Was the seed of fundamentalism sowed before independence?

A peculiar situation is prevailing in the subcontinent now. When Bangladesh and Pakistan are suffering from threats of Islamic Jihadists an aggressive Hindutava has raised its head and is threatening the very basis of democracy in India. The only Hindu state in the world Nepal has elected a communist lady as their first female president.    When the subcontinent achieved independence and was divided on the basis of religion nobody thought it will have a far reaching and dangerous consequence. Even though it was divided on the basis of religion, the subcontinent inherited a democratic system and both the major countries India and Pakistan declared solemnly that they would keep the democratic practice of the Westminster style.
Perhaps it is the irony of fate that in both Pakistan and India religious fanaticism has become the dominant force under the cover of democracy nowadays. Bangladesh was part of Pakistan. After seceding from Pakistan Bangladesh declared that their fundamental state policy would be democracy and secularism. But this country is now also facing the danger of the rise of religious fanaticism. Some western analysts question that how it is possible that after 200 years of British rules under secular and democratic practices the countries of the subcontinent have allowed the anti-democratic communal and fundamentalist politics to become the dominant force in their countries now?
A famous British left political thinker Jack Waddis commented that the present leadership of the subcontinental countries are not fully responsible for this new political polarization. The older leadership who fought for independence were also responsible for the present turmoil. Though they were democratic politicians and most of them were secular, knowingly or unknowingly they sowed the seeds of fundamentalism in the subcontinent. Mahatma Gandhi was a western educated leader and preached democracy and practiced non-communal politics. But he too influenced the vast majority of Indian people who were Hindus by mixing his politics with religious vision. He promised them to establish the 'Ram Rajya" in the pattern of the ancient Hindu Kingdom.
Gandi did not stop there. To get the support of the Indian Muslims for his independence movement he encouraged them to start 'Khilafat Movement'. The aim of that movement was to restore the medieval Turkish Empire (the Ottoman Empire) which was defeated and divided into many parts by Britain and France, the winners of the First World War. Mohammad Ali Jinnah was a young barrister then and committed to secularism.
He warned Gandhi not to encourage Indian Muslims to join a movement to revive a medieval empire. He warned that while this might induce Indian Muslims to join the movement for independence of India but at the same time they would dream to restore the old Muslim empire in their homeland. This same Jinnah in his middle age left his role as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity and demanded the partition of India on the basis of religion. He wanted a separate homeland for the Muslims and claimed that Indian Muslims are a separate nation.
Yusuf Meherally was a renowned socialist leader in the last century and a friend of Jinnah. One day he asked Jinnah whether by demanding Pakistan he wanted to establish a state on the basis of religion. Jinnah said, ‘No’. He said that Pakistan will be a Muslim majority democratic state, not a communal state. The rights of the religious minority would be assured and they would have equal rights as citizens alongside the Muslims. Yusuf Meharally warned Jinnah that the partition of India on the basis of religion would gradually destroy the democratic fabric of both the newly independent countries.
In Pakistan it would be a matter of time to grab the power by the fundamentalist groups from moderate Muslim politicians. Because the country was created on the basis of religion, the religious groups will demand more and more Islamization of the country. He pointed out that though India would have a strong secular leadership like Nehru, however, Gandhi's plea for Ram Kingdom would encourage the communal and Right wing leadership in the Congress which may gain power in the course of time and there might be an attempt to turn India from a secular state to a state of Hindutava. Jinnah did not agree with the veteran socialist leader. But if he were alive today he would witness the rise of the aggressive religious zealots in Pakistan.
India was blessed with strong democratic base of state and strong secular leadership, but it is also now witnessing the rise of Hindutava which has not only defeated the democratic forces but the Left forces in the country. It was inconceivable even 10 years back that a Hindu chauvinist Party like BJP could rise to power with a landside victory. But today it is a reality. So when we analyze the present situation in the subcontinent we cannot solely blame the present leadership for their deviation from the democratic path.
Pakistan is no more a democratic state of Muslim majority but a Wahabi state and almost a mirror image of Saudi Arabia. Although there is a facade of democracy in Pakistan still, its survival depends on military presence of America and its support. Otherwise Al-Qaeda or Taliban could take over state power with the powerful support of the Right Wing army.
When BJP first came to power in India and Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister they did not dare to destroy the secular basis of statehood. There was tremendous pressure on Vajpayee from BJP's associate wings-the extreme Rightist Shiv Sena and RSS to make India a Hindu state.
That time BJP was not alone in power. They had to depend on the partners of their coalition to remain in power. Now with an overwhelming majority in the parliament the extremist section of BJP and their cohorts Shiv Sena and RSS are trying to impose Hindutava on the whole country. They are trying to reject pluralism in Indian politics and showing intolerance to the minority communities. Killing of a Muslim citizen in Dadri on suspicion of eating beef has alerted the democratic minded Indians about the threat of violent extremism.
   Shiv Sena and RSS have forced Ustad Ghulam Ali to abandon his performance in India because he came from Pakistan and is a Muslim. The ex-foreign minister of Pakistan went to India to launch his book and a prominent BJP leader and journalist was going to attend the function. He was stopped by the Shiv Sena supporters, was humiliated and his face was smeared black. Many Right wing BJP leaders supported this shameful deed.
In protest of this intolerance and violence by the supporters of the ruling party the progressive Indian intellectuals and litterateurs have returned the accolades and prizes they were given by the Sahitya Academy. Prime Minister Narendra Nath Modi is now in a horns of dilemma. After coming to power he tried to create a non-communal and democratic image of his government.
But the most powerful Right wing section of his party along with Shiv Sena and RSS have tarnished that image by their intolerance and violence. It seems Modi wanted to follow the footsteps of his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee.  His past as a RSS man, perhaps, prevented him from being strong like Vajpayee. If he fails to prevent the Shiv Sena and RSS to dictate his government's policy then Indian democracy will face an uncertain future.
If we summarize the situation in the subcontinent, then we can say that the three major countries Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are under the threat of rising fundamentalism. For that we cannot solely blame the present leadership of these countries. The seeds of communalism and fundamentalism were sowed by the father-figures of these countries like Gandhi and Jinnah.
Their minor mistake has now become a major obstacle for the development and progress of democracy in the subcontinent. Only one father-figure, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh tried to uphold the principle of secularism and democracy by changing the medieval religious social structure of the country. He was assassinated by the extremist and reactionary forces.
What will happen next? Can the subcontinent resist the tide of violent extremism? It depends on the unity and solidarity among the secular minded and democracy loving people and their progressive intellectuals. This is a time when secular forces of the three subcontinental countries-Bangladesh, Pakistan and India should unite and wage relentless war against the demon of funda­mentalism.
America's so-called war against terrorism is nothing but a bluff and blue print to dominate the whole world according to their new world order. This is high time when the war against imperialism and war against fundamentalism should declare solidarity among them.

