riots / demonstrations and / or damage to public property. Hence, protests against Hussain, which have been by and large peaceful and primarily restricted to legal and internet forum battles, have not seen any injunction against Hussain. At the same time, any book, cartoon or utterance, which can drive Muslims to paroxysms of rage, have been censored or banned. It is not the Islamists alone who are prone to get offended. The supposedly liberal Gandhian dispensation was apoplectic with the reception received by ‘Mee Nathuram Godse Boltoy’ and did not rest till the play was banned by the ‘Gandhi-murderer-organization (RSS) associate, the then Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee’.

However, the ban on Mee Nathuram…, should not blind us to the fact that in spite of their protests where any person questioning Gandhi is not deemed patriotic enough (recollect the avalanche of rage when KS Sudarshan of RSS declared Gandhi to be a noble soul, but not the Father of the Nation), criticism of Gandhi and Nehru are considered acceptable even in today’s dangerously divided India. In fact, that ban becomes all the more sad when we remember that Supreme Court had, in 1969, stuck down a ban on Gandhi-hatya Ani Mee (Gandhi-assassination and I), by Gopal Vinayak Godse, brother of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin Nathuram Godse, even while accepting that the book did indeed glorify the murderers of Gandhi.

What is more worrisome is the growing tendency of the State to yield to hooliganism, particularly of the minority variety. It does not seem to take more than a few minutes for a couple of thousand of Muslims to assemble anywhere at anytime of the day and demonstrate against the numerous injustices being meted out on them. Only this demonstration is not peaceful and is always accompanies by riots, stoning, damage to public property and grievous injury (often fatal) to a few innocent bystanders. So, a caring Government and a judiciary, which wants to maintain public peace at all costs, is willing to abdicate its duty of being the enforcer of law, and succumbs to their demands. The same scenario being repeated, be it Mau, Azamgarh, Miraj, Burhanpur, Sangli, Murshidabad or Hyderabad. Lest it be assumed that this tendency is limited to Muslims alone, we must not ignore the fact that rising intolerance has become the mark of public discourse even in other communities. Remember the ban on the movie Da Vinci Code in Andhra Pradesh and some North Eastern states, when Indian States became probably the only governmental entities in the world to have banned the movie? That ban followed Government's fear that protests by hurt Christians could create a law and order problem. Punjab was rocked by violent protests against the attire of Dera Saccha Sauda's Ram Rahim for days altogether. Only last month, some alphabet book published in distant Mizoram became the crux of protest of Xtian hooligans in Punjab again, leading to arrest of the author and publisher of the book. No National newspaper has reported anything on the arrest of these hooligans who destroyed public property, so we can safely assume that none happened!

All along, we had been made to believe that while the lower courts judged on the facts of the case, the higher courts judged on provisions of the laws relating to the case. Sadly, that seems to be slowly getting diluted in cases where there seems to be a risk of violence by any affected party.  In this book's case, there weren't even any protests, merely the fear that there might be riots. I have not read the book and so don' t really know if it is actually offensive. Bhasin's book is supposedly based on analysis of Islamic scriptures. Logically, one would expect a scholarly rebuttal based on facts and not a blanket ban. I wonder if militant Hindutva votaries should take a leaf of their Islamic counterparts and be more aggressive and damaging in their protests. Should it start with Wendy Doniger's Hindus, An Alternative History?

Saving Ourselves

After many years and Crores of rupees spent on cleaning the Ganga, all to without any avail, we have yet another spectacle of the BJP Government in Uttarakhand launching a Save Ganga campaign. Quite a noble initiative, one would say. After all, aren’t rivers the life blood of our country? And doesn’t the Ganga occupy the highest pedestal of them all? Moreover, with environmental consciousness being the newest ‘cool’ fad amongst Indian elite, isn’t it time that we should all stop dumping plastic bags in the river and save it from drying up?

Of course, yes! Answers to each of these questions would be in the affirmative. Sadly, saving the river is much more that stopping sewage or dumping of sundry dead bodies. Coming from the BJP Government, which only a couple of days back has decided to oppose the Central GoM decision not to go ahead with construction of dams in the 155 kms stretch of Bhagirathi, this Save Ganga campaign seems to be as meaningful as Nitin Gadkari’s song at the BJP National Convention at Indore. As more and more hydrologists are now accepting, setting up of sewage treatment plants to save rivers are akin to administering distilled water before it is administered to a dead body; a dead body because a river without water is dead. Period.

