Author: Bulbul Roy Mishra
Publication: BJP today
Date: June 1-15, 2002
It is said that if there was no
Shakuni, there would have been no Kurukshetra war. Shakuni's power politics
in the royal household eventually led to a devastating war that saw the
end of the Kauravas including Shakuni.
In today's Mahabharat, the garb
of Shakuni has been donned by a class of pseudo-secular cum intellectuals
who are hell-bent to divide Indians along the communal line for petty political
gains or self-publicity. Their role is to instigate, misguide and provoke
Muslim brethren against their Hindu brothers so that the fight between
the two goes on with the ferocity of Kurukshetra war. Instead of finding
solution to a dispute they invariably strive to prolong it, ostensibly
with the intention of helping the underdogs, but actually to set them against
the majority community. And this they do by misinterpreting speeches, exaggerating
incidents and distorting facts. Let us take the recent riot in Gujarat
as the case in point and analyze the role of those so-called well wishers
of the Muslim community.
All of us by now know how the media
as a whole has misinterpreted Vajpayee's Goa speech to project him as a
rabid anti-Muslim, wearing a secular mask all through. "It must be mortifying
for Atal Bihari Vajpayee to realise at the fag end of his career", wrote
Amulya Ganguly in editorial column of the Hindustan Times in his article
"Mask for all seasons" on May 6, "that he will be remembered in history
as the Mask". Ganguly, the prophetic historian, ought to have done a little
homework by reading the text of Vajpayee's Goa speech before passing his
judgement. He obviously did not. One who really did was the editor of the
Indian Express himself, but by then eminent journalists of the likes of
Ganguly, A.G.Noorani, Vir Sanghvi and Kuldip Nayar had shred Vajpayee.
All of them misquoted Vajpayee as saying which he actually did not - "wherever
there are Muslims, they are unwilling to live in peace". Sonia Gandhi also
betrayed her narrow political vision in condemning Vajpayee for double
talk, after first accusing him of losing his mental balance. What Vajpayee
actually spoke was reprinted in the Indian Express on 24 April and his
words were as follows: "Islam has two facets. One is that which tolerates
others, which teaches its adherents to follow the path of truth, which
preaches compassion and sensitivity. But these days, militancy in the name
of Islam leaves no room for tolerance. It has raised the slogan of Jehad.
It is dreaming of recasting the entire world in its own mould ... Wherever
such Muslims live, they tend not to live in coexistence with others, not
to mingle with other; and instead of propagating their ideas in a peaceful
manner, they want to spread their faith by resorting to terror and threats.
The world has become alert to this danger." It is noteworthy that Vajpayee
did not condemn all Muslims but only "such Muslims". The Prime Minister's
implicit reference in this regard was obviously to the jehadis in Kashmir
and elsewhere, as he referred to international concern about terrorism.
Even Musharraf would not have found the above remark of Vajpayee as exceptionable.
Shekhar Gupta, the editor of the
Indian Express, atleast had the courage to admit as late as on May 4, in
his article "Desi Punch, Italian Judy" that "I finally heard the Prime
Minister's Goa speech and one has to concede that he has a right to complain
over the way most of the media reported it and what are now popularly believed
to be his sweeping remarks against all Muslims.... You have to accept that
on this particular remark Vajpayee had been condemned unfairly." Other
journalists or political leaders did not have the courage or integrity
to mend their remarks on Vajpayee based on the mischievous distortion of
what he actually said.
Mani Shankar Aiyar in his editorial
article "For Israel, a Gujarati view," published in the Indian Express
on April 30, has compared the incomparable. "Ariel Sharon is the Narendra
Modi of Israel", writes Aiyar. "Naroda Patiya is to Gujarat what Jenin
is to Palestine." Aiyar's clever comparison of the two incomparable situations
betrays his propensity to trick his readers into believing in the most
absurd. Aiyar with his external affairs background should know better that
Gujarat riot is just not comparable with the deliberate vengeful strike
of Israel on Jenin. Secondly, the killings in Gujarat were not brought
about by the attack of an external power or a state machinery like it happened
in Jenin. Thirdly, the historic Palestinian controversy is absent in Gujarat.
So far three complaints of rape
have been registered together with a complaint that the womb of a pregnant
Muslim lady has been slit. Surely those who are capable of doing such heinous
crime cannot call themselves votary of any religious belief, much less
Hinduism which teaches to look upon all ladies as mother embodiment. Such
criminals deserve worst punishment. But to allege that such crime has been
perpetrated by the Hindus at the instigation of the Chief Minister himself
is nothing but narrow and mean politics, contrived to divide the nation
on communal line. Such perverse propaganda will no doubt spell disaster
for the country by completely alienating Muslims from the majority of the
Hindus. It is pertinent to mention here that while Lok Sabha was debating
Modi ouster, opinion poll of Aaj Tak revealed that the majority of viewers
were in favour of Modi continuing,
One ought to remember that the Muslims
and the Hindus in India share a common heritage and culture. Islamic dargahs
are visited by Hindu pilgrims with utmost devotion. Similarly, Muslims
also participate in Hindu festivals. The Prime Minister himself has many
Muslim friends and followers who will testify his true secular credentials.
My appeal, therefore, to our Muslim brethren is that don't be swayed by
aggressive propaganda of your so-called well-wishers. Have trust in the
sagacity and fair play of Vajpayee government. The wrong doers both at
Godhra and in other places in Gujarat shall surely be punished.
