Region 
 

Ahmedabad

Hindu Majoritarianism

The deeper tragedy is not just the BJP’s anti-Muslim rhetoric, but the Opposition’s failure or refusal to offer a strong and effective counternarrative.

By Atif Shamim Syed | June 2025

On May 13, 2025, just three days after a U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Pakistan and India came into effect, BJP minister Vijay Shah ignited another political firestorm. Referring to Colonel Sofia Qureshi - a decorated Indian Army officer who led public briefings during the recent conflict - Shah called her a “sister from the terrorists’ community.”

It wasn’t a slip of the tongue or a poor choice of words. Shah said it deliberately, fully intending it as an insult. While praising the Indian response to the Pahalgam attack during a public event in Ambedkar Nagar, he said, “Those who widowed our daughters, we sent a sister of their own (Col. Sofia Qureshi) to teach them a lesson.”

The insinuation was clear and deliberate - an effort to cast doubt on Qureshi’s patriotism based on her Muslim identity.

The backlash against Shah’s comments was intense and immediate. Opposition parties staged state-wide protests. Shah’s nameplate outside his official residence was defaced. However, the BJP, familiar with such controversies, neither apologized nor disciplined the minister.

What makes this incident particularly troubling is not only the targeting of a senior military officer, but also how sectarianism and communal rhetoric are becoming routine at the highest levels of the Indian government. Contrary to the BJP’s claims, this is not an isolated incident. From terms like “love jihad” to Modi’s past references to Muslims as “infiltrators,” the ruling party has repeatedly used anti-Muslim rhetoric as a strategy to strengthen its political support base.

The deeper tragedy, however, is not just the BJP’s anti-Muslim rhetoric, but the Opposition’s failure – or refusal - to offer a strong and effective response.

Colonel Qureshi’s case momentarily put the BJP on the defensive. But if the past is any indication, the controversy will eventually fade, and the minister will stay in his position. Opposition outrage tends to be short-lived, reactive, and ultimately inconsequential. This isn’t just about political miscalculation—it’s about an underlying crisis of conviction.

In today’s India, opposing anti-Muslim rhetoric has become politically perilous. So thoroughly has the BJP fused Hindu identity with Indian nationalism that defending minority rights is seen as a betrayal. This has left opposition parties in a strategic bind. They can no longer criticize communal politics without being branded “anti-Hindu.” Unfortunately, they often choose to remain silent.

The Indian National Congress, once seen as a champion of secularism, now moves carefully and hesitantly. Its leaders seldom speak out in defence of minorities for fear of being labelled as appeasers. This fear has given rise to a politics of symbolism. Rahul Gandhi’s temple visits and Arvind Kejriwal’s televised Hanuman Chalisa recitations are all token gestures meant to avoid being left out of the Hindutva bandwagon.


A few Indian regional leaders have adopted their own versions of a soft-Hindutva approach. Mamata Banerjee in Bengal and Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi have turned to public displays of Hindu religiosity in hopes of shielding themselves from the BJP’s sectarian criticism. But instead of presenting a counter-narrative, these opposition gestures tend to validate the BJP’s core philosophy—that public display of Hinduism is necessary to demonstrate one’s patriotism. Even when BJP hate speech escalates to genocidal levels, like during the 2021 Haridwar Dharma Sansad, the Opposition’s response remains muted. They issue empty press statements, without calling for mass protests or demanding legal action. Lack of concrete opposition becomes complicity.

In the 2024 elections, the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) avoided strong secular messaging lest it be used as evidence of being “pro-Muslim.” Their fears proved justified when the BJP falsely accused them of planning to impose Sharia law. For want of a bold counter-narrative, the BJP lies stuck.

Some regional parties have attempted alternative narratives based on caste and class rather than religion. They have emphasized the exclusion of lower castes and minorities from the Hindu nationalist project. However, these efforts are disconnected and limited to specific areas and thus unable to compete with the BJP’s powerful nationwide Hindutva movement.

One reason for this imbalance is the absence of a cultural counterweight. RSS – BJP’s spiritual parent - spent decades building a formidable ideological infrastructure through schools, media, and social networks. The Opposition has no equivalent. It remains perpetually defensive, reacting to BJP narratives rather than setting its own.

Today, secularism in India is not a vision. It is a crisis management strategy. It no longer inspires or unites. It no longer has the moral clarity or political courage that once shaped India’s political discourse. Defending a Muslim army officer like Colonel Qureshi should be a matter of national pride. Instead, it is regarded as a political risk.

This is India’s true tragedy - not that the BJP wields hate as a political weapon, but that the Opposition lacks the conviction to disarm it.

Read More