Rajinder Sachar'sviews on the way the state should deal with the purveyors of death through terror have not been a secret, whether it be on the ?rights? of the Khalistanis in the 1980s or the ?freedoms? of the Islamic terrorists in Kashmir during the 1990s. Like Arundhati Roy, another fringe voice now mainstream courtesy of Mainos, Sachar has consistently stood on the side of those who resorted to violence to challenge the integrity of India. The US has its Noam Chomsky, but as yet no policymaker in Washington has given that maverick control over homeland security. Should that take place, the US would begin to resemble Iraq, a country under foreign occupation. Knowing Sachar'sproclivities towards the extreme-his appointment as head of a commission that had as its mandate the same task last given to Lord Minto and Mr Morley in 1909 (of engineering a festering division within Indian society between Muslims and the rest) is a mystery.
The terms of reference of the Sachar Commission, and not simply its composition, ought to have been challenged the way the UPA attempt at the nuclear emasculation of India has been now. Expectedly, the result has been a report that, while professing to enhance the position of Muslims in India, actually makes the community vulnerable to a backlash from without and to jihadisation from within. The report and its accompanying publicity will have the effect of creating a new and virulent division between Muslims and the rest of the country. It will further the cause of those who seek to ensure that Muslims regard themselves as being separate from the rest of the country, and in time to be-once again-different from the country itself. This is exactly the objective of the Wahabbi planners in the ISI, who are hoping that the toxic solutions floated within the US, the ISI HQ and the UPA towards ?solving the Kashmir masla? will get implemented by Manmohan Singh and thus act as a lever towards fragmenting India into a welter of principalities.
Predictably, each year that this policy of unilateral concessions towards Islamic terrorism has been followed has witnessed the growth of the cancer within the rest of India. No longer can it be said that Indian citizens-barring the Wahabbis in Kashmir-are free of the ?Al Qaeda? virus. Modules and cells of this entity now exist across the country, including in several campuses and even among certain policymakers and business-houses. Unlike in the 1990s, terrorists are now assured of a local support structure in most parts of the country, including in UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, Maharashtra,Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal and Kerala. The unilateral cease-fire enforced in Kashmir during 2002 directly resulted in the oxygenation of what at the time was a dying jihadist movement. And yet, such misguided policies have been reinforced and expanded under the UPA dispensation.
Muslims in India are overwhelmingly peace-loving, wanting job security and a happy family life the way their Hindu, Christian, Sikh and Jain brothers and sisters want. The worst enemies of Islam come from the ranks of those who have fattened themselves in the name of this great faith. If Rajinder Sachar had enquired into the position of Muslims in Bangladesh or Pakistan, he would have found their economic situation much direr than that of co-religionists in India. Had he done an objective study of the lack of human rights enjoyed by Muslims in countries ruled by those who exploit the name of Islam for gain, such as Saudi Arabia, he would have discovered that the position of Shias, women and non-Wahabbi Sunnis in that authoritarian state is almost as pathetic as that of Dalits in Pakistan, again another section that Rajinder Sachar has not bothered to notice. Unless the position of Muslims worldwide is put in context, including the lack of education of the majority of non-Wahabbi Muslims in several Muslim-majority countries, the conclusions of a survey based on dubious data will be as distorted a view of reality as that of another UPA favourite, U.C. Banerjee, who evidently believes that passengers on trains set themselves on fire out of amusement.
Certainly, such an individual deserves to be made Governor of a state at the least, if not Vice-President of India. The job of Rashtrapati should of course go to Rajinder Sachar for his efforts at prosecuting not the killers in the Punjab but the policemen fighting against them, and of emulating Morley-Minto in crafting a report that divides Indian from Indian. The saving grace is that despite the numerous toxic policies adopted-let it be said-almost entirely by non-Muslim policymakers, the Muslim community is thus far refusing to commit the same mistake that was made by large sections in the 1930s and the 1940s, of falling into the trap set by those with colonialist ambitions of dominating the entire people of a country by keeping them divided.
Despite the efforts of Manmohan Singh to pose as the messiah of the Muslims, that community seems to have realised that support for this administration would in brief years result in such turmoil within India as would make this still-peaceful, still-prospering country as unlivable as are most of the countries now ruled by despots shamelessly and impiously exploiting the name of Islam in order to amass wealth and lead debauched lives that are at such variance with the example set by the early Muslim pioneers, who made this religion a world force within four centuries.
