The Indian Media's Majority Bashing

By Ajay Kamalakaran

A non-violent independence struggle gave way to a bloody and violent partition of India, where it is believed that 1 million people died in Muslim- Sikh-Hindu riots. There were severe casualties on both sides of the new India-Pakistan border, but the riots left a permanent scar on the Indian psyche. While the Hindu and Sikh populations of Pakistan were almost entirely cleansed, millions of Muslims were allowed to stay back in India. India firmly declared itself a secular republic and the constitution guaranteed that the rights of the minorities would be protected.

Over the last 58 years, India has evolved into a vibrant, multi-cultural, multi-ethnic democracy. India's Muslim population is around 140 million, which is more than the entire population of Pakistan. India's Muslim citizens, like other minorities in India, have enjoyed harmonious existence for most of the 58 years that India has been independent.

The glaring exceptions in these 58 years are: the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom that followed the assassination of Indira Gandhi (by her Sikh bodyguards), the communal riots that erupted after the demolition of the Babri Mosque in 1992 and the Hindu-Muslim riots in Gujarat in 2002. All three sets of riots were indeed a black mark on India and the Hindu community. Few will disagree that such riots should never ever take place again. The Indian media, in a bid to create sensationalism, has attacked the generally-tolerant Hindu community and demonised it globally, much to the glee of Indo-phobes around the world.

The worst riots independent India ever witnessed were the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. In a span of three days after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, over 3000 Sikhs were brutally murdered within a 5 kilometre radius of the Indian Parliament in New Delhi. It wasn't however, the educated people of Delhi, who indulged in the pogrom (yes the use of the word pogrom can be justified here). Politicians channelled hooligans and hoodlums and gave them a free reign of terror where the state's internal security apparatus turned a blind eye. These were exactly the actions that the assassinated-Prime Minister would have never allowed. There were several stories of educated Hindu-people risking their lives to save their Sikh neighbours. This author's Granduncle, then a civil servant in the Home Ministry, hid a Sikh colleague in his car, and took him to safety. When the mobs stopped his car, they saw a Government of India logo and let it pass. It's a foregone conclusion that the mob would have not spared a single person in the car, if they saw the hidden Sikh.

The Indian majority-bashing media conveniently ignored these and other stories and went on a campaign to malign every Hindu in India, based on what happened in those three days. To win western approval, the Indian media has continued its attacks on the country's Hindu community. Take for example, the Babri Mosque demolition. In 1992, a mob of fanatics, attacked the 450 year-old (yet disused) Mosque and tore it down. This sparked a series of riots in India and neighbouring Pakistan and Bangladesh. More than 6000 Hindu temples were torn down in Bangladesh and around 3000 temples in Pakistan. In fact, the Jain Temple in Lahore was torn down with a bulldozer! Yet, the Indian media only harped on what it proclaimed as the death of secularism in India.

The Babri Mosque/Ram Temple issue in India has more to with politics than it does with religion. A group of Hindu and Muslim citizens who met in Bombay a few months after the demolition were unanimously of the opinion that a hospital be built in the disputed complex. Most rational Indians would prefer a charitable hospital to a temple or mosque. India, being a deeply religious country, has millions of mosques and temples stretching from Laddakh in the north to Kanyakumari in the south. The Indian media along with its Pakistani and Bangladeshi counterparts still bring up the demolition of the mosque while conveniently ignoring the fact that more than 10,000 new mosques (All India Muslim Law Board's figures) have been built in India since that time.

This brings us to the much-reported Gujarat riots of 2002. It would be wrong to call the riots as a pogrom or holocaust as claimed by some members of the South Asian media. A pogrom is loosely defined as an organised massacre of community on another, like what Jewish people suffered in Russian Bessarabia in 1904 or during World War 2 in Nazi Germany. As terrible as the Gujarat riots were, they would absolutely not qualify for the term pogrom. Violent mobs went on a rampage and attacked several helpless civilians. The Indian media's coverage was shamelessly one-sided. This author firmly believes that an attack on any Indian is an attack on the country. There were several cases of barbarity during these riots and it was absolutely unfortunate that many Muslims were at the receiving end of the riots.

The undeniable fact is that both Hindu and Muslim mobs attacked civilians of the other communities in a series of revenge acts. It wasn't just Muslims who were forced to stay in refugee camps for a few weeks, there were refugee camps for Hindus as well. The Indian media, again in a bid to win western approval, painted a blatantly unfair image of these riots. It has been established beyond a doubt that 75% of the 2000 people killed in the riots were Muslims, but to equate these riots to the World War 2 Holocaust is a tremendous disservice to the millions of Jews, Roma, Russians and Handicapped people that died because of Nazi hatred.

Another misdeed of the Indian media is to appoint fanatics as the true representatives of the Hindu community in India. In every talk show on Indian television, a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) or Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) is invited to speak on behalf of all of India's Hindus. The print media gives disproportionate coverage to these same groups. No one but the Indian and International Media considers these groups as representatives of the Hindu people. Yet, every Hindu in India is maligned on the basis of what these leaders say. If any rational person objects to the Indian media's bias, they are immediately labelled as Hindu fanatics.

Rather than using their wide reach to highlight India's unity in diversity, the media plays straight into Western and Pakistani hands by trying to label India as a hotbed of religious intolerance. In fact, the west openly approves of negationism in India. Film Festivals from Berlin to Toronto often felicitate sub-standard documentaries on India, as long as they malign the country. Documentaries on the Kashmiri Hindus, who were evicted from their homes almost 15 years ago, are seen in the west as mere propaganda. So-called social activists from India are welcomed and honoured in Europe and America as long as they harp on the bigotry of India. It's unfortunate that the members of the Indian media fail to understand that they are nothing but pawns in the hands of India's former colonisers, who would like nothing more than to see India's people divided.

It's about time that the "silent majority" of Indians stand up to this defamation campaign. A war is being waged on India by Indo-phobes, who use elements in India, to create instability. The onus is on the masses of India to realise that the country is a growing economic and political power and that every single citizen needs to take a stand against the negation and vilification campaign against India. It's only the people of India, who can put an end to the old British policy of Divide and Rule, which still persists in India 58 years after independence.