Over the last century, we as a Nation has failed Nature which made the Indian Subcontinent among the most fertile, productive and populous regions of the world. Dams after dams on rivers crisscrossed with ill conceived canals have ensured that even the supposedly perennial rivers get reduced to a rivulet like trickle for most of the year. A dam building western model, simply duplicated without study of its applicability in the Indian context, has ensured that within a few years, dams get silted up, never achieve even half of their power generation or irrigation capacity and finally, fail to achieve its target of flood alleviation. Nothing can be more potent a symbol of this rot than the Hirakud on river Mahanadi. This dam was ostensibly constructed for protection of deltaic Orissa from floods. Now, the dam management has to flood Orissa to save the dam!

Coming back to the Ganga, the river as we know, is an amalgam of many streams and rivers, of which, some like the Yamuna are even mightier than the Ganga when it actually merges with the latter at Prayag. The primary stream, which flows from Gangotri and before it, from Gaumukh, is the Bhagirathi and it is the same Bhagirathi which carries the name of Ganga throughout its journey in the Indian heartland.  Most importantly, the BJP wallahs whose hearts seem to beat so strongly for the Ganga, want not 1 but 3 dams to come up over Bhagirathi, effectively killing the river and by extension Ganga. 

Unfortunately, killing the Ganga does not seem to be an obsession with the BJP alone. Since the times of British, when canals were built to divert water from the Ganga, more and more projects on the river have meant that there is lesser and lesser water in the river. A river, which sustained river trade, lakhs of fishermen and multiple civilizations has been left gasping for the element which makes it a river in the first place. What good would a save river campaign do when there would be no river to protect?

Unfortunately, like most other issues of public domain, environmental concerns in India have been hijacked by extremists, one of the breast beating variety, and the other and more dangerous ilk (for they are the power wielders), of everything-is-fine variety.

What is more confounding is that both these varieties come together when India is ‘pitted’ against the ‘imperial’ west, aka, India’s persistence with the per capita emission standards. While it can be argued that the Hagen summit was doomed to fail on account of the developed world’s intransigence on bearing the cost of cleaning up of their mess, more shameful has been India’s assertion of its right to pollute, based on the per-capita emission figures. Again, while India may not be found wanting in legal speak, the morality and truth behind such a position needs a definite enquiry. Rather than seeking refuge behind its destitute millions, India should pause and think of a developed country whose land, air and water is even half as poisoned as India or a country whose forests, rivers and mountains have faced so much denudation as ours. The fact remains that these destitute millions, who allow India to shamelessly ask for a Right to pollute are the ones who demand the least of Natural resources. I dare say that the carbon emission rates of our consuming classes would be at rates which would put even the much maligned Americans to shame.

More inexplicable is people’s reluctance to accept that the climate is changing. It doesn’t require one to be a greybeard today to proclaim that the summers are hotter, days hotter, nights warmer, and rains shorter than what they were even 10-15 years back. Flowers and fruits bloom out of season and what comes is always more severe than its predecessor. Our surroundings have changed. The common house sparrow has been replaced by the pigeon and mynah without even our realizing it. The weaver bird, the tailor bird, the parrot, the bulbul, the crane and the sarus seem headed only to our illustration books. Squirrel population has boomed and we have many more monkeys around. But what about other mammals? The udbilav, the mongoose or even the rabbit? We haven’t realised it probably but we have lost Spring. For a land which chronicled six seasons, we have been left with three, a very long summer, a short winter and a short season of rains. But who cares? Our culture, which was so intricately entwined with nature has moved on. For a people who worship trees, mountains, rivers, animals and birds, we seem to display little sensitivity even in instances where the land may be as sacred as Braj or the river as sacred as the Ganga.

Last year’s drought is still fresh in my memory. Indicators for this year have been far from cheerful with absolutely no rainfall in North India in either February or March. Even thinking of a consecutive year of drought sends shivers down my spines. In spite of myself, I cannot but go back to those hymns of the Rig Veda which talk of the 12 year drought, which caused erasure of all knowledge from Earth. We survived that period though at a great cost. Wonder if we have that much of time today?

