1. The Constitution of Pakistan forbids its citizens from taking part in the religious occasions of others.

2.19 per cent of children, mainly girls, remain out of schools.

3. Single National Curriculum promotes intolerance and religious extremism.

4. Clerics are authorised to censor educational content.

5. Recitation of the Quran was mandated during school assembly.

Dr. Willy Fautré, Director of Human Rights Without Frontiers (HRWF), a non-governmental organisation in special status with ECOSOC, criticised the national education policy of Pakistan and pointed out its flaws, which resulted in intolerance, religious extremism and creating an atmosphere of hatred against other religions.

In a written statement submitted to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations, and read out at a side event, the organisation also pointed out the provisions of the Pakistan’s Constitution and its much-disputed Single National Curriculum launched in 2021 responsible for religious intolerance and religious extremism as government schools are not secular and inclusive. The side event was held on 26 March, room 25 Palaise the Nations. Titled Human Rights in Pakistan:  Education under siege, ideology, intolerance, and the erosion of Human Rights in Pakistan, its organisers were major NGOs like CAP and HRWF.

The statement by The Coordination des Association et des Particuliers pour la Liberte de Conscience, says:

“Constitution of Pakistan states in Article 22 that ‘No person attending any educational institution shall be required to receive instruction, or take part in any religious ceremony, or attend religious worship, if such instruction, ceremony, or worship relates to a religion other than its own.’

Therefore, Article 22 of the Constitution of Pakistan promotes non-respect of religions among the students. Human rights organisations have criticised this policy.

Citing the statistics of the Pakistan Institution of Education, the organisation said that 73 per cent of educational institutions in Pakistan are government schools, while 14 per cent are religious schools or madrasas. Such a large number of madrasas presenting an exclusivist interpretation of Islam and non-respect for other religions have contributed to an atmosphere of religious extremism and intolerance in the country.

The organisation also points out the flaws in the SNC launched by the Pakistan government. It says:

“In August 2021, the Pakistan government launched the much-disputed Single National Curriculum (SNC) for government schools, claiming that this initiative would reduce educational disparities. However, the human rights defenders criticised the SNC for its lack of inclusivity and its over-emphasis on Islamic religious content at the expense of religious minorities. In fact, school curricula and textbooks promote intolerance towards minorities and depict women in a way that is non-inclusive and is not compatible with international human rights standards.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan expressed deep concerns about the government perpetuating a singular view of religion in educational institutions through SN, depriving young students of the right to a secular education.”

The Coordination des Association et des Particuliers pour la Liberte se Conscience feels that the SNC is an attempt to Islamise the entire Pakistani society, putting the religious minorities in jeopardy. It says:

“The SNC has also been criticised as an Islamisation program under which all facets of Pakistan’s core educational curriculum were infused with religious content, aligning with the ideological bent of the existing Sunni Muslim orthodoxy. (Source: Wasim Hameed, “Minorities in Single National Curriculum”. 4, The Nation, 9 July 2021.)

According to a 73-page Report of the Salluv ECPM Foundation 5, “Pakistan, Education System, Curriculum and EU Funding” financed by the European Parliament and published in 2024, “a study by The Current revealed that Muslim religious ideas or texts were present in 7.7 per cent of the SNC’s mathematics, social studies, science, general knowledge, English, and Urdu books. Additionally, 7.47 per cent of books have references to Islam, while 0.27 per cent mention other religions in all non-religious books.”

The organisation also pointed out an act of the Punjab Assembly passed in 2022, which authorised the clerics to censor educational content and its resolution mandating the recitation of the Quran during the school assembly. Such acts and resolutions were not compatible with international human rights standards.

