The Faulty Trendsetters

In recent couple of weeks amongst a lot of hue and cry, something has come up again. A trend. A trend that has been visible for some time now. Trend of a corrosive strain of American Left-wing identity (CAL) politics has taken root among the progressive sections of the young, urban elite in India. This politics is defined by purity, where no more than minor differences of ideology are tolerated. Anything more instantly makes you an enemy, fit to be despised or, in the vocabulary of the modern woke Left, ‘cancelled’. The only way out for Indian progressives would require a concentrated effort of engaging with ordinary people holding so called ‘problematic’ views, listening to them and trying to convince them of your own viewpoints, rather than dismissing them as “waste-of-time bigots”. RSS Karyakartas have spent many decades on the ground, working selflessly in small towns and villages, gradually convincing people of their ideology and the potent of commitment. The ideological hegemony that the RSS enjoys today is built on their sweat and blood. Meanwhile, many on the progressive side display little patience to even engage with their family and friends with opposing viewpoints. This by no means suggests that these viewpoints don't have credibility or vigour to take on the majority view, but only that they fail to achieve their objective because the process fails to counter the narrative of the majority view.

If you look on the other side, the cohesive acceptance can be gauged from the fact that RSS invited Dr. Pranab Mukherjee, a lifelong congressman, to the annual conference at Nagpur as a guest of honour to respect opinions of dissent. For the progressives’ following this CAL style, the very reason why they have miserably failed at being an opposition is because of their lack of groundwork and accepting behaviour. The Vice-President very beautifully says, “let the government propose and opposition oppose”. Even Dr. Shashi Tharoor pointed out that “you need to appreciate the government where necessary, the opposition just cannot feed on the mistakes of the government.” When emergency was declared it was these “waste-of-time bigots” who provided Jay Prakash Narayan with the organisational strength and took a backseat in favour of the Loknayak being the face of movement. The reason BJP and RSS continue to strengthen themselves despite all the dissent and protests is because they've actually gone to the people and heard them over the years. Even at the peak of their power they are seen during the Patna floods with more than 11k volunteers, they are seen working with tribals through their Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram and they are seen organising protests in form of Sabrimala agitation. This groundwork, however, has lacked in all other social and political organisations challenging them. Our country before being a nation state is a civilisational state. No one has understood this concept better than the RSS. Culture and emotions are two things that humans have fed on and are the binding factors. The CAL stylers’ are happy fighting their battles on Social media and fulfilling their appetites for being activists, and in process just being the pseudo ones. Ever imagined why despite the economic issues, some farmer distress here and there, even with the so-called communal tag they carry, they've been successful and continue to strengthen themselves? The reason is simple, despite all their failures they're the ones who have actually gone to the people and assured them that the problems will be resolved soon and thus become the healing hands. When they win an election, the first priority is to strengthen organisationally. On the other hand, when the current opposition wins, here and there, they sit back in their AC rooms and go back to being Social Media Warriors. When the BJP loses election, the first thing that they do is something like a membership drive. One other major difference is type of cadre that they can build. Normally any cadre of any organisation, especially political ones, require the so-called dosage of power. When in government they want their ways and that special treatment as a sense of entitlement. It would be foolish to think that RSS/BJP cadre doesn’t but it’s their commitment towards fighting that ideological battle that drives them more. And importantly this drive starts from places like Nabrangpur in Odisha or Ballia in UP or Khunti in Jharkhand or Forbesganj in Bihar or Shikaripura in Karnataka or Nemom in Kerala instead of Akbar Road and Jantar Mantar in Lutyens’ Delhi. Good section of them would not have heard of all these places. Indeed, in woke speak, ‘engaging’ is often considered as ‘indulging’, and is thus deemed as a moral failing. And that my friends, has made all the difference!

