India Positive Page 7

  Finally, ‘What the Shattered AAP Dream Tells Us about Ourselves’ talks about holding our governments accountable, despite all the disappointments.

  The Rohingya Are Human, Too: How We Can Deal with Refugees and Still Keep India Safe

  By handling the Rohingya crisis both humanely and practically, India stands to strengthen its political presence in the South Asian region

  News reports informed us that the BSF used pepper spray and stun grenades to stop Rohingya refugees from entering Indian territory. The government also seems keen to get rid of the Rohingya already in the country (their numbers are estimated at around 40,000), citing security threats.

  Many of our TV news channels seem to agree. We have even heard news anchors screaming, ‘Let the Rohingya be found floating around in the Indian Ocean. Don’t dump them here.’ Well, we are talking about human beings here. That includes children, women and elderly people. Some of these are people living in our own neighbourhoods today.

  There are border villages of Myanmar’s Rakhine province (where the Rohingya come from) which are not far (in the range of a hundred kilometres) from some towns in Mizoram. Ethnically, these people are Indo-Aryan. Their own country has marginalised them for decades. They are denied citizenship and passports, need state permission to marry (which takes years) and to travel to neighbouring villages, and are excluded from government jobs.

  Worse, there is a systematic campaign of racism and hate against them in Myanmar. Imagine living in your own country like a hated outsider, denied basic rights, and watching people from your community getting routinely killed just for being who you are.

  If you can understand this suffering as a human being, then it is perhaps also time to disclose that the majority of the Rohingya are Muslims. Does it make a difference? Is their suffering any less because of their religion?

  So why are we pepper-spraying their kids and screaming to get them out?

  There are several reasons. Some are actually valid. Others simply reek of our bigotry and lack of human empathy. They also ignore the potential benefits and opportunities that India gains by being a regional Big Brother.

  But first, let’s go over the valid reasons for not welcoming the Rohingya. According to the Indian government, some Rohingya in India may have terror links, or are at risk of radicalisation. This assessment is not inaccurate. Unfortunately, there are groups with fundamentalist leanings among the Rohingya.

  To fight the injustice the Rohingya have been subjected to, organisations like the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) have popped up. They use violent means to grab attention for their cause. In fact, the recent purge of the Rohingya by the Myanmar government was a result of ARSA terror attacks.

  Hence, the Rohingya are not just seen as victims, but also as a community with significant radical elements. People who live in strife, have limited means, and are discriminated against, are more vulnerable to being indoctrinated. In fact, plenty of Indians fit these criteria and can be exploited in the same way.

  Having said that, if we had a proper registry of the Rohingya in India, enabling us to monitor the community more closely, such probability is reduced. If we gave them legal refugee status in the country (rather than forcing them to hide from authorities) by issuing refugee cards, for instance, we could have a better idea of what they are up to. As in any community with radical elements, we would find that over 99 per cent of them are not terrorists.

  Spraying them with pepper, or sending them back to the country that will probably kill them, doesn’t seem like something a civilised, democratic and humane country would do. One of the reasons cited for doing so is the ‘burden’ refugees place on the state that hosts them. The fact that there are about a million Rohingya left in Myanmar is a matter of concern.

  Most of these refugees move to Bangladesh, as most Rohingya territories in Myanmar border this country. In the recent exodus alone, Bangladesh received over 4,00,000 refugees, ten times as many as the total number of Rohingya who have sought refuge in India. These refugees fend for themselves, get very few state benefits and work mostly as daily wage labourers. Are they really going to create such a burden?

  The bigger question is: how do we handle refugees in general? What would we have done, for example, if Hindus were persecuted in Pakistan to the point that they were all forced to run to us? Would we accept them and give them asylum, or would we pepper-spray them back?

  We need to provide a mechanism for refugees from our neighbouring countries through which they can legally apply for asylum. If they can prove persecution—religious, ethnic or otherwise—they may be considered eligible. Economic reasons alone will not be enough to justify immigration. Once inside the country, these refugees would also be tracked by the state. They would be more obligated to inform the government of their movements and activities than regular citizens.

  Of course, having a formal refugee policy doesn’t mean India alone takes in refugees while the rest of the continent does nothing. Just as in the EU, there should be sharing arrangements in the ASEAN region to handle refugee crises. Richer nations can contribute more money towards the resettlement of asylum seekers.

  Meanwhile, if India took the lead in handling the Rohingya crisis, it would lift our image as a serious power and problem-solver in the region. If we indulge in fearmongering and pepper-spraying instead, it will only show how immature we are.

  Ultimately, the Myanmar government cannot be absolved of its actions which have created the crisis. To deny citizenship to people who have lived in your country for decades is deplorable and unjustifiable, whatever the rationale. Myanmar is a country with a Buddhist majority. We see Buddhism as one of the world’s most non-violent religions. Hence, the extreme violence meted out to Rohingya is, frankly, shocking to most Indians.

  India can play a big role in pressuring Myanmar to fix this problem peacefully. But we have to decide. Are we going to be the scared, xenophobic and close-minded India of the past, or a more open, humane and mature society?

  How we treat the helpless at our door goes a long way in determining that.

