By Amar Singh
The Rajindar Sachar Committee’s report on the social, economic and educational status of the Muslim community in India struck a blow to the Congress’ democratic and secularist assertions made over the decades. It lays out the actual conditions the Muslim minority faces and how it lags behind in terms of human development indicators.
It reports that only a small percentage of them are in government service and involved in areas of socio-political life.
The community has been reduced to a sort of political working capital in the hands of the big political parties. According to the report, Muslims need assistance at all levels. They face deprivation in terms of habitation facilities, access to bank credit and also political decision-making power.
Since Independence, India has seen many commissions and committees constituted to resolve the problems of the minorities, especially Muslims. The Ram Sahay Commission on Muslim weavers, the Srikrishna Commission and the Gopal Singh Commission were formed during Congress governments, but their reports are gathering dust. Such moves constitute nothing but political stunts with empty promises for the vulnerable minority. It is obvious that the Sachar Committee report will meet the same fate.
But this is the first commission to have studied the roots of the problems the Muslim community is facing and what the government has done for it in the last 50 years. Ghettoisation and insecurity have grown among Muslims after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992. As a result, the percentage of Muslim children attending school and university has significantly gone down.
The follow-up on the report has taken on political hues, with the Congress using it as a tool to woo the minorities and the BJP raising concerns over the figures mentioned in it. But what has the Congress done for the minorities during all these years? It claims to be a champion of secularism but has used the term only as a euphemism to appease Muslims and secure their votes.
The Sachar report should be an eye-opener for big political parties like the Congress and the BJP, which are using the Muslim issue as a device of vote-bank politics.
After Independence and during Congress rule, there was talk of a classified circular which directed that no Muslim be appointed to senior-level positions in the defence forces. The Congress had created such a stir for a long period of time so that Muslims would be forced to leave India. Further, an imprudent game was played by the communal forces during Jawaharlal Nehru’s rule with the clandestine support of the administration and the police. This continued for almost 30 years, creating fear and anxiety among the minorities. The communal clashes that took thousands of human lives and destroyed property worth crores of rupees were the consequences of this game. The Congress appointed commission after commission to investigate the communal riots, but none of the big perpetrators has been convicted.
Instead of punishing the culprits, the police and the administration invariably prosecuted the innocent Muslim victims. The fear and anxiety this caused, and the cavalier approach of the government, resulted in low levels of progress among Muslims in education and commerce. During a span of 50 years, the entire community has been pushed into a vacuum of illiteracy and unemployment.
The fervour of backward class politics of the Congress waned in the wake of the Mandal and Mandir issues. Now it is seeking to widen its base while leading a coalition government. It has moved for other backward classes quota in higher educational institutions and talked of reservation for Muslims.
The Congress’ efforts for the progress of the minorities have been proved hollow, particularly in the Hindi heartland. On the contrary, the smaller parties, including the Samajwadi Party, the Telugu Desam Party and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, and the Left parties, have brought several benefits to Muslims. The SP has time and again asked for affirmative action on the basis of the Sachar Committee report. They should be encouraged to participate in the process of economic growth. The report is a revolutionary step to uplift the minorities in India, and if the Government of India implements its recommendations, that will boost India’s secular democracy.
It is to be seen how sincerely and resolutely the United Progressive Alliance government will pursue the agenda it has laid out. Should the findings be put in deep freeze, leaving the secular and vibrant democratic future of India in a disastrous state? According to the Director of the Centre for Policy Research, Professor Pratap Bhanu Mehta, the report not only reflects the poor human index of Indian Muslims but indicates the vacuum of Indian governance. It points to the poor development of infrastructure facilities such as electricity and telecommunications services in areas of Muslim habitation. Muslims are not represented enough in the civil services, in banks, in other public sector undertakings, in the judiciary and in the agencies involved with national security tasks. The Central government needs to coordinate with State governments to pool resources and formulate such policies as would help translate their developmental regression into progress.
The Sachar Committee has suggested that a commission examine the livelihood problems faced by Muslims. But apart from instituting a committee of experts, the Congress has made no substantive effort in this direction. Proper representation of the minorities, especially Muslims, in the police and defence forces will prove to be a morale-booster for them in terms of their safety and security issues, but this has not been looked into. As per the committee’s recommendation, the Congress government has promised to open schools, training institutes and banks, provide free education up to the age of 14 and create infrastructure in areas populated by Muslims. But that promise now lies in cyberspace.
The report mentions that representation for the Muslim community to the same order as the percentage of Muslims in the population of the country is found only in one place: in jails. The fact that this is true can be seen now in Congress-ruled States such as Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. Many innocent Muslim youth of Mumbai and Hyderabad are in jail only on the basis of suspicion. There is hardly any effort being made by the respective governments to provide them legal aid.
In the context of the report, the Congress is trying to play the role of a messiah for Muslims. These represent nothing but tokenism. The Action Taken Report on the Sachar Committee report is but a post-dated cheque. As ever, the Congress wants to use Muslims as a vote bank. It is not really bothered of their rights or their welfare.
There are many areas where work needs to be done for the growth and development of the Muslim community, such as the provision of basic infrastructure facilities in education, health, road and drinking water, employment generation, safety, promotion of the Urdu language, modernisation of madrassa education and the separation of politics from community development.
In the present situation, the SP strives to continue the efforts it has undertaken to work for the minorities and the downtrodden. The party stands for the empowerment of the poor, the minorities, and the marginalised sections that were the worst victims of exploitation due to the lopsided policies pursued by successive governments at the Centre. Muslims want to live a respectable life without any political prejudice. They know how to carry themselves in the present conditions and how to uplift themselves and grow. The government has to support them in different spheres of activity.
The SP wants the implementation of the Sachar Committee report in toto. A high-power expert committee representing all political parties should be constituted to look into the implementation of the recommendations.
[Amar Singh is general secretary of the Samajwadi Party. He wrote this article from a hospital in Singapore while undergoing treatment. The article was published in The Hindu dated August 17, 2009]
8/19/2009 04:00:00 PM |
Filed under
Featured,
Focus,
Issues
|
Read More »
On Islam and Gender Equality
By Yoginder Sikand
Salbiah Ahmad is a trained civil and shariah Malay woman lawyer. She practiced for several years in Singapore and taught briefly at the International Islamic University, Kuala Lumpur. Involved with human rights issues for over two decades, she writes for a range of Malaysian and international newspapers and websites.
