Network of Hate

(Jagdish Seth, India Post, Dec 27, 2002.)

“The Foreign Exchange of Hate, IDRF and the American Funding of Hindutva” released by Biju Mathews last month has created ripples in the Indian American media.

The report is not a serious study. It’s a pamphlet.

It says: “The purpose of this report is to document the links between the India Development and Relief Fund (IDRF), A Maryland, US based charity, and certain violent and sectarian Hindu supremacists organization in India (RSS).”

On every page in the tradition of Gobbles of Nazi era, the report cries itself hoarse that “the Hindutva movement is a violent sectarian movement seeking to create a Hindu Rashtra in India. It seeks to exclude or eliminate religious minorities such as Muslims and Christians and fix Dalits and Adivasis into an internal hierarchy of caste.”

The campaign unleashed by a coalition of so-called professionals, students, workers and artists of Indian origin now living in the States. All of them are either avowed leftists, or linked with Christian missionary and evangelical organizations or linked with Islamic fundamental groups.

They have tried to prove their thesis by way of algebra equations like a=b and b=c and so a=c. In spite of their referring to the reports of various press reports or other reports they have failed to show that the organizations being funded by IDRF are connected with any communal riots in India. Perhaps they don’t know that it was Swami Chinmayanand who founded VHP. Now will they apply the same equation and apply the formula to Chinmaya Mission?

The report charged IDRF on the count that 80 percent of the funds were utilized for Hindus. In a country with more than 80 percent of population of Hindus, who else can be beneficiaries? The very word Hindu to the authors is like red rag to a bull. They forget Hindus are a pluralistic society with various sects and sub-sects and Hindu is a broad term encompassing all the sects and sub-sects. Had the authors emigrated to the U.S.A a hundred years ago from India, they would have also been labeled Hindoos. Hindu religion accepts many paths, teachers, scriptures and teachings. One cannot be Christian without accepting Christ or a Buddhist without accepting Buddha but one can be a Hindu without accepting any single figure.

How deep is their knowledge and working of the RSS can be judged by their assertion, “As an organization, the RSS is elusive and shadowy –it is only open to Hindu males – primarily upper castes; it maintains no membership records it has resisted being registered with the Government of India as a public/charitable trust; it has no bank accounts and pays no income tax.” 

Can an organization of more than 75 years of its establishment and growing exponentially in India stand this criterion? Can the biggest volunteer organization of the world be run without a bank account? If RSS is not paying any income tax then why not the Congress governments in India for more than 45 years brought this fact before the people of India brought it to book?

The report further alleges: “The RSS advocates a form of Hindu nationalism, which seeks to establish India as a Hindu Rashtra and rejects the notion of a composite Indian identity brought about by a synthesis of different cultures and faiths.”

The ‘learned’ authors of the report are, perhaps aware that the present government in India is a coalition of more than 20 different parties led by the BJP (political wing of the Sangh parivar). The BJP can fool one or two parties but not parties of diverse agendas. Besides, the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister have said not only in their public statements but in the Parliament too that India can never be a Hindu Rashtra.

The report further charges the RSS for such ‘educational’ activities as the holding of Ramayana and Mahabharata competitions for school children in tribal areas. It’s a pity that the ‘learned’ authors are oblivious of the fact that these two great epics of India are the national epics and their heroes are national heroes for more than five thousand years. They forget that these epics form the bedrock on which India’s unity stands.

Referring to the working of Hindu Students Council (HSC), the report says “It does this through multiple levels of ideological work – by organizing mass meetings and readings on campuses on a narrow range of Hindu thought, that is ideologically a perfect fit for Hindutva, (such as Gita readings).”  Can any sensible person call Gita a book of narrow range of Hindu thought? Do they expect readings from Arabian Nights?

One can discern the mischievous designs of the authors when they refer to Rama ‘an upper caste Kshatriya.’ They forget that it was Lord Rama who took already tasted fruit from Bhilani, a tribal woman and hugged Nishad, the boatman and called him the first citizen of Rama Rajya. The message of Ramayana is universal and not sectarian. The authors have not learnt anything from their masters. Had it been not so, the former Soviet Union not allowed the epic to be translated into Russian and staged at various theaters in Russia.

Naming violence as the central strategy of the RSS, the report base their conclusions on the writers like D.R. Goyal and Purshottam Agarwal who are pamphleteers of more than half a century and are now part of history. A lot of water has flown under the Yamuna Bridge since more than 75 years. Now Mayawati of Bahujan Samaj Party, an outfit of predominantly Dalits and chief minister of U.P is campaigning for BJP in Gujarat. India is going thorugh a process of evolution. The BJP is no longer untouchable as the leftists are and Congress  rulers had been painting for the last many decades. They are now a ruling party

If the authors had even a semblance of fair play and justice they would have quoted from the speeches of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, Hussein Shaheed Suhraverdi’s  speeches on Direct Action in Bengal that led to massive killings of hundreds of thousands of innocent Hindus in the province. The report is silent on the Saudi funding of madarasas in India which are openly preaching sedition and are often dens of terrorism. Are they unaware of Jehlum Medical College, Srinagar and many other organizations that have been functioning as a conduit for distributing funds to terrorist in Kashmir and other parts of India? Don’t they know that the plan for terrorism in Kashmir was hatched by ISI, CIA and Saudi Arabia at Riyadh?

Nowhere the authors have mentioned that India was partitioned on the basis of religion and on the two-nation theory. Pakistan was established  as homeland for Muslims of India. But majority of the Muslims in India refused to migrate to Pakistan in spite of the fact that the entire non-Muslim population was squeezed out of Pakistan as a result of large-scale violence. The credit goes to the founding fathers of India that they declared India as a secular state in spite of large-scale killings of Hindus in Pakistan.  The authors have kept their mouths shut on the part played by RSS workers in that part of India, which was declared as Pakistan. They saved thousands of Hindus, children, women, and men from the clutches of the Muslim National Guards, para military wing of the Muslim League.

Time and again they have referred to recent killings of Muslims after Godhra as a well-planned pogrom. These riots were most condemnable and the  reaction cannot be condoned. But it goes to the credit of the state government that it could contain the situation and the riots remained localized in three districts of the state. There was no flight of Muslim population even from the affected districts and from the state. The report terms the killing of Muslim as ‘genocide’ but is silent on ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits form Kashmir and mass killings of the Hindus in Bangladesh..

The report speaks volumes of RSS designs against Muslims and Christian population. Had it been so, there would have been a large-scale exodus of minorities as happened in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In Pakistan there are no Hindus and Sikhs left after Partition. In Bangladesh, Hindus are not even half of the population as it was at the time of Partition.

Referring to the Christians in India, they forget to mention that under the British rule, only the foreign Christian missionaries were allowed to enter into the tribal areas, whether it was North East or Bastar of Central India. The authors should refer to the report of a commission appointed by the Government of India for their activities.

People should not forget that almost entire population of the Muslims and Christians in India are coverts. They didn’t come from Arabia or the UK or the Europe. It speaks of the tolerance of the Hindus of India. It’s the same BJP who played a leading role to get APJ Abul Kalam as President of India.

The Foreign Exchange of Hate is nothing but babble of lies and half-truths.