[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
BOMBAY MUSLIMS READY TO REJECT POET IQBAL'S POLITICS
BOMBAY MUSLIMS READY TO REJECT POET IQBAL'S POLITICS
By: Iqbal Masud
The Pioneer, May 29, 1995
In the midst of big happenings like the Congress split, we have lost sight
of one important event. The impact of the BJP-Sena victory in Maharashtra on
the question of minorities; that is, the Muslims. There is a vital, perhaps
irreversible, change in Indian politics. Unless one stays in Bombay, reads
the daily urdu papers, keeps in contact with the ordinary people - not Muslim
leaders who have disgraced themselves in the last few weeks by total loss of
nerve - one will not know.
One day they were attacking the Shiv Sena. The morrow after the combine's
victory, they rushed to Mr balasaheb Thackeray and pleaded for favors. Mr.
Thackeray accepted their surrender but the very next day he rightly humiliated
them. The panic was only among the leaders. The people on the ground in
Bombay's Muslim areas went about their business undisturbed by Sena victory.
This was true of the Bombay locality of Bhendi bazar as of the Muslim
suburb of Mumbra, etc. People were actually purchasing residential places
and moving into Bombay. I know all this. So, when the Times of India phoned
up on the day of the Shiv Sena victory, I said in effect, "Why should the
Muslims be disturbed. They suffered under the Congress and now they will
adjust with Shiv Sena."
This let loose a storm. The so-called Leftists pestered me with anonymous
phone calls (a cowardly gesture), asking why I was surrendering to Shiv Sena.
"Because," I answered, "You have misled the Muslims. You incited them to
riot, but you kept away. The Muslims got it in their neck." This is the
essential truth of the Bombay riots. The calls persisted till I had to seek
police assistance.
Today I am amused that the same people have formed "secular" bodies in
association with Muslim Leaguers. They offer new leadership to the Muslims.
This is a gimmick to gain the leadership of the Muslims and probably strike
a deal with Shiv Sena. But Shiv Sena is too smart and the Muslim Leaguers
will be humiliated.
These antics should not divert us from the main task of apprehending what
is wrong with Bombay Muslims. The problem was not of leadership, but the
psuchosis of a whole community. This needs an analysis.
Actually Bombay was a genuinely secular place in the 1950s. The change
began in the 1960s and 70s - with the movement for the Muslim identity.
The starting point was unheroic. As Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay,
in the 1970s, I noticed a sudden increase in the number of COFEPOSA economic
offences committed by ordinary Muslims.
I asked the Collector of Central Excise and Collector of Customs the
reasons for this. They replied, " They (Bombay Muslims) are getting poorer.
In desperation they have resorted to 'extra-legal' way of life. They have
opted out of the Indian State and society." I said, "but this is shocking.
Why did not you stop it?" They said, "Why should we? It is a Muslim affair.
Why should I risk my men's lives? It is a Muslim affair."
I accepted this reasoning at that time. But this was a mistake. It led
to the rise of the mafia which began to rule over the Muslim areas.
I bacame aware of this in the 1980s. A young Urdu journalist approached
me and said: 'I am going to start radical paper. Please help me with articles."
I agreed. However, he came back after three months with a man who looked like
an "extra legal" boss (to use a neutral term). The boss made the same request
as the journalist to go along.
The journalist called later and said that the 'extra-legals' had kidnapped
him and forced him to run the paper in accordance with their scheme. It was
clear that the 'extra legals' were after higher game. They were no ordinary
anti-social. They had a plan to subdue the Bombay Muslim intellectuals.
>From mid-1980s onwards this tendency went on till the 'extra-legals' had
established a base in certain Muslim areas.
This was the basis of the famous mafia empire stretching across into the
Gulf. They became the dominant presence in Bombay's Muslim areas.
Today's analysts are mixing all this up with "secularism", "fundamenatalism"
etc. These are all meaningless cliches. The predominant features of Muslim
intellectual life are two big Muslim educational institutions. Both are
ruled by ex-Congress politicians. They have become fossilised. They kept
Muslims back by making Urdu the medium of instruction.
The result is hundreds of Muslim boys and girls failed at the college
entrance examinations which is in English. These students either drop out
or become third-rate college students after some years. The other feature
is the Urdu Press which is supposed to be divided into conservative and
progressive sections.
Actualy this division is meaningless because the style of reporting and
presentation is not very different. They bring into being a very mediocre
kind of readership which sees national issues in black and white terms:
Muslim Urdu world against the rest.
The other Urdu papers are the voice of the 'extra-legals'. This was the
situation which prevailed up to Dec. 1992 riots and the blasts of March 1993.
Later, the 'extra legals' were weakened but they have not vanished. They
established links with the local party in power and directly ruled over
Bombay Muslims. Their men freely purchased and sold buildings, evicted
residents, etc.
The local police helped the 'extra legals' against the independent Muslims
who belonged to various parties like the Janata Dal.
The so-called Bombay Muslim culture is the product of these pressures. It
has therefore become conservative, wary of the non-Muslims and of the govt.
It has also become the carrier of what Maulana Wahiduddin Khan recently called
poet Iqbal's view of politics. Meaning a superior Muslim culture. This view
led to Partition and later Babri Masjid Committee being formed and the whole
problem of Ayodhya.
As Kalimuddin Shams of the Forward Bloc of West Bengal pointed out in 1985,
Syed Shahabuddin converted a purely local Muslim problem into an all-India
one. This led to the subsequent riots. This in turn led to the Dec. 1992
riots. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan recommends abandonment of 'Iqbal's view' and
getting along with the Hindus. This is the choice before Bombay Muslims today.
Whether BJP-Sena rules Bombay or not is not the issue. The question
before Bombay Muslims is whether they are ready to give up poet Iqbal's
view of politics.
I think Bombay Muslims are in a mood to give Maulana Wahiduddin Khan a
hearing. That is a great advance. There is room for cautious optimism, for a
radical change in Muslim perception of Hindus. But this also requires a
proper response - not continuous and deliberate assault on Muslim sensibility
and even physical security.
