Author: Balbir K Punj
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: May 9, 2002
The famous poet from Kerala, Kamala
Surayya, formerly Madhavikutty - aka Kamala Das - recently celebrated her
70th birthday. Kamala Das's embracing of Islam in December 1999 had kicked
off a string of comments and controversy. Yet nobody questioned her inalienable
right to choose a religion. But let's look at the other face of the picture.
Had Kamala Das been born a Muslim and chosen to convert to Hinduism, how
would have the pseudo-secularists of India reacted? What would have been
the response of her co-religionists?
It is time the secularists examined
their conscience and explained why they hold religious freedom to be a
one-way street. In all Muslim countries, from Morocco to Malaysia, conversion
to other religion (even those enjoined by Quran like Judaism and Christianity)
is met with death penalty. But conversion to Islam from other faiths is
welcomed with drumbeats and trumpets.
In the wake of 9-11, several scholarly
treatises have hit the market that claim Islam is a tolerant faith, and
that large conglomerations of non-Muslims have lived peacefully under the
Islamic Turkish Ottoman Empire in the Middle Ages. But if freedom to choose
one's religion is the litmus test of tolerance, what prevents Muslim majority
countries to accord it to their citizens? It is not just the denial of
the right to convert to other faith. Most of them deny the non-Muslim communities
to observe their own festivals in public.
If you are in a Wahabi Arabic country
like Saudi Arabia, Qatar or Libya, you cannot celebrate Diwali in public.
In Saudi Arabia, freedom of religion simply does not exist. Even the American
soldiers - Christians and Jews - deployed in Saudi Arabia since 1991 at
KSA's own request, can't visibly wear a Cross or Star of David around their
necks. We in India are indeed proud to be different from such theocratic
states.
These thoughts come to us as we
listen to the secular harangue on how the minorities are treated in India
and how they ought to be treated. Even a cursory examination will show
that India has one of the most liberal constitutions in this regard. While
communal clashes do occur, the scare scenario raised by some pseudo-secularists
is wholly unjustified.
After 50 years of Independence,
the most important minority community, that of Muslims, has increased its
strength from 50 million to over 150 million. In congested urban settlements,
where people belonging to different communities are packed cheek by jowl,
any silly incident is enough to create a communal conflagration. The role
of some criminal elements in these incidents cannot be ruled out.
For instance, the 1992 Mumbai riots
were the result of a mix-up between Islamic fundamentalism and gangsters,
some of whom are facing trial now. No one is a saint when a riot breaks
out. Those who accuse the BJP Government in Gujarat of inaction might as
well turn around and ask what the Congress regime of Delhi was doing in
1984, when mobs led by its party leaders unleashed an orchestrated orgy
of violence against the Sikhs.
Ultimately, it is not the law and
the Constitution that would enforce peace - these are only enabling institutions.
Peace can only be secured by an attitude and spirit of accommodation between
the communities. This is precisely what the RSS said recently at Bangalore,
leading to a storm in the secular tea cup. The question arises, Who are
the people interested in creating divisions among Indians rather than seeking
peace and accommodation?
Incidents that affect peace and
harmony in the country have, on investigation, revealed the existence of
a foreign hand behind them. Also there has been a dubious role played by
some of our own self-proclaimed secularists. The systematic attempts made,
first in Punjab and then Jammu & Kashmir, to target Hindu families
and massacre them (including killings of Amarnath pilgrims), were meant
to sow seeds of disruption in the country. Remember how Deendar Anjuman
was working at the instance of ISI to disturb communal amity and defame
the Sangh parivar till it was exposed by the Karnataka Police (a Congress-ruled
State). Also recall the support SIMI was able to get from "secular" parties
and media after it was banned. If the Gujarat violence is not viewed in
this context, we would be guilty of ignoring an important facet.
Our pseudo-secularists are playing
into the hands of outside forces by painting a frightening picture of India
as a country where people are being killed daily. These very people had
no tears to shed when the victims were Hindus in J&K and elsewhere.
One such "champion of minorities" (with whom I share my birthday) is John
Dayal, secretary general of All India Christian Council. At a conference
in Jaipur on March 31 last, he advocated that the present Minority Commission
be disbanded and reconstituted over its inefficiency to castigate the majority
community in Gujarat.
Ever since some clashes occurred
between Hindus and Christians in Gujarat three years ago, Mr Dayal has
been taking his complaints against the BJP and RSS everywhere - even into
the US Congress. Perhaps he believes that American marines will land in
Gujarat to protect the Christians or even take over the country. He forgets
that there are large groups of Christians of different sects in Kerala,
Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Karnataka, who have had no occasion to complain
even though the "bad Sangh Parivar" is very much present there. He holds
the BJP directly responsible even for Staines's murder in Orissa, which,
at the time of the incident, was a Congress-ruled State.
Mr Dayal is critical of the recent
"dialogue process" between the RSS and Christian groups. He says it gives
"credibility to the RSS". He does not understand that the RSS, a 77-year-old
august organisation with membership running into millions, does not require
any credibility certificate from anyone. The Government banned the organisation
twice but each time the authorities had to eat a humble pie and rescind
the order. Nor does the RSS need the credibility of the "Western world"
that he speaks about. Mr Dayal, on the other hand, should tell us how much
credibility his group needs from the "Western world" from where most of
the funds come for the purpose of conversion programmes, that spread malicious
propaganda against India and its ancient civilisation.
One thing that this "Western world"
did in the year 2000 was to seek to establish hundreds of thousands of
churches in the country under the Millennium programme. Mr Dayal is fond
of organising inter-faith harmony meetings. But he should ask his fund
providers whether this was not provocative for communal harmony? Christians
constitute around 2.43 per cent of the population and there are vast areas
where there are few Christians. What are the churches for in areas where
there are no Christians? The obvious answer is to fuel communal disharmony
in that area with attempts to "create Christians".
If such is the credibility of collaboration
with "Western world", it raises hackles of all those who believe in civil
society. Christians in India are true patriots. But if a section of the
Church continues to looks to the "Western world" for support, funds and
inspiration rather than to the Indian Constitution - and their fellow citizens
- questions are bound to arise. In line with a section of Muslims, some
Christian groups too are seeking to widen the cultural gap between Hindus
and Christians. The real threat to our secular fabric comes from such elements.
(The author is a BJP MP and can
be contacted at ethtv2@id.eth.net)
