by. Kuldip Nayar(November, 30, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) It was a case of political asylum. The government of India bungled it because of the fear of fundamentalists. It could not take the stand that a democratic, secular country would, not bow before their demand to oust Taslima Nasreen, an intrepid author of Bangladesh.She was living in Kolkata with a visa till Feb 17, 2008. She wanted a permanent residence or citizenship. (The government has moved her to some place beyond the public gaze.)
In fact, all political parties, except the BJP, have more or less rejected an asylum for her. Even the Left has not supported her case. The BJP has done it to exploit the situation. Put M.F. Hussain, the world famous painter, in place of Taslima, the party’s stand stays exposed. Its foot soldiers have threatened to kill him if he returns to India.
In fact, all political parties, except the BJP, have more or less rejected an asylum for her. Even the Left has not supported her case. The BJP has done it to exploit the situation. Put M.F. Hussain, the world famous painter, in place of Taslima, the party’s stand stays exposed. Its foot soldiers have threatened to kill him if he returns to India.
His paintings of Hindu goddesses irritate the fanatics who have filed dozens of cases against him.Both instances when boiled down relate to freedom of expression which has been threatened. That it should happen in India which is proud of its ethos of pluralism is a point of concern. Fundamentalists in every religion want to open the door for communalism.Yet, once they find it ajar, they would even beak it. India faces the same dilemma. It should not compromise on principles. But the erosion is already visible.
Great Britain, with all its racial prejudice, has proved to be far more liberal than India. Hussain is living in London which has become a Mecca for dissenters and conscientious objectors. I had imagined that India would one day be a rendezvous of revolutionaries and others who raised the standard of revolt against their autocratic regimes.I even thought that leaders from Pakistan and Bangladesh would come to Delhi instead of going to London, Dubai or New York.One other instance which has dismayed me is the centre’s attitude towards a leading editor who was harassed by Bangladesh. I tried my best to fix his interview with officials in key positions in the government. He wanted to stay in Delhi. But none met him.
The government was afraid of Dhaka’s reaction. India, under Jawaharlal Nehru, was a different country. He had a vision and could see the country becoming a meeting point of different ideologies and people from different climes. He welcomed the Dalai Lama at a time when he required the best of relations with China.Yet he preferred Indian values to Beijing’s threats. In contrast, the Manmohan Singh government led by the same party, the Congress, issued instructions to its ministers not to attend the felicitation ceremony of the Dalai Lama.Therefore, it was not surprising to see the centre quibbling over the status of Taslima. It was just scared lest the asylum should annoy Indian Muslims.
This is unfair to them because they are not a community of obscurantists. Nor is Islam against a liberal approach. But my great disappointment is over the reaction of leading Muslim organisations in the country.The All India Milli Council which often holds seminars on pluralism says that she had "not behaved as a gentle lady of an international dimension".
The Jamiat-i-Islami which supports a secular front expressed its regret that the violence in Kolkata was not a sudden outpouring of anger but the demand by several Muslim organisations for revocation of Taslima’s visa for many months. Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, very close to the Congress, says: "Let her not stay in any part of the country. Send her back. You cannot put the entire country at stake for her sake."I wish these organisations, honourable as they are, would tell me what she said against Islam. Her first book, Lajja (shame) was no piece of literature but described vividly the anti-Hindu riots in Bangladesh after the demolition of the Babri masjid.
The 1993 writing is still haunting her. The protesters against Taslima in Kolkata do not realise that they have communalised the whole issue of Nandigram.Already, the BJP is pointing out at its poll meetings in Gujarat how "intolerant and fanatic" Muslims have turned out to be in their reaction to Taslima.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has been most disappointing. It has taken an anti-Taslima stand. I have always heard Brinda Karat, the politburo member, taking up the cause of women. But when it came to Taslima she was just silent, not even seen anywhere.Her party’s key functionary, Sitaram Yechuri, said that the West Bengal government did not force Taslima to go from Kolkata while the fact was that two officials of the state government put her in a flight to Jaipur despite per protests.
It has come to light that the administration was badgering her for a long time to leave Kolkata. The CPM which claims to protect democratic and secular forces has surrendered before fundamentalists for the sake of votes.
