A controversial Islamophobic remark by some political leaders from BJP ruling at the centre has become a bone of contention in India’s diplomatic relations across the globe. As many as 15 Islamic countries and recently, China, have made brooding diplomatic remarks on India’s stand on Prophet Mohammed.
In due course of action, the BJP has taken coercive measures to manage the dent by curtailing the violent protests, controlling the social media and invoking the spirit of religious tolerance. Further, the Government of India has also cleared its stand as a nation. It is to understand that, as many as 89 lakhs Indians are living, working and studying in gulf countries. The remittances from these countries are high in number. Needless to say that in the year 2020-21, India’s trade with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), comprising countries like Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman and the UAE, was $87 billion. But the controversial remark on Prophet has instigated the social media users in Arab countries. The users were already taking offence to the remarks and calling for a boycott of Indian goods. The 57-nation Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) despised the remarks made by the suspended spokespersons of the BJP and linked the row to the hijab ban controversy and demolition of Muslim properties in India. The Government of India has proved its stand, but as far as statements by the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GGC) are concerned, India preferred to maintain silence. Under the leadership of PM Narendra Modi, the relations between India and UAE along with some other Islamic countries have significantly improved in the past few years, but there is an apprehension made by experts that the controversy could minimise some of India's recent diplomatic successes with these countries.
The root of this controversy had started in a TV panel discussion, where a BJP spokesperson made a controversial remark on Prophet which could be labelled as islamophobic. The hate speech of the spokesperson was encouraged and her remarks were endorsed by the TV anchor. It was not the end of this drama. The hate speeches are now a very normal phenomenon and also becoming perpetual.
It is not only about Islam or Hinduism but now these hate speeches have increased its canvas to gender, caste and race. The United Nation is having a strong concern on hate speech. As per the UN, hate speech has been increasing since 1950s. Further to this, it has become one of the strong reasons for violence across the globe .A report by Equality Lab on Quantum of Hate Speech on Facebook in India says that Islamophobia tops the list. Anti-Muslim sentiments hate speech is at top with 37% of total hate speeches. False news has 17% of space in hate speech. Gender related or misogynist hate speech content and Dalit or caste related hate speeches have 13% of share each. Violence hate speech has 11% and anti-religious content has 9% of total hate speech in Facebook.
Now in social media or in TV discussion, we have seen a different ball game. This ball game is polarisation. Some even started hash-tag campaigns to boycott Islamic countries airlines. Countries like Netherland, which is reputed for its islamophobic stand, fuelled up the issue in international platform. So here, one thing must be remembered is criticising religious practices is different and growing intolerance for any religion is different. Due to this mass scale and media induced polarisation, intolerance is growing.
We need to understand that in India islamophobia is also a creation of historical interactions with Muslims. Muslim invaders destroyed the country and ruled for hundreds of years. Suppressed Hindu kings looted India, established mosques; damaged temples etc are the interactions which are public narratives about Muslims. After India’s Independence and Pakistan’s formation, islamophobic and dislike for Muslims as well as anti-Muslims discourses have been more visible. Riots, genocides, cultural dominance and terrorism fuelled it more. This has made a categorisation of communities that is “Them “and “Us”. Hindus are “them” for Muslims and Muslims are “them” for Hindus. In local level, islamophobic behaviour is legitimatised by local leaders or officials. It should be stopped. In many States in India, this polarisation has taken islamophobia to a different stage, i.e xenophobia, which is a catastrophic weapon against social solidarity. There is a process called as “Racialization of Muslims.” It defines Muslim community as a race but not as religious or cultural identifiers. This new identification catalogues Muslims as a different community which is identified by their biological or physical aspects. Islamphobia is dangerous when the State induces the process of racialisation. When the process is State-sponsored, then it aims at psycho-social control. Psychosocial control is equal as verbal assault, tirade of speech or dominant actions.
The result of the action leads to organise Muslims into two categories such as “Acceptable Muslims” and “Unacceptable Muslims.” These two types of Muslims are defined by the State actors. Such classification is made by a point of view that Muslims whom the State can trust and Muslims the State can’t. The fabric of Indian society is secularism. There are many countries and many vested interest groups which may take mileage on the prophet row. India is known for its tolerance, cultural mannerism and social cohesion. The doctrine of “we -feeling” will augment the mutual tolerance between different religions.
The mutual respect between two major religions in India is depleting. The trust on Government mechanism to seek justice is questionable. What is more disturbing is that the introduction of new justice system, called as Bulldozer Justice. The arrogance of being majoritarian and brutal suppression of protest is also the add-on which may increase the fissure between citizens of the country.
(Dr Parida is an Assistant Professor in Sociology. Email id- abash.parida@gmail.com)
