Submit :
News                      Photos                     Just In                     Debate Topic                     Latest News                    Articles                    Local News                    Blog Posts                     Pictures                    Reviews                    Recipes                    
Political Play
Ratan Sharda
All that noise about Tripura Governor Tathagata Roy's 'Civil War' talk 24 June, 2017
The West's "next confrontation," observes MJ Akbar, an Indian Muslim author, "is definitely going to come from the Muslim world. It is in the sweep of the Islamic nations from the Maghreb to Pakistan that the struggle for a new world order will begin." (1996, Quoted by Samuel P Huntington)

What probably is missed in Akbar's quote or not mentioned by Huntington is that a clash between the Hindu civilization and Islamic Civilization that took a break after British took control of India took a renewed life as Independence drew near.

Is India in a state of perpetual overt or covert Civil War?

Another round of outrage from illiberal secular class is over Tathagata Roy's quoting what Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee had said on 10th January 1946. "The Hindu Muslim problem won't be solved without a Civil War." All hell let lose. Outraged secularists overlooked the fact that in August 1946 Jinnah had launched 'Direct Action' to force Pakistan upon undivided India and thousands of Hindus were butchered. It was a one sided Civil War, as Hindus didn't fight back, Congress didn't fight back.

We took an easy shortcut and India was divided. If there was a Civil War and Hindu leaders had stood up to the bullying of Jinnah, India could have remained united with much lesser cost than what we paid in the 1947 partition related riots. Millions were rendered homeless, lost everything except lives, thousands of lives were lost, thousands of women raped, most never to return to their families and millions injured. While on the Western flank it was not one sided, it remained one sided in Noakhali and by the time Hindus picked up arms, fortunately Gandhi ji came and stopped the violence, but then letting this war simmer. Gandhi ji went to the other extreme, telling Hindus "not to harbour anger in their hearts even if the latter wanted to destroy them, even if Muslims want to kill us all we should face death bravely".  After this we saw a temporary calm on the surface with occasional bout of blood letting, specially where symptomatic treatment was administered by Congress leaders for shortcut to power. Where the battle was fierce, for example Punjab, peace prevailed for decades, even if on surface.

This experiment of aggressive Islam was tested successfully again in Kashmir in 1953. Then, in worst decisive form in 1989 when 350,000 Kashmiri Hindus left home and hearth fearing for their lives and culture with high decibel war cries from mosques. Unfortunately, political leadership and government didn't back Hindus again and all they got was safe passage after losing hundreds of lives, women's honour and property with peace of mind. 1989 was a culmination of sustained campaign against Hindus since 1953.

Assam was a kind of write off but for occasional civil war between Assamese tribes and infiltrating Bangladesh Muslims till BJP came to power. Violence from Bangladeshi Muslims was blatant with help of bodies like Assam Muslim Students Union, supported by Congress and Badruddin Ajmal, their comrade in arms for many years. Whole of North East outside Assam has seen a different level of war sponsored by Church with conversion and then alienation of local tribes from their ancient traditions and cultures resulting in separatism.

This one sided Civil War (as Hindus so far have avoided violent confrontations) is now on in Bengal since advent of Mamata's TMC. Her own MP attacked a Durga Puja pandal. New restrictions are coming up on millennia old, most celebrated festival of Durga Pooja. Durga immersion is postponed by Mamata government in view of Muharram while in Bihar Nitish government limits the timing for immersion harshly. In a few villages like Hindu majority Kinglapahari it is banned. Perpetrating riots is condoned as seen in Deganga during Durga Puja or Malda by smugglers of various hues. Next could be Tamil Nadu with Church and Jihadis' collaboration.

Hindus in Kerala are under perpetual siege whatever the t he colour of government. You have example of Kerala where Moplah violence against Hindus in 1920s after failure of Khilafat resulted in thousands of murders, violence, rapes and conversions. In Mallapuram, a Hindu couldn't fold up his lungi for decades after 1920 as it was treated as disrespect against dominant Moplahs. Statue of father of Malayalee literature 'Ezhuthachan' cannot be unveiled as Muslims do not 'wish' to encourage 'idol worship'. Thus, Kerala too is in state of silent Civil War. It is peaceful because Hindus are still ready to give in to the aggression of Muslims.

Thus, the experiment of Civil War in the guise of aggressive Secularism that began with Direct Action, followed by ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus, exhibited in oppression of Bengali, Assamiya people and silent domination over Hindus in Kerala is spreading. Western UP too is seeing an atmosphere of Civil War where there are sustained skirmishes between Hindus and Muslims.

Reality of Clash of Civilizations

Senior leaders of RSS have time and again asserted that they don't believe in Clash of Civilization as Hindu Civilization believes in pluralism and respect for all faiths and cultures. How can there be a clash in such a philosophy that believes in synthesis of various thoughts? However, fact remains that it is not a Utopian world that would listen to Hindu philosophy.

