“There are plans to Islamise Kerala in 20 years using money and marriages. Popular Front of India (PFI) is trying to multiply Muslim numbers in the state by influencing youth of other religions and converting them by giving money, marrying them to Muslim women and thus producing kids of the community”.
Who uttered this unspeakable communal gibberish? I won’t be surprised if you think that this “rabidly communal” statement is either from Nitin Gadkari or Parveen Tokadia or some hard-core Hindu fundamentalists. But the surprise is that this was the statement of a chief minister whose party has always been a great benefactor of the minorities and whose cause they always upheld while deriding the majority community in the country in one sweeping statement as “communal”. How can we forget that it was the CPM chief minister EMS Namboodiripad was who responsible for the creation of a separate Muslim majority district, Malappuram, which has now become the hotbed of Islamic terrorism.
Yes, the statement was from Kerala chief minister VS Achutanandan. He also said that the radical Muslim outfit –Popular Front of India (PFI) was aiming to convert Kerala into a “Muslim Country”. Let us not mistake him that he was trying to score political points over his home minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan. CPM general secretary Prakash Karat did not differ from his CM either. A day earlier Karat also warned the state against the threat of Muslim terrorism in the context of the PFI activities.
Achutaanandan being the head of the government was probably concerned about the terrorist activities in the state. He says the PFI in its earlier avatar as National Development Front had given training, money and weapons to youngsters to eliminate opponents. Now they were trying to create a clean image by organising freedom parades on the Independence Day. Several district administrations had already banned the parade, he said.
It is no secret that Kerala which has around 25% Muslim population with lot of Gulf connections has become the hotbed of terrorism in the South. Even as early as in 2008, Kerala’s links with global terrorism came to light when three Keralites were killed in an encounter in Kashmir. It is now the CPM has woken up from its deep slumber.
What triggered the wrath of the Communists in the state was the attack on a college professor T J Joseph whose hand was chopped off in Taliban style. What was his crime? He was reported to have set a question paper for internal examination in the college which allegedly hurt Muslim sentiments.
Since the PFI role was suspected in the case, Police raided its offices and “it exposed PFI’s pan-Islamist network fed by a heady mix of Wahhabism and hawala”. The raid also brought to light al-Qaueda training, tapes,Taliban style courts that dispense justice according to Shariat law, literature on conversion, explosives enough to kill dozens and documents indicating unusual interest in the Indian Navy. It was also reported that it was one of the PFI’s Taliban-style courts in Kottayam district that drove them to sever the limbs of Joseph.
Interestingly, however, the state home minister K Balakrishnan does not subscribe to the view that Taliban style courts are functioning in his state though his own Police were aghast while viewing the CDs seized from PFI. According to the police, the CDs showed brutal punishment like severing of limbs of the enemies of Faith. Activists were also made to slaughter animals so as prepare them for human slaughter.
Well, the question is whether it is genuine transformation for the Kerala communists to realise the true colours of Muslim extremists and contours of jihadi extremism, especially after they passed a resolution in the Kerala Assembly for the release of Abdul Nasser Madani from Coimbatore jail where he was incarcerated as an accused in the Coimbatore Bomb blast case in which 58 were killed and hundreds injured. After his release, he formed a political party which supported the Left Democratic Front in 2007 elections. After Madani’s Islamic Sevak Sangh was banned, it was renamed as NDF in 1993. The strategy was not to have a name which will sound Islamic or Arabic, but national so as to hoodwink the people. Therefore, he latest avatar of NDF is Popular Front of India formed in 2006.
PFI’s activities include “Love Jihad”. The modus operandi is to finance Muslim youth for getting the latest gadgets and attire to lure non-Hindu girls with promises of marriage, convert them into Islam and drop them at terrorist training camps. According to crime record bureau of Kerala police, 8 girls are reported missing every day in the state. In 2007 alone, 2167 girls and 2530 girls in 2008 were reported missing. Kasargod tops the list of jihadi conversions with 568. But only 123 cases were registered with the Police. According to one estimate, 4000 girls have been converted under Love Jihad all over India. That is why Kerala CM apprehends that his state would become Muslim country in 20 years and points his finger at outfits like PFI.
PFI, however, says it is ironical that both the CPM and RSS which have a long history of being actively involved in all criminal activities are speaking against the PFI. It was a sort of poetic justice when PFI says in its website “CPM in spite of its tall claims of secularism is basically a Hindu party in Kerala. The CPM is trying to consolidate the Hindu and Christian communal votes”. CPM which considered itself “ultra secular” is paid back with its own coin.
The PFI does not spare the Christian missionaries as well. It says “evangelists financed by rightist groups in the US are behind the Church in Kerala. They are high pressure missionary groups who raise money on the number of people converted – a charge that is often levelled by the Sangh parivar against the missionaries.