Darwin’s Theory of Evolution VS Creationism

One major drawback of Pakistan’s education system is that it is influenced by conservative clerics who lack a scientific spirit and therefore oppose scientific theories and ideas. For example, clerics have opposed the teaching of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution in Pakistan because they think that the theory is against Islamic law. In October 2023, clerics of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa forced a college professor named Sher Ali to publicly renounce teaching Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

Earlier in May 2022, his car was attacked with a magnetic bomb, leaving him in his wheelchair for months. The professor was also made to make the statement that “According to Shariah, the woman’s intelligence is inferior to that of a man. I consider this the final word on this issue and believe that women should be covered from head to toe while venturing out. Women can only go out if it is needed or necessary”.

The organisation, therefore, feels that the education system of Pakistan not only promotes hatred against minorities but also is a hindrance in the development of scientific temperament among the students.

Controversial and Inequitable Image and Girls in the Curriculum of Public Schools

The organisation also found that the SNC textbooks are full of content that presents women as inferior to men as approximately 60 per cent of SNC books included images of males, whereas females accounted for only 39 per cent.

Moreover, portrayal of female characters is one-dimensional in terms of their appearances, character traits and hobbies. They are mostly portrayed as wearing hijab or headscarf, while most men are depicted wearing western attire, with only 20 percent wearing traditional Islamic clothing. With regard to occupations, male textbook characters are often portrayed as doctors, lawyers and soldiers, while female textbook characters are mostly portrayed as domestic help, housewives or caregivers.

The European Union Funding in the Dock: Misuse of Taxpayers ‘ money of the 27 EU member states

The NGO further says that the EU funds for Pakistan’s education projects have been misused. According to the 2024 Report of Sallux/ ECPM “Pakistan, Education System, Curriculum and EU Funding”, the EU directly invested 94 million euros in education projects in Pakistan between 2016-2024.

The report contains over 40 pages of excerpts and pictures from textbooks showing that the views expressed in the official curriculum in Pakistan are not compatible with EU values as expressed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Such an amount of concrete evidence cannot be ignored.

The NGO, therefore, draws the conclusion that beyond the incompatibility of the SNC and the UN standards, the pressure of many extremist clerics and fanaticized crowds can easily kill any reform attempt as long as perpetrators of intellectual terrorism, violence and hate crimes remain unpunished and can continue terrorising 2.1 million teachers in Pakistan.

In view of the present scenario of education and its consequent fallout on the human rights situation in the country, the Co-ordination des Associations et des Particuliers pour le Liberte de Conscience has made the following recommendations to the United Nations:

1. The United Nations should urge the authorities of Pakistan to make the SNC compatible with the UN international human rights standards.

2. The UN should effectively protect its 2.1 million teachers against threats and aggression perpetrated by Islamic extremists and prosecute the latter ones.

Article was first published on newageislam.com

The post Pakistan’s education policy blatantly anti-minority, anti-women appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Outside the auditorium, a long queue assembled in the lobby of the O’Brien Science Building. Most of them were Indian students. Eventually, I began conversing with the person ahead of me and we found seats together. He was in his late twenties, doing his masters, and had previously worked at a large e-commerce MNC (multi-national company) before moving to Ireland. I asked him why he was attending today’s talk by the foreign minister. He said that he was a big admirer of Dr. S. Jaishankar and his work, as well as ‘other leaders’ like him.

According to him, Dr. Jaishankar was a ‘smart’ and ‘bold’ person who cared for the country’s interests and how Indians were represented abroad. Challenging his point, I brought up the recent deportations of illegal Indian immigrants from the United States and the minister’s tepid response to the matter. He replied saying the immigrants had committed a crime by being in the States illegally and therefore it was right they were sent back. ‘In chains?’ I added. No, he said. ‘That went too far. But America will be America.’

As for those ‘other leaders’ he said, ‘the thing I like about this government is that they put the country first. The country comes first and then everything else.’ I found this interesting. By putting the country first, he was referring to the government’s unwavering focus on growth and development. I said that not all Indians saw this growth. In fact, most Indians still suffered gruelling poverty, malnutrition, and unemployment. Becoming aware of my political outlook and wanting to avoid further argument, he finally said, ‘everyone has their opinions. And everyone’s opinion matters.’