There was a sustained clash of civilizations as mentioned by Samuel Huntington between Christians and Muslims. Clash between two Abrahamic religions in which Jews became fodder, began with advent of Islam lasted for nearly two centuries. This was a kind of my 'Only God' is superior to your 'Only God'; and 'Son of God' versus 'Last Prophet of God'. Both basically out to outsell their exclusivity and monopoly over salvation.

Civil wars were perpetrated on hapless natives of Africa and Americas by imperialists, ably supported with Church doctrine of saving and harvesting souls to liberate them and carrying 'White man's burden.'

We are aware of Islamic conquest of India that took 500 years or more to overcome Indian civilization. It was a clash of a monotheist exclusivist religio-philosophy enforced with edge of sword and a plural, not just tolerant but respectful to all faiths civilization, viz Hindu civilization. A civilization that didn't go out to impose its philosophy on the strength of sword but through exchange of ideas and change of heart.

The latest to join series of civil wars is war between different sects of Islam itself.

Reasons behind perpetual War mentality of Islamists

Why is it so that Muslims can never be at peace in a country where they don't control the state apparatus and don't dominate governance? Simple answer lies in its faith system run on 'Quran'.

Let us not touch the issue of authenticity of Quran as the final word of Allah personally conveyed to Prophet Muhammad. After all it is a matter of faith and there is no proof. Just as there is no proof of 'Virgin Mary', but we Hindus accept both as matter of faith and respect them the way they are presented by their followers.

Quran clearly states the concept of 'Kafir' - one that is non-believer in Allah and who must be either eliminated or converted or enslaved to be sold or traded like a commodity. Or if the Caliph or King is merciful let them live as Dhimmies (second grade citizens with much less rights) who can survive by paying highly penalizing 'Jaziya' tax. Even a Muslim is to be treated the same way if he practices 'shirk' i.e. worships any other God or even Mazar etc. Thus, a 'true believer' is always supposed to be at perpetual war with non-believers.

As per 'Wikipedia' in classical Islamic law, the major political division are dar al-islam (lit. territory of Islam), denoting regions where Islamic law prevails,dar al-sulh (lit. territory of treaty) denoting non-Islamic lands which have concluded an armistice with a Muslim government, and dar al-harb (territory of war), denoting adjoining non-Islamic lands whose rulers are called upon to accept Islam. …. Dar al-Islam, literally house/abode of Islamis a term used by Muslim scholars to refer to those countries where Muslims can practice their religion as the ruling sect and where certain religions are to be 'tolerated'; wherein Muslims represent the majority of the population, and the government promises them a privileged status. The majority opinion of scholars, which relies on tradition, claims that only countries ruled by Sharia can be considered true "abodes of peace."

Specifically for India, there is the philosophy of 'Ghazwa-e-Hind' in Quran. Ghazwa-e-Hind or the final battle of (Hind) India is an Islamic term mentioned in some "good" hadiths in particular predicting a final and last battle in India and as a result, a conquest of the whole Indian sub-continent by Muslim warriors.

None of the conventional scholars of Islam have ever disowned these definitions nor claimed that they don't believe in struggle to convert Dar al-Harb into Dar al-Islam or 'Rule of Shariah'. They have not criticised treatment of 'Kafirs' or concept of 'Ghazwa-e-Hind. This shows why they are at eternal war with Hindus and other Kafirs.

Outside India, first two Islamic concepts are fully operational. This has resulted in huge unrest in Europe and in African continents. All countries with sizable population of Muslims are facing unrest, civil war like situation due to struggle by Islamists to establish of 'Rule of Shariah' and opposition to Western civilizational values as kufr.

While Western liberals have chosen to close their eyes with high sounding verbiage, common Christians afraid of losing their civilizational values have struck back. The lone wolf fringeattack on Ramadan crowd in London and highly agitated protests in other parts of Europe are signs of this restlessness and fight-back to reclaim their society.

Hindu liberals and one eyed seculars too have behaved like their European counterparts (after all they all share same Western stand point). Hindus have begun asserting themselves but inherent believers of non violence and followers of Gandhian path have, fortunately, not yet turned violent.

Tathagata Roy may be criticised, harangued or shamed for naming the unmentionable - even if as a historic quote. But, reality is upon us. It is up to us to close our eyes in the hope that it is a bad dream and just a figment of Hindutva hawks' imagination and be ready to be overwhelmed sooner than later. Or accept the challenge and force back an exclusivist fascist religio-political philosophy to accept peace by giving up on 1400 year old ideas born from arid Arabic tribal civilization.

Editorial NOTE: This article is categorized under Opinion Section. The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of In case you have a opposing view, please click here to share the same in the comments section.
About The Author
Ratan Sharda is a citizen journalist. He has authored books like 'Secrets of RSS'. A marketing consultant by profession, Mr. Sharda is a keen observer of the country's political scenario.
Email Id
Verification Code
Email me on reply to my comment
Email me when other CJs comment on this article
Sign in to set your preference
merinews for RTI activists

Not finding what you are looking for? Search here.