Mangaluru: Rahul Gandhi to visit Kudroli temple, Ullal dargah, Rosary Cathedral

Words Jihad and Jihadi have been in abundant use for the negative purposes from last two decades in particular. They have been closleyl linked to the word terrorism and violence, done by section of Muslims here and there. This global use of word is particularly a post 9/11 phenomenon. Just to recapitulate after the WTC was hit by two aeroplanes; the building sunk leading the death of nearly three thousand innocent people. The victims belonged to most countries and religions. In the aftermath; Osama bin Laden called it Jihad. American media coined the word Islamic terrorism since then. Most of the acts indulged in by Muslim terror groups have been labelled under this title. This; irrespective of the fact that many an Islamic Scholars, many a Muslim clerics like Maulanas of Deoband and Barelvi, stating that Islam does not approve of violence against innocent people. The words have stuck.

This has also beoame one more weapon in the hands of communal sectarian elements. Apart from the mainstream media social media has been delving this with gay abandon using these words in a derogatory way. The lap media also called Godi media, which is an important part of the opinion making against Muslims has been using it day in and day out.

Recently (March 11, 2020), Mr. Sudhir Chaudhary, the Editor-in-Chief of Zee channel in a show went on to the limits of this misrepresentation by showing a chart and classifying Jihad into various categories, Love, Jihad, Land Jihad and latest in series being Corona Jihad in the wake of Tablighi Jamaat event. Mr Chowdhary concluded that all these types of Jihad are being done to weaken India. Surely, these types of programs have been increasing and intensifying Hate against Muslims and Jihad.

Unlike most of the times, this time around a complaint was filed against the said editor, a FIR was filed and lo and behold the editor’s tune changed.  In the next program he talked respectfully about the word Jihad! The tone and tenor changed. Was it a late realization or the fear of facing criminal action which made him change the tune, he alone should know, but that’s another chapter to the story?

As such jihad is by and large used as synonym for violence, terrorism. This is very much contrary to the its use in Koran.. Islamic scholar Asghar Ali Engineer argues that its use in Koran is multilayered. It stands for ‘utmost striving’ and has nothing to do with violence against innocents. As per him the concept of Jihad is far above violence. Those indulging in power games have used it as a cover for expanding power and called it as Holy War. This is very similar to the use of word Crusade by Christian Kings and Dharm Yudh by Hindu kings.

A deeper and more rational study of Koran and Hadith bring forth the real meaning of the term. Sufi’s who were away from the power struggle and focussed on spiritual aspects of religion like Bhakti Saints or liberation theologians, unfolded the deeper meaning of the term. Engineer points out that “it is for this reason that they describe war as jihad-e-Asghar and jihad to control one’s greed and selfish desires as jihad-e-Akbar (Great jihad)” (On Multi Layered Concept of Jihad, in A Modern Approach to Islam, Dharmaram , Page 26, 2003, Bangalore)

The reference to Jihad comes in Koran over 40 times, mostly referring to Jihad-e-Akbar, striving to overcome personal greed and selfishness. The real transformation of the word Jihad in popular perceptions and Chaudhary is the extreme example of that, takes place during the training of Mujahideen in the few specially set up Madarssas in Pakistan. This was initiated and coordinated by America in the decade of 1980s, when the Russian Army occupied Afghanistan. That was the time American forces were totally demoralised due to their humiliating defeat in Vietnam, at the hands of Vietnamese people.

To confront the Russian army, US planned to join the anti Russian forces. For this with the help of extremist Salafi version of Islam, they promoted the radical tendencies within a section of Muslims. The brain washing of the Asian Muslim youth as Mujahedeen to Taliban took place in few Pakistani Madrassas, totally funded by America. For this funding opium trade was also put into operation. The brainwashing module designed in Washington incorporated many components which also distorted the concept of Kafir, and created Hate against communists. Communists were labelled as Kafirs (Non believers) and so killing them was presented as Jihad. Getting killed while doing such an act was to be rewarded with entry pass to Jannat with 72 virgins waiting for those embracing this path.

America further went on to promote Taliban and Al Qaeda, which joined anti Russian forces, leading to defeat of Russian forces. Mahmood Mamdani in his book ‘Good Muslim Bad Muslim’ makes an inference based on CIA documents that America invested 8 thousand million dollars and also supplied seven tonnes of armaments, including the most sophisticate missiles to these forces. One also recalls the Al Qaeda leaders’ visit to US, White house. In the Press meet the then US President Ronald Regan, introduced them as being the equivalents of founding fathers of United States as they are fighting against the evil of communism.

Now of course the situation has taken its own turn and nearly three decades after their inception the same elements, later followed by ISIS and IS acted like Frankenstein’s monsters, killing Muslims in large numbers. It is estimated that over 70000 Pakistanis have been killed due to the action of these groups, who were propped up and nurtured by US to enhance its control over the oil wells of West Asia.

The likes Sudhir Choudhary can merrily propagate the Hate using the term Jihad. That such elements can also be partly controlled through the process of law is a part of great learning after the FIR filed against him. One hopes that such hate filled programs will come to a halt once we combat them ideologically and after resorting to the provisions of Indian Constitution. 

Mangaluru, May 15: Dakshina Kannada Superintendent of Police on Friday warned those who are opposing quarantine to either go for it or face legal action under Epidemic Diseases Act.

In a release here on Friday, Mr B M Laxmi Prasad said that schools and hostels have been identified for quarantining those who arrive from other states. Those, who return, will be quarantined in the respective Gram Panchayat/local bodies’ jurisdiction. The public should not panic over the quarantine facility.

The quarantine facility has been introduced in the interest of the general public. If anyone opposes or protests against such facility, then legal action will be initiated against them, he warned.

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.