The Indian Muslim

The Indian Muslim
The Asian Age India | Seema Mustafa

Well known American journalist Selig Harrison was in town recently, and particularly interested in finding out why the Indian Muslim had not been lured by the "jihadi" movement.

He was too polite to say it bluntly, but the question really was: how is it that the Indian Muslim has not become a terrorist? I had just the duration of a lunch to attempt to answer this question, that can only be dealt with in a book, if at all, but I must say that the question has been asked by many other visitors and Delhi based diplomats who appear very intrigued by the ability of the Indian Muslim to stay out of the "movement" as it were.

Harrison's questions were pertinent and to the point, and definitely made one think deeply about what we here take as granted, but what others in the rest of the world find very significant and interesting. And particularly those who have been travelling through West and South Asia and find that despite its large mix of castes and religions, India remains largely peaceful from within.

Terrorism continues to be exported into the country, and does not have a support base at any level. Intelligence agencies are now the first to admit that the sleeper cells of the Pakistan sponsored terrorist groups, be it the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, the Hizbul, the Harkat or the Jaish-e-Mohammad, are functioning largely in isolation and have not been able to rein in the Indian Muslims despite relentless efforts.

Why? How is it that the Indian Muslim has remained outside the "war" that has taken grip of West Asia, and what the West likes to describe as the Islamic world. There are any number of reasons, but because of limited space I will restrict the column to two broad heads: historical and political.

Historians, of course, will take us back several centuries and with reason, but as a student of political science, I will trace back the political genesis of what the world is admiring as a "phenomenon," to the freedom movement. The Congress struggle against British rule was unique, to put it simply, as it was not exclusive in nature and made a conscious effort to involve all sections of society and in particular the Muslims. The result was that despite the Muslim League that managed the partition of India, a majority of Muslims were brought into the Congress-led struggle for independence and developed, even before the birth of this nation, major stakes in its future.

At the time, the Muslims along with all other sections, rallied under the leadership of secular leaders like Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, and learnt from the onset not to look for a Muslim leadership to represent their cause. Those who believed in a separate homeland, and an Islamic nation, left for Pakistan with the majority of Muslims staying back to weave their destiny with that of India.

The promises made then were inspiring, and the decision by Maharaja Hari Singh to bring Jammu and Kashmir into the Indian fold came as a major boost for the secular forces seeking to make India a secular, democratic polity, and not a Hindu rashtra. The Indian Muslims at that time embraced Jammu and Kashmir as a symbol of secularism (and an endorsement of their decision to stay back in India), and this is one of the reasons why even today the major resistance to Pakistan's claim over Jammu and Kashmir comes from the Muslims in India. The ability of the national leaders to make the freedom struggle inclusive, and not exclusive, is a major historical reason why the Indian Muslims felt involved and in command of their future.

The decision to make India a democratic, secular polity is the other major reason as the story would have been very different if Nehru and Gandhi had succumbed to pressure at the time and declared it a Hindu rashtra. The Indian Constitution embodied the spirit of the freedom struggle, and convinced the minorities that their participation had not been in vain, as every citizen of India was protected, and given equal rights including the freedom to worship and follow their own personal laws. The state was enshrined in the Constitution as a secular entity, with not a word in the document that could be even vaguely interpreted as being discriminatory in nature. This was in itself a major achievement for a country torn apart by partition and communal violence, a testimony to honest intent and a vision for India that spelt security for the minorities.

In practice, there have been aberrations, but despite the Gujarats and the Narendra Modis, the Muslims in India have been assured of their right to vote, and of a say in the democratic process. This is the one singular political reason why the Indian Muslim has never been tempted to take law into his own hands. Under the law � even if not always in practice as the Dalits know better than the minorities � everyone is equal, and this in itself is a major accomplishment in a region where the law of the land discriminates against its own people. The state has tried to grapple with the problems of reality, through direct action. The ballot box remains the source through which anger and frustration can be translated into a change in government. And the sanctity of the vote in India remains undiluted. As it has moved mountains that appeared invincible, over and over again.

The Indian Muslim has of course had to bear many crosses, and these are not just of ghettoisation and poverty. To some degree these ills afflict other sections of Indian society, with the Dalits in particular feeling the discrimination worse than the minorities. But the communal riots do leave a sense of deep insecurity, the taunts of being pro-Pakistan continue to haunt the Muslims, the partisan approach of the administration and in particular the police force leaves scars that do not always fade but deepen with experience. Fortunately, the anger that was growing particularly in the generations born after Independence, has been contained to a great deal by the regional parties that have been able to understand and accommodate this in states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar by addressing the minorities directly through a more sensitive and responsive administration than that provided by political parties like the Congress. The BJP of course, would like to create mayhem and where in power � Gujarat and Rajasthan in particular � has been pursuing distinctly anti-minority policies.

The third political reason is one that is not always mentioned, but has perhaps contributed the most in making the minorities feel they belong and are not alone. And that is the attitude of the majority of non-Muslims in this country, who rarely hesitate to rise to the occasion to demonstrate the true meaning of secularism. If a BJP government rushes to arrest an innocent Muslim journalist describing him as a terrorist, his case is fought not by Muslims, but by non-Muslims who carry on a relentless campaign and eventually secure his release. If a government arrests innocent lecturers as terrorists, again the court case is fought by non-Muslims who work through the night to secure justice. If a Narendra Modi kills thousands of Muslims in Gujarat, it is not the Muslim bodies but the secular NGOs who rush in to provide relief and succour, to file cases in court, and to defy threats to their own lives as they work to bring justice to the victims.

It must be pointed out here that terrorism has little to do with Islam and more to do with the Muslims who have established theocratic states, suppressed democracy, taken away their rights, and indulged in the worst kind of oppression to keep themselves in power. As Sudanese leader Hasan Turabi has been saying for a long while now, if democracy is brought to these Arab lands, terrorism will disappear. If people have a stake in their own government, freedom to determine their future, and equal rights under the law, there will be no need for this misplaced jihad, and violence and terrorism. The West is better not because it is Christian, but because it had the education and the leadership to usher in democracy as the favoured form of government. West Asia was colonised and exploited, with the Palestinians having to pay for the Holocaust, and the region having to pay for despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia.

The Indian Muslim should not be treated as an exception. He is the rule, if the climate is right. Place a man in a storm and he will emerge with all the weapons necessary to protect himself. He will kill if he is told that that will bring him peace. Place a man in a soft breeze and under a shining sky, he will plant flowers and sing lullabies. India's founding fathers discovered the right climate (although the Sangh is trying hard to convert it into a storm).

http://www.asianage.com/?INA=2:175:175:200511
© 2005 The Asian Age