[I am happy that I have a real Manish Shukla (at
least one of the several viewpoints that I am trying to address) in my good
friend Jiten. I welcome all the other Manish Shuklas in my FB circle or
elsewhere to participate in this dialog so that we can all be richer in
information and more (or less) committed to the truth as we perceive it.]
MS: if Modi sanctioned
it, do you think he'd have issued a written executive order? Are you kidding
me? Just because SIT didn't find any "evidence" he sanctioned it
doesn't mean ANYTHING in Indian politics and judicial system….(I have excised
the portion in MS’s comments about the Ehsan Jafri case as I will be dealing
with it in more detail later.)
Besides, it seems the
modi supporters also fall in two categories - 1> Those who implicitly agree
that he played a role, but are willing to neglect it due to his other positive
records in Gujarat. This category now hides behind SIT ruling because the charges
couldn't be "proved" and hence claim he's innocent despite them
knowing deep down inside what happened there…
And no many Modi opponents like me don't believe
just because you support him, you're anti-Muslim. That has nothing to do with
what he didn't do to prevent what happened. It's more about what he didn't do
rather than what he probably did as a whisper to his lieutenants. If you
recall, during 83 Sikh riots in Delhi, Bal Thackrey is famously known to assure
some of the Sikh leaders that he wouldn't let that happen in Mumbai, and he
made sure of that. Modi was in same position here and didn't do squat other
than ordering some help on paper. If your argument is "only 790 Muslims
were killed and that's nothing compared to other riots", then you're just
not getting the point or are willfully ignoring that record. Same is true with
the ridiculous claim that some idiot tried to claim the the train incident was
an accident. Yes, he was an idiot, but proving someone else an idiot is not a
defense for Modi.
Me: OK. First things first. My purpose behind this
dialog is to firstly lay out the facts that are recorded officially, which, in
my opinion, are strong enough to make my case for Modi. It is also to lay out
all the opinions that have been made by the so-called ‘amateur’ Modi-haters and
address each and every one of them so that it can serve the purpose of at least
informing them of the other side of the debate. There are millions of Manish
Shuklas out there and several differing shades of opinions ranging from ‘If you
like Modi you must be a Muslim-hater’ ( I will call them the ‘irrational’
Modi-haters) to the more balanced ones (like my friend Jiten) such as ‘Modi
opponents like me don't believe just because you support him, you're
anti-Muslim. That has nothing to do with what he didn't do to prevent what
happened. It's more about what he didn't do rather than what he probably did as
a whisper to his lieutenants’ (I will call them ‘rational’ Modi-haters). I
don’t know the proportion of irrational to rational Modi-haters but if you have
spent any time or effort in observing the discourse in the Indian media and
social media, you KNOW that there is a vast number of ‘irrational’ Modi-hatred
out there – people willing to accuse ME (and any other Modi-supporters) of
Muslim-hatred just because I/we support Modi.
[In fact the entire media strategy of Congress is to
foment this guilt complex among ordinary Hindus so that we would rather
re-elect a horrendously corrupt, divisive and dynastic Congress than vote for
Modi and be considered as anti-Muslim. My Modi-hating friends would rather see
the India being subjected to another 5 years of rape by the Congress goons than
allow their American friends to wag their fingers at them and make them
ashamed. They don’t mind being ashamed for a hobbled, economically devastated
India, thanks to another 5 years of Congress mis-rule, but oh, they are so
alarmed at the prospect of being called citizens of Modi-nation. Even though
they haven’t taken the basic courtesy to verify whether the charges against
Modi are true or not. Sorry, yours truly is not taking this bait and not
falling for this Goebbelsian propaganda. But I will expand on this particular
aspect of Congress strategy later.]
So the first shibboleth that I want to destroy is
that just because I support Modi, I must be anti-Muslim. At least (this
particular) Mr. Manish Shukla does not believe so. And I am thankful for that.
But he then goes ahead and makes a slightly less egregious insinuation.
Shuklaji says, “Modi-supporters fall into a single category. Those who implicitly agree that he played a role, but are
willing to neglect it due to his other positive records in Gujarat. This
category now hides behind SIT ruling because the charges couldn't be
"proved" and hence claim he's innocent despite them knowing deep down
inside what happened there”. Wow! What an amazing deduction. And how far is
this blatant insinuation (that every Modi-supporter KNOWS that Modi is GUILTY
but is willing to overlook it due to the great developmental strides in
Gujarat) from taking the next step and just outright accusing us
Modi-supporters of being Muslim-haters? A very slippery slope and a very fine
distinction indeed.
