February 12th, 2012
Communalism in India is a product of British partisan politics, L.K. Advani’s personal grievances, and forced links between the fabricated histories of Somanatha temple and Babari Masjid.
How could an incident like the Babari Masjid demolition rear its ugly head in secular India? This was not a surreptitious act like an assassination, which suddenly and without warning, took away leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and later Prime Ministers Indira and Rajiv. None of these outrageous acts were committed by a Muslim or a Christian.
Gandhi was killed by Nathuram Godse, a Chitpawan Brahmin, Indira by her Sikh bodyguards and Rajiv by the LTTE.
The communal historians have tried to portray the Marathas (especially people like Shivaji Bhonsle and the Peshwas who succeeded as power centres in the Maratha confederation) as the leaders of the Hindus against their enemies, and the Sikhs as the sword arm of the Hindus. The theory of Marathas and Sikhs as protectors of Hindus has to be seen in the context of their killing the greatest Indian of the 20th Century and the Indian Prime Minister who helped undo the division of India into Hindu and Muslim and changed the political geography of South Asia.
Electioneering brings out hidden nuggets of critical information. L K Advani is a refugee from Sindh in Pakistan – a Hindu victim of the Partition of India in 1947. He has enough reason to be a Muslim hater on the grounds of personal suffering and material loss. Being uprooted from one’s ancestral home and losing personal possessions is a horrible experience.
Partition was not the desired objective of Sindhis, Punjabis and the Pakhtoons inhabiting what was known as the North Western Frontier Province. The only Muslims favouring Partition were land holding taluqdars and zamindars of North India who feared the Indian National Congress’ declared objective of abolishing the British creation. The British created these middlemen to have a substantial class supporting their rule and succeeded in winning the loyalty of people like the Raja Saheb of Mahmoudabad and Nwabzada Liquat Ali Khan of Karnal. These two and their kind (Hindus and Sikhs) remained loyal to their British benefactors and fought against freedom up until Partition and thereafter.
The twisting of history — implied in asserting that the Nehru government rebuilt the temple at Somanatha — is a ploy to create a precedent for building a Ram temple at the site where the Babari Masjid stood for centuries.
Indian democracy cannot afford communalism. The idea that India belongs to the Hindus is as fallacious as the idea that all Muslims are Pakistanis at heart.
Last Saturday (4 February), while addressing an election rally at Faizabad, Advani stated that the Ayodhya Rama Janmabhoomi movement had taught him nationalism and cultural nationalism. He went on to assert that the NDA government under Vajpayee had planned to pass a law in Parliament for building the Ram temple, similar to that of the Jawaharlal Nehru government for building the Somanatha temple – through facilitating negotiations between Hindus and Muslims.
Advani’s reference to the Somanatha issue shows the ‘Made in England’ origin of the greatest problem facing India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. This is the Hindu-Muslim issue, which makes sure that all the resources of these states are consumed by security and nothing is left for health and education and other nation building activities.
The return of Shaikh Hasina to power in Bangladesh and the Congress in India should have meant that the issues which exacerbate Hindu-Muslim relations like Somanatha and Babari Masjid would be addressed by scholars and not partisans playing the property game. Politicians like Advani have to be made to realise that all they are doing is perpetuating the ‘Divide and Rule’ policy. The twisting of history — implied in asserting that the Nehru government rebuilt the temple at Somanatha — is a ploy to create a precedent for building a Ram temple at the site where the Babari Masjid stood for centuries. Nehru opposed the association of the Indian government with the Somanatha rebuilding exercise. He was against the then President Rajendra Prasad attending the consecration ceremony and Dr Prasad had to be content with a personal attendance. Gandhi wanted the expenditure on the project to come from voluntary donations and not the government of the state.
Unfortunately for secularism, the emotional response to the temple issue swept the BJP into power at Gujarat and even, for an extended term, at the Centre. The Congress plays a role in which it appears to be the B team of the BJP and refuses to take a positive stand even in Gujarat. The result is a wholesale alienation of both Hindus and Muslims from the secular ideal.
It is time to point out that Hindus and Muslims have learnt to live without strife both in the North and the South of India before the British created trouble between the communities and ended their rule by dividing the country. Friendship with Pakistan and Bangladesh is essential for the survival of India.