Let us just remember that we will not be doing Gangaa favour by not throwing polybags in its waters.

Please bring Hussain back

It seems that the barefoot painter has been conferred Qatari citizenship which he has accepted. Reactions to this news have been almost predictable. Copious tears are being shed by his supporters who again proclaim that this is another proof of how the liberal space in India has shrunk. On the other hand, the ‘moving-to-center’ Sangh Parivar has actually said that it ‘welcomes’ Hussain as an Indian citizen.

Leaving aside polemics, firstly, taking up or not taking up an alternate citizenship is Hussain’s personal choice. So many people around the world give up their native citizenships and accept that of other countries; Hussain is just one among them. So, why this brouhaha over an individual act? Anyways, for people who are proud of Hussain, citizenship does not matter for they themselves are ‘citizens of the world’ (as if there existed such a thing). More importantly, as Indians, we have a habit of embracing as our very own, any celebrity around the world, who has had the remotest Indian connection, be it a VS Naipaul or a Bobby Jindal. Compared to them, Hussain is much more an Indian, having taken birth and lived much of his life in India. His citizenship is incidental then. Taking an alternate perspective, he has been away from the country for long, in effect, not having any material connection with India. So, if this de facto state is changed to a de jure state, then what exactly is the problem?

Coming to the more serious point which should merit our attention, i.e., muzzling of artistic freedom in India which led the country to ‘lose’ its ‘jewel’. Hussain has been accused of deliberately hurting religious sentiments of a vast segment of Hindus though his blasphemous depiction of Hindu Goddesses. As a result, by various estimates, more than 900 cases stand lodged against him in various courts across the country. For the record, Hussain has not attended a single court hearing and has, on the contrary, taken refuge from law, in the welcoming confines of a co-religionist Nation.

Why do a vast section of Hindus believe that Hussain has offended their religious sensibilities? It is because he has depicted Mother Goddess manifestations in vulgar and hitherto unknown scenarios. So, a painting titled ‘Sita’ has a naked female figure rubbing her clitoris on the tail of a monkey. Another painting titled ‘Durga’has another naked female figure copulating with a predatory cat. How exactly can these paintings solely be taken as secular expression of an artist’s instincts is beyond me. People who proclaim that these paintings are only a continuation of our Khajuraho traditions, are either ignorant of what those temple sculptures contain or are completely ignorant of Hindu (read Indian) traditions.

Firstly, Khajuraho and Konark are only exceptions among thousands of Indian temples. Secondly, by liberal estimates, around 10% of total sculptures belong to the genre of erotica, the rest being devoted to more mundane aspects of a householder’s life or depictions of tales of Gods and Goddesses. Thirdly and most importantly, those sculptures which provide gist to the ‘liberal’ arguments, depict courtesans, demi gods and celestial nymphs; all the categories of which, in Indic traditions, are supposed to be libertine. Nowhere would you find a heretical depiction of God or the Mother Divine even remotely in the way which Hussain has depicted. Fourthly and let it be as loud as the final trumpet…as per the liberals themselves, times have changed so we must look ahead and mould ourselves to changing times; a noble and acceptable sentiment indeed. However, applying the same principles, India is not India of 1200 years back and the benchmarks for acceptance have changed. Centuries of Islamic and Christian rule in India has imprinted in a more conservative form of sexual morality and imagery in the psyche of the people and for an overwhelming multitude of Indians, even fresh Khajuraho or Konark like sculptures or even paintings would be sacrilegious; forget about permitting truly blasphemous ‘artistic expressions’. It is quite a commentary on the intellectual (?) dishonesty of this bunch, that it needs to use some artefact from that time as a certificate to further its arguments, when it  does not have time for the Indian past other than proclaiming it only to be an age of oppression and darkness.

Another point of defence for Hussain is that he knows his Ramayana better than many Indians and his depiction of Hindu Goddesses depict his love for Hindu traditions. At the risk of sounding repetitive, why is that that Hussain’s depiction of his own mother, revered figures from Islamic faith or even Blessed Teresa of Kolkata, are always shown is composed and compassionate situations, always fully covered from head to toe? Why is that that his love manifests in different forms for different religions?