Critical Thoughts on Islam, Rights and Freedom in Malaysia is a collection of Ahmads essays published over the years on the Malaysian activist website www.malaysiakini.com. A major focus of the book is a critique of patriarchal interpretations of Islam and an articulation of what could be called a gender-sensitive Islamic theology (kalam) and jurisprudence (fiqh). In this way, Ahmad seeks to provide an Islamically-grounded argument for gender equality. This she does for broadly two reasons: as a strategy to develop consensus on womens rights, speaking in an Islamic language in order present gender justice as Islamically acceptable, even mandated, to believing Muslims; and as a reflection of her own personal religious consciousness and conviction as a Muslim woman.
Ahmad believes that in a Muslim-majority country like Malaysia, working for gender justice from within an Islamic paradigm is indispensable, since public discourse is heavily conditioned by Islam, a phenomenon that gender activists can ignore at their own peril. To do so would render them irrelevant to most Muslims, and lay them open to the charge of being irreligious and of allegedly undermining Islam. There is thus an urgent need to enter the realm of Islamic discourse and seek to promote gender-justice using appropriate Islamic arguments. At the same time, Ahmad suggests, this strategy is not a substitute for secular human rights activism for gender justice. Rather than seeing the two approaches as necessarily mutually exclusive, she argues for a synergy through which they can work together in tandem for common goals, considering them to be options depending on the situation at hand.
Interestingly, Ahmad does not claim to be an Islamic feminist (Feminism is not my new religion, she says), but acknowledges that it has shaped her understanding of Muslim womens oppression, providing a lens through which to critique unequal, and what she regards as un-Quranic, power relations between Muslim men and women. She disagrees with Muslims who see feminism as an attempt to discredit Islam or who interpret it as standing for enmity between men and women and as a Western conspiracy to undermine Muslim society and culture.
Ahmad arrogates to herself the right to ijtihad, unencumbered by the opinions of the classical ulema. Like the others, she approaches the Quran directly, bypassing the tradition of fiqh as well as the Hadith, because these two latter sources of kalam and fiqh contain numerous prescriptions and views that militate against her understanding of gender relations, some of which have been manufactured precisely in order to justify womens subordination. She does not regard the Quran as a closed text, whose interpretation has been frozen, settled once and for all, at some distant moment in the past. Rather, she sees it and the Sunnah as what she calls works in movement, that, like all other texts, can be, and indeed, have been, interpreted in diverse ways. Rather than being a limitation, she suggests, this is actually a blessing in that in this way these fundamental sources of Islam are able to maintain their continuing relevance across space and time, providing guidance, in terms mainly of broad principles, that can suit changing socio-historical contexts. In this way, she is able to argue for her own interpretation of the sources that contradicts, in numerous ways, the dominant male Muslim discourse.
Ahmad argues that the basis of gender equality is contained in the Quran itself. The Quran, she says, treats men and women in exactly the same way. The Prophet Muhammad expressed this principle by declaring, Humans are equal as the teeth of a comb. This, and the upholding of the inherent dignity and integrity of every human person, must be, Ahmad says, the starting point of Quranic exegesis or tafsir. This exegesis must also be continuously informed by a contextually-sensitive of public interest or maslaha, which also includes gender-justice, which is one of the fundamental aims (maqasid) of the shariah.
In approaching the Quran, Ahmad suggests, one must also keep in mind that while the Quran represents the Absolute Truth to Muslims, it is impossible for human beings to gain a perfect, authoritative or absolute understanding of it. This is because the Divine revelation has to be interpreted by human beings, who, by their nature, are limited creatures and are influenced by their own social circumstances. Hence, it is inevitable that exegesis of the revelation can never be perfect. Since, traditionally, most Muslim exegetes have been men, heirs to a long-standing tradition of patriarchy, their understandings of the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet have not escaped the fact of their gender and their patriarchal biases. This, Ahmad therefore argues, calls for a more gender-sensitive understanding of the Quran, in order not just to highlight womens concerns and perspectives but also to attempt to be more true to the intention of the Quran itself. Hence, Ahmad suggests, the need for Muslim women to study the text themselves directly, without relying on the tradition of patriarchal exegesis, and through the lens of adl or justice and balance, a fundamental principle of the Quran, which also includes justice between the genders.
The ontological equality of men and women in the eyes of God is something that is explicitly mentioned in the Quran. At the same time, however, there are verses in the text that could be interpreted to argue for different rights, roles and responsibilities of men and women, some of which have been interpreted by most Muslim male exegetes as legitmising what Ahmad sees as womens subordination. Ahmad claims that interpretations of the Quran (and Sunnah) that unfairly privilege males over their wives are tantamount to a violation of tawhid, the oneness of God, the very basic principle of Islam, that requires submission to God alone.
Ahmads way to reconcile these verses with what she regards as the mandate of gender justice is by calling for a critical distinction between verses that relate to the huquq Allah or rights of God (that pertain to matters between the individual and God, principally worship or ibadat), and those verses that relate to the rights of persons or huquq ul ibad, which include social affairs and relations (muamilat). She claims that while the former are unchangeable, the latter can change, particularly in order to uphold the Quranic mandate of justice. She evokes what she calls a powerful idea in the juristic notion that all matters in relation to rights of man or humankind is (sic.) the subject matter of muamalat (transactions) and thus negotiable. Curiously, she leaves unmentioned the source for this undoubtedly contestable claim, which not many traditional Muslim scholars would accept, for they would argue that any verse that is specifically mentioned in the Quran cannot be considered to be negotiable.
On the basis of her claim that Quranic verses that deal with muamilat can be changed or negotiated, if the changed context so demands in order to remain true to the Quranic principle of justicea claim for which she does not adduce any substantial evidence from within the Quran itselfAhmad argues for a change in certain rules regarding legal relating to women, claiming that traditional understandings of these verses have lost their relevance in todays context or that they do not properly reflect the intention of the Quran as she reads it.
One such contentious issue relates to women working out of their homes for a wage. The traditional fuqaha or Muslim jurisprudents allowed for this in only very extreme circumstances, but today in Malaysia Muslim women are to be found working in all sectors of the economy. Indeed, in many Malay families it is the wife that is the main bread-earner, and their families cannot manage with their income. Furthermore, Malay women are probably better educated, on the whole, than their men folk, as evidenced, for instance, by the fact that they outnumber Malay men in universities across the country. Given this, Ahmad argues, dominant notions of headship (qawwam) of the family need to be critiqued. Most male Muslim scholars rely on the following Quranic commandment to justify the claim that the family must remain under the authority of the husband:
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means (Quran 4:34).