London, 13 November 2015

 

Was the seed of fundamentalism sowed before independence?

A peculiar situation is prevailing in the subcontinent now. When Bangladesh and Pakistan are suffering from threats of Islamic Jihadists an aggressive Hindutava has raised its head and is threatening the very basis of democracy in India. The only Hindu state in the world Nepal has elected a communist lady as their first female president. When the subcontinent achieved independence and was divided on the basis of religion nobody thought it will have a far reaching and dangerous consequence. Even though it was divided on the basis of religion, the subcontinent inherited a democratic system and both the major countries India and Pakistan declared solemnly that they would keep the democratic practice of the Westminster style. Perhaps it is the irony of fate that in both Pakistan and India religious fanaticism has become the dominant force under the cover of democracy nowadays. Bangladesh was part of Pakistan. After seceding from Pakistan Bangladesh declared that their fundamental state policy would be democracy and secularism. But this country is now also facing the danger of the rise of religious fanaticism. Some western analysts question that how it is possible that after 200 years of British rules under secular and democratic practices the countries of the subcontinent have allowed the anti-democratic communal and fundamentalist politics to become the dominant force in their countries now? A famous British left political thinker Jack Waddis commented that the present leadership of the subcontinental countries are not fully responsible for this new political polarization. The older leadership who fought for independence were also responsible for the present turmoil. Though they were democratic politicians and most of them were secular, knowingly or unknowingly they sowed the seeds of fundamentalism in the subcontinent. Mahatma Gandhi was a western educated leader and preached democracy and practiced non-communal politics. But he too influenced the vast majority of Indian people who were Hindus by mixing his politics with religious vision. He promised them to establish the Ram Rajya in the pattern of the ancient Hindu Kingdom. Gandi did not stop there. To get the support of the Indian Muslims for his independence movement he encouraged them to start Khilafat Movement. The aim of that movement was to restore the medieval Turkish Empire (the Ottoman Empire) which was defeated and divided into many parts by Britain and France, the winners of the First World War. Mohammad Ali Jinnah was a young barrister then and committed to secularism. He warned Gandhi not to encourage Indian Muslims to join a movement to revive a medieval empire. He warned that while this might induce Indian Muslims to join the movement for independence of India but at the same time they would dream to restore the old Muslim empire in their homeland. This same Jinnah in his middle age left his role as the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity and demanded the partition of India on the basis of religion. He wanted a separate homeland for the Muslims and claimed that Indian Muslims are a separate nation. Yusuf Meherally was a renowned socialist leader in the last century and a friend of Jinnah. One day he asked Jinnah whether by demanding Pakistan he wanted to establish a state on the basis of religion. Jinnah said, No. He said that Pakistan will be a Muslim majority democratic state, not a communal state. The rights of the religious minority would be assured and they would have equal rights as citizens alongside the Muslims. Yusuf Meharally warned Jinnah that the partition of India on the basis of religion would gradually destroy the democratic fabric of both the newly independent countries. In Pakistan it would be a matter of time to grab the power by the fundamentalist groups from moderate Muslim politicians. Because the country was created on the basis of religion, the religious groups will demand more and more Islamization of the country. He pointed out that though India would have a strong secular leadership like Nehru, however, Gandhis plea for Ram Kingdom would encourage the communal and Right wing leadership in the Congress which may gain power in the course of time and there might be an attempt to turn India from a secular state to a state of Hindutava. Jinnah did not agree with the veteran socialist leader. But if he were alive today he would witness the rise of the aggressive religious zealots in Pakistan. India was blessed with strong democratic base of state and strong secular leadership, but it is also now witnessing the rise of Hindutava which has not only defeated the democratic forces but the Left forces in the country. It was inconceivable even 10 years back that a Hindu chauvinist Party like BJP could rise to power with a landside victory. But today it is a reality. So when we analyze the present situation in the subcontinent we cannot solely blame the present leadership for their deviation from the democratic path. Pakistan is no more a democratic state of Muslim majority but a Wahabi state and almost a mirror image of Saudi Arabia. Although there is a facade of democracy in Pakistan still, its survival depends on military presence of America and its support. Otherwise Al-Qaeda or Taliban could take over state power with the powerful support of the Right Wing army. When BJP first came to power in India and Atal Bihari Vajpayee was Prime Minister they did not dare to destroy the secular basis of statehood. There was tremendous pressure on Vajpayee from BJPs associate wings-the extreme Rightist Shiv Sena and RSS to make India a Hindu state. That time BJP was not alone in power. They had to depend on the partners of their coalition to remain in power. Now with an overwhelming majority in the parliament the extremist section of BJP and their cohorts Shiv Sena and RSS are trying to impose Hindutava on the whole country. They are trying to reject pluralism in Indian politics and showing intolerance to the minority communities. Killing of a Muslim citizen in Dadri on suspicion of eating beef has alerted the democratic minded Indians about the threat of violent extremism. Shiv Sena and RSS have forced Ustad Ghulam Ali to abandon his performance in India because he came from Pakistan and is a Muslim. The ex-foreign minister of Pakistan went to India to launch his book and a prominent BJP leader and journalist was going to attend the function. He was stopped by the Shiv Sena supporters, was humiliated and his face was smeared black. Many Right wing BJP leaders supported this shameful deed. In protest of this intolerance and violence by the supporters of the ruling party the progressive Indian intellectuals and litterateurs have returned the accolades and prizes they were given by the Sahitya Academy. Prime Minister Narendra Nath Modi is now in a horns of dilemma. After coming to power he tried to create a non-communal and democratic image of his government. But the most powerful Right wing section of his party along with Shiv Sena and RSS have tarnished that image by their intolerance and violence. It seems Modi wanted to follow the footsteps of his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee. His past as a RSS man, perhaps, prevented him from being strong like Vajpayee. If he fails to prevent the Shiv Sena and RSS to dictate his governments policy then Indian democracy will face an uncertain future. If we summarize the situation in the subcontinent, then we can say that the three major countries Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are under the threat of rising fundamentalism. For that we cannot solely blame the present leadership of these countries. The seeds of communalism and fundamentalism were sowed by the father-figures of these countries like Gandhi and Jinnah. Their minor mistake has now become a major obstacle for the development and progress of democracy in the subcontinent. Only one father-figure, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh tried to uphold the principle of secularism and democracy by changing the medieval religious social structure of the country. He was assassinated by the extremist and reactionary forces. What will happen next? Can the subcontinent resist the tide of violent extremism? It depends on the unity and solidarity among the secular minded and democracy loving people and their progressive intellectuals. This is a time when secular forces of the three subcontinental countries-Bangladesh, Pakistan and India should unite and wage relentless war against the demon of fundamentalism. Americas so-called war against terrorism is nothing but a bluff and blue print to dominate the whole world according to their new world order. This is high time when the war against imperialism and war against fundamentalism should declare solidarity among them. London, 13 November 2015