RE: Doha Debate in Delhi : 'Do Muslim get a fair deal in India'.
Andrew Buncombe, a British Journalist with Independant newspaper, left Doha Debate in Delhi, with the impression that the majority of the audience appears to support the the motion that Muslims do not get a fair deal in India?
To his utter surprise, next day he finds that audience has voted against the motion.
He should not be surprised. This incident itself proves how deep is the negative feeling against Muslims in India and how little sympathy they get from an elitist crowd of middle class, upper caste Hindu milieu. The worst part is that like Sachin Pilot, his own Congress Party has been guilty of gross discrimination in public affairs and horrendous violations of Human Rights of Muslim minority, though declaring their governed nation to be a model of secularism and democracy. Congress double game is the the biggest fraud that Muslims have suffered in their own country. Even with level-headed leaders like Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi, the rank and file of Congress thrives on demonising Muslims and paying only lip service to their upliftment.
The daily media chorus against Muslim seems to be a must to get a samblance of unity among the diversified pluralist society. Only Muslim bashing can give the minority of Brahmins, the bare electoral majority to rule the country. That scenerio is hard to change, given the electoral compulsion of the political class. Some drastic changes imposed on the system of governance can only do justice to 150 to 200 million Muslims of India.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Siraj Wahab <sirajwahab@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 16, 2010 4:29 PM
Subject: [nrindians] Do Muslims get a fair deal in India?
To: nrindians@googlegroups.com
http://andrewbuncombe.
Do Muslims get a fair deal in India?
Posted by Andrew Buncombe
- Tuesday, 16 February 2010 at 11:46 am
Last night I was in the audience for the filming of the of the latest of the Doha Debates, the series of discussions headed by Tim Sebastian and broadcast by BBC World News. Held within the quite solace of St Stephen's College, one of the most prestigious colleges within Delhi University, the debates were breaking new ground by holding their first event in Asia.
I had been in two minds whether to go, mainly because I thought the issue being discussed, "This house believes that Muslims are not getting a fair deal in India", seems to be so overwhelmingly obvious. Ever since the government-appointedSachar Committee reported in 2006 that Muslims in India had less access to education, government jobs and survived on lower incomes than average, it seemed the issue was settled. Of course, there are plenty of Muslims who reach the heights in India, from politicians through to Bollywood stars such as Shah Rukh Khan, but taken as a whole it would be hard to argue that Muslims did not suffer discrimination.
Indeed, when the debate got started it seemed everyone taking part agreed on this issue, including the two participants challenging the motion. The veteran journalist MJ Akbar, who has spent much of his career highlighting discrimination in India, was one of the two taking on this task and even he admitted "you cannot say that Muslims get an entirely fair deal". Sachin Pilot, a young government minister, (he is also the son of a former Congress minister) and an alumni of St Stephen's, also admitted things were not perfect. Yet he argued that there were many elements within Indian society that suffered and it was not that Muslims suffered particular discrimination.
Against this, Seema Mustafa, a journalist and political commentator, said the government had done little for Muslims who had been especially victimised by security forces since the 9/11 attacks. Teesta Setalvad, a prominent civil rights activist, claimed that Muslims were being excluded from the "elite political and economic leadership of India". "The Muslim today lives in a segregated class leading to ghettoisation and a consequently very dangerous situation. Above all, Muslim women are discriminated against to make sure a credible leadership does not emerge," she said.
They also mentioned the Indian establishment's refusal to properly bring to justice those responsible for attacks on Muslims, be it the destruction of the Babri Masjid of the appalling misnamed Gujarat "riots" in which hundreds of Muslims were brutally murdered in a systematic operation assisted by elements within the local government, headed by the right-wing nationalist Narendra Modi, a man who has been tipped as a possible future leader of the country.
In fact, so obvious to me was the outcome of the debate, that I left early. I was rather surprised therefore to wake up and discover that the vote had gone the other way. The vote by the students of the college, alumni of which account for six current government ministers, found that 63 per cent opposed the motion while only 37 agreed.
So what to make of this? In a situation where the statistics apparently prove one thing, how could a group of such young smart people have voted the other way. Were they really taken in by Sachin Pilot's disingenuous argument that "everyone in India has an equal opportunity" or what it simply that was this was what they wanted to believe (and who would not wish for such a situation).
I couldn't help thinking there was something of a cycle here: if the sorts of people that get to become government ministers in India are drawn from educational establishments seemingly so blind to the obvious pitfalls of their society then maybe that's why nothing get's changed. And yes, one could say the same thing about plenty of other countries all around the world.
Inclusive Justice is a matter of rights rather than an outcome of the this and that person. Muslims need to fight, struggle for inclusive justice across the organisations ,agency, enterprises and institutions that are supported with the money of taxpayers.
ReplyDelete