Coming to the protests, what exactly have been the mode of protests? The more serious one has been attack on an exhibition which displayed his paintings. No one attacked or even attempted to attack him physically, nor have there been any attempted or real damage to his personal property (in spite of the canard being spread by his supporters). What have the people hurt by his paintings done? They have simply taken the route of decent law abiding citizens and lodged cases in courts, painfully aware that the Indian judicial system will not let them have justice. The way cases progress, it is very likely that Hussain will pass away before any of these courts bring him to justice.

What has been Hussain’s response? He left India for the cosy confines of another land. Till last year, he and his son would refute that he is in exile, pointing out that Hussain has been living in Dubai and London for years, only occasionally visiting India. However, why let go of any opportunity to demean Hindus who still hold on to their faith? So, his holiday sojourns have become forced exile.

Normally, people who leave their countries to escape the law are known as fugitives and it is any Government’s moral duty to ensure their extradition. Here we have a fugitive from law, who is being supported and feted by ‘liberals’ of all hues and the Government saying that it will provide protection to him. Protect him by all means. He should live and no harm should befall him, lest it gives more imaginary fodder to his supporters.

Certainly should a PIL be filed asking for his return to India. However, unlike Bhim Singh’s PIL asking for his feted return, a more apt one should be for a direction that he be brought back so that the court cases against him be expedited.

My Name is Khan

Now that the storm has passed and My Name is Khan (MNIK)’s collections have fallen very significantly, it will do good for us all to analyse the issue once again.

Getting the facts first:

• Shahrukh Khan, the co-owner of Kolkata Knight Riders lamented the absence of Pakistani cricket players from any of the IPL teams
• He further stated that Pakistan is a good, nay, a Great Neighbor to have. He was then honest enough to accept that his family comes from Pakistan and he still has his ties there
• Shiv Sena proclaimed these enunciations to be heresy and decided that MNIK would not be allowed to be screened in Mumbai and Rest of Maharashtra
• The State Government made massive security arrangements, rounding off more than 1,500 Shiv Sainiks and deployed around 23,000 securitymen to guard cinema halls
• The State Government withdrew security cover of some Sena MLAs and threatened withdrawal of the cover provided to the Sena President, Uddhav Thackeray
• Most cinema halls in Mumbai reported almost complete occupancy the weekend the movie was released
• Shiv Sena washed its hands off the matter berating the public for not being patriotic enough for watching the movie of a ‘traitor’ in droves
• The intelligentsia hailed the house full boards as Mumbai’s knockout reply to Sena
• The State Government was hailed for superb handling of the ‘bully’
• Reports suggest that the occupancy rates of the movie hover in the range of 30% now
• New reports suggest that all through the shenanigans, Shahrukh Khan and Karan Johar had maintained discreet contacts with Matoshree
• As per other reports, the movie is a colossal hit in Pakistan and Shahrukh’s stock has further risen in that country

Rather than going into conspiracy theories or speculating that the entire tamasha was an affair stage managed by the principal actors for their own gains, let us focus on the larger issue of an Individual’s Freedom to Speech and the State’s duty to protect it.

Here, we have the scenario of one of the leading lights of Hindi moviedom proclaiming his love for a State which has only given pains to India right from the time it was conceived in the minds of Rahmat Alis and Saiyyad Ahmad Khans of yore. This celebrity, who happens to be the co-owner of an IPL team himself, did not pick up any player from his beloved neighbor but lamented the collective action of all of the teams the next day. The movie in question is a bleeding heart testimonial to the goodness of the second largest religion of the world and discovers superhuman qualities in the hearts of a true believer. Well Well… to each man his own. As Indians, we are very accommodative to all who love our enemies. After all, our Communists did not become person-non-grata to our population inspite of their open and aggressive support of China during the Indo China war of 1962. Earlier still, Babasaheb’s Ambedkar support to the British Raj and his strong opposition to the freedom movement did not make him a traitor to the country. Then, we certainly should not grudge Shahrukh his sympathy to the Pakistanis or should we?
 