Great Britain, with all its racial prejudice, has proved to be far more liberal than India. Hussain is living in London which has become a Mecca for dissenters and conscientious objectors. I had imagined that India would one day be a rendezvous of revolutionaries and others who raised the standard of revolt against their autocratic regimes.I even thought that leaders from Pakistan and Bangladesh would come to Delhi instead of going to London, Dubai or New York.One other instance which has dismayed me is the centre’s attitude towards a leading editor who was harassed by Bangladesh. I tried my best to fix his interview with officials in key positions in the government. He wanted to stay in Delhi. But none met him.
The government was afraid of Dhaka’s reaction. India, under Jawaharlal Nehru, was a different country. He had a vision and could see the country becoming a meeting point of different ideologies and people from different climes. He welcomed the Dalai Lama at a time when he required the best of relations with China.Yet he preferred Indian values to Beijing’s threats. In contrast, the Manmohan Singh government led by the same party, the Congress, issued instructions to its ministers not to attend the felicitation ceremony of the Dalai Lama.Therefore, it was not surprising to see the centre quibbling over the status of Taslima. It was just scared lest the asylum should annoy Indian Muslims.
This is unfair to them because they are not a community of obscurantists. Nor is Islam against a liberal approach. But my great disappointment is over the reaction of leading Muslim organisations in the country.The All India Milli Council which often holds seminars on pluralism says that she had "not behaved as a gentle lady of an international dimension".
The Jamiat-i-Islami which supports a secular front expressed its regret that the violence in Kolkata was not a sudden outpouring of anger but the demand by several Muslim organisations for revocation of Taslima’s visa for many months. Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, very close to the Congress, says: "Let her not stay in any part of the country. Send her back. You cannot put the entire country at stake for her sake."I wish these organisations, honourable as they are, would tell me what she said against Islam. Her first book, Lajja (shame) was no piece of literature but described vividly the anti-Hindu riots in Bangladesh after the demolition of the Babri masjid.
The 1993 writing is still haunting her. The protesters against Taslima in Kolkata do not realise that they have communalised the whole issue of Nandigram.Already, the BJP is pointing out at its poll meetings in Gujarat how "intolerant and fanatic" Muslims have turned out to be in their reaction to Taslima.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has been most disappointing. It has taken an anti-Taslima stand. I have always heard Brinda Karat, the politburo member, taking up the cause of women. But when it came to Taslima she was just silent, not even seen anywhere.Her party’s key functionary, Sitaram Yechuri, said that the West Bengal government did not force Taslima to go from Kolkata while the fact was that two officials of the state government put her in a flight to Jaipur despite per protests.
It has come to light that the administration was badgering her for a long time to leave Kolkata. The CPM which claims to protect democratic and secular forces has surrendered before fundamentalists for the sake of votes.
The emerging third alternative, swearing by secularism, has said that Taslima must apologise. What is her fault? Is it because she has written in favour of the afflicted women in Bangladesh?
In fact, what is visible is minority communalism. The recent blasts at Varanasi, Azamgarh and Lucknow have pointed a finger at it.
Two years ago, I would say that Muslims in India did not go to Afghanistan when there was a call for jihad. They did not go to Kashmir to fight because they were aware of the country’s sensitivities.
I cannot say that now because it is clear to me that a soft kind of parochialism has infected Indian Muslims.
Whether the Al Qaeda or the Taliban have infiltrated the country is not as relevant as the fact that terrorists get logistic support from within India and are given shelter here.
The justification given for this are the riots in Gujarat and the destruction of the Babri masjid in Ayodhya which are like a millstone of guilt around the nation’s neck.Yet, there have been vehement criticism of the happenings and till today there is no slac kening of the anger in the media.
Responsible for the two tragedies, BJP lost the government at the centre because of them. The common man is tolerant and believes in the tradition which is secular in content. But what should he do? His life revolves around daily living and he mixes with different communities in the process.
He has been conscious of Hindu fundamentalism for some time because of the BJP, the Shiv Sena and the Bajrang Dal. Now he also has to reckon with Muslim fundamentalism which he suspected to be there but has not seen it in concrete form. He is insecure. Yet his antenna tells him that the country’s soul is intact, although many Hindus and many Muslims have got contaminated.
The writer is a leading journalist based in New Delhi.
 It was a case of political asylum. The government of India bungled it becau...){kind=link}
Post a Comment