NOTE: Mainly written as a part of discussion with shreyamanb@gmail.com

Let’s lacerate the Fear Mongering: The Citizenship Amendment Bill

The Citizenship Amendment Bill which was recently passed by the Parliament has become a casualty to fear mongering by a lot of sections of people in the country. A lot of erroneous allegations are doing rounds to create confusion and instigate the crowds. While most of these have inherent biases against almost everything that the government proposes, there are few who’re genuinely concerned about the state of our country. I hope to logically get through to them. So, let’s lacerate this haze about this latest legislation that has been adopted. This legislation aims to provide that the Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, who entered India on or before December 31, 2014, will not be treated as illegal migrants. In order to get this benefit, they must have also been exempted from the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 by the central government.  The 1920 Act mandates foreigners to carry passport, while the1946 Act regulates the entry and departure of foreigners in India. The basic aim of this legislation is absolutely unrelated to what propaganda that has been peddled the Lutyens’ Khan Market Gang. The aim of this legislation is to correct the historical injustice which has been done to all these communities. In a broader perspective, Partition caused about one crore people to cross over the boundaries and take refuge as paupers. The people who chose to live in then Pakistan found themselves in an Islamic nation governed by religious laws. A pact between Republic of India represented by then PM Pandit Nehru and Islamic Republic of Pakistan represented by then PM Liaqat Ali Khan was signed to ensure safety of minorities in both the newly formed nations, which came to be known as Nehru-Liaqat Pact. However, let’s look at the situation of minorities in both these nations. In India Muslims formed 9 percent of total population in 1947 while Hindus were 85 percent. In 2011 census, Hindus were pegged at 79.8 percent while Muslims are placed at around 15 percent of total population. The amount of persecution in other nations can be gauged from some of the further mentioned situation. Farahnaz Ispahani in her article Cleansing Pakistan of its Minorites claims that “at the time of partition in 1947, almost 23 percent of Pakistan’s population was comprised of non-Muslim citizens. Today, the proportion of non-Muslims has declined to approximately 3 percent.” In a speech, Bangladeshi researcher Abdul Barakat claimed that “on an average 632 Hindus left the country each day and 230,612 annually. He says there will be no Hindus left within Bangladesh within next 30 years.” This is in addition to the frequent news of Hindu girls being abducted and forcibly converted in Pakistan becomes a frequent headline. It’s not that we became aware of this today. Back in 1950s, Bengali Dalit leader Jogendranath Mandal, who was a minister in East Pakistan, had to flee to India on account of persecution of Hindus. It was expected that India and the newly formed nations would protect their minorities. While India stands by its minorities, others have miserably failed to do the same. Henceforth it is only natural that India should fulfil its role as a protector and truly implement the Nehru-Liaqat Pact.

Now let’s look at the outlook of this law and bust some myths. First let’s look at legality of this legislation. Article 11 of the Constitution says “Parliament to regulate the right of citizenship by law. Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this Part shall derogate from the power of Parliament to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to citizenship”, So the parliament has sole right to regulate matters regarding the citizenship. Some CMs have made tall claims regarding not allowing the implementation in their states’. They shouldn’t get their hopes up. There have been claims made by some sections that this law is violative of Fundamental Rights, granted to us by the Constitution. First, among these rights, only Article 14 and 21 are automatically extended to non-citizens. Others are reserved only for all current citizens of the republic. It is true that Article 14 establishes the concept of Equality Before Law and Equal Protection of Law, thus ensuring no one is discriminated on basis of religion. But there is an exception. Article 14 makes provision for “reasonable classification” wherein the principle of equality is relaxed. Thus, the principle of affirmative action or positive discrimination is possible if the criteria for classification is reasonable. All our policies for caste-based reservations, special rights to minorities in India are possible due to this reasonable classification. Even the Supreme Court has underlined this concept. In the case of Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Justice S R Tendolkar, the Court said “It is now well established that while Article 14 forbids class legislation, it does not forbid reasonable classification for the purposes of legislation”. It put forth the concept of “intelligible differentia” which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group, and one which has a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question. The object sought to be achieved as underlined in the act is to give citizenship to some community instead of taking or denying any community any benifit. Moreover, In the case of Parisons Agrotech Pvt Ltd. v. Union of India, the Apex Court held that the equality clause does not forbid geographical classification, provided the difference between the geographical units has a reasonable relation to the object sought to be achieved. Similarly, the persecuted minorities from these three nations form a reasonable classification, since all have faced systematic attacks, persecution and communal violence due to their presence in Islamic nations. All of the above being said, I’m sure this legislation would stand the test in the Supreme Court as well. Indian Muslims or for that matter any current Indian citizen, is in no way affected by this amendment. They are and will continue to enjoy all the benefits as legitimate Indian citizens. So, in essence this act is only a relaxation given to members of these six communities in the period of naturalisation, reduced from 11+1 years to 5+1 years, provided they fulfil all the conditions. The bill deals with refugees who are foreign citizens. Government has NOT prohibited any person of any country, Muslim or not, to apply for citizenship of our republic through the legal means. Any such process take place under other acts like Foreigners Act, 1946 and the MHA will continue to grant citizenship to everyone through that means, just as it was the case before enactment. India has also declared that any refugee entering India post 2015 shall be examined by the above-mentioned acts irrespective of their religion. Let’s examine the claims of some smaller groups within the Islam. But before that let’s keep in mind that there is a fundamental difference between persecuted religious minorities and ethnic violence. Ahmadiyya and Shias are victims of sectarian and ethnic violence which has nothing to do with religious persecution. Thus, they can’t be compared to persecuted religious minorities like Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis and Christians. Moreover, from a legal point of view, if we include cases of ethnic violence along with religious persecution, it cannot be called as “reasonable classification” and it will violate Article 14.

