Conceding the ideological turf
An earlier article on this blog had sought to establish by empirical data that the Congress party and its secular allies were soft on terrorism of the jehadi variety . Their record in apprehending and punishing such terrorists when in power is woefully miserable. What bodes grave ill for the integrity of the Indian State however is the base rationale and motivation for the seeming reluctance to confront this sovereignty-debilitating problem with the steely resolve that it demands. That rationale has two facets: a Machiavellian motive to be a permanent contender for power at all costs by nurturing and indulging a Muslim vote bank coupled with a dangerous—even if correct –assumption that the community would take grave offence to the extent of withdrawing its electoral support to even its most ardent political benefactors if any of its members were punished for perpetrating terrorist acts. This second facet leads to an irresistible inference that secular parties are soft on terrorism on account of their belief that there is sympathy among a majority of Muslims for jehadi terrorism. Even if ,however,this eminently disputable premise were true that secular parties should only too readily accept it is both shameful and depressing. It at once indicates that our secular parties have neither stomach nor inclination to wage and win a war of ideas against those who propagate jehadi violence and simultaneously discloses that our secular politicians would sacrifice long-term national interest for immediate power or that alternatively for love or money are themselves seduced by the jehadis.
Consider Congress’s feeble handling of Dawood Ibrahim, ever since he was first identified as being one of the masterminds of the 1993 blasts that ripped through Mumbai.Its governments have never sought either his extradition from Pakistan where he undeniably resides in splendid luxury and enjoys state protection nor of any of his co-conspirators who dispersed not only to Pakistan but to other parts of the world.
In October 1993 the Vohra Committee which was established in the wake of the March 1993 blasts in Mumbai published its report on the political/bureaucratic-mafia nexus in the country .That report ,on the basis of evidence and confidential material placed before it came to the unambiguous conclusion that there existed an alarming political-mafia nexus in several states in the country and that there was a dire need for the creation of a nodal agency of various intelligence gathering outfits in the country to weed out this unholy nexus. While the findings of the committee were made public the materials and evidence disclosing the names of those with criminal links were withheld. What however is in the public domain is statements of witnesses recorded in the 1993 blasts investigation. These disclose that Dawood Ibrahim enjoyed close links with several prominent politicians particularly from Maharashtra at least one of whom even today occupies ministerial office. Congress reluctance to implement the recommendations is accordingly not surprising in the least.
Sometime after the chargesheet in the 1993 terrorist attack case was filed Dawood offered to surrender to the investigating authorities in India on certain terms. The two chief of these was that he be tried only for the 1993 case and that he be placed under house arrest as opposed to being held in custody in jail for security reasons. This audacious offer by an absconding accused in a trial with substantial evidence against him was clearly a bluff made in the confident belief that the Indian authorities would not bite his bait. Again, not surprisingly, the Congress government then in power rejected his offer on the specious ground that they could not accord him preferential treatment. The immense advantage in securing the prime conspirator’s presence in India, the information that could have been obtained from him particularly as regards Pakistan’s role in that heinous attack on India’s sovereignty, his conviction and sentence in that case and the consequent elimination of his potential for similar attacks in future were all strangely lost on the then administration. Dawood’s bluff was never called;his interrogation could expose his many allies in India. Significantly a few years later the NDA government after relentlessly pursuing Abu Salem in Portugal secured his extradition to India from that country on 2 conditions:
that he be investigated and tried only in respect of the 1993 case and that in the event of his conviction the death sentence be not imposed upon him since Portugal did not recognize that sentence. The Congress,then in opposition did not raise the faintest protest on the ground of preferential treatment.
The NDA government in sharp contrast pursued the extradition of Dawood Ibrahim from Pakistan with missionary zeal.The then Home Minister Mr LKAdvani in particular made the extradition of Dawood by Pakistan almost a precondition for the improvement of Indo-Pak relations at the Agra summit of 2001, an insistence which irked Musharraf in the extreme and led him to blame Mr Advani by insinuation for the breakdown of talks. Undeterred, Mr Advani pressed the issue with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell during his visit to the U.S. in January 2002.His efforts were finally rewarded in October 2003 when the United States designated Dawood Ibrahim as a global terrorist having links with Al QAEDA and financing activities of LeT and other terrorist organisations.
