By Atanu Das , Sr Journalist, Ex-PTI
New Delhi, 28 June , When former US president Barack Obama spoke about the ‘possibility of India at some point pulling apart’, he only proved that colonialism is deeper than skin colour.
Related : The Balkanisation of India has been a long-time fantasy of imperialists of every hue.
Those of the British colonial variety believed it was the superiority of the British Raj that held India together. Churchill proclaimed it openly. Pakistan was, in a way, a realization of that fantasy.
It was not because of British rule nor because of post-independent Nehruvian rulers that India is still together, it is despite them.
Attacks on minorities that apparently weren’t. Don’t the following instances count as attacks on ‘ethnic minorities’?
When Naga Christian terrorists threatened the Buddhist tribes of Arunachal Pradesh…
When Baptist Christian terrorists killed and issued Christian fatwas against Hindu Jamatiyas in Tripura…
When Christian Mizo militants drove away Hindu Reangs from Mizoram to live in harsh refugee camps for over a quarter century in neighbouring states…
Who spoke for those ‘ethnic minorities’?
Actually it was the Hindutvaites who did, even if they would differ from these ‘ethnic minorities’ in superficial cultural features.
Conveniently quiet. Within the larger Indian landmass comprising Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, when the Sindhi Hindus of Pakistan were frequently persecuted, what did the US have to say?
Did the Obama administration ever care to voice out for them?
When the Chakma Buddhist tribes of Bangladesh were driven away as refugees, did the Obama or Clinton administration raise its voice?
Every tenant of the White House since 1971 has had a moral responsibility to answer for siding with Pakistan when it was carrying out a genocide of Hindus in what was then East Pakistan.
But in all such cases, we have been met with silence.
‘Minorities’. India is full of so-called minorities.
Saivites are minorities with respect to all non-Saivaites.
Tamils are minorities with respect to all non-Tamils.
Jamatiyas are minorities with respect to all non-Jamatiyas.
Shias are minorities even within the Muslim community.
Ahmadiyas will be one of the most persecuted minorities if ever India became non-Hindu.
Hindu ‘majority’ is not majoritarianism. Hindus being in the majority means this nation still has a majority of people who believe in non-proselytising, mutually respectful co-existence.
If this Hindu majority also becomes politically aware, it shall be the greatest protection to every minority — not just ethnic or religious, but gender and linguistic, as well.
At the same time, a politically aware Hindu majority would resist the expansionist politics of not only Islamism but also evangelical crusadeism.
It’s a curious case, however, as to why instead of embracing the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr, Barack Obama is choosing to adopt the language and mindset of an imperialist like Winston Churchill.