Ahmad engages in her own exegesis of this verse, departing considerably from the dominant male-centric interpretation. She argues that the verse does not stipulate that all males are guardians or are preferred to or superior to or are responsible for all women. It is true, she writes, that in some circumstances, some men are financially responsible for some women, as the verse indicates, but in other contexts, such as with the case of many Malaysian families today, some women may be financially responsible for some men and also for their children. This indicates, she says, that the rule that men are solely responsible for the maintenance of women is not valid universally. Engaging in a contextual reading of the verse, she argues that the notion of males as guardians over females, owing, in part to the latter being financially dependent on the former, was a product of the particular spatio-temporal context in which the Quran was revealed and which it directly addressed. Since the context has vastly changed today, she says, the notion need not be consider binding any longer. It is a cultural assumption, geared to a particular historical context, not a religious assumption that is valid for all contexts. Further, she argues, the assumption of male supremacy underlying dominant interpretations of qawwam as reflected in, for instance, traditional fiqh as well as in shariah law as it is officially administered in Malaysia, fails to reflect what she regards as the Qurans intention that marriage should be characterized by companionship and compassion between the spouses, without any element of hierarchy.
Ahmad engages in a similar contextual exegesis on the question of Muslim womens dress. Since the 1970s, as a result of the influence of various dakwah or Islamic movements, growing numbers of Malay women have taken to what is widely seen as Islamic dress, including the tudong or head-covering. Some even wear gloves and stockings and a few cover their entire face, too. Women not wearing what is regarded as Islamic dress are often looked down upon Westernised and as not truly Islamic. Interestingly, no such prejudices apply to Muslim mens dress. As in many other Muslim contexts, Islamic dress for women has become a symbol for Muslim community identity in Malaysia.
Ahmad critiques the notion of a single, prescribed Islamic dress, one that must be imposed on women even against their will. What Islam says about womens dress, she says, is always mediated by humans and is mostly gendered. Further, she writes, Muslim women should be allowed to choose what to wear on their own free will, for, she quotes the Quran as saying, Let there be no compulsion in religion (Quran 2:256). She claims that the purpose of the Quran in advising women to wear a cloak (jilbab) was not to conceal them, but, rather, to render them visible, hence recognizable, as a way to protect women, and in order to distinguish them from slave-women, who were routinely subjected to sexual abuse in pre-Islamic times. Ahmad argues that the notion that Muslim women alone must bear the responsibility of maintaining and publicly expressing Islamic identity by wearing Islamic dress is deeply problematic. This is something that must be shared by both males and females alike. She critiques those who insist that Islamic dress for women is essential in order to preserve their modesty for not applying the same standards with regard to the need for Muslim males, too, to preserve their modesty through appropriate sartorial codes. Further, while she does not appear to argue against the notion of modest dress, whether for women or men, Ahmad points out that the widely-held assumption that seventh century Arabian dress is alone what is Islamic is deeply problematic.
Ahmad argues that numerous laws in effect in Malaysia (and other countries) today that negatively impact on Muslim women are a product of traditional fiqh, which was largely a male product. Critiquing the tendency to equate fiqh, or what can be called the historical shariah, with the Divine shariah, she suggests that fiqh, being a human construct, a product of human reflection or ijtihad on the Quran and the Sunnah, can err. If it violates the basic aim of the Quran, which is justice, it can, indeed must, be suitably modified. The fuqaha of the fiqh schools were products of their own age, and it was inevitable that their opinions were influenced by the cultural, social, economic and political conditions of their times, including the fact of deep-rooted patriarchy. Some of them even changed their opinions on particular matters in the face of changed circumstances, thus suggesting that fiqh is not something stagnant, but, rather, can change as a result of changed conditions and demands. In order that fiqh respond creatively to the modern context, therefore, it is necessary to re-think fiqh in todays context, keeping in mind the vast transformations in gender relations, womens educational and economic status and the compelling need for gender justice and equity.
Not unexpectedly, Ahmad is bitterly critical of political and religious authorities who defend the application of several traditional fiqh prescriptions in the matter of family laws in the name of the shariah that, in her view, circumscribe, and even negate, what she regards as the Quranic stress on gender justice and equality. In this regard, Ahmad berates these authorities for turning down proposals to include marital rape as a punishable crime, accept women as shariah court judges, remove gender-biased clauses in the hudud laws, remove the male monopoly on declaring divorce, amend laws that require wives to submit to their husbands sexual demands against their will and maintenance on being arbitrarily accused of being disobedient to their husbands, arguing that their stance represents a blind adherence to traditional fiqh, a human and historical product, in the name of upholding the Divine shariah. She notes with dismay that because of this unwarranted conflation between fiqh and shariah or Islam itself, any voicing of criticism of fiqh can easily be branded as heresy, and even as apostasy, a punishable crime in many Muslim-majority countries. This thus is one of the biggest challenges facing the womens movement in Muslim countries, she suggests.
While she reluctantly notes certain positive legislation in this regard that has sought to improve Muslim womens legal status in several countries, she argues that the reform has not gone far enough. Once reason for this is because of methodological narrowness, with such reform being limited largely to borrowing from other Sunni jurisprudential schools in certain matters, which is hardly the paradigm shift in the notion of rights that she advocates. What she asks for is something much wider, not just in terms of substantive law, but, more than that, in legal methodology that would produce what she regards as a contextually-relevant gender-based fiqh , a product of a gender-sensitive Quranic exegesis, guided by the underlying notions of equality and justice in the Quran as well as by feminist theory.
Ahmad recognises that the gender-sensitive tafsir and fiqh that she calls for will not be easily accepted by traditionalist ulema as well as doctrinaire Islamists, who, finding these contrary to their understandings of the Islamic sources, may well consider them heretical. This is an issue related to the fundamental question of Islamic religious authority. Traditionalist ulema claim to have the sole authority to interpret Islam, but, Ahmad argues, Islam does not have any room for a priestly class that can monopolise religious interpretation and authority. Being human beings, the ulema, too, are liable to err and are not, in any way, infallible. Ahmad appears to controversially suggest that, contrary to what most traditional ulema would argue, every Muslim, male or female, has the right to interpret Islam based on a reasonably good understanding of its sources. One succeeds on sound grounds, not on ones calling, she says in this regard.
[Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Social Policy at the National Law School, Bangalore. He can be contacted on ysikand@yahoo.com]
8/19/2009 03:41:00 PM |
Filed under
Issues,
Women
|
Read More »
“Why have Indian Muslims, most whom seem well-educated and demonstrate sound judgment on all other matters under the sun, suddenly lose sight of their bearings (and manners) when it comes to attacking all things Pakistani, be it the country’s politics, culture, food or fashion. Why are they hell-bent on defying common sense when it comes to writing off a whole country as being a terrorist hub?” This statement from a Dubai-based Pakistani writer Rabia Alavi whose half of extended family are Indians, is really shocking indeed. I don’t know how this shameless Pakistani woman gathered the gumption to dub We, Indian Muslims, as nonsensical and the ones who are ‘hell-bent on defying common sense when it comes to writing off a whole country as being a terrorist hub’. I just wonder why doesn’t this Pakistani writer – who is seemingly possessed with a squint and blinkered vision – see to it that it is Pakistan which is in fact proving to be no less than a terrorist hub when it comes to attacking all things Indian. My dear Ms. Rabia Alavi have you forgotten the 26/11 Mumbai attacks which claimed several Indian lives irrespective of the religions these martyrs belonged to. Which country did these ‘Islamic heroes’ nay ruthless inhuman killers belonged to? Can you deny that these ‘Jihadis’ did not belong to Pakistan? Your Pakistani government has itself publicly acknowledged that these goons hailed from Pakistan, whom it firstly tried to portray as non-state actors. Are YOU a MUSLIM or not? Are the rulers of Pakistan MUSLIMS or not? Does Islam ask to settle political scores by slaughtering human beings whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims? Is this what is JIHAD you Pakistanis call or think so? What kind of Islam are you Pakistanis propagating? You Pakistanis first of all need to get lessons regarding the true teachings of Islam. We, Indian Muslims, really don’t need to take lessons from you all. Your kind of Islam has miserably failed you all no ends, and Pakistan, which was formed in the name of Islam, is fast approaching to don the status of a failed state. Just cite me a single reason as to why We, Indian Muslims, shouldn’t acknowledge and proclaim Pakistan as a terrorist hub.
I simply look askance when Rabia Alavi daringly asks: “But why do Indian Muslims trouble themselves with Pakistan’s worries anyway? Don’t they have enough of their own? Need I remind them how uncomfortable their minority status is for them? Are they not second-class citizens in their own country? Are they not troubled by the countless assaults on the country’s minorities, the destruction of Babri Masjid or the slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat? Don’t they worry about the Modis and Sadhvi Pragyas of their country?” This is simply ridiculous. For your kind knowledge Ms. Rabia Alavi, We, Indian Muslims, don’t ever care about Pakistan or its worries. But, isn’t it a fact that Pakistan is constantly after us trying to create troubles whenever it’s possible. And, 26/11 Mumbai attacks is just another add on in its long list of crimes. Rabia would do well to at least acknowledge the fact that We, Indian Muslims, never sought help from Pakistan or any other country for that matter to take care of our problems. We, Indian Muslims, are ourselves strong and capable enough to tackle our own problems whenever need be. I don’t buy your theory that We, Indian Muslims, are second-class citizens in our own country. Let me state that We, Indian Muslims, are thankful to the Almighty Allah and our country’s system of governance that we exercise our democratic rights on our own free will without any sort of coercion or favour whatsoever. Whenever need be We, Indian Muslims, have changed governments at the Centre and in the states that failed to deliver either in terms of development or providing security to lives of people. Yes, I do acknowledge that communal riots did take place. But, these are now becoming things of the past. Rabia, but what about democracy in Pakistan. Just see how the Pakistani Generals trample your democratic rights at their own free will. It is pitiable that even after 60 years of independence you all are struggling to let democracy prevail in Pakistan in true sense of the term. Isn't it a sorry state of affairs for your beleaguered country? Don't you have your own problems? What about Jiye Sindh movement, Mohajirs and NWFP? Aren't these grave problems for Pakistan which it has squarely failed to handle? What about Pakistani Muslims who are being slaughtered daily by Talibani jihadists. Aren’t you seeing this? Don’t you have the courage to take these Talibani jihadis head on. I know you are meek and a coward. You won’t even dare to write or talk about the tribals in North West Frontier Province of your country Pakistan. If you ever dare to do so, well you know your fate? DEATH at the hands of NWFP Talibani jihadis! Ms. Rabia, I'm sorry to state that YOU are not a real Pakistani as you are writing sitting pretty well ensconced in secure confines in Dubai. And, just look at me. I'm writing my comments sitting in my own homeland. Just look how much guts you possess and what I possess. This is enough to prove that I'm not a second-class citizen, while I just feel sorry about your status at this critical juncture which your country is presently in.
Ms. Rabia Alavi, do you know that the foundations of the so-called Islamic Republic of Pakistan was laid by an aristocrat Mohammad Ali Jinnah, who wasn't concerned with Islam at all except being a namesake Muslim. By the way, don’t you know that fact that Your Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah profoundly enjoyed alcohol, never entered a prayer hall or Masjid except for his marriage with Zoroastrian Rutten Bai. Jinnah loved consuming pork flesh and extracted its soup. Don’t you know that consuming pork and alcohol are forbidden in Islam? And, You still revere this Pork eating and wine consuming Mohammad Ali Jinnah – Your GREAT Quaid-e-Azam!! Please don’t take my comments as otherwise. I suppose this is what you really asked for while initiating needless debate regarding actions of Indian Muslims vis-à-vis Pakistani Muslims.
Present below is the Opinion of Dubai-based Pakistani writer Rabia Alavi and my comments above. The writer charges that Indian Muslims are hell-bent on portraying Pakistan as a terrorist hub. However, the entire world is now witness for what really Pakistan stands for. This Opinion was published in the Khaleej Times on 1 March 2009. This Opinion is being published for the benefit of my readers. – Danish Ahmad Khan
The Problem With Indian Muslims
By Rabia Alavi
I try to steer away from the politics of India-Pakistan debates, partly for the reason that even though I am a Pakistani, half of my extended family is Indian, and they were part of the value system that taught me the rights and wrongs of life as I was growing up.
But I also refuse to indulge in these discussions where eventually you find yourself taking sides, because I cannot do away with a country that has much in common with mine – historical roots, cultural similarities and a language that is widely spoken and understood by the people of both countries, to name just a few.
