| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| If You Knew Me By Now... |
| 2006-03-12 |
| If You Knew Me By Now... Isn't the Indian Muslim's right to protest valid? Why then a silent admonishment? Indian Muslims are a bewildered, angry and hurt lot. They can’t understand the sharp reactions to the large-scale protests they took part in recent weeks. It’s not the reaction of the Hindutva forces that has alarmed them. What many Muslims find insulting is the suggestion that they should not have protested in such large numbers as it was against the national current and smacked of religious mobilisation. Sociologist Imtiaz Ahmad believes such responses reveal the metamorphosis of the Hindu liberal. "There are clear double standards here. On the one hand, you keep telling Muslims to come into the mainstream. When they believe they have a stake in the country and the right to protest, then why are you upset?" He also points out that contrary to popular perception, Muslims did take part in protests organised by various Left and secular organisations. Maulana Mehmood Madani, of the Jamait-e-Ulema-e-Hind which mobilised about a lakh people in New Delhi on the eve of the George Bush visit, goes to lengths to say his rally was largely addressed by non-Muslims. "I had approached the Left to have a joint rally. They suggested we protest on two consecutive days." There’s another detail: Madani’s organisation restricted their show to the Ramlila grounds as they were told that not more than 5,000 people would be given permission to march. The next day, at least 15,000 marched from Ramlila grounds to Jantar Mantar during the Left rally. The suspicion is that the Delhi administration was uncomfortable with the prospect of too many Muslims gathering at one spot. Muslims are now asking whether the sight of hundreds of skull caps and beards upsets people. Says Masoom Moradabadi, editor of Urdu paper Khabardar: "If Hindus respond emotionally to certain issues, don’t Muslims have the same right? Are we being told that we should know our place? Clearly, many people don’t want us to have the same rights." He also believes the backlash has surprised the community. Again there is a fear of being cornered. There is also the other sensitive issue linked to every Muslim debate—the charge that the community is anti-national because there is a concept of an international Muslim congregation. In Parliament, BJP MPs accused Muslims of trying to instigate "another Khilafat movement". Many Muslims simply can’t understand why the majority community remains insensitive to their anguish over the brutalities in Iraq and other Muslim countries. It is not the nuclear deal that the community is protesting; it is George Bush they have a problem with. It is mischievous to blur the boundary. Educated Muslims are also angry with the suggestion that they should "speak out". What do they want us to say, asks Ahmad—"that we don’t have the right to protest?" Liberals and conservatives alike point out that every worthwhile Muslim organisation has condemned the intemperate utterances of a UP minister, the Lucknow violence and the Varanasi blasts. Yet they are told again and again to speak out. Kamal Farooqi of the Muslim Personal Law Board says: "I have serious objections to this. No one has the right to tell me my safety lies in being scared and quiet." Yet, Muslims have learnt that every time they become vocal, a heavy price is exacted. |
| Posted by:john |
| #1 Fascinating backlash from India. George W Bush is long gone, the protests had no effect on his visit, but the muslim protestors themselves are under attack. The communists began these protests with support from their darlings in the Indian media who did tight shots to mask just how small the numbers were. Having failed, they joined with the muslims. Now you had tens of thousands. The mobs however had no time for anti-capitalist diatribe. They were protesting Denmark, Iraq, Palestine... But the backlash was not long in coming... the majority of Indians see these protests and ask ... is it acceptable behavior when an invited head of state visits to call him a dog? To prevent an address to the parliament? They ask .. who are these bearded mullahs? Where the hell did they come from? How come they look like Pakistanis? Why don't they protest when jihadis kill civilians in Jammu and Kashmir? Why don't they protest the terror war launched by Pakistan against their homeland India in which tens of thousands of innocents have died? Why don't they protest the bombings of train stations and temples? They note the identification with pan-islamic causes and ask .. of what relevance are these things to India? Why are they attacking foreign policies that are to the benefit of Indian security? Are these muslim protestors loyal citizens? |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-12 06:35 |