The problem here is not Shahrukh but hypocrisy of the intelligentsia. Shahrukh was simply speaking with a forked tongue when he expressed his anguish over non inclusion of Pak players in the IPL. Being the owner of a team, he could have very well recruited 4 people for his own team. Having not done that, he probably wanted to mollycoddle his Pakistani audience and hence the crocodile tears. However, Shahrukh, as an Indian citizen, was merely using the freedom provided by our Constitution in speaking his mind. Only, why should the intelligentsia troop to support a man who is only out to promote his business is beyond me. I wonder where exactly was this intelligentsia hiding when Kamal Rashid Khan’s movie ‘Deshbhakt’ on attack on North Indians in Mumbai was banned by the same State Government’s police to prevent ‘inflaming of passions’. Arguably, that movie was much more pertinent and just compared to some bleeding heart testimony to terrorists. Why was there no squeak of support for that movie, however badly made, on grounds of freedom of expression? Here, the State abdicated all its other responsibilities to ensure that a movie is screened when it was clearly a potential riot issue (as if that was the biggest issue in Maharashtra) and there, the state decided that another movie could be a law and order issue! Perhaps the other Khan lost out for he did not count the State’s high and mighty amongst his friends!

Coming to the more important issue of the need to separate art from politics or sports from politics, as our omniscient conscience keepers advised us…excuse me.. when exactly were arts or sports away from politics? Be it Sean Penn using the Oscar’s platform to make speeches for Gay rights or Arundhati Roy using her pen to peddle her thoughts, Celebrities have all along used and abused their status to push the political agenda they identify with. Closer home, Shabana Azmi and Mahesh Bhatt are now known more for their politics than for their art. And if Shahrukh was so keen to protect his movie from Sena’s backlash, why did he need to open his moth on issues which do not concern him. Be it defending Shoaib Malik’s apologies to Muslims worldwide after Pakistan’s defeat in the T20 World Cup Finals or his wearing his Islamic identity on his sleeve, Shahrukh has made it a point to be in the limelight as much as possible.  If anyone fights for a cause, one cannot logically be away from its repercussions. Boycott of celebrities and products which they promote is a part of the game. Who can forget the way Anita Bryant’s sensational singing career went into a tailspin ultimately leading to her bankruptcy, in face of resolute campaign by gay rights groups. Anita’s fault was merely having taken the lead in organizing the ‘Save our Families’ campaign in opposition to militant gay rights activism.

Coming to Sports, India was on the forefront of boycott of South Africa for its apartheid policies refusing to play the Nation for atrocities it was committing on its own people, i.e., actually meddling in some other sovereign country’s affairs. The same cheerleaders of that boycott want India to constantly engage with a country which has killed and maimed thousands of our countrymen!!! And if sports is indeed separate from politics, why is it that sportspersons are considered ambassadors of a Nation or why is that National sentiments over-ride sporting mores when teams don National colors on the field? Why is it that sportspersons wear black bands while playing or the triumphs of Jesse Owens and Muhammad Alis of the world were seen as potent political statements? Or, why are sportspersons pulled to make statements in political campaigns?

What is particularly galling is the tendency of Shahrukh to proclaim from rooftops that his father was a freedom fighter and so he cannot be a traitor. Who exactly is his father and why is it that that inspite of his protestations, we are yet to know anything about him? It does not take much for anyone to proclaim anything. There were a lot of instances where people jailed for petty crimes during the British Raj’s fag end claimed to be in jail for fighting for India’s freedom. For all we know, if the Senior Khan did go to jail ever for something remotely related to Nation building, it could be very well as a Muslim League member, demonstrating in support of Pakistan. We don’t count Mohammad Ali Jinnah or Liaquat Ali Khan as India’s freedom fighter, do we? Finally, one’s lineage alone does not determine the course of life for others. Quite a few of the ULFA terrorists have come from exalted families of freedom fighters. That did not or has not prevented them from running a war against the Indian Nation. This is not to insinuate that Shahrukh has the welfare of any other Nation at the cost of the Indian Nation in mind, but the logic presented by him can be as illogical as possible.

While violence and force cannot be condoned, boycott is a very legitimate form of protest, be it against publicity seekers or those who actually stand for a cause. It is a shame that our intelligentsia have been unable to find more reasonable causes to defend.