Author: K.N. Pandit
Publication: VijayVaani.com
Date: October 4, 2008
URL: http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=157
Nine Muslim organizations held a protest in
the capital recently, slamming Congress for victimizing Muslims who they claim
are innocent. The protest was evoked by Delhi police investigations into this
month's Delhi bomb blasts.
The phenomenon of protesting against security
forces and police conducting enquiries in the light of clues obtained through
investigating agencies is being increasingly communalized and politicized
at various levels. The trend was first set two decades ago by the Kashmir
Islamic insurgency, in which case people came out in multitudes to protest
the arrest of a suspected collaborator with insurgents or their conduits.
The media would jump into the fray and click shots that highlighted so-called
victimization.
In the case of Jamia Nagar investigations
and the rounding up of two students of Jamia Millia, no less a person than
the Vice Chancellor has come out in open support of the students alleged to
have links with the Delhi bombers. He has offered financial support towards
the legal defence of the arrested students.
It is important to note that the Jamia students
would normally receive legal assistance under the law. The Vice Chancellor
had no compulsion to join the issue unless he wanted to be in the limelight
for some reason. Moreover, though a central university is an autonomous body,
it has to go by norms set by the funding agency; UGC does not recommend its
grants be used for the defence of alleged criminals.
The Union HRD minister, more loyal than the
king, has given a clean chit to the Jamia Vice Chancellor. Another cabinet
minister has hinted that the government is considering a ban on some Hindu
organizations like Bajrang Dal and RSS. This is UPA's secular balancing. Yet
only a few days before the HRD Minister patted the Jamia Vice Chancellor for
his stand, the Prime Minister's Office had issued a missive to the Union HRD
Minister to rein in the Jamia Vice Chancellor.
Kashmiri leader Mufti Muhammad Sayeed, patron
of the Peoples Democratic Party, has warned the Prime Minister of a dangerous
situation developing in the country, in which the Muslim community is subjected
to discrimination and defamation. It is not his first open threat. In the
early 1990s, when armed insurgency erupted in Kashmir and the political process
was derailed, Mufti found a new constituency in Azamgarh to fight elections
for a seat in Parliament. With the sordid story of Azamgarh as a hotbed of
Islamic radicalism and terrorism now coming out, one can easily understand
Mufti's commitment when he was taken as Home Minister in the V.P. Singh government.
With extended links between Muslim youth of
Azamgarh working in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries and known anti-national
elements back home, it is not unusual to see Muslims of the region rise in
protest against punitive measures by government to curb crime. Nobody says
all Muslims are terrorists: nobody says all Muslims are anti-nationals and
subscribe to the concept of Islamic Caliphate from Turkey to Indonesia. Nobody
believes Islam preaches violence. But why are only Muslims involved in bomb
blasts and terrorist activities in this country? A satisfactory answer has
to be produced to this question.
Either there is dichotomy in what ordinary
Muslims preach and practice or there is a revolt within Islamic society in
which the use of terror is made a legitimized instrument. That terrorists
are using Muslim localities and houses as hideouts, that they are using Muslim
students and others as informers and conduits, that terrorists seek shelter
in Muslim ghettos after they execute a terrorist attack, raises questions.
When community elders believe that police
pick up innocent youth and a protest against this has to be made, have not
they the responsibility to issue instructions to the community not to give
shelter to terrorists if they are Muslims; not to assist their subversive
schemes and conspiracies, not to provide logistical support. Should not suspected
terrorists and their accomplices be isolated and made social outcasts (tark-i-mawalat)?
Islam is a religion of immense social reach.
Historically speaking, Muslims always show greatest regard to the ulema and
learned theologians. They are the pathfinders. Hence the ulema and learned
men have a responsibility to step forward and stop aberrations which let terrorism
make a dent among sections of Muslim youth. Islamic terror cannot be eradicated
by a state on its own; civil society has to play a role to normalize civil
life and inter-community relations.
The Deoband fatwa against terrorism has been
hailed as a positive move by all nationalist forces. But the writ of the ulema
that should run in the length and breadth of the country appears to be lost.
It has not stemmed the tide of terrorist subversion. Indian Muslims need to
take stock of this situation and not let people get the impression that its
anti-terrorism decree is hollow or that it is helpless before the radicalized
mentality. Whatever the case, it cannot absolve itself of responsibility at
this juncture.
There is another aspect to the issue. Instead
of joining hands to protest lawful police investigation process, instead of
creating a confrontational situation, Muslim elders should have constituted
mohalla committees in each Muslim locality to undertake house-to-house checks
to flush out terrorists and anti-national elements, if any. Security personnel
should have no difficulty in contacting locality elders and receiving briefs
from them. Community involvement will reduce pressure on security forces and
in the process no innocent person would be victimized.
Indian Muslims are faced with the same situation
that faces contemporary Pakistani civil society with the difference that Indian
Muslims have tasted and even drawn mileage from a well-entrenched democratic
and secular arrangement. They have not only become crucial to other political
parties, but have floated their candidates directly and won many seats in
Assemblies and Parliament. They cannot afford to disregard the democratic
option.
The writer is former Director, Centre of Central
Asian Studies, Kashmir University