Unfortunately, in the two years that I was watching my son grow out of diapers, a new generation of Indians has emerged — a generation that has forced me to take sides, albeit unwillingly. And while this generation has nothing to do with age, sadly, it does with creed. Yes, I direct my complaint towards Indian Muslims — a part of the Indian society that should be bound to Pakistan by ties of a common religion, to say the least.
Why have Indian Muslims, most whom seem well-educated and demonstrate sound judgment on all other matters under the sun, suddenly lose sight of their bearings (and manners) when it comes to attacking all things Pakistani, be it the country’s politics, culture, food or fashion. Why are they hell-bent on defying common sense when it comes to writing off a whole country as being a terrorist hub?
What used to be friendly bantering during India versus Pakistan cricket matches is not so friendly any more. What were merely funny punches about Lollywood’s efforts to imitate Bollywood are also beginning to hurt. These may be trivial examples, but the bottom line is, there seem to be serious efforts on the part of the Indian Muslims to hurt and incite Pakistanis into making emotional outbursts. They can then go about saying what an intolerant bunch those Pakistanis are.
Indian Muslims may rant and rave about what emotional fools Pakistanis are, or how they lack tolerance for other cultures or religions, while Indian Muslims get by quite amicably as a minority of 13.4 per cent (officially) in a country that is predominantly Hindu.
But let’s not forget that if it were not for Partition, this sweeping judgment would target them too. And while we are on the subject of tolerance, I must add that Indian Muslims can often not even bring themselves to be polite to their Pakistani counterparts. One has to wonder if this is just cold-shouldering of a people they dislike, or outright hatred that makes them not want to even look at their Pakistani counterparts.
Pakistanis might be more emotionally-charged when it comes to attacks on their country’s sovereignty and what not. But given the state of things in their country — a government that cannot prevent foreign attacks on its soil, a society that is practically illiterate and willing to believe just about anything that insurgents, liberals or the government want them to believe, and an economy on the verge of collapse – can you blame them?
Pakistanis don’t have answers to many of the questions that Indians, or anyone else, for that matter, ask of them. But don’t Indians know that already?
Why ask the Pakistanis, if not to hurt, and convince them that they are part of a failed nation. Even those Pakistanis who are resilient enough not to have given up on their country in these worrisome times are faced with constant reminders by their Indian brethren that they lack a future back in their country.
But why do Indian Muslims trouble themselves with Pakistan’s worries anyway? Don’t they have enough of their own? Need I remind them how uncomfortable their minority status is for them? Are they not second-class citizens in their own country? Are they not troubled by the countless assaults on the country’s minorities, the destruction of Babri Masjid or the slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat? Don’t they worry about the Modis and Sadhvi Pragyas of their country?
Understandably, actions committed in the name if all Indians are not actually condoned by any secular Indians, no matter what religion. In fact, they are a shame for those who see India’s secularism as a respect for all religions. But is India really that secular? This might not be the right piece to debate that question. But it certainly seems that the reason why Indian Muslims are on the constant lookout for one mistake that we Pakistanis make so they can pounce on us and cry ‘foul’ is that they are insecure. Not only does that put them on the defensive, to the extent of being paranoid, it also makes them shun a people who they could have been close to, had the circumstances been different.
And this is no thanks to the Indian media, which prides itself for being liberal and open-minded, oh, and supportive of the minorities.
Again, debating whether it is as all-embracing of the actions of minorities as it claims to be might be a question to be answered on another forum. I do wonder though why Indian Muslims have to be an extra bit smarter, a little bit more qualified, and a bit more Indian to ensure that their country is behind them at all times.
Let me not digress from my real concern in my hurry to find plausible explanations for the otherwise (excuse the word) spiteful attitude of many Indian Muslims towards their Pakistani counterparts. And that is a persistent worry that the bad side is winning in this battle of hearts.
And by that I mean those with vested interests, namely the people in power in both India and Pakistan who have always tried to drive a wedge between the people of the two countries.
When people like me, who grew up with such a fine mix of Indians and Pakistanis that I did not know the difference between the two, has to end up throwing her weight to a particular side, we are definitely losing. And it is up to us to decide if we want to give up on friends, family and relationships built over long periods of time only because they belong to the other side of the border.
(Courtesy: Khaleej Times)
3/23/2009 01:40:00 PM |
Filed under
Featured,
Focus,
India,
Issues,
Terrorism
|
Read More »
By Danish Ahmad Khan
India’s Election Commission has finally announced the dates for 2009 Lok Sabha elections. The parliamentary election this time round promises to throw up significant elements of surprises which is bound to change the very grammar of politics in the country. The elections come at a time when neighbouring countries have already undergone revolutionary changes. In Nepal, a popular revolt brought Maoists into power overthrowing the 250-year-old monarchy and subsequent loss of the status of world’s only Hindu kingdom. In Bangladesh, Awami League’s Sheikh Hasina Wajed came to power after securing landslide win in recent parliamentary elections.
The formation of Central Government largely depends on the number of seats political parties win in at least two key states – Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. In Bihar, Lok Sabha elections will be conducted in four phases spread over 40 constituencies. The notification for the first phase will be issued on March 23; last date of filing nomination papers will be March 30; scrutiny of nomination papers on March 31; last date for withdrawal of nomination papers will be April 2; and voting will take place on April 16. The first phase of polls will be conducted in constituencies namely Gopalganj, Siwan, Maharajganj, Saran, Ara, Buxar, Sasaram, Karakat, Jehanabad, Aurangabad, Gaya, Nawada and Jamui. The notification for the second phase will be issued on March 28; last date of filing nomination papers is April 4; scrutiny of nomination papers will be on April 6; last date of withdrawing nomination papers April 8; and voting will be held on April 23. The constituencies to go for voting in the second phase includes Valmikinagar, West Champaran, East Champaran, Sheohar, Sitamarhi, Madhubani, Jhanjharpur, Darbhanga, Muzaffarpur, Vaishali, Hajipur, Ujiyarpur and Samastipur. For the third phase, the notification will be issued on April 2; last date of filing nomination papers April 9; scrutiny of nomination papers will be done on April 11; last date of withdrawal of nominations April 13; and voting will take place on April 30. The constituencies going to polls for the third phase are Supaul, Araria, Kishanganj, Katihar, Purnia, Madhepura, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bhagalpur, Banka and Munger. The notification for the fourth and last phase in Bihar will be issued on April 11; last date of filing nomination papers on April 18; scrutiny of nomination papers April 20; last date of withdrawing nomination papers April 22; and voting will be held on May 7. The Lok Sabha constituencies of Nalanda, Patna Saheb and Pataliputra will go for voting in the fourth phase.