It is also felt that since the Congress at the national level and UDF at state level are wooing the Muslim votes, the Left is trying to consolidate Hindu and Christian votes. The CPM, for a change, is likely to play Hindu card in the coming Assembly elections. After all, both the CPM and RSS are speaking the same language on “Love Jihad”.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
GEO-POLITICAL REALITIES
Who said that we forgot Mahatma Gandhi and his ideals and remember him ceremoniously only on Oct 2? It is not the whole truth. We can’t be untruthful to the apostle of Ahimsa and Satya. Yes, our government and politicians remember him whenever we go in for talks with Pakistan. What did Gandhiji preach us? He said if someone slaps you on one cheek, show him the other. That’s what we are doing very religiously whenever we get insulted by Pakistan. Go again across the border or invite them to our land and submit ourselves to have egg on our face again and again. There are some cheer leaders on our side who call themselves “incurable optimists” who want this to happen. For them, Pakistan is always right.
No, it is not just our External Affairs Minister SM Krishna’s smug performance and the “forbearance” he had to swallow whatever his counterpart Shah Mohd Qureshi hurled at him without any diplomatic decency that shows India in bad light. But Krishna did not show the same gesture to his own colleagues back in India. He started attacking Home Secretary GK Pillai for his “untimely” remark on Headley’s disclosures thus making him the scapegoat for the failure of talks. His tirade against Pillai also exposed the rift between MEA and Home Ministry. If at all there was any outcome on Indo-Pak talks, it was this. Exposing our own weaknesses rather than fixing Pakistan for its nefarious role in exporting terror. As a cartoonist put it, we need peace talks between our own MEA and Home Ministry before we think of peace talks or composite dialogue or whatever phrase we invent, with Pakistan. We not only showed the other cheek, but praised the one who slapped us when Krishna and Qureshi were on the same page on Pillai.
When Pak Foreign secretary came to India, he was no different from his minister. He termed the dossiers presented to him as “piece of literature”.
In fact, the first slap was when our Prime Minister had a summit meeting with his counterpart from Pakistan at Sharm-el-Sheikh. Our Prime Minister walked into Pak trap when he condescended to include Balochistan in the joint statement. At that time the scapegoat was, like Pillai this time, the one who drafted the joint statement and who now presides over our national security affairs.
It is no secret that it was our Prime Minister who was pushing for talks with Pakistan when he met Pakistani Prime Minister at Thimpu, undoubtedly under the pressure of the US whose strategic interests demand it. When Qureshi said that “India was not prepared”, he was only making a complaint to the US against India. Did you notice that even before Krishna could return to his country, the US started welcoming the talks? Now that the talks were botched up, why is Dr Man Mohan Singh adopting the message of Gandhiji’s three monkeys? Don’t speak evil, hear evil, and see evil. He should atleast sort out the turf war under his nose.
As if our discomfiture is not enough while dealing with Pakistan, especially over Headley’s disclosures, the US too is not happy over the use of Headley inputs on ISI’s active role on 26/11 tragedy. There was initial reluctance on the part of US to give access to Headley for Indian investigators. When the NIA succeeded in getting vital info on ISI, the US does not want to be the instrument for India to embarrass Pakistan and that is the reason the US wants India to act “responsibly”, whatever it means.
When we talk about Headley, we can’t ignore our own double standards. Krishna says Headley’s revelations can’t be ignored and Pakistan can’t be “selective” on fighting terror. Fair enough. What is our track record? When the same Headley says that Ishrat Jahan is an LeT operative, we say “we can’t take note of the statement of a person who is behind the bars in the US”. Why this “selective” approach when it comes to Gujrat or Modi? And how can you expect Pakistan to take Headley seriously?
When we analyse the Indo-Pak talks and the US pressure, we must realise one thing. It is not a sense of altruism to have peace in the sub-continent that the US wants India and Pakistan to bury the hatchet. It is guided by its own selfish interests. In a year’s time, the US will start its first phase of pull out from beleaguered Afghanistan where it finds itself in deep trouble. When it pulls out of Afghanistan completely, it does not want the country to be taken over by Taliban and al Queda and pose a threat to its interests once again. That is why the US wants Pakistan, its frontline partner in fighting terror, to engage Taliban who have entrenched themselves on the Pak-Afghan border. If Pakistan has to do that its eastern border with India should be free of tension.
But that is where Pakistan is playing a clever game. It wants US intervention to sort out all issues with India (read Kashmir issue) At the same time it wants to strike a deal with Taliban for dominance over Afghanistan. After all, ISI and Taliban have symbiotic relationship. At any rate, Pakistan wants to keep India out of Afghanistan so that it can have a proxy rule in Kabul. The recent donors meet in Kabul has confirmed this.