So why then is the Congress so meek and indeed almost indulgent in its attitude towards Dawood and his known acolytes like Sunjay Dutt? The answer is not far to seek. The party believes that the poor,uneducated Muslim who constitutes a significant majority of that community largely because years of Congress rule has consigned him to that condition privately regard Dawood and his ilk as icons of justice where the Indian state has failed them in their hour of need. Rather than disabuse adherents of this presumed view within the community by deterring terrorists through their capture and conviction the Congress prefers to let the law meander aimlessly forever so that its inaction earns it the electoral harvest of a grateful community’s votes. Meanwhile, the nation burns as the undeterred merchants of terror unleash their next vicious attack.
That Congress has capitulated abjectly to fundamentalist and extremist ideologues in the Muslim community is most clearly established by its passionate support for SIMI. The party and its spin doctors in the media have actually given this demonstrably pernicious outfit a clean bill of health in the face of both the organisation’s unabashed adherence to and espousal of jehadi violence for the purpose of subversion of the Indian State and its well established involvement in several terrorist attacks across India.
The Student’s Islamic Movement of India (Simi) is a fundamentalist organisation of Muslim youth founded in Aligarh in 1977. Its aim is “the liberation of India” by converting it to an Islamic state. Simi has declared jehad against India the aim of which is to establish Dar-ul-Islam by forcefully converting all Indians to Islam or by extermination. Simi is opposed to democracy, nationalism and secularism and thus to the Constitution of India. For Simi, Osama bin laden is an Islamic hero and not a terrorist. Further, Simi does not regard Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of India.
As if its credo was not seditious enough for any mainstream political party to at least maintain a healthy distance from the organisation if not roundly condemn it, the Congress party and its secular allies have staunchly championed its cause. Worse, their support of Simi has been in the face of overwhelming evidence of the organisation’s active participation in terrorist activities.
On the 26th of March 2002 at a specially convened Parliamentary session to enact POTA, Sonia Gandhi shockingly opposed the Act on the ground that it was being introduced only to target Simi which was not a terrorist organisation. This in spite of the fact that the Home ministry on the basis of Intelligence Bureau reports had justified the ban on the ground that the outfit had strong links with Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the LeT. She was supported amongst others by Prakash Jaiswal whom the UPA appointed as Minister of State for Home on its assumption of the reins of power in 2004.
Since then the role of Simi in the perpetration of terrorist activities through the length and breadth of India is well-documented history. The Institute of Conflict Management headed by KPS Gill has catalogued over 100 incidents from the year 2000 to July 2008 that characterized Simi as a terror outfit.
Even so, when Simi challenged the latest ban on it imposed by the UPA regime in February 2008, the Home Ministry manned by Shivraj Patil and Prakash Jaiswal wilfully or otherwise presented its case so abysmally that the Delhi High Court was compelled to quash the ban on Simi on the ground that the government had not furnished any evidence to indicate that Simi was involved in any terrorist activities since the previous ban. It was only the vociferous criticism of the opposition and particularly the anger and protests of the police forces in various states including Congress –run states(the State of Maharashtra for example was at pains to point out that Simi was responsible for two major terrorist acts since the earlier ban—the train blast of 11th July2006 and the Malegaon explosions in September the same year) that the UPA government appealed to the Supreme Court which promptly restored the ban.
The purpose of this treatise is not to flay Congress’s avowed secular credentials. In a polity as diverse as India the road to power for a political party necessarily consists in championing sectional interests while feigning to be “truly national “ in order to maximize its electoral appeal. The real danger is when a political party in fact begins to accept its propaganda as gospel. Once before in 1975 the Congress seduced by its own propaganda that it alone could guarantee stability subverted this country’s democracy and declared an unconstitutional Emergency. Today its only badge of pride is the appropriation to itself of the coveted title of all those who seek the Muslim vote bank: keeper of the secular ideal. On available evidence the Congress seems to believe that the title behoves it to encourage separatist ideas, jehadi doctrines and an Islamic theocracy in India. This election is the time to put a mirror before Congress eyes, disabuse the party of its dangerous misconceptions about secularism and relieve it from the responsibity of office before it cedes India to a barbaric culture as effete rulers have so often done in the past.
No comments:
Post a Comment