Meanwhile, the auditorium filled to its capacity. The students were visibly excited to see the Foreign Minister. Observing them, I became aware of the possibility that many students here may share my friend’s views. Since coming to Ireland, I’ve had mixed feelings encountering large groups of Indians. Many of them expect you to speak in Hindi, even in a foreign land, which as a South Indian I am not eager to oblige. Then there’s a cautionary feeling; one that comes with being a minority in India. I first gauge the political leanings of the people I interact with, some of whom under the guise of being ‘non-political’, defer in favour of the ruling party.

Here in Ireland, I am far away from the religious violence at home. Yet I find it strange carrying on conversations with supporters of the ruling party, pretending their views shouldn’t affect the pleasure of their company.

Why beat around the bush? I thought. I asked him frankly what he thought about the divisive politics of the government — the remaking of India as a Hindu nation, and the rise of hate speech and violence against Christians and Muslims. In response, he said that every government had its own variety of politics. Hindu-Muslim was just the ruling party’s version of it. In the end it was about winning elections, in other words — power. I was oddly relieved to hear this answer. It seemed analysed from a neutral but nevertheless, ruthlessly pragmatic standpoint.

‘But,’ he continued. ‘There must be a balance of power. Hindus have nowhere else to go in this world. What if something were to happen to us? There must be mutual respect. We respect all religions. But they should also respect us.’ By ‘they’ he meant Muslims, whom he perceived as a looming threat to the existence of Hindus.

I asked, in a country of 1.4 billion, where the majority was Hindu, Hinduism being the third largest religion in the world after Christianity and Islam, how were Muslims in India a threat to Hindus? Who lived in the constant fear of having their houses demolished, or being lynched by a mob driving home from work? In Ireland, a homicide makes it to the front page of every major publication in the country. In India, crimes against Muslim Indians and Dalits are hardly ever reported. With first-hand experience, we both laughed at the irony of this reality. In Ireland people were valued as human beings.

Most of all, I wanted to tell my friend that as a Christian I no longer felt safe in India, neither did I feel I belonged. That I was tired of being called a rice bag, a cultural traitor, with an insane desire to go around evangelizing and converting people. That it had become difficult seeing churches attacked and burnt, and parishioners beat up during our festivals. That I had grown up with Muslims, and watching their mere existence demonised with repeated calls for their slaughter was painful. That if it was Muslims bearing the maximum brunt of hatred now, it would be the Christians next. That his reasons for leaving the country and mine were very different. That I worried about my family and felt guilty I had left them behind. Did he know that feeling?

He seemed to agree with everything I was saying, yet there was something immutable in his stance. Who was I anyway, to come one day and challenge his views? Like he said, all opinions were personal and had no bearing on the other. But his opinion did matter. We were sitting in a foreign country where I considered myself safe. Because I didn’t feel safe in India, and that was directly because of his opinion and a good number of Indians who shared it.

To diffuse the tension, he laughed and said that he personally did not believe in religious discrimination, and had close Muslim and Christian friends. He apologetically repeated his first point, ‘people do anything for power. At the end the day, the powerful man rules. It’s sad, but it is the way it is.’

Forty-five minutes late, Dr. Jaishankar arrived dressed in a grey suit and tie, green for the occasion. Walking down the aisle, he was received with thumping applause. The meeting was attended by Irish and Indian ambassadors Kevin Kelly and Akhilesh Mishra as well as higher-ups and academics from UCD. The title of his lecture was ‘India’s View of the World’; an interesting topic in a time afflicted with polarisation, several major conflicts, and rising inequality. Yet apart from mentioning the developed world’s failure to meet SDGs (sustainable developmental goals), and vaguely reaffirming India’s neutrality on the Russia-Ukraine war, Dr. Jaishankar said little about what India thought of the world.

The talk seemed more about presenting India as a global superpower — robust growth, soon to be third largest economy, increasing number of airports, digitalised economy, and technological adeptness, were points he stressed on. Similarly, talk of