Afghan President Karzai too is a man in jitters. Once the US and Nato forces pull out, he will be made a mincemeat by Taliban and al Queda. That is the reason he is trying to have peace with Taliban categorising them into good Taliban and bad Taliban. “Inclusive government” in Afghanistan that India talks about is all hot air. Pakistan is going to recover its lost ground in Afghanistan and as an analyst put it, it will be a great reward for Pak army and ISI for their support to Islamic extremism and global terrorism. Since the entire tribal population of northern Afghanistan is not with Taliban, there is also a distinct possibility of civil war rearing its head once again in the country of rugged terrain.
No, it is not just our External Affairs Minister SM Krishna’s smug performance and the “forbearance” he had to swallow whatever his counterpart Shah Mohd Qureshi hurled at him without any diplomatic decency that shows India in bad light. But Krishna did not show the same gesture to his own colleagues back in India. He started attacking Home Secretary GK Pillai for his “untimely” remark on Headley’s disclosures thus making him the scapegoat for the failure of talks. His tirade against Pillai also exposed the rift between MEA and Home Ministry. If at all there was any outcome on Indo-Pak talks, it was this. Exposing our own weaknesses rather than fixing Pakistan for its nefarious role in exporting terror. As a cartoonist put it, we need peace talks between our own MEA and Home Ministry before we think of peace talks or composite dialogue or whatever phrase we invent, with Pakistan. We not only showed the other cheek, but praised the one who slapped us when Krishna and Qureshi were on the same page on Pillai.
When Pak Foreign secretary came to India, he was no different from his minister. He termed the dossiers presented to him as “piece of literature”.
In fact, the first slap was when our Prime Minister had a summit meeting with his counterpart from Pakistan at Sharm-el-Sheikh. Our Prime Minister walked into Pak trap when he condescended to include Balochistan in the joint statement. At that time the scapegoat was, like Pillai this time, the one who drafted the joint statement and who now presides over our national security affairs.
It is no secret that it was our Prime Minister who was pushing for talks with Pakistan when he met Pakistani Prime Minister at Thimpu, undoubtedly under the pressure of the US whose strategic interests demand it. When Qureshi said that “India was not prepared”, he was only making a complaint to the US against India. Did you notice that even before Krishna could return to his country, the US started welcoming the talks? Now that the talks were botched up, why is Dr Man Mohan Singh adopting the message of Gandhiji’s three monkeys? Don’t speak evil, hear evil, and see evil. He should atleast sort out the turf war under his nose.
As if our discomfiture is not enough while dealing with Pakistan, especially over Headley’s disclosures, the US too is not happy over the use of Headley inputs on ISI’s active role on 26/11 tragedy. There was initial reluctance on the part of US to give access to Headley for Indian investigators. When the NIA succeeded in getting vital info on ISI, the US does not want to be the instrument for India to embarrass Pakistan and that is the reason the US wants India to act “responsibly”, whatever it means.
When we talk about Headley, we can’t ignore our own double standards. Krishna says Headley’s revelations can’t be ignored and Pakistan can’t be “selective” on fighting terror. Fair enough. What is our track record? When the same Headley says that Ishrat Jahan is an LeT operative, we say “we can’t take note of the statement of a person who is behind the bars in the US”. Why this “selective” approach when it comes to Gujrat or Modi? And how can you expect Pakistan to take Headley seriously?
When we analyse the Indo-Pak talks and the US pressure, we must realise one thing. It is not a sense of altruism to have peace in the sub-continent that the US wants India and Pakistan to bury the hatchet. It is guided by its own selfish interests. In a year’s time, the US will start its first phase of pull out from beleaguered Afghanistan where it finds itself in deep trouble. When it pulls out of Afghanistan completely, it does not want the country to be taken over by Taliban and al Queda and pose a threat to its interests once again. That is why the US wants Pakistan, its frontline partner in fighting terror, to engage Taliban who have entrenched themselves on the Pak-Afghan border. If Pakistan has to do that its eastern border with India should be free of tension.
But that is where Pakistan is playing a clever game. It wants US intervention to sort out all issues with India (read Kashmir issue) At the same time it wants to strike a deal with Taliban for dominance over Afghanistan. After all, ISI and Taliban have symbiotic relationship. At any rate, Pakistan wants to keep India out of Afghanistan so that it can have a proxy rule in Kabul. The recent donors meet in Kabul has confirmed this.
Afghan President Karzai too is a man in jitters. Once the US and Nato forces pull out, he will be made a mincemeat by Taliban and al Queda. That is the reason he is trying to have peace with Taliban categorising them into good Taliban and bad Taliban. “Inclusive government” in Afghanistan that India talks about is all hot air. Pakistan is going to recover its lost ground in Afghanistan and as an analyst put it, it will be a great reward for Pak army and ISI for their support to Islamic extremism and global terrorism. Since the entire tribal population of northern Afghanistan is not with Taliban, there is also a distinct possibility of civil war rearing its head once again in the country of rugged terrain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)