India under BJP

Soon after India's abrogation of Article 370, which gave a special constitutional status to Kashmir, India enforced a lock down on Indian controlled Kashmir. It arrested political leaders and activists and shut down internet and control of movement into Kashmir was tightly restricted. Since the August 5th, 2019 shut down the situation has been pretty much the same, with some restoration of internet and telephone services, but with an overwhelming presence of Indian military the situation in Indian Kashmir can hardly be described as normal.

In 1999, at the height of the Kargil war between India and Pakistan, Kashmir was considered the hottest spot for conflict in the world. Today after over 200 days of what the UN special rapporteur described as a 'draconian shut down', there is, internationally, an eerie silence about the situation in Indian Kashmir. At the height of the crisis the Indian government itself admitted that 4,000 people had been arrested of whom 200 were politicians. While there has been a release of some prisoners, the numbers are still significantly high.

Prime Minister Modi and Interior Minister Amit Shah's move on Kashmir was not a bolt out of the blue but part of a strategy encapsulated in their party, BJP's, agenda. In the years leading up to the recent Indian action in Kashmir, New Delhi embarked on an aggressive public relations strategy highlighting their economic position, trade relations and repositioned their foreign relations with countries who could possibly be foremost in making a noise against the Indian treatment of the largely Muslim population of Kashmir. It is therefore not surprising that little governmental condemnation of India has been expressed in recent months.

Indeed Human Rights organizations, the various sections of the UN and leading NGO's have been more forthright about concern over India's Kashmir actions and the recent Citizenship Act (which deprives millions of their Indian nationality). The major powers, like United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and France have been hesitant to criticize India directly and have, on the Kashmir issue, refrained from castigating New Delhi of its draconian measures.

On a broader perspective there is concern that philosophically and ideologically, India under Modi and the BJP, has gone through a paradigm shift where democracy has been replaced with oligarchy, where a radical nationalist agenda in which an ‘India for Hindus only’ agenda has infested the psyche of the Indian majority, leaving over 250 million religious minorities at risk. The fabric of a secular India, which many of us admired, even if imperfect, is being rewoven into a Hindustan identity where even history is being rewritten to emphasize that India is Hindustan, which by the new definition means that other than Hindus everyone else is a second class citizen.

The history of India, much like any nation is layered through centuries of different predominant currents of cultural, social and religious persuasion. From ancient times the influence of Buddhism , Hinduism, Jainism, Muslim and British rule have moulded the India of today. Just as Any country cannot ride itself of its ancient past India too cannot rename its identity as simply as it renamed cities like Bombay to Mumbai. A secular India ensured that not only is the past history preserved it also allowed the segments of India's multi ethnic and multi cultural and diverse religious population to prosper and coexist side by side.

The India that Modi and the BJP are forging is inherently based upon a trait of hate, which harvested will only yield blood as the recent riots in New Delhi have shown. A lesson of history has shown that a misplaced sense of nationalism is a close cousin of fascism and this genie is not easy to put back into the bottle. Germany under Nazism, Italy under Mussolini, are just two examples of what happens when nationalism turned on its head can cause immense social and political damage.

The more telling question is whether Indians in general realize that the strength of their secular ethos has been sapped by the BJP and the rhetoric that rings in the streets of many Indian towns and cities under this new dogma will not bring unity to India but more discord. India is not a homogenous nation and its many diverse languages, customs and ethnic shades found a commonality in India's secular colors. Under BJP and Modi they are playing dangerous games with the same threads that bound Indian society together and when snapped the repercussions will not be pleasant for India.


India's strength was its diversity, the fact that Sonia Ghandi, an Italian by birth and upbringing could integrate into the India that Ghandi and Nehru envisioned and not only integrate but lead one of its major political parties, spoke of the power of India's secular tolerance. When replaced with intolerance the very Indian-ness of India becomes threatened and this is what Indians must wake up to and correct before its too late.