I am part of a group where there are constant debates on the resurgence of Hindutva / sanatana dharma. I wrote this as a mail to one of the guys who was regularly posting anti minority mails.

Point One

Islam - In Arabic, Islam means 'submission'. In Islam there is no separation between religion and government—what in Christianity would be called the separation of church and state. So is Hinduism. This implies why the Islamic population justifies political / military battle….to build an Islamic state. Thus you can have the Islamic republic of Pakistan or other such states and not a Hindu republic of India or a Christian republic of Spain, which are equally religious countries. Politics and religion (are suppose to be) different here.

Christianity - Over centuries we have known rulers and subjects resorting to violence, which are now lessons we learn in history (Inquisition, Crusades, War of religion, Anti-Semitism etc). Thus Christians have also advocated violence to justify spreading their religion

Fortunately for us in India or Hindustan, over the many years, we have hardly fought wars on religion, be it Ashok fighting the Kalingas or if you look at any other battles. Even when the Muslim invaders were in India, many Indian kings had a pretty secular armed force. We have never had a concept of “jihad bis saif” or referred to qital fi sabilillah, means Jihad by the sword.

The point I am making is the acceptance of violence as a means to an end is not part of our solution for generations.

That is probably the reason that Gandhiji was able to defeat the Subash Chandra Bose or Bhagat Singh fractions in the Independence movement. And also like that viral that is going around, India has never invaded another country in the last 5000 odd years…or something to that effect

Second point

If you look at the geo-politics of the Indian sub-continent of the last 50 – 75 years, India has not been a “dudh ke dhula” in the matter of inciting mischief with its neighbors.

1. Kashmir - If you were to look at the origin and the status of the Kashmir issue, the problem has originated in India and in spite of JN Nehru's promise, the Kashmir plebiscite has not happened. I think it was to happen in 1953 as per their commitment. The acquisition of Kashmir by India, we all know, was not by a fair method.

2. Interference is Bangladesh was nothing but with ulterior motives of dividing Pakistan. This is when Bhutto said that he will fight India even if it means he has to eat grass

The point here is that we have hurt (the state of) Pakistan more than they have hurt us as a state/nation...in real terms. Since they cannot fight us in a battle, the “cut 1000 small wounds” statement is famous

Third point

Appeasement of minorities or even vote bank politics is not unique to India. We know of how Obama campaigned to ensure black votes while his opponent John McCain used Bobby Jindal to get Indian votes. On the reverse, we have seen the rise of majority vote bank politics in countries like Austria (the Freedom Party won 17.5% votes in the last election campaigning solely on anti immigration) and New Zealand (where the Green Party is gaining importance). This has been the policy of the Congress for many years now, only because they have realized that the majority does not vote as a block, unlike the minority

Fourth point

Probably since Maulana Azad, Muslims in India have not got a true leader who have been progressive. Unfortunately, the Muslim leadership has stuck to dealing with the lowest common denominator of that society, much like the rest of the politicians & worked on safe bets to win elections in their selected constituencies. This has left most Muslims in deprived underdeveloped

Putting all this in perspective, I think it makes sense to do the following

· See how minority appeasement can be stopped. By that I mean all sorts of minorities, including SC/ST kind of stuff. I love the Gujarat model of world class development, no corruption (read less corruption) and (hopefully) a peaceful society, where the minority knows its place in the society.

· Communicate to the minorities their rightful place in the society. I have lived in Saudi, UAE and UK. I have also had an opportunity to see how minorities are treated in other developed and mature countries in Europe or Americas. What I have seen is that the minority is respected, however told in no uncertain terms that they are not the decision makers and that they need to abide by the rules set by the majority.

· Forget the past. So India should stick by the Simla Agreement and Pakistan should forget the Plebiscite. This I believe has positives and negatives for both countries

· India should play a bigger role in SAARC and should strength, and have the courage and gumption to call a spade a spade. India should also counter the Chinese threat in the Indian Ocean thru close co-operation with Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, the 2 most vulnerable countries from an Indian geo-political scenario

It does not make sense to

• (a) spread hatred thru viral campaigns, because like what Gandhi said, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind
• (b) blame the present generation of the minority as they are a byproduct of their past. It makes more sense to get theminto the larger society and develop a bigger sense of camaraderie.