After the fresh violence of
Muzaffarnagar in Uttar Pradesh, my first reaction over the whole story was, who
the hell claims to be the greatest safe guarders of Minorities, better called
Muslims in India. We have been coming across the famous “Gujarat Riot 2002”
every week or so, so as to veil the other communal Violence throughout the
country. But, it’s high time for the people of India to get an eye wash, and
have an observation around them regarding the current political scenario of
India.
Riots are not new in India. But what is
new is that we have learned to differentiate between two types of riots in our
political discourse. One is a type that suits our convenient conscience and we
love to drag on the debate over it. Example is the Gujarat riots of 2002.
The other doesn't appeal much to our conscience and we are very comfortable in alienating it from our conscience. Example: the innumerable riots that often take place in northern India (especially UP). Besides, Assam is geographically too far away while Kashmir is too sensitive to handle.
But strangely, the ‘secular' leadership and media of the country never bother to take up a campaign against these riots. Let us talk about our Young Mr. Akhilesh Yadav, It has been almost a year and a half since the Samajwadi Party came to power in Uttar Pradesh. According to the government's own estimate, in the past 17 months there have been 30 riots in the state. 58 people have died and scores have been injured in the clashes. Apart from these there have also been around 134 separate incidents of communal violence.
The other doesn't appeal much to our conscience and we are very comfortable in alienating it from our conscience. Example: the innumerable riots that often take place in northern India (especially UP). Besides, Assam is geographically too far away while Kashmir is too sensitive to handle.
But strangely, the ‘secular' leadership and media of the country never bother to take up a campaign against these riots. Let us talk about our Young Mr. Akhilesh Yadav, It has been almost a year and a half since the Samajwadi Party came to power in Uttar Pradesh. According to the government's own estimate, in the past 17 months there have been 30 riots in the state. 58 people have died and scores have been injured in the clashes. Apart from these there have also been around 134 separate incidents of communal violence.
Even back in 1992, when communal
violence was at its peak in the country, the city where the Babri Masjid – Ram
janm Bhoomi contentions arose from, Faizabad, did not see riots. But under the
present government’s rule, Faizabad too got its share of communal riots. Still
today, the only reason we have to regret is the 2002 riot in Gujarat, or more
precisely, the chief minister of the state, Narendra Modi.
The Samajwadi’s has zero control on the state administration. Yet, it feels to ignite communal politics in the guise of secularism or rather minority appeasement and put the commoners' lives at risk. There is a nice similarity between the ruling parties of both UP and Bihar. Both the SP and JD(U) claim themselves to be the messiah of minorities but none rally care for good governance and development. Nitish Kumar was known for his development model but he ruined his own reputation in June by terminating all ties with the BJP and putting his poll equation and consequently the governance factor in jeopardy.
The Nitish administration also uttered very little about the arrest of Yasin Bhatkal, the dreaded terrorist, from the state. The SP was recently seen slamming the Modi administration over the explosive letter of DG Vanzara but exhibited unprecedented attitude when it came to victimizing Durga Shakti Nagpal, also a public servant.
Not a single word from any of the secular quarters are heard when these double standards are openly displayed. Strange indeed. UP and Bihar parties always enjoy benefits of doubt. The Akhilesh Yadavs and Nitish Kumars always enjoy the benefit of doubt despite all odds because they belong to two very important states, electorally. With elections not far around the corner the value of human life against votes once again gets tested. As allegations and counter allegations are traded, every political party calculates the methods to gain from the growing communal clashes.
The Samajwadi’s has zero control on the state administration. Yet, it feels to ignite communal politics in the guise of secularism or rather minority appeasement and put the commoners' lives at risk. There is a nice similarity between the ruling parties of both UP and Bihar. Both the SP and JD(U) claim themselves to be the messiah of minorities but none rally care for good governance and development. Nitish Kumar was known for his development model but he ruined his own reputation in June by terminating all ties with the BJP and putting his poll equation and consequently the governance factor in jeopardy.
The Nitish administration also uttered very little about the arrest of Yasin Bhatkal, the dreaded terrorist, from the state. The SP was recently seen slamming the Modi administration over the explosive letter of DG Vanzara but exhibited unprecedented attitude when it came to victimizing Durga Shakti Nagpal, also a public servant.
Not a single word from any of the secular quarters are heard when these double standards are openly displayed. Strange indeed. UP and Bihar parties always enjoy benefits of doubt. The Akhilesh Yadavs and Nitish Kumars always enjoy the benefit of doubt despite all odds because they belong to two very important states, electorally. With elections not far around the corner the value of human life against votes once again gets tested. As allegations and counter allegations are traded, every political party calculates the methods to gain from the growing communal clashes.
Politicians like Mulayams have been
nurturing their ambition to become the prime minister for years despite the
riots and corruption charges but surprisingly, the ambition is termed as
'greed' when it applies to BJP's Narendra Modi. How many politicians do not
dream to become the prime minister, especially in this era of coalition
politics?
Akhilesh has not succeeded in curbing riots in Uttar Pradesh, a trend which was seen even during the days of his father, and has also allegedly encouraged communal politics as a ‘secular response' to the saffron camp's Hindutva politics in Ayodhya. Gujarat, on the other hand, has not seen a single riot after 2002 while it used to be frequently rocked by communal clashes prior to that.
Akhilesh has not succeeded in curbing riots in Uttar Pradesh, a trend which was seen even during the days of his father, and has also allegedly encouraged communal politics as a ‘secular response' to the saffron camp's Hindutva politics in Ayodhya. Gujarat, on the other hand, has not seen a single riot after 2002 while it used to be frequently rocked by communal clashes prior to that.
What is also disappointing that the
likes of Mulayam and Akhilesh are never heard of speaking on how to improve
governance and quicken development. May be for them, it is politically viable
if India remains backward and engaged in communal animosity. In India, the
'secular' is more 'communal', isn't it? But they still get away with it.
Do the safeguarders of Muslims like
Hon’ble Congress Party, Samajwadis and JD(U) still have the dignity left to
point out at Mr. Modi?. For me, atleast he has done a lot for all the Muslims businessmen
of Gujarat, who once left the state after Gujarat massacre, have decided to
return to the state due to its overall economic growth. Like every other
citizen, the minorities also like to have a secure livelihood, and not a
messiah every now and then proclaiming to protect their right.
Before wrapping up this article, I take
the cue from a statement of a minority from the past stated that- “Jo apne dhram ke sath nai khada ho sakta, wo
humare dharm ki kya rakhwali karega? “Those who can’t stand with their own
religion, what will they do for our religion?
Now, it is up to the Muslims to decide,
whom they should consider for safeguarding their rights to living?
