Author: Francois Gautier
Publication: Rediff on Net
Date: April 30, 2001
URL: http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/apr/30franc.htm
The West seems to have suddenly
woken up to Muslim fundamentalism in South Asia when the Taleban demolished
the Bamiyan statues, in spite of frantic appeals from all over the world.
But there is a bit of hypocrisy in the outrage triggered by this destruction.
Firstly, Islam is very clear about
statues: didn't Prophet Mohammad break the first stone Gods himself? Thereafter,
it became a holy duty for all good Muslims. Firuz Shah Tughlak (1351-1388),
who has an avenue named after him in New Delhi, wrote: 'On the day of a
Hindu festival, I went there myself, ordered the executions of all the
leaders and practitioners of this abomination; I destroyed their idols
and temples to build mosques in their places.' As Belgian historian Konraad
Elst points out, 'Muslim fanatics are merely faithful executors of Quranic
injunctions. It is not the Muslims who are guilty, but Islam.' Thus, the
Taleban, who want to restore the early purity of Islam, really thought
they were performing a righteous act by destroying the 'heathen' Buddhist
statues.
Secondly, does the West ever protest
when Hindu temples are destroyed periodically in Bangladesh and Pakistan?
The HRCBM, a Santa Clara-based organisation that investigates and exposes
human rights violations in Bangladesh, has recorded a few outrages against
Hindus in Bangladesh during 2000:
On March 29, 2000, Malarani Roy
of Karagola village was abducted by Muslims. She was brutally beaten up
and gang-raped. The local police found her, but refused to register a case.
On June 26, a group of Muslims directed Smriti Rani Saha of Sirajganj town
to migrate to India. When she refused, she was abducted, gang-raped and
brutally murdered. On May 28, Debasish Saha of Poradaha was fatally shot
by a Muslim gang. On June 4, Mayaram Tripura of Balipara was shot dead
by local Muslims. On October 6, 2000, Muslim devotees, after offering namaaz
at the Gajipur Jama Masjid, strolled across to the Hindu Kali temple, destroyed
the puja pandal, smashed the idols, and looted nearby Hindu-owned shops.
Take a look at the figures of the
Hindu population of India's Muslims neighbours: in 1941, in what would
become Pakistan, there were approximately 25 per cent Hindus and 30 per
cent in what would later become Bangladesh; in 1948, only 17 per cent in
Pakistan and 25 per cent in Bangladesh; in 1991, a bare 1.5 per cent remained
in Pakistan and less than 10 per cent in Bangladesh.
Thirdly, the West has not yet realised
that for the Muslims of South Asia, Hindus are kafirs by excellence: the
Buddhists adore only Buddha, the Christians only Jesus, but Hindus worship
a million gods and goddesses; and that makes them -- even today -- the
number one enemy of Islam. This is why Kashmir is so important: it is not
about territory, it is about a holy war against Hindu India that has been
going on for 15 centuries and it is only the first step of the encirclement
of India by hostile Muslim neighbours: Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
with soft nations, like Nepal, often lending them a helping hand.
Nothing symbolises more the absoluteness
of Muslim belligerence towards Hindus than the Hindu Kush. Historically,
the passes across the Hindu Kush have been of great military significance,
providing access to the northern plains of India to foreign invaders, starting
from Alexander the Great in 327 BC, to Taimurlane in 1398 AD, and from
Mahmud of Ghazni, in 1001 AD, to Nadar Shah in 1739 AD.
As noted by Srinandan Vyas on the
Hindu.org web site: 'In Persian, the word "Kush" is derived from the verb
Kushtar -- to slaughter or carnage, because all Hindus living there were
slaughtered. Encyclopaedia Americana says of Hindu Kush: The name means
literally "Kills the Hindu," a reminder of the days when Hindu slaves from
Indian subcontinent died in harsh Afghan mountains while being transported
to Moslem courts of Central Asia. While Encyclopaedia Britannica mentions
that the name Hindu Kush first appears in 1333 AD in the writings of Ibn
Battutah, the medieval Berber traveller, who said the name meant "Hindu
Killer," a meaning still given by Afghan mountain dwellers who are traditional
enemies of Hindus.'
'Unlike the Jewish holocaust,' writes
again Vyas, 'the exact toll of the Hindu genocide suggested by the name
Hindu Kush is not available. However the number is easily likely to be
in millions.' A few known historical figures can be used to justify this
estimate. Encyclopaedia Britannica recalls that in December 1398 AD, Taimurlane
ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle for
Delhi; likewise, the number of captives butchered by Taimurlane's army
was about 100,000 .
Encyclopaedia Britannica again mentions
that Mughal emperor Akbar 'ordered the massacre of about 30,000 captured
Rajput Hindus on February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod, a number
confirmed by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian.' Afghan historian Khondamir
records that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of Herat
in western Afghanistan, which used to be part of the Hindu Shahiya kingdoms
'1,500,000 residents perished.'
Why does not the Government of India
tell Indian children about the Hindu Kush genocide? The horrors of the
Jewish Holocaust are taught not only at schools in Israel and USA, but
also in Germany. Because both Germany and Israel consider the Jewish Holocaust
a 'dark chapter' in history. Yet, in 1982, the National Council of Educational
Research and Training issued a directive for the rewriting of school texts.
Among other things it stipulated that: 'characterisation of the medieval
period as a time of conflict between Hindus and Moslems is forbidden.'
Thus denial of history, or negationism, has become India's official 'educational'
policy.
It is high time that the West realises
that India is fighting a lonely battle against Muslim fundamentalism in
Asia. The French for one, who have a definite problem with Muslim terrorism,
should support India more openly.