  Shorts First, Soul Next?

  RSS should use all its influence with the government to push for 10 per cent growth, not Hindu culture

  Something dramatic happened: the ninety-year-old Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh changed its uniform. The ubiquitous RSS khaki shorts will make way for brown trousers.

  This change is superficial at one level. After all, a rose is a rose by any other name and an RSS worker is an RSS worker no matter what they wear. But it also shows the RSS intent to change with the times. In fact, the RSS today has a golden opportunity to contribute to India’s progress, which is its stated mission. This can only happen if the organisation modifies its current ideology as well as some of the means it adopts to achieve its goals.

  The RSS began life during the British Raj, as an organisation dedicated to bringing the Hindus of the country together to protect their interests. It was banned first during British rule and thrice after Independence—in 1948, when Nathuram Godse assassinated Mahatma Gandhi; then during the Emergency (1975–77); and after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992. Some of these bans were political (the Congress saw the RSS as an adversary). Eventually, all of them were revoked. Such a history does create trust issues for outsiders who wonder what this organisation is really about.

  The official RSS website sums up its mission: ‘Expressed in the simplest terms, the ideal of the Sangh is to carry the nation to the pinnacle of glory through organising the entire society and ensuring the protection of Hindu Dharma.’ Further, ‘Our one supreme goal is to bring to life the all-round glory and greatness of our Hindu Rashtra […] Bharat must stand before the world as a self-confident, resurgent and mighty nation.’

  The mission thus appears to be twofold: one, to restore India’s glory in the world; and two, to organise and protect Hindu religion and culture. There is nothing wrong with these goals as such. Problems arise when the RSS uses certain
methods to carry out this so-called mission.

  Not all its actions are harmful. The RSS does some good charitable work. Its volunteers have helped out in almost all of India’s recent natural disasters. Individual shakhas organise community work like morning fitness classes, helping millions across the nation.

  However, problems arise from the RSS belief that nationalism must be inculcated in people even at the cost of personal liberties, from the imposition of RSS ideas about traditional Hindu culture being the essence of India’s glory as well as the cornerstone of a peaceful and prosperous society. The two separate objectives of making India glorious again and protecting traditional Hindu culture are frequently intertwined for the RSS, which assumes one cannot happen without the other.

  This is not true. Worse, this will not achieve the RSS objectives of building a glorious India and saving Hindu culture. So what will make India glorious? The first necessary (but not sufficient) condition for a country to be respected among the nations of the world is a certain level of prosperity, including higher per capita income and standards of living. We ourselves look up to countries richer than us. So if RSS wants a great India, it needs to focus on something it hasn’t focussed on so far—the economy.

  The RSS has tremendous influence over the government, and so far it has used this only to promote Hindu culture and a few charity initiatives. Instead, RSS should set up its own team of economists and demand 10 per cent GDP growth. When that is achieved, India will become rich, its youth will get jobs, people will be happier, and India will be respected. If you don’t have money in your pocket, the world is not going to listen to you.

  The second condition for a glorious country is a free society, where citizens have the liberty to make life choices—which god to pray to and how much, who to love and how much, how patriotic one needs to be and how to express that patriotism. The moment you get into imposition mode, some of that glory and greatness is lost.

  North Korea makes its citizens chant slogans about its greatness on a regular basis. Does anyone take that nation seriously? It is in free societies that people, ideas, culture and art thrive, creating a huge impact on the world. If you take away people’s liberties to restore order, you won’t get glory. You will only get a fascist reputation.

  As for helping Hinduism prosper, it will help if the RSS becomes more inclusive by reaching out to Dalits, women and Muslims. These sections of our society need to be represented on RSS high-level committees and boards. All RSS heads in the past have been upper-caste Hindus. Membership is almost entirely Hindu. Is this spreading Hindu culture or building a cult?

  If RSS implements these changes, it can play a far greater role in Indian society and go a long way towards achieving its objectives. While the RSS is affiliated to the BJP, it doesn’t face similar political pressures. It can take on some issues that the BJP can’t address. Its statement about reservation policies needing to be reviewed, for instance, was welcome, for no political party in India has the courage to say this. It may have cost the BJP government the Bihar elections, but should the RSS be more concerned about the Bihar polls than restoring India’s glory? Nation first, politics later. Never dilute that.

  Greater emphasis on the economy, inclusiveness, and putting the nation first, will be a shift in focus that both the RSS and India as a whole could benefit from. It is not only the shorts, but also the soul of the organisation, that needs a bit of a change. Hope we see that change soon.

  We Are All Anti-nationals: The Equation D+M>H Explains Indian Politics, but D+M+H Is a Better Combo

  We need to move beyond divisive vote bank politics and sectarian identities to build a better India

  Whoa, what’s happening? It used to be BJP versus the rest, the tolerant fighting pitched battles with the intolerant. How and when did it become nationalists versus anti-nationals?

  A couple of kids protested at JNU. No big deal there, as that campus probably has more protests than classroom lectures. However, this article is not a judgement on JNU, though it is about time that university began to behave like one.