As the unfolding political developments currently indicate, the present Lok Sabha elections promise to be an interesting, unnerving hard-pitched battle never witnessed before in India’s electoral history. In fact, it will be sheerly not out of place if the 2009 Lok Sabha polls will be seen as reaching yet another milestone in the nation’s chequered parliamentary history. The State of Bihar with its 40 constituencies will play a decisive role to help put in place a viable government at the Centre. And undoubtedly, it is the nearly 17 percent Muslim votebank in the state that will make or mar the fortunes of political parties, which in turn will significantly play their own respective roles in forming the Central government.
Hard-pitched battle for Muslim votes
With the elections approaching nearer, Lalu Prasad Yadav-headed UPA (United Progressive Alliance) and Nitish Kumar-led NDA (National Democratic Alliance) are all set to put up an extremely strong fight on the political turf of Bihar. The UPA in Bihar consists of Lalu Prasad Yadav’s RJD (Rashtriya Janata Dal), Ram Vilas Paswan’s LJSP (Lok Jan Shakti Party) and Indian National Congress (INC). While, the NDA consists of Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar’s Janata Dal(United) and BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party).
There is virtually a mad scramble between the two political conglomerations to grab a large chunk of crucial Muslim votebank in order to call the shots at the Centre. However, as it seems now, Nitish Kumar’s party JD(U) and his alliance NDA is far ahead in the game of political oneupmanship insofar as wooing Muslim votes is concerned. Recently, the RJD received a jolt when the chairman of party’s minority cell Mohammed Nematullah resigned and joined the ruling JD(U). Earlier, Nitish Kumar also succeeded in getting two backward Muslim leaders – Ali Anwar of All-India Pasmanda Muslim Mahaj and Dr. Ejaz Ali of All India United Muslim Morcha – nominated as MPs in the Rajya Sabha. This has largely gone down well with a section of Muslim population in the state. Besides, in the past three years of his rule Nitish Kumar has aggressively tried to woo Muslims through several populist welfare schemes. His biggest achievement has so far been to keep communal riots at bay. This has obviously enthused the community instilling confidence and hopes in his government towards an even more safe and secure future.
Nitish Kumar govt’s minorities’ welfare schemes
The Nitish Kumar government has implemented several schemes for the welfare of the minorities. According to Bihar’s minority welfare secretary Afzal Amanullah, every minority student scoring above 60 percent gets Rs. 10,000. The scholarships have already been disbursed among the 2008 group. The government also ensures that minority students get bank loans for education without hassle. “The Bihar State Minorities Finance Corporation has been asked to be more generous in providing loans for income-generating projects. While the corporation disbursed only Rs. 160 million during the past 21 years, the government has earmarked some Rs. 200 million for the financial year that ends on March 31. We have already distributed more than Rs. 50 million to Muslim, Christian and Sikh youth. The government plans to increase the amount next year,” says Amanullah. Among other minority welfare schemes, the Nitish Kumar government contributes Rs. 3,000 to a fund for each minority girls under age 15, which she however gets only upon getting married after attaining the age of 18. This amount is provided under the ‘marriage insurance’ program of the government. Besides, the government offers Rs. 10,000 to each divorced or deserted minority woman.
However there are some other welfare measures particularly for Muslims which the Nitish Kumar government should have implemented, feel community members. Regarding madrasas, Bihar government is severely lagging behind its counterparts in sanctioning a good amount for their uplift. It may be noted that the Bihar government sanctioned only a meager Rs. 22 crore in comparison to states like West Bengal, Rajasthan, Delhi and Andhra Pradesh. West Bengal government sanctioned Rs. 350 crore, Rajasthan sanctioned Rs. 300 crore, Delhi allocated Rs. 250 crore, and Andhra Pradesh government sanctioned Rs. 175 crore. Presently there are over 4,000 madrassas in Bihar, including the seminaries where the salary of the staff is paid by the state government. There are 2,459 unaided madrassas and hundreds of others operating in different places in the state. Though Nitish Kumar government didn’t sanction an appreciable amount for the development of madrasas, it however decided to provide free bicycles to girls studying at madrasas. Under the Chief Minister’s Cycle Project, about 4,000 girls who are students of Fauqania (equivalent to Class 10) would be provided bicycles, particularly in rural areas. At present, the Fauqania course is available in 150 of the total 1,119 government-run madrasas in the state. According to the first ever status paper brought out by the Bihar Madrasa Education Board, there are only 32 madrassas for girls under the government-aided category and 576 madrassas in the unaided category. The salary of Madrasa Education Board teachers is currently not at par with those of government school teachers. There is a feeling among the community that the salary of madrasa teachers be also brought at par with government school teachers, which will in fact go a long way in ameliorating their pitiable condition.
In Bihar, there are altogether 11,000 graveyards at present. The Nitish Kumar government has approved the fencing of only 8,000 graveyards and sanctioned Rs. 22 crore towards this. Besides, the community also rues the fact that in the whole of Bihar there is only one Muslim Vice Chancellor and that too in a minority institution like Maulana Mazharul Haq Arabic University.
However, given the above facts at least one thing can be said that in comparison to Lalu Prasad Yadav and his wife Rabri Devi’s 15-year rule, Nitish Kumar in his 3-year rule has performed well and tried to keep all sections of the people happy, including Muslims. During Lalu Yadav’s rule, Muslims particularly on the educational front suffered the most. Even, Lalu Yadav or his wife never cared to implement significant welfare measures for the minorities except to benefit their own Yadav caste. This is surely not the case with Nitish Kumar government thus raising his performance graph among a large section of the electorate, particularly minorities.
Who stands to gain in Bihar LS polls 2009?
There are currently three main players who are going to sweat it out on Bihar’s political turf and the winner would hence emerge as key player in helping to form a viable government at the Centre. The three main players are Lalu Prasad Yadav, Ram Vilas Paswan and Nitish Kumar. Besides, there are two other players – Indian National Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party, who cannot be ignored. In 2004 LS polls Lalu Yadav’s RJD had 24 MPs, Ram Vilas Paswan’s LJSP 4 MPs and Sonia Gandhi’s INC had 3 MPs. RJD had then contested in 26 seats, LJSP 8, and INC in 4 seats. These three parties who are currently part of ruling UPA will be contesting LS polls jointly in Bihar this time as well, but are still to reach an understanding regarding seat sharing. Nitish Kumar’s JD(U) and BJP who are part of NDA will be jointly contesting the polls and have already arrived at an understanding. JD(U) is going to contest in 25 seats while its ally BJP will be contesting in 15 seats. Nitish Kumar-led NDA obviously has an upper hand insofar seat sharing is concerned, while UPA constituents in Bihar are still to iron out seat sharing differences.