A grave and growing danger is emerging within India, caused by people who claim to be Muslim but who may more accurately be termed ?pseudo-Muslims?, those who seek not to follow but to exploit the name of the religion for political and financial gain. These are largely followers of Abdul Wahab, an individual who took inspiration from the British to create a new faith, and whose followers have consistently been backed by first Britain and then the US. Even after September 11, 2001, showed the toxicity of this 300-year-old faith, the flow of cash from the ?Wahabbi International? has ensured that the US and Britain remain unwilling to accept through deeds that those who follow Abdul Wahab are among the biggest threats to international security. In Iraq for example, the Bush administration-whose ties to key Wahabbi rulers are deep-has been demanding that the lion'sshare of that country'soil be retained in the control of those who are regarded as friendly to the Wahabbi-ruled states.
In contrast to this activism on behalf of friends of the Bush and Cheney families, Washington is totally silent about the fact that the Shias of Saudi Arabia-on whose territory 94 per cent of the country'soil wealth is situated-enjoy less than 1 per cent of the profits made from that resource. As for US President George W. Bush, who repeatedly boasts of his love for his church and its creed, he has thus far been remarkably low-key about the need to ensure that Sudan'sChristian minority (based in the South) be given a fair share of the oil resources that are located almost entirely on their territory.
Clearly, despite 9/11, the Bush administration is still unwilling to bell the Wahabbi cat.
Small wonder that there is so much pressure on Manmohan Singh to surrender sovereignty in Kashmir, a step that the Wahabbi interests close to the Bush family have long adopted as a mission, as any record of financial flows to Kashmiri Wahabbis would demonstrate.
Under the welcoming gaze of the UPA, pseudo-Muslims belonging to the Wahabbi International (of which the ISI is a potent instrument) have moved dangerously close to establishing a Crescent of Terror that would stretch from Kashmir to the north-east. All along this northern periphery of India, ?Al Qaeda? cells have been set up to give sanctuary and succour to the Islamic terrorists. In less than a decade, this entire belt has the potential to erupt into a chaos as bloody as that witnessed in Kashmir during the 1990s. It will be remembered that it was during the 1980s that the Wahabbis entrenched themselves in that unfortunate state, creating the human and physical infrastructure used later to launch a ruthless war against the country that has still to be won, but which-despite many mistakes made by policymakers in New Delhi, is far from lost. Indeed, while the Islamic terrorists have succeeded in defeating the USSR in Afghanistan (and within five years, possibly NATO as well) as well pounded into incoherence the US military in Iraq, they have not had a similar success against the Indian armed forces, something that our neglected and maligned jawans can be proud of. However, conditions are now being created for changes in policy that could make Kashmir a springboard for a general assault of Islamic terrorism on the whole of India. Not surprisingly, given the composition of the advisers of the Mainos, those supposedly in charge of national security have not given the same attention to this onrushing threat as they are bestowing on the critics of the Mainos and their retainers. Today, the intelligence and enforcement apparatus of the union government is so concentrated on the task of destruction of political and other challenges to Mainos, that it is small wonder that Afzal has become the UPA poster boy. Of course, it needs to be remembered that the systematic elimination of nationalists from-for example-the mainstream media in India began when the Mainos were protected and pampered so that they could emerge as the new rulers of India.
Maino rule is very different from Nehru family rule. During that era, Kashmir CM was anti-Wahabbi. Today, he has adjusted to the new era by acting as an ideological soulmate of Mufti Mohammed Sayeed of Rubaiya shame. Recently, an official advertisement released by J&K tourism mentioned ?Kohi Maran?, or the ?Wicked Mountain?. The pre-PDP/Congress name was Hari Parbat, clearly a name wholly unsuitable for those in favour of the ISI line. Another of the numerous overt proofs of Maino favourite Wajahat Habibullah'ssuccess in insulating Kashmir from responsibilities mandated by the secular Constitution of India is an advertisement of the state government released six months ago,which specified that settlement of evacuee property would be ?governed by the Sharia?. Small wonder that the (Hindu) evacuees have thus far been given nothing by the state government.
If other Maino favourites such as Rajinder Sachar have their way, numerous other anti-secular Kashmirs would get created across India, where the laws of the land as passed by Parliament would cease to be operational, just as they often are in Kashmir. According to high-level officials in what is still Srinagar, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed and his follower Ghulam Nabi Azad have demanded that ?only Muslims? should be involved in any discussions concerning the future of the state. Later, once the backlash against such policies ensures a genuine change of regime, there may be need for several Commissions of Enquiry to ensure that justice be done to patriotic elements such as the families of the December 13, 2001, martyrs, who have suffered intolerable neglect for the past five years. In the 1980s, this columnist used to visit Punjab state, and saw for himself that the only two Congresspersons active against the Khalistanis were the martyred Beant Singh and M.S. Bitta. Of the two, the doughty fighter against terrorists-who has been ignored and humiliated by his own party-still continues an increasingly lonely battle against the wholesale surrender to the Wahabbi International that is being witnessed today.