  This article aims to examine the labelling of people as ‘anti-India’ or ‘anti-national’ and why there is so much of that going around. From award wapsi to the JNU protests, someone is always being asked to go to Pakistan. In asking why, this article will not take sides. When both sides behave stupidly, it is best just to watch.

  So, what is going on? Essentially, Indian politics is governed by the equation: D+M>H.

  Sorry to be nerdy, but let me explain. D refers to Dalits, or rather all lower caste voters (including SCs, STs, BCs and OBCs). You could call it the Downtrodden vote. M refers to the Muslim vote. Again, if you prefer political correctness, you could call it the Minority vote. H refers to the upper caste Hindu vote. The greater-than symbol means that the Downtrodden plus Minority vote is always greater than the upper caste Hindu vote.

  Let’s say that D is roughly 40 per cent, M is 20 per cent, and H accounts for 40 per cent of the vote bank. Of course, these numbers are vastly oversimplified. But they help understand the political dynamic in our country today.

  This equation means that, under normal circumstances, the BJP can almost never be the ruling party. It isn’t surprising that in the nearly seventy years that have elapsed since Independence, BJP has been in power for less than seven.

  The only way BJP can form a government is when one or more of the following happen. One, the D+M vote gets divided due to multiple parties competing for the same vote. Two, D and M separate from each other in a particular election. Three, the BJP projects a charismatic candidate who woos some D and even a few M votes to the H side.

  In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, all this happened, propelling Modi to victory. In the recent Bihar election, parties opposing the BJP ensured D+M did not split, and they won. In Delhi, in 2015, AAP not only got the D+M vote but also managed to slice out a fair chunk of H.

  Why does D+M vote in constant opposition to H? Well, D and M both feel persecuted by upper class Hindus who they feel have denied them opportunities. D+M is such a sizeable chunk of the vote that many political parties woo them. They feed the victimisation theory in order to do so.

  The eventual solution for uplifting D and M lies in their focussing on educating and modernising themselves. Since that is difficult, the political parties representing them often resort to agendas that attack H, and H’s aspirations.

  The Congress has always enjoyed the D and M vote. SP, BSP, TMC, RJD and JD(U) are other parties who seek this vote. Even AAP realises the value of this vote, hence its constant attacks on Modi.

  Meanwhile, the H vote sees things differently. It doesn’t feel like a victim; hence, there is no inherent need for retribution. In fact, H can even dream of a better India. It aspires to build a nation that is prosperous, free and respected in the world. Since D+M wants to annoy H, it often enjoys seeing these H aspirations being punctured.

  This is where the ‘anti-national’ narrative is born. H wonders why D+M, already appeased by reservations, does not move along and share its aspirations. Aren’t they anti-national in refusing to dream big, like itself? Meanwhile, D+M thinks: how dare H dream big while we are suffering? India owes us first. How dare H impose its national aspirations on us?

  This fundamental tussle is what generates our daily politics. Sadly, it also allows true anti-nationals to divide us. A terrorist group infiltrates and attacks India. Parties which seek the D+M vote, afraid of upsetting them, do not condemn it enough. Similarly, a fringe H group makes an outrageous Hindutva statement. The BJP doesn’t condemn it enough, so as not to antagonise the H vote.

  In this constant D-M-H conflict there is one casualty—India. But the equation doesn’t have to be this way. D+M+H is a better combo, and it can decide who to vote for based on real issues rather than merely to settle scores.

  The politicians like this divide. It allows them to be relevant just by feeding the conflict, rather than focussing on real work. And we citizens can’
t seem to get past it either. But if we don’t all come together as a nation, aren’t we all anti-nationals?

  D has to integrate and engage with H, and come up with a better plan than perennial reservations which only maintains the divide. M has to realise that India comes first, religion later. H has to stop imposing its culture and views on others, and understand not everyone thinks the way they do.

  We need to come together, listen to all sides and resolve our differences. Work on moving beyond our D, M or H affiliations. Until only ‘I’ remains, which stands for India. And that is when we will no longer deserve the ‘anti-national’ label.

  @chetan_bhagat

  If there are people here who can think beyond whether it was the BJP or Congress’ fault and think about what is actually good for the country, let me know. Would be nice to see some people who actually care about India first.

  532 replies/ 335 retweets/ 3,550 likes

  @chetan_bhagat

  The Modi wave even at its peak gave BJP a few %age points vote share lead. With the wave ebbing, and opposition uniting, simple arithmetic making it very difficult for the BJP to win in several places. Good or bad, shows what 2019 could be like for India.

  243 replies/ 164 retweets/ 1,261 likes

  To Get Poll Maths Right, BJP Needs to Remember Three Numbers

  Catering to different kinds of voters is the only way the BJP can win against a united Opposition in 2019

  By the time you read this, dozens of articles will have appeared on what the BJP did wrong in Bihar. Prescriptions on what the BJP should do now have also been given—from reining in Hindutva elements to speeding up reforms. The party, meanwhile, has cited the official reason for the defeat as ‘getting the voter arithmetic wrong’. If it was indeed about the arithmetic, then the BJP could solve its problems by simply buying a few nice Vedic math calculators. It is arithmetic and more.