Shuklaji, in your
cognitive dissonance, you are not even WILLING to countenance the possibility
that Modi is indeed NOT GUILTY. On one hand you pompously aver that you do not
consider Modi-supporters to be automatic Muslim-haters but on the other hand
you glibly accuse us of being hypocrites because we do not share your ill-arrived-at
opinion that Modi IS GUILTY. Where is the fairness that I assumed when I began
this dialog?
You are getting into a Sherlock Holmsian deduction
game. The known facts are that,
1. A
thousand people, including 750+ Muslims were killed in riots
2. Modi
was the chief minister of the state
3. Modi
is Hindu and espouses Hindu causes and is branded as ‘anti-secular’ by the
designated agents of deciding who is secular in India
Ergo, he must have been
complicit in the Muslim-killings. And since there is no proof that he actually
had any complicity, you nonchalantly denigrate the SIT constituted by the
Supreme Court as incompetent or motivated or both.
Well, no cigar for you
Mr. Holmes. There is no proof against Modi because he is NOT GUILTY. And the
highest court of the land says so. You may think that Indian Supreme Court is
full of corrupt jokers (as if American Supreme court with its Thomases and
Scalias and Alitos are a paragon of objective and impartial jurisprudence) but
unless and until proven otherwise, the SIT judgment stands and it completely
vindicates Modi.
Now I will take up the
next bit of spacious inferential reasoning by you. That of 1984 (not 1983)
anti-Sikh riots and the alleged role of Bal Thakaray in shielding the Sikhs of
Mumbai from possible retaliation. Firstly, you must understand (and not just
spout) the political realities of India, Gujarat and Mumbai. In 1984, 2002 and
today. In 1984 and pretty much even until recently, Bal Thakaray (BT)/Shiv Sena
was the undisputed king of Mumbai. BT had an iron grip on the Shiv Sena cadres
and if he didn’t give a go-ahead, not even one Shiv Sainik would dare to as
much as cast an eye on anyone in Mumbai. If BT did indeed assure the Sikhs of
his protection and their lives were spared (all this is just hearsay as you
have agreed) then my million thanks to BT. But in 1984 Shiv Sena and Congress
were not exactly buddies joined at the hips. In fact the complete lack of
anti-Sikh riots in Mumbai simply points towards a grisly Congress pogrom of
anti-Sikh riots in Delhi. Rajiv Gandhi even made an absolutely callous
statement when he was asked about the murder of Sikhs. He famously invoked the
big tree falling and the ground shaking analogy (look it up in case you don’t
know about it).
In 2002, Modi was a
mere transplant into Gujarat politics. He had been anointed the CM for less
than 5 months (he was a transplant from national executives of BJP) and had his
hands full dealing with the devastating earthquake that happened in January
2001. He had no control over the VHP and Bajrang Dal cadres. It is simply
erroneous and even disingenuous to claim that Modi could have prevented the
bloodbath of riots by simply flicking a magic wand and he callously refused to
do so. It is even more preposterous to compare his grip on VHP, Bajrang cadres
to that of BT’s iron grip on Shiv Sainiks. If you study the actual convictions
and sentences meted out post 2002 riots, most of the culprits were VHP/Bajrang
cadres. Until recently the name of NaMo generated as much anger among VHP
cadres as it did among the Congress cadres. Also you need to understand the
realities of Gujarat and its Muslim population. There are over 6 million
Muslims spread all over Gujarat. In the top cities of Gujarat (Ahmedabad,
Surat, Vadodara, Bharuch etc.) there are 100,000 plus Muslims, spread over
hundreds of localities. As against this vast and spread-out population, there
were only 6000 serving police personnel in entire Gujarat. It was physically
impossible to protect each and every locality unless hundred thousand plus personnel
were requisitioned and deployed. This COULD NOT BE DONE in just a few hours or
even a couple of days. (remember that the army was fully deployed in Operation
Parakram and the neighboring state CM’s from Congress simply declined to
provide additional police resources). You may continue to hold your unresearched,
knee-jerk opinions about the complicity of Modi because it is difficult to
disown one’s opinions even in face of overwhelming contrary evidence (this is
called cognitive dissonance). But that doesn’t make your opinions right.
