Author: B. Raman
Publication: Outlook
Date: April 11, 2005
URL: http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20050411&fname=raman&sid=2&pn=1
Those who are vigorous in their
denunciation of the human rights of the Christian and Muslim minorities
in India remain muted on the Bush Administration's policies in Iraq and
the serious violations of the human rights of the Iraqi Muslims by the
American troops. Who is devious, mischievous and motivated?
Apropos the comments on my article,
Hidden Persuaders, I wish to state the following:
Aziz Hanifa, the well-infomed Washington
DC based correspondent of India Abroad, had contributed a report to his
weekly dated March 18, 2005, on the controversy over Narendra Modi's
then planned visit to the US. The report, which was carried by the weekly
under the title "US Unlikely To Stop Modi", stated inter alia as
follows:
"Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice is unlikely to bar Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi from entering
the country, senior State Department officials said. Rice was bombarded
with e-mails, letters and messages from secular, Christian and Islamic
groups protesting against Modi's visit at the invitation of the Asian American
Hotel Owners' Association. State Department officials told "India Abroad"
she was aware of the protests and concerns raised over Modi's visit
, but no decision has been made on denying him entry to the United States.
The officials said it was highly improbable that Modi, who reportedly
holds a ten-year multiple entry visa to the US, will be stopped at the
port of entry and turned back. The officials explained that there
is a provision of law to refuse visas to people, who have denied
religious freedom to people and it is possible it could apply
here, but we are not sure. But that is one thing we may be looking at."
Shortly thereafter, the announcement
about the rejection of Narendra Modi's application for a diplomatic
visa and the cancellation of the ordinary visa already issued to him before
the Gujarat riots was made. In response to my enquiries as to what went
wrong made with my Indian as well as American friends, I ascertained
that there were serious reservations in the US State Department over the
political wisdom of applying a 1998 law relating to the denial of
visa to those accused of violating religious freedom to Narendra Modi in
view of the role played by the BJP in strengthening India's relations
with the US..
Ultimately, the office of Dick Cheney,
the Vice-President, at the instance of some Christian organisations, intervened
and persuaded the State Department to apply the law to Narendra Modi
and deny him a visa. I was told by credible contacts that one John Prabhudoss
and his organisations were among those, who had successfully sought the
intervention of Cheney's office.
Till I received this information,
I had not heard of either John Prabhudoss or his organisations. On scrutinising
the reports sent by the Washington-based Indian journalists on the visa
denial, I came across the following reference in a despatch of March
23, 2005, sent by the Outlook correspondent in Washington DC, which was
carried in the Outlook online edition:.
"Tactically, enlisting Congressman
Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania, an evangelist with strong feelings about
the persecution of Christians, may just have tipped the scales in their
favour. It was easy to activate Pitts since he had first hand knowledge
of Gujarat. He had been there on a private visit last year and never stopped
talking about the persecution of Christians and Muslims. P.D. John who
leads the Federation of Indian American Christian Organizations of North
America (FIACONA) was walking the halls of the US Congress, reminding young
staffers of Gujarat 2002 and the arson in the Dangs. "
On further enquiries, I came to
know that P.D. John referred to in the Outlook report was identical
with John Prabhudoss. I was told he calls himself sometimes as John Prabhudoss
(when he went to Iraq after the US invasion and occupation, for example)
and sometimes as P.D.John (when he visited Gujarat after the riots in 2002,
for example) and that he wears two hats. It is also alleged that he uses
other aliases such as J.P. Doss. He is reportedly the Chairman, Governmental
Relations Committee of the Federation of Indian American Christian
Organizations of North America (FIACONA), Washington DC; and the Executive
Director of the Policy Institute for Religion and State (PIFRAS).
My enquiries and research also indicated
that both are Christian organisations and that, while the FIACONA
focusses on lobbying in Washington DC on the issue of the violations of
the rights of the religious minorities and the restrictions
on the right of the Christians to proselytize in India, the PIFRAS largely
concentrates on backing the Bush Administration's policy of promoting democracy
and good governance, particularly in the Islamic world. I came across the
texts of the reports prepared and disseminated by John Prabhudoss
on his visits to Iraq and noticed that most of the members of the delegation,
which he had taken to Iraq, were Christians.
My research and enquiries also indicated
that while he and his organisations have been very vocal in their
criticism of the violations of the human rights of the Christians and Muslims
in India, they have been muted on the violations of the human rights of
the Sunni Muslims of Iraq by the US troops, the alleged brutalities committed
by the US troops at the Abu Gharaib prison and the alleged massacre of
the Iraqi Sunnis, particularly at Falluja, by the US troops. Nor did I
find any activism by him and his organisations on the brutal violations
of the human rights of the Muslim detenus at the Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
If they have campaigned on these issues as vigorously as they have
campaigned on the issue of the violations of the human rights of the Muslims
and Christians in India, I would be glad to know the details and
would be only too happy to stand corrected.
My research also brought out his
acquaintance with and proximity to some of the political leaders
in Washington DC, who had played a role in the decision to deny a visa
to Narendra Modi.
After taking all these into consideration,
I wrote my article and stand by my assessment as given in that article.
Since March, 2002, I have written strongly against Narendra Modi and on
the massacre of Muslims in Gujarat. I have written equally strongly in
Indian and foreign media on the serious violations of the human rights
of the Muslims by American troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and in the Guantanamo
Bay detention camp. I find it difficult to accept the arguments and the
allegations against me of those in the community of Indian origin
in the USA, who are vigorous in their denunciation of the human rights
of the Christian and Muslim minorities in India and walk the lobbies
of the Congress almost every day on this issue, but prefer to remain muted
on the serious violations of the human rights of the Muslims by the American
troops so well documented by prestigious Human Rights organisations
such as the Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch.
In my view, this is because many
of those on whose support they rely for their campaigns relating to India,
are supporters of the Bush Administration's policies in Iraq. Who is devious,
mischievous and motivated? Me?
B. Raman is Additional Secretary
(retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, and, presently, Director,
Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Distinguished Fellow and Convenor,
Observer Research Foundation (ORF), Chennai Chapte