It seems that Nitish Kumar is having an unassailable lead over his political rival UPA so far. This is because Nitish Kumar has successfully kept his ally BJP in check and never allowed it to propagate its Hindutva brand of politics in the state and vitiate the communal atmosphere. The minorities in the state are obviously happy and consider this as the biggest achievement of the chief minister. Moreover, another factor that significantly favours Nitish Kumar is that the BJP has no independent base at all in Bihar. The party with only 5 MPs has neither been able to advocate its Hindutva agenda or expand its base in the state at all. In the current elections too BJP would be mostly dependent on Nitish Kumar to help achieve success. BJP, on its part, however, is trying to raise Ram Mandir issue again in the elections but is bound to squarely fail on this front as the BJP on the national level is itself facing severe problems because of its NDA partners and infighting in the party itself. Another significant decision that may eventually turn the tide in favour of Nitish Kumar, particularly Muslims, is that the JD(U) has decided that BJP’s poll punch line ‘Advani for PM’ will not be included in its poll campaign. The party thinks that the NDA prime ministerial candidate L.K. Advani still doesn’t find favour with majority of the Muslim population in Bihar. However, as things stand now, Muslim population is not much opposed to Advani. Though mention of Narendra Modi’s name does attract extreme revulsion from Muslims. The current poll campaign in Bihar is therefore unlikely to see the presence of Narendra Modi in election meetings across the state. The JD(U) will try its best to highlight the achievements of the Nitish Kumar government – how effectively it has pursued various welfare schemes for the Muslims and the way in which it kept the saffron agenda of its partner BJP at bay during its three year rule. The JD(U) surely realizes the importance of Muslim votebank and the imperative need to effectively wean it away from its arch rivals RJD, LJSP and INC.
The major loser in the current LS polls in Bihar will be none else than Lalu Prasad Yadav’s RJD. There are several factors that appear to be going against him. First, Lalu Prasad Yadav as Railway Minister in the UPA government kept himself busy all along in self-projection – the person who brought about historic turnaround in the fortunes of the Indian Railways ever since India’s independence. He paid occasional visits to Bihar as Railways Minister but did little to keep into check his drifting votebank. His votebank MY (Muslim-Yadav) just proved to be a myth during 2005 Assembly polls with RJD’s poor showing resulting in the loss of power in the state. The 15-years of RJD rule could only guarantee security of life to Muslims by not letting communal riots happen. The main beneficiary was the Yadav caste which Lalu Prasad Yadav belongs to. Whenever need be, Lalu Prasad Yadav always tried to create a fear psychosis about the surge of the saffron brigade in order to garner Muslim votes. Much to the chagrin of Muslims in Bihar, the RJD government is also responsible for patronizing those charged of killing Muslims in the Bhagalpur communal riots. It was during the RJD regime that Kameshwar Yadav, an accused in the Bhagalpur riot case, was exonerated by the state police and instead given a certificate for maintaining communal harmony. The reason for his exoneration is apparent since Kameshwar Yadav belonged to the caste which Lalu Prasad himself belonged to. During the three years of his rule now Nitish Kumar has succeeded in making a dent in Lalu Prasad Yadav’s backward Hindu votebank by weaning away OBCs (Other Backward Classes) by providing them reservations. Besides, as is evident from 2005 Assembly elections, which brought Nitish Kumar into power, even a substantial section of Muslim votebank has also been weaned away from Lalu Prasad Yadav. In the given scenario, the current LS polls will therefore prove to be a major headache for Lalu Prasad Yadav in how to regain his lost clout and the traditional votebank which has already drifted too far.
The Dalit leader Ram Vilas Paswan is another key player who cannot be ruled out. He is trying his hard to emerge on the national scene in a big way. But his ambitions are difficult to be realized now with the presence of another great Dalit icon Mayawati, the Uttar Pradesh chief minister. Ram Vilas Paswan’s votebank too comprises of BCs (Backward Class), OBCs, MBCs (Most Backward Class) and a section of Muslims. In the current elections, it is likely that Paswan will succeed in retaining LJSP’s 4 seats if not gaining more. With his focus on national politics, Paswan has done little to expand and consolidate his party’s base. But, if Paswan pays more attention to state politics then it is likely that Lalu’s loss may very well become his party’s gain. Insofar as Indian National Congress is concerned, ever since its debacle in the aftermath of Bhagalpur riots and later the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 the INC has lost its traditional Muslim votebank. So far, Muslims have also failed to embrace the INC wholeheartedly. However, a section of Muslim votebank has begun to return to the Congress fold but more needs to be done if the INC wishes to reclaim its traditional votebank. As it is now, the INC stands a chance to keep its 3 seats intact but will be unable to increase its tally in the given circumstances. Congress Party president Sonia Gandhi herself is not too keen on engaging with her UPA ally Lalu Prasad Yadav. She also prefers to visit Bihar less, and her last visit being in 2003.
The 2009 LS polls will be historic indeed and will change the course of India’s politics insofar as coalition politics is concerned. This will be for the first time ever that a severe challenge is being posed to both the centrist mainstream parties – Indian National Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party. This time smaller regional parties are expected to put up good showing in their respective states and will be eventually calling the shots in forming a coalition government at the Centre. However, much depends on the crucial Muslim votebank particularly in the two key states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. It is these two states that after all play a key role in helping form a government at the Centre, and therefore the sizeable Muslim votes in these two states proves to be a decisive factor.
This is for the first time ever that the political parties are finding it tough to campaign devoid of any major poll issue at hand. As it is, the present elections are being held amidst ongoing global recession, which is likely to stay for a couple of years more. The parties therefore are finding it difficult now to raise the pet issue of inflation, as it will have few takers since everybody knows what the real problems are. For BJP, the issues of Ram Mandir, Article 370 in J&K, and Hindutva have already been placed on the backburner. These issues are not cutting any ice with the gullible electorate any more. Even, for Muslims the issue of communalism no longer remains a threat. What matters most now are the issues of development and security to life. In the past elections, it has been witnessed that Muslims have come out of the emotive phase and have begun shunning emotional rhetoric. They are now resorting to tactical voting which, admittedly, is politically beneficial for the community as such. Muslims have surely come of age now fully realizing their potential. They need to be more assertive and prove themselves to be hard bargainers if they want to ameliorate their educational and economic condition further.
