'Dr Subramanian Swamy, I strongly disagree with you'

This is in response to the inflammatory and jingoistic article written by Dr Subramanian Swamy which was published in DNA on July 16. I am 17 years old. I am not a Muslim. I am not a Christian. I was born a Hindu, but I am against religious fundamentalism of any kind because it breeds distrust and tears apart the social fabric of any country.

Some of Dr Swamy’s statements that I found objectionable were: “Muslims of India are being programmed by a slow reactive process to become radical and thus slide into suicide against Hindus.” And “Hindus cannot accept to be killed in this halal fashion, continuously bleeding every day till the nation finally collapses.”

Several similar statements of his promote a supremacist, bigoted, so-called Hindu agenda in a land where the Constitution allows complete freedom of religion. The last thing India needs in the wake of the recent tragedy (the Mumbai serial blasts) is the propagation of a Hindu state and denigration of the contribution and patriotism of over 150 million Muslims in the country, written by former cabinet minister, Dr Subramanian Swamy.

History bears testimony to the fact that dividing India along communal lines is fraught with the risk of national disintegration. I would like to remind Dr Swamy of the  contribution of the likes of Dr Abdul Kalam, Ustad Amjad Ali Khan, the Khans from Bollywood, AR Rahman and numerous other luminaries who happen to be Muslims and have been patriotic citizens of India!

“Undivided India in 1947 was 75% Hindu even after 800 years of brutal Islamic rule,” says Dr Swamy’s article. Mughal rulers like Akbar and Shahjahan were well known for their respect and tolerance of Hinduism. This statement highlights the fact that for over 800 years, India has remained largely secular and non-communal.

Dr Swamy lists five fundamental “goals” that terrorists have and offers solutions to combat them. I will list these goals, his solutions, my analysis of the flaws in them and suggest more meaningful solutions.

To combat the situation in Kashmir, Dr Swamy encourages the occupation of PoK and assisting Baluchis and Sindhis in attaining independence, should Pakistan continue to back terrorists. Life isn’t that easy. India and Pakistan are both nuclear powerhouses and risking a nuclear and conventional war would mean mass civilian casualties would be the consequences of such poorly conceived actions.    

Wouldn’t this also breach the principles of “Ahimsa paramo dharmaha” - an essential tenet of Hinduism?

The solution to the problems in Indian Kashmir lie in the economic revival of Kashmir, infrastructure investments, improvements in education, healthcare, job and business opportunities, tourism, and a sense of belongingness towards India. You do not fight fire with fire; similarly, you do not combat one fundamentalist force with another.

*Dr Swamy believes that one of the main aims of terrorism is to target Hindu temples and kill Hindu devotees. His proposed solution to this is to “remove the masjid in Kashi Vishwanath temple and the 300 masjids at other temple sites”.

My firm belief is that this will only encourage cross-border terrorist elements towards even more heinous acts of terror. Such actions which are illegal and reprehensible would alienate even the moderates amongst the Indian Muslims. We are all aware of the mayhem that followed one Babri Masjid incident. Dr Swamy’s solution will only magnify the consequences manifold.

•?The third goal of the terrorists, according to Dr Swamy, is to turn India into Darul Islam. Dr Swamy’s solution is to rename India, Hindustan and declare it a Hindu Rashtra, wherein non-Hindus only have the right to vote if they “proudly acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus” and if they “feel for the Hindus”. This supposed solution is virulently fundamentalist and undemocratic.

Our Constitution clearly states that India affords to its citizens Liberty of Belief, Faith and Worship and Equality of Status and Opportunity. Dr. Swamy’s solution is in open violation of our Constitution.

• The fourth goal terrorists believe in, according to Dr Swamy, is to change India’s demography by illegal immigration, conversion and refusal to adopt family planning. His solution is to enact a law prohibiting conversion from Hinduism to any other religion and annex land from Bangladesh.

Dr Swamy seems to take foreign relations too lightly. India cannot infringe upon the sovereignty of another nation. This would compound the problem of terrorism manifold from another quarter! A more effective solution to this problem is enactment of a tighter border policy, like the USA did for its Mexican immigration problem.

•?Terrorists’ fifth goal, according to Dr Swamy, is to spread a propaganda against Hinduism in mosques and madrassas, and lead Hindus into capitulation. Dr. Swamy states boldly that the problem of terrorism can be solved within five years if we propagate the development of a Hindu mindset and defend the nation.

The problem with this vague “solution” is that terrorism is far too big a problem to be defeated by one government in five years! An actual solution to the problem would simply be in the socio-economic uplift of Muslim youth and their integration into mainstream economic activity.

The article then ends with Dr. Swamy urging Hindus to vote for a party that will promote a Hindu agenda so as to create a “democratic Hindustan”.

This sentence is a blatant contradiction in itself, as democracy refers to the principles of social equality, which this sentence violates in letter, spirit and intent. The Bhagvad Gita itself preaches tolerance and equality of all people. When the morale of the city is at its lowest, you don’t add more fuel to stoke the fire.

The solution to the problem of terrorism isn’t the adoption of a radical Hindu fundamentalist policy. It lies in stricter governmental security and intelligence policies. Since 9/11, there has not been a single terrorist attack on the USA. However, India has suffered from innumerable terrorist attacks in the same period. Did the US deny voting rights to non-Christians or discriminate against people of different faiths or ethnicities? Did the US destroy mosques? Did the US turn its back on the label it so proudly carries - “the Land of the Free”? Certainly not.

The US just adopted a stricter homeland security policy and increased intelligence.

In this hour of crisis, we Indians need to exercise restraint and not get swayed by extreme fundamentalist rhetoric of any kind. We need to ensure that our society and our government acts with firmness in combating the scourge of terrorism espoused by anti-national elements.

Dr Swamy, I do not know whether the Harvard Business School and the scores of students whom you have taught, would be proud of your article from a humanist, secular and democratic perspective. Why did you not espouse such virulent causes in your many years as a policymaker, Parliamentarian and Cabinet minister of the Union of India?