One other issue that has been raised is increment in population. I think it’s a genuine concern. But as act clarifies that relaxation made to people from these communities only applies to those who came to India, till the cut-off date of 2014. After which even members of these communities have to go with the usual 11+1 years of naturalisation, as provided by Citizenship Act, 1955. Now let’s look at some of the issues and raised by some in North-East regarding them suffering, due to influx of non-local refugees. The government has been sensitive to the needs of the Northeast people from day one. It was for the time in history of India that a separate ministry to co-ordinate between and look into implementation of needs of North-East was established under the PM Modi’s leadership. These provisions on citizenship for illegal migrants will not apply to the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura, included in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. These tribal areas include Karbi Anglong (in Assam), Garo Hills (in Meghalaya), Chakma District (in Mizoram), and Tripura Tribal Areas District.  Further, it will not apply to the “Inner Line” areas notified under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.  In these areas, visits by Indians are regulated through the Inner Line Permit.  Currently, this permit system is applicable to Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland. Thus, persecuted refugees won’t be settled in all these areas.  Moreover, Article 371 which provides special rights to North-eastern states will not be affected. The rights include usage of customary laws, land rights, rights of local bodies, local representation, etc. India is a civilisation whose base has always been protected and nurtured by tribal community and therefore it is of utmost importance to protect their indigenous nature. One other issue which has been raised by some sections of society has been the inclusion of other religiously prosecuted communities across the world. It has always been a consistent stand of Government of India regarding citizenship in which it has instead of making blanket laws, focused on country and situation specific laws. Weather it has been about Tamils or Tibetans of any other communities. The government is clear that all other refugees would be dealt with under existing laws like Foreigners Act 1946 and the established process would be followed. CAB specifically focus on persecuted religious minorities. It doesn’t mean other class of refugees would be ignored. One final issue that has propped up has been the issue of Rohingya Muslims. There are fundamental differences between Rohingyas and other refugees. CAB is specifically for three nations- Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan- where the minorities bore the brunt of partition and hence are persecuted. Rohingyas don’t fall in this category as they primarily originate in Myanmar. Also, there are conclusive reports that Rohingyas are a threat to national security of India. Rohingyas have contacts with terrorist organizations like ISIS and LeT. Not just India, PM of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina is on record calling Rohingyas as a threat to national security.

One red flag regarding this bill is how would citizenship be dealt with regard to converts. It is not beyond imagination that for an issue like citizenship, conversion from other religion to any of the six provided in the act is an absolute probability. It is unclear as of now how government proposes to deal with such situations. This can be further clarified only after the MHA comes out with notification and guidelines to apply for citizenship. I am hopeful the apex court will look into that aspect. All in all, this legislation not only furthers our country’s great panoramic cultural continuity of last 5000 years but also adds another feather to it. This legislation not only is in accordance with Vasudaiv Kutumbakam principle that we so dearly value, but also creates exceptions where our National security and Interest is compromised. This is the ultimate example of New India, which holds its’ culture and values but at the same time is willing to go to any and all lengths to protect its integrity and people.