Indic Varta

  • Visitor:7
  • Published on:
  • 3 min read
  • 0
  • 0

In this short article, Dr. Shankar Sharan analyzes the history of modern India, and quoting various important religious leaders of Islam, he proves that they have always spoken a language full of arrogance of power. This fact alone shows that they cannot be the victims as they portray themselves to be. He also shows how this arrogant approach will no longer work in the modern world.

Muslims Speak the Language of Power

In the last hundred years, the Muslim leaders have been making fun of some of the most sacred symbols of Indianness. When Azam Khan makes fun of Indian Army; when Owaisi threatens the government; when Farukh Abudllah makes fun of India, this language comes from a position of unbridled power. We shall take a look at this tradition.

In August 1946, in just two days, two thousand Hindus were massacred in Kolkata in the ‘Direct Action Days’. This was Jinnah’s way of threatening Congress, so that they concede to his demand of the Islamic State of Pakistan. He said that: “It is in the benefit of Hindus to accept the demand of Pakistan, if only to save themselves from mass massacres and complete destruction.”

Before that, in 1926, Maulana Akbar Shah Khan had threatened Madan Mohan Malviya in public that he should prepare for the fourth battle of Panipat. At that time the comparative ratio of Hindu Muslim population in India was 700 Muslims on 2200 Hindus. The Maulana arrogantly declared that foreign Muslims won’t be invited for fighting. Local Muslims will be more than enough to defeat Hindus.

Around the same time, Khwaja Hassan Nizami, the Chief Sufi of Delhi Nizamuddin Dargah and a prominent Islamic intellectual said that the Muslims are the ruling class of India. They had ruled the Hindus for hundreds of years and that is why they have a birth right over it. The Hindus are a global minority. They are quite bogged down by the internal fighting. They trust Gandhi and worship cows. They feel dirty by even drinking water in someone else’s place. The Hindus do not even desire of self-rule and nor do they have any time for it. They should be left alone to fight their internal battles. They have no capacity to fight others. Muslims have ruled in the past. Muslims will rule in future.

This mentality did not change with Partition. Syed Shahbuddin had once threatened to stop the oil supply from Arab countries. What Owaisi keeps saying has been said by many Muslim leaders: “Just remove the police, and then see.”

Unfortunately these are not empty threats. In independent India too, it is the Hindus who have been at the receiving end, who have been suffering and getting killed. They were ethnically cleansed from Kashmir. From Kerala and Assam they have been partially cleansed. But there is not a single instance where the Muslim community has been cleansed as a community or ethnic group.

Thus, in principle and in practice, Muslims have been playing the politics of power. Their words, their deeds, their attitude all show that they are not weak, but instead they are very strong. This is the important point to note.

Hundred years ago, when the Muslim leaders started this politics in India, they became successful through a serious of accidents and Pakistan was created. The Hindu leaders proved so naïve, that even after awarding a separate country for Muslims, they let the Muslims stay here and gave them all kinds of religious freedom.

This is the India that they choose to slander all over the world. Can this ungratefulness and arrogance of continue forever? Most of the Muslim leaders think that yes this can continue. They dream of creating an Islamic State everywhere. They are drunk on power. The Muslim intellectuals also think that Hindus are either narrow, or coward, or just engaged in making money. That is why they can be easily defeated and Muslim rule can be brought once again.

It is all about attitude. The Muslim leaders know how China, Russia and Singapore treat their Muslims. China destroys illegal mosques; people are prohibited to give their children Islamic names. Burqa is banned. Even then Pakistani leaders bow before China. But in India Muslims protest only against America and Israel. But no protest ever takes place in front of the Chinese embassy. What does this mean?

Muslim leaders understand the language of power. The countries where democracy is not an issue and where Muslim leaders are treated the way they should be, it is these countries that the Muslim leaders respect. On the other hand, those countries and societies which tolerate Islamist demands due to a wrong understanding of democracy or humanity are promptly disrespected and destroyed by the Muslim leaderships. The same is true from Delhi to London.

Will this always be the case? Will the Muslim leaders never complain about China, but keep pestering India? Can some Jinnah become successful in India even today with the policy of blackmail and ‘Direct Action’? These questions are not just in relation to India.

The Muslims consider them an international community. That is why all over the world, the acts of Lashkar-e-Toiba, Al Qaeda, Islamic State etc. become a source of power for them. They believe that sooner or later they will become dominant everywhere. Even the innocent Muslim boys, fed on propaganda tend to respect a terrorist like Laden. But can a community which can offer only violence, threats and complaints, and which has nothing to offer in the fields of science and knowledge to the world, really defeat a community of ‘Kaffirs’ full of knowledge culture? Most of the Ulema think that yes, it is possible.

The thinking Muslim cannot fail to realize that what is taken as strength by the Muslim leaders is also their weakness. Today the war is not fought with daggers and pistols. Only some innocent civilians can be killed with that. The West, the den of Kaffirs, is the place which has invented all the weaponry for a modern warfare. It is their human concern which does not let them kill innocent civilians while fighting Al Qaeda, Islamic State or the Jihadis. The situation with Kashmir is the same. Otherwise the stone pelters of Kashmir would also be seen in China or Russia.

It should also be noted that there are only two countries in the world which overthrew the Islamic rule – Spain and India. Very recently almost one lakh trained Pakistani soldiers surrendered to India in a war of just thirteen days, a war which Pakistan itself started.

If the irresponsible commentary of Owaisi and Azam goes unanswered then it shouldn’t give the wrong signal. If this is their ‘strength’, then has it benefitted anyone in any way? A lot of Muslims also think such kind of irresponsible comments are wrong. In the pre-independence India there was a huge number of Muslims who thought like this. Their tragedy is that such moderate Muslims can never organize themselves and their voices are suppressed by the extremists. This is the problem that they must solve.


[Translated from Hindi by Pankaj Saxena]