The current elections will see development and terrorism threat emerging as the key issues. The goings will certainly be tough for the political parties as the future portends now.
Please see:
http://www.indianmuslimnews.blogspot.com
http://www.indianmuslimsrediscovered.wordpress.com
3/16/2009 03:29:00 PM |
Filed under
India
|
Read More »
The scourge of terrorism is here to stay for quite some time and cannot be merely wished away. Most of the countries around the world have become vulnerable and falling prey to terrorism at a menacing pace. The way 26/11 Mumbai attacks and the recent attack on Sri Lankan cricketers in Pakistan took place shows how terrorism has spread its vice-like grip on the entire body polity. The attack on Sri Lankan cricketers barely came a day after Lok Sabha (Parliamentary) polls were announced in India. The timing is indeed quite bewildering. Even, Mumbai attacks took place at a time when assembly polls in some states of India were underway. This aspect was also puzzling as is the present one that took place in Pakistan. The motives and politics behind these attacks are difficult to comprehend. Though, one can say that terrorists are definitely out to create mayhem and deepen the global financial crisis further. And, this needs to be stopped in whatever way we can.
The current spate of terrorist attacks in the subcontinent also brings into focus a glaring aspect – the way innocent youth, who were in the age group of 18-20, were used in both these attacks. It is not difficult to understand that these vulnerable youth were emotionally blackmailed and completely brainwashed, and then used as sacrificial goats to carry out these dastardly attacks in both the countries. In the given circumstances, there is a paramount need to sensitize, educate and make aware these youth about their creative potential and shun the dastardly elements in the society whoever they are and wherever they are. As such, this becomes the foremost responsibility of the elders of the society to keep a keen watch on their movements, and educate and enlighten them appropriately to fight the menace of terrorism head on. India’s first woman police officer and Magsaysay Award winner Kiran Bedi, in an interview, rightly says: "Terrorism should be introduced in schools as a subject; it is very important that our youth be aware of it. NSS, NCC and Scout & Guide should dedicate special sessions on terrorism awareness."
Present below is an interesting and informative feature written by my colleague at IANS, Nabeel A. Khan. This feature was published on 27 October 2008. I thought it important enough to publish this feature on my Blog for the benefit of readers, particularly at the present juncture when youth are being misguided and misutilized to fulfill the devilish and inhuman desires of the masterminds of terrorism. This feature highlights the views of a cross-section of people, and is sure to make an interesting and enlightening reading. –
Danish Ahmad Khan [Picture: Kiran Bedi - India's first woman police officer & Magsaysay Award winner.]
Terrorism should be subject of study in schools: Kiran Bedi
By Nabeel A. Khan
New Delhi, Oct 27 (IANS) Terrorism should be taught as a subject in schools so that Indian youth become more aware of the scourge, says celebrated former police officer Kiran Bedi.
As the country continues to debate the larger ramifications of terror attacks in many cities, Bedi, the first woman officer in the Indian Police Service and a Magsaysay Award winner for her jail reforms, told IANS in an interview: "Terrorism should be introduced in schools as a subject; it is very important that our youth be aware of it. NSS, NCC and Scout & Guide should dedicate special sessions on terrorism awareness."
NSS is the National Service Scheme and NCC the National Cadet Corps, both co-curricular activities in high schools and colleges around India.
Bedi was worried that people tended to forget about terror attacks soon after they occurred. Apart from introducing the subject in schools, "society should come forward and start participating through team policing", she said. "Only state police, without civilian support, cannot easily stop or prevent acts of terror and for this we need to make our society aware."
In the political spectrum, there is bipartisan support for the idea.
Bharatiya Janata Party spokesman Prakash Javadekar said that primarily it was the duty of police to protect the lives of citizens, but added that public help in combating terrorism was equally necessary.
"The people on street, like small shopowners, vendors and parking attendants should be trained and sensitised against such incidents. Such people can also contribute to providing information to the intelligence," Javadekar told IANS.
His party's youth wing "may start a campaign to spread awareness and alertness among the people through a scientific and logical approach", he added.
Congress party leader Salman Khurshid said fortifying communication between people and agencies was very important.
"Network of information between people and police is very important in combating terrorism and for this we need to remove people's cynicism towards police. Everywhere some people are good and some people are bad; the same goes for police," Khurshid said.
Both the political leaders felt NGOs should come forward and create awareness in different communities about the evils of terrorism.
Academics also favoured the idea of NGOs and social organisations creating awareness and alertness against terrorism.
"People are still not alert against terrorism and for this reason social organisations and NGOs should start massive awareness campaigns," Alok Puranik, writer and lecturer in Delhi University, said.
Social activist Harsh Dobhal said targeting any particular community after a terror attack only makes matters worse. Government agencies should work in an unbiased manner to ensure equality is maintained among the people of all religions, castes and creeds, he added.
"Government agencies should act in a responsible manner. Innocent people or a particular community should not be falsely implicated. The police bring a new mastermind every day (following a terror attack). Their statements are contradictory, which is bound to raise doubts. The police need to build faith in the people's minds."
Shabnam Hashmi, another social activist, wanted the media too to act in a more responsible manner.
"The media is trying to be judgmental, they announce their verdict even before the judiciary does that. More often the media is acting as a mouthpiece of police and polarising the opinion. That is very irresponsible," she said.
While the thinkers debate, terrorism appears to have receded to the back of the mind of the man on the street.
"I don't care about terrorism, I think I am too young to think about it," said 18-year-old student Pallov.
Dietician Vandana Sekhawat said: "I never thought about how I can help in such a tragedy, but the recent events have definitely given me a shock."
"I don't have time to think of such things; I just know that I have not been harmed by it," said Sonu, a garage owner in south Delhi.
(Courtesy: IANS)
3/05/2009 11:08:00 PM |
Filed under
Featured,
Focus,
Terrorism
|
Read More »
The Rajindar Sachar Committee’s report on the social, economic and educational status of the Muslim community in India struck a blow to the Congress’ democratic and secularist assertions made over the decades. It lays out the actual conditions the Muslim minority faces and how it lags behind in terms of human development indicators.