Lastly I will actually
provide a circumstantial, inferential reasoning of my own (I know that I
promised to stick to the facts but when the accusations go into the la-la-land of
unsubstantiated flights of fancy, one needs to change one’s approach) that will
not only absolve Modi of any complicity, but will actually buttress my
contention that Modi actively worked his damnedest to bring the riots under
control as soon as possible and with God’s grace, succeeded in it.
Here is a partial list
of major communal riots in Gujarat prior to 2002 and their duration, the loss
of lives and the number of days before the army was called in. In case you are
not aware, EACH AND EVERY RIOT IN THE WHOLE OF INDIA prior to 2002 (and mostly
since 2002 also) was under the auspices of a Congress Government – at the state
level as well as the central level.
1969 (Ahmedabad+) 5000+ (*) Several Months Army
on day 6
1982 (Surat) 30+ 10 months not immediately
1985 (Ahmedabad) 300+ several months not immediately
1986 (Ahmedabad) 50+ At least a month not immediately
1990 (Gujarat) 220+ 9 months Not
known
1991 (Gujarat) 30+ 3 months not known
1992 (Ahmedabad+) 40+ at
least a month not known
1999 (Surat) 10+ < a month army not called in
(The following is a
description of the riot-prone nature of Gujarat in the words of Zafar
Sareshwala:
The worst riot in post
partition India happened in 1969 in Ahmedabad; more than 5000 Muslims were
killed in that massacre. But because there was no 24x7 media, no one outside
got to know because those earlier riots were not documented. It was a small
incident involving a cow but it led to a shocking outburst. At that time,
Gujarat was under the Congress Party’s Hitendrabhai Desai’s regime while Indira
Gandhi was in power at the Centre. During the 1969 riots our office,
factory, everything was burnt down. There is an area called “Kalupur which is
the heart of Muslims neighbourhoods. In that locality, the police station is
situated on Relief Road. Right opposite that police station, there is a
mosque and several Muslim shops. That mosque and the shops were burnt
down. When Mrs Indira Gandhi visited the riot affected area, she visited that
spot. I still remember, I was 5 years old, my grandfather was present when
Indira Gandhi got down from her car and said, ‘Here is a police station, and 40
metres away, a mosque and Muslim shops are set on fire. She got down from her
car, called her sentries and told them to measure the distance. How on earth is
it possible that right opposite the police station Muslim shops were burnt? In
the 1969 riots Muslims were systematically massacred.
…
“Then
there was another major riot in 1985 preceded by several smaller ones. It went
on for months on end. Again my factory was set on fire as also our house. In
1985 Madhavji Solanki of Congress Party was in power in Gujarat and Rajiv
Gandhi at the Centre. Between 1985 and 2002, people came to expect that after
every 2-3 months there would inevitably be a riot. There was curfew for 200
days. During the 1987 riots also Amar Singh Chaudhury of the Congress party was
the CM. This was followed by the 1990 riot. At that time again
Congress Party’s Chimanbhai Patel was the Chief Minister. Again our factory was
burnt down. In 1992 also it was burnt, Chimanbhai Patel was the Chief Minister
even at that time.
“Every
Dalit riot was converted into an anti-Muslim riot whether in 1981 or in
1985. In every riot, our office and factory was burnt down and we were
subjected to great indignities because the police would not even accept our
F.I.R. In those days a Muslim could never get an FIR registered. After that we
were humiliated by the insurance company. I remember in 1992, my business was
almost in ‘full bloom’. But our entire factory was reduced to ashes. We
had an insurance of Rs 1.5 crores in 1998.The insurance company gave us a
cheque for Rs.9 lakh. Has anyone documented what happens to the Muslim
establishments that are burnt down? Was every insurance company run by Narendra
Modi? )
It
should be clear from the above partial list and Mr. Sareshwala’s description
that even a small inclident could spark riots in Gujarat and had the potential
to take hundreds of lives and the frenzy of violence would go on for months.
With the gruesome murder of 58 Hindus in Godhra, the situation could have
easily gone to 10000+ lives and months and months of a vicious cycle of
violence. It was only Modi’s dedicated and efficient efforts that allowed the
situation to be under control in 3 days and with a loss of only 1000+ lives.
It
is easy to pontificate sitting in an armchair that Modi should have saved each
and every life lost to the riots. The reality is a little more complicated than
that.
No comments:
Post a Comment