New Directions

Ironically, it was the coming of the British, particularly when they annexed India that the consciousness amongst the local populace about there being two distinct communities arose either by design of the British with a view to divide and rule or to enable them to administer the two communities properly, which required that the two be treated differently because of their different customs and traditions.

It is the movement for Independence of India that brought the differences between the two communities into the limelight. Initially, of course, the two communities worked together for independence of India but soon the Muslims realized that the Hindus had suddenly become conscious of the fact that they were in the majority and hence had the right as well as expectation to govern the future India in the post-British period which was set to become a democracy on the Anglo-Saxon model. No doubt, that in a democracy, this was a natural process but because of the simmering hatred of centuries, this consciousness amongst the Hindus began to manifest in various acts of intolerance by the Hindus and eventually led to the emergence of a Hindu militaristic political arm, the RSS. The Muslims watched this rise of fascist trends amongst the Hindus with concern and their fear of Hindu dominance after Independence of India was exacerbated which, in turn, gave rise to the consciousness of a Muslim nationhood that found expression in the evolution of “The Two Nation Theory” i.e. Muslims and Hindus of India were two distinct nationalities.

The rest is history! What is significant is that both new countries carved out of British India i.e. Pakistan and India, at the time of their creation claimed and aspired to be secular countries, where religion was not to play any part in the governance of the country. Fortunately, at the time both countries were led by two individuals of outstanding ability and moral calibre i.e Jinnah and Nehru and both were committed to building secular societies in the countries that they led.

It is an irony of history that it is Pakistan which strayed from the path first by adopting the Basic Principles Committee Report in 1952 and thereby abandoning secularism and adopting a path to make the new country into an Islamic country where religion and politics were to merge. Inevitably, this process led to a rise in influence of the religious elements with a fundamentalist bent of mind in the body politic of the nascent country. Pakistan thus formally abandoned the quest for secularism by adopting Islam as a State religion and by declaring itself the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1973.

Judging from the nature of the two peoples, that is Muslims and Hindus, who in spite of their different beliefs, are essentially cast in the same mould, one would have expected India to follow the same obscurantist path as that taken by Pakistan but they were fortunate to have Nehru’s leadership for a longer period than that of Jinnah in Pakistan, hence the process was delayed. This, at the time, was to the great advantage of India as it became a darling of the western world as well as that of the Soviet Union. Because of its huge population, potential economic strength, soft image and permissive culture, India was all set to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council. But soon after the passing away of Nehru and his heirs, acrimony between the two countries increased and the inherent devious nature of the Hindus in India asserted itself and RSS suddenly appeared to dominate the politics of India. Fortunately in the early years the RSS’s political arm, the BJP was led by an intellectual, Vajpayee, hence, while he governed, the RSS influence in India was contained and did not become rabid. An intellectual in the person of AB Vajpayee, by his very nature is not wont to be an extremist. But as soon as Vajpayee disappeared from the scene, Hindu India emerged with full force and discarding the secularism independent India’s founding fathers had opted for, it started taking steps to turn India into a Fascist Hindu state, where religious symbolism asserted itself and support was sought from history by re-writing it to show that the Muslims responsible for the atrocities committed in the past when, if at all committed, were undertaken by merely unscrupulous adventurers. Their being Muslims was just a chance occurrence because, in those times, atrocities by such adventurers was the norm regardless of their religious affiliations.

Soon this new-found hatred under the leadership of Narendra Modi led to ways and means of undermining the Muslims by the Indian government and the political establishment itself. The new citizenship laws introduced by the BJP government recently are just the beginning of the persecution of Muslims, which is bound to lead to their perpetual harassment and pogroms in the future. This in turn is bound to destabilize India with emergence of indigenous resistance by Muslims and resulting terrorist activities as well, most likely to be spearheaded by the remnants of the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. India has thus lost many advantages and the chances of its emergence as a world power. Its chances of becoming a permanent member of the Security Council have also receded to a great extent. Indeed, in this scenario, in the not too distant a future, India may even have to contend with disintegration because, in the on-going turmoil, various militant sub-national groups, which abound in India, may also jump into the fray. This may lead to a mass exodus of Muslims from India to Pakistan which could even destabilize Pakistan since Pakistan does not have the capacity to absorb refugees in such large numbers. It is obvious that such turn of events would not bode well for the future of the subcontinent.

In hindsight, it can be said that much as we in Pakistan dislike the rise of Hindu nationalism in India and its repercussions, the fact remains that it is the Indian Muslims who are responsible for such developments in the subcontinent through giving rise to Muslim nationalism when none existed, through propounding the Two Nation Theory in the first place. Perhaps, to that extent, there is some rationale in India’s actions in the Modi era as Indian Hindus too, have merely followed the Muslims’ lead by embracing the Two Nation Theory propagated by Muslims in the pre-partition era. But looking into the future, there is a possible saving grace in all these developments in the subcontinent as the widespread protests that have erupted in India against the new citizenship laws, may eventually lead to the coming together of all communities inhabiting the subcontinent and thereby the shunning of antagonism and militaristic posturing, which can go a long way in alleviating the lot of the unfortunate poverty-stricken people of this land.