The Backlash from Islamic World

 

The Backlash from Islamic World

There was a time when the Arab World and the Islamic countries looked with awe at Nehru’s India as a model of secular liberal democracy governing a diverse and plural society.  They knew that only Nehru could keep a multi- religious conglomeration, that is India, united and integrated, where all citizens were equal and lived with dignity.

 

The unmaking of Nehru’s India is very painful. The unprecedented backlash against India from the Islamic countries- cutting across continents- over the derogatory remarks made against Prophet Mahammad and the Islam by the BJP spokespersons- Nupur Sharma and Naveen Jindal-has tarnished India’s image abroad. This was bound to happen because of the manner in which the divisive communal politics is practiced in India under the Hindu right wing regime. The autocratic Islamic countries, governed by the extreme Islamic ideology, devoid of democracy and the rule of law, had the temerity to lecture India- the largest democracy- on religious tolerance and the treatment of Muslim community, which constitutes 15 percent of India’s population- the second largest Muslim population in the world after Indonesia.  

 

The dangerous divisive rhetoric and police actions that would have been rare a few years ago have become a regular feature. The silence of the Centre has promoted the relentless aggressiveness of the Hindu Right wing elements. Bulldozing houses, slapping sedition charges on critics and university teachers and students, evicting hawkers selling non-vegetarian food, creating controversies out of halal meat and namaz venues, mandir-masjid flashpoints- all these have been encouraging signs for TV and social media right-wing loudmouths. Nupur Sharma’s and Naveen Jindal’s’ offensive comments against Islam are the product of this ecosystem. The BJP leaders Amit Shah, Yogi Adityanath, Anurag Thakur and Sadhvi Pragya, among others, have set the anti-Muslim rhetoric in their public utterances at various times.  Even Narendra Modi chose to ignore the concerns of intellectuals and retired bureaucrats and discredit by labeling them as ‘Khan Market Gang’ and ’Tukde-Tukde Gang’.  

 

The rabble-rousing elements of the ruling party are responsible for inviting strong reaction from the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and disgracing India.  The 57-member OIC called upon the UN to take measures to address the practices targeting Muslims in India: “These abuses come in the context of the escalation of hatred and abuse of Islam in India and in the context of the systematic practices against Muslims and restrictions on them….and demolition of Muslim property, in addition to the increase in violence against them.” And in an unusual reaction Grand Mufti of Oman called upon all Muslims to ‘rise as one nation’.  Former Indian Ambassador to the Gulf countries, Talmiz Ahmed says, "In the past, incidents of communal hate and violence were seen as part of India’s domestic politics…when an incident such as the Babri Masjid demolition took place, there was faith that India remained committed to a democratic and plural order but now there is a feeling that this aspect of India’s commitment has changed.” The demolition of Babri Masjid is no longer considered an aberration of secular India.

  

The domestic politics has bearing on foreign policy.  The attempt to distinguish between the domestic vote bank politics of invoking communal sentiment and hatred against the Muslims community, while at the same time projecting abroad India as a liberal democracy committed to fundamental rights and the rule of law, has come to haunt the Modi government, following the backlash from the Islamic countries, including the Taliban Afghanistan.  The secular India is risking being seen as a country turning towards majoritarianism, with national security implications. As Prashant Jha points out, “Narendra Modi has carved out his domestic legacy and paid his debt to his ideological roots… created a political and electoral climate where politics of secularism was buried. This, political design, which excluded Muslims, created both an ideological cover and political incentive for bigotry…What has been a recipe for electoral success is now a political and strategic albatross around India’s neck” (HT 8/6).

 

India’s relationship with global civil society is strained. The world media is skeptical of India’s democratic story.  In the best universities abroad, it is hard to find scholars of repute across anthropology, political science, history, law and humanities, who are not critical of India’s current trajectory. Even in West Asian countries, some sections of the Indian diaspora, wedded to the idea of pluralism and diversity, minority rights and representation, are   unable to relate to India’s current political orientation. Professor Happymon Jacob, Jawaharlal Nehru University, says, “when bilateral relationships carefully built over decades by professional diplomats start getting undermined by communal politics and electoral calculations, hate speech can no longer be dismissed as ’our internal matter’: it becomes a matter of national interest” And “ when extremism or communalism is increasingly viewed as being treated by the ruling party, and it boils over into spaces outside the borders, even without any material ,manifestation, it is bound to have foreign policy consequences”(The Hindu 9/6).

 

The Indian media, particularly the TV media-has played in mainstreaming hate speech and divisive nationalism. The television mainstreamed the fringe by bringing it into drawing rooms. Day in day out non-issues being hyped up to set a narrative, with the newsrooms ending up parroting the fringe because that is what gets them eyeballs. It is a narrative that insults not only the intelligence of the Indian public, but also the very ethos of Indian republic.     

 

Let us hope the backlash from the Islamic world would change the divisive communal political discourse of the current regime in India.