End of the middle ground? India by no means is a monolith. And that is not true of this subcontinent-size country alone. There is hardly any large or populous country in this world that doesn’t nurse human diversity. Name the countries – China, United States, Indonesia, United Kingdom, Malaysia, Russia, Nigeria, France and so on – diversity is a reality. Similarly, the idea of Kashmir is plural too. Europe’s fascist era – rooted in the belief of racial and national exclusivity – resulted in several catastrophes – wars, genocides and social exclusion at an unimaginable scale. Today, as the world has moved on, humanity looks at that era with disgust and shame. Anything to do with the idea of fascism evokes stigma and revulsion. The idea of inclusiveness – despite all its imperfections – defines modern civility. Multiculturalism, with all its intrinsic flaws, is the preferred way of life. India is at a crossroads today. As a nation it has remained wedded to the idea of cultural, religious and ethnic inclusiveness for most part of its history. There have been times of acute stress too, but the institutions of the state and the self-correcting mechanisms of its constitution have ensured inclusiveness. On Kashmir, most Kashmiris would argue, Indian state’s terms of engagement have been different. Its relation with the idea of Kashmir has been fuelled by scenic romanticism, denial for its present and an obsession for its medieval past. The political approach has been deeply influenced by a craving – often covert – for the revival of that medieval past. Insensitive assimilation has been preferred to consensual inclusiveness. A sea of liberal and secular voices and spaces in India’s civil society has also strongly helped nurture the culture of inclusiveness in India. Despite the presence of a brawny right – represented by the Rashtriya Swayemsewak Sangh (RSS) and a plethora of its affiliates, subtly working for the creation of a Hindu rashtra – the centrist liberals and their voices have largely prevailed. All that seems to be changing so rapidly today. The rise of the life-long RSS member Mr. Narendra Modi to the position of the Prime Minister is witnessing a dramatic change of color and ideological allegiances in the country’s civil society spaces. A lot of people who would swear by pluralism and multiculturalism until recently support all the ideas that are emanating from this new government. They justify that support for “the wrongs and the disappointment” unleashed by the long rule of the dynastic politics of the Congress Party. To a third-person observer, Congress Party’s rule has in fact been characterised by gross mis-governance and policy paralysis. That such state of affairs has ignited widespread frustration, especially among the youth, is understandable too. The longing for a new development era of inclusive prosperity and good governance is justified too. But is the Hindu right the only option available? We often hear people who don’t see themselves as right-wing blaming “pseudo-secularism” for India’s political and economic muddle. It is astonishing how the very idea of secularism is misunderstood even among the supposedly learned circles in the country. Secularism – as is being generally understood - is not being charitable, tolerant and accommodative alone of minorities. Secularism is what it is classically understood as – keeping all sort of religion away from the business of the state, in all substance and forms. Constitutionally, India is a secular country. If secular ideals of the state are sidestepped by the personal religious beliefs and rituals of executive leaders in state domains, secularism comes into question. A lot of liberal Indians who until yesterday would dismiss Kashmir’s yearning for political justice as a “majoritarian pursuit” seem to see the Hindu right’s approach to issues like Article 370, uniform civil code and vegetarianism as normal and not majoritarianism. India hasn’t had a Muslim right-wing for a long time now. Groups like Jamaat-i-Islami in India and a plethora of other similar groups in Pakistan are seen as the Islamist right. To most Hindus, including the liberal educated and enlightened civil society, Islamist right – for whatever it stands for - is irreconcilable, and hence neither worthy of engagement nor partnership. They expect centrist Muslims not to share the rightist worldview of exclusion and intolerance. Those expectations are understandable. What is happening today is that they want the same centrist Muslims and all others to show understanding and willingness to engage with the Hindu right, and partner with its “development goal”. Is that fair? The Sangh Parivar has always seen the Muslim reality of India – and even that of Kashmir – a “historical aberration.” In all its thought processes Islam has a foreign connotation. That it came from the Arabian Peninsula is seen from the prism of the military expeditions that originated from India’s west around that time. That Islam’s journey towards east and the west of Arabia was a spiritual rather than a political phenomenon is least understood. Islam is not an Arab thing or something about its culture. This faith originated in the Arab land – like all Abrahimic religions - because God Almighty in his infinite wisdom chose an Arab to be his Final Messenger (peace be upon him) to the humankind. The idea of seeing Islam as alien to India is the belief that God’s Final Messenger – Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) – is a prophet for Muslims alone. That is not the case. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the messenger for the whole mankind. Similarly, Islam in Kashmir was part of a spiritual transformation, not political hegemony. Not coming to terms with this reality only accentuates the divide and misunderstanding. Kashmir must retain its pluralism. Re-creating medieval history would achieve nothing. Islam easily co-exists with cultural diversity and sensitivity. Repulsive stereotypes prevail because the inter-religious dialogue doesn’t exist. Reconciliation and peaceful co-existence in the complex idea of India will only come through respect for diversity. All religions have their extreme right positions. Today’s crossroads demand empathy for one another. It needs understanding each other’s fears and presumptions. It demands greater knowledge and understanding of each other’s faith. It also requires rising above stereotypes. And, finally, it asks for identifying a common ground where communities could co-exist with respect for each other and dignity. That common ground must exist. (AHT, Dateline Srinagar, GK, Ist May 2014)
Posted on: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 04:58:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015