My views on the “Citizenship Amendment Bill” were concurred by few and opposed by few. And even though I do not agree with some of their opinions but still, I respect their views as well. As everyone is entitled to their own opinions and views on different issues.
Yesterday on HM made a statement on the floor of the house proclaiming that Congress has divided the nation based on religion in 1947 and this bill was kind of a corrective measure to rectify that mistake.
I feel that the statement is twisted and misleads the public. The idea of religious identity is the basis of partition that has less to do with Congress and more to do with the ardent advocates of communal notion of nation building-VD Savarkar of Hindu Mahasabha and Jinnah of Muslim League. The ML had a firm grasp on the political value of such an idea. Jinnah outmaneuvered political opponents on his way towards establishing Pakistan and by 1940 the germ of the idea propounded initially in 1923 by Savarkar had seized Jinnah’s imagination and was fuelled by events on the ground. From the beginning, both MK Gandhi &Nehru rejected the idea. British PM Churchill predisposed to managing situations through divisions saw innate merit in supporting Jinnah rather than giving into Congress’s demands. Soon after Jinnah articulated the idea of Pakistan in Lahore resolution of 1940 the British endorsed the essence of it thereby pushing the idea further into the realm of reality. It is also a fact that Congress failed in persuading either Jinnah to give up his separatist dream or in convincing the British to not to help Jinnah take that path. Various rifts came to surface in the riots of West Bengal after political fall out between Nehru and Jinnah.
Jinnah called for “direct action” to realise the idea of Pakistan. Thousands died as the riots that began in1946. Trouble spread to Naokhali, in WB, and Bihar. This was probably the turning point when congress leaders saw no further point fighting the idea that Jinna had presented, the idea that the British had assiduously foisted and aggressively worked out. The short answer to HM’s postulation is that it was not Congress that caused the division along religious lines.
It is not that they don’t know the history, but it only a blame game that the people of India could easily decipher. The HM glosses over history to present RSS-BJP as a so-called keeper of “Hindu” interests everywhere. But is there a “Hindu” interest that is separate from India’s interests in India which is the common home of people of many faiths.
North-Eastern India was in flames on Tuesday, resembling Kashmir before the military crackdown, last August,-only hours after Union HM had pushed through the hotly contested bill in Lok Sabha. On Wednesday, even the army was called out In Tripura, although the Internet had to be shut down, to prevent the protests from spreading. This part of the country has not seen such comprehensive people’s protests since the Assam agitation of the 80s.
Hours after Lok Sabha passed CAB, in the US the House Foreign Affairs Committee -an influential bipartisan subset, of the US Congress —has regretted that India is proposing to use “religious” test in awarding citizenship. If the measure becomes law its likely to recommend to the US government to sanction HM and other high officials. And that scenario may not be advantageous to India and in turn can be a huge letdown.
Yesterday on HM made a statement on the floor of the house proclaiming that Congress has divided the nation based on religion in 1947 and this bill was kind of a corrective measure to rectify that mistake.
I feel that the statement is twisted and misleads the public. The idea of religious identity is the basis of partition that has less to do with Congress and more to do with the ardent advocates of communal notion of nation building-VD Savarkar of Hindu Mahasabha and Jinnah of Muslim League. The ML had a firm grasp on the political value of such an idea. Jinnah outmaneuvered political opponents on his way towards establishing Pakistan and by 1940 the germ of the idea propounded initially in 1923 by Savarkar had seized Jinnah’s imagination and was fuelled by events on the ground. From the beginning, both MK Gandhi &Nehru rejected the idea. British PM Churchill predisposed to managing situations through divisions saw innate merit in supporting Jinnah rather than giving into Congress’s demands. Soon after Jinnah articulated the idea of Pakistan in Lahore resolution of 1940 the British endorsed the essence of it thereby pushing the idea further into the realm of reality. It is also a fact that Congress failed in persuading either Jinnah to give up his separatist dream or in convincing the British to not to help Jinnah take that path. Various rifts came to surface in the riots of West Bengal after political fall out between Nehru and Jinnah.
Jinnah called for “direct action” to realise the idea of Pakistan. Thousands died as the riots that began in1946. Trouble spread to Naokhali, in WB, and Bihar. This was probably the turning point when congress leaders saw no further point fighting the idea that Jinna had presented, the idea that the British had assiduously foisted and aggressively worked out. The short answer to HM’s postulation is that it was not Congress that caused the division along religious lines.
It is not that they don’t know the history, but it only a blame game that the people of India could easily decipher. The HM glosses over history to present RSS-BJP as a so-called keeper of “Hindu” interests everywhere. But is there a “Hindu” interest that is separate from India’s interests in India which is the common home of people of many faiths.
North-Eastern India was in flames on Tuesday, resembling Kashmir before the military crackdown, last August,-only hours after Union HM had pushed through the hotly contested bill in Lok Sabha. On Wednesday, even the army was called out In Tripura, although the Internet had to be shut down, to prevent the protests from spreading. This part of the country has not seen such comprehensive people’s protests since the Assam agitation of the 80s.
Hours after Lok Sabha passed CAB, in the US the House Foreign Affairs Committee -an influential bipartisan subset, of the US Congress —has regretted that India is proposing to use “religious” test in awarding citizenship. If the measure becomes law its likely to recommend to the US government to sanction HM and other high officials. And that scenario may not be advantageous to India and in turn can be a huge letdown.
