Pluralism Vs. Fundamentalism ; A Challenge to liberal Muslims.

Pluralism Vs Fundamentalism: A Challenge to Liberal Muslims.

The latest issue of India Abroad (Sept.24) seems to have a theme running in its many reports, and that is pluralism Vs fundamentalism, all pertain to the Muslim attitude to the believers of other religions, and mainly the Hindus.

As has been rightly pointed out by Ed Royce, United States Representative from California, Hindus suffer "more discrimination than just about any other ethnic group" in South Asia and ethnic cleansing that had taken place in Pakistan where "the fact that Pakistan was once 25 percent Hindu" indicates the theocratic nature of the state of Pakistan, where even Shias and Ahmedias are treated as non-believers.

Ethnic cleansing has happened a few years ago even in Jammu & Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state of the Indian Union, when about 400,000 Kashmiri Hindu Pandits were forced by the Jihadists to leave their home and hearth and stay in tents in Jammu and New Delhi, thanks to the inaction of the Government of India. The same Jehadists have brain-washed or forced/ bribed urchins to throw stones on Indian security forces to get martyrs for their cause – to merge with Pakistan.

Pakistan was created as a homeland for Muslims of the British India, and all the kings were given the right to accede to one or the other state, India and Pakistan. Jammu & Kashmir ruler decided to join India which has adopted a republican constitution assuring equality, liberty and fraternity to all its citizens irrespective of their caste and creed. While India has been one of the most successful democratic experiments in the world, Pakistan has mired itself in theocracy, now fundamentalism and terrorism.

Can there be a civilized modern state and society based only on fundamentalism? Expansionism finished fascism. Totalitarianism killed communism in spite of is humanistic ideals. It is renaissance and reformation that saved Europe and Christianity from fundamentalism. A similar process can revive the glory of Islam. Hindus are blessed with a pluralistic philosophy since the Vedic times, and there have been many reformers throughout the ages beginning with Buddhism and Jainism.

Those liberal Muslims who feel that their religion has been mis-represented in the world should highlight the pluralistic and liberal values in their religion. Holy Koran says, for example: There is no compulsion in religion and the ink of the scholar is holier than the blood of the martyrs.

The liberal Islam of the Middle Ages ( mid-8^th century to mid-13^th century) created the Islamic Golden Age which promoted art, architecture, mathematics, science, philosophy, poetry and many other human endeavors in the far flung regions of Asia and Europe in centers such as Cairo, Damascus and Cordoba. These centers preserved and translated the Greek, Roman, Indian and Chinese books and became the repositories of knowledge of the world.

Liberalism and fundamentalism are the two choices before the Muslim. First choice would lead to glory, and the second would most likely to lead to wars and destruction. The time has come for the liberal Muslims to make the right choice and lead their community.

http://www.indiaabroad-digital.com/indiaabroad/20100924/?pg=7&pm=1&u1=friend

Sept.22,2010.

****

.

Arming without aiming ?

Arming without aiming?

Aziz Hanifa's report on the book, Arming Without Aimimg: India's Military Modernization by Stephen B.Cohen and Sunil Dasgupta, ( India Abroad, Sept.17) does not summarize the arguments of the authors to support title of the book. The aim of India's of arming is just to keep the intruders away from its borders and to safeguard its legitimate interests around its borders.

India is modernizing its armed forces mainly because of the belligerence of its two neighbors who want to prevent the rise of India as an important power shaping the 21^st century. It is true as pointed out by the authors of the book that India's "preferred stance has been military restraint" due to the fact that non-violence and non-aggression have been part of its ethos of the people of India for the last five thousand years.

Though China attacked India in 1962 and exploded an atomic device in 1964, India did just a technology demonstration in 1974. This immediately invited sanctions from the Western powers. It exploded a nuclear device only in 1998 after it was known all over the world that China was assisting Pakistan to become a nuclear power.

However the authors of the book have to be commended for highlighting " the defense acquisition process, which is amazingly convoluted" or as Ashley Tellis puts it, " internal sclerosis in India's internal defense thinking". One of the reasons for this is the commission or corruption involved in military procurement which runs into thousands of crore of rupees ( Swedish gun (bofors), French & German sub-marines, Isreali missiles (Barack). Besides, in defense purchases, consumer is not the king : restrictive clauses on the purchase of war ship (USA) and escalation in the price of air-craft carrier (Russia).

Unlike China which produces most of its defense requirements, India still depends on imported armaments as defense R&D is still inadequate. Indian private sector is still taboo in military equipment industry as the state is afraid of the emergence of military-industrial complex in the country. Then there is the fear of strong military in view of the Pakistani experience.

Indian politicians have let down India and the Indian Army in many ways. Kashmir is the problem created by the politicians and the army was not given a free hand. The Chinese invasion was due to the romantic view of the Chinese Communists by the politicians. The report of Lt.Gen.Henderson Brooks and Brig.P.S.Bhagat 1962 war is still a state secret, 48 years after, as it is supposed to be an indictment of politicians.

India has to overcome these issues with a clear vision of its future. India cannot continue to be a reluctant power. A continental country, an emerging economy, a democratic polity and an ancient civilization should not allow itself to be bullied by others. Only power, economic and military, can ensure its legitimate place in the world. India started getting grudging respect only after Indian became a stronger economy (after 1991) and stronger military power ( after 1998).

India has to formulate a vision of its future among the comity of nations – strong but peaceful nation which uses its power not just to secure its borders but helps others, especially in Asia, to defend themselves. Its sphere of influence should not merely extend from Singapore to Aden but also include the Middle East, South East Asia and other parts of Asia. India should have a strong defense industry. Once the vision is clear, strategy will evolve to suit the vision.

( A letter sent to India Abroad,New York, commenting on a report on the book,Arming without aiming, in is issue dt.Sept.17,2010)

http://www.indiaabroad-digital.com/indiaabroad/20100917/?pg=7&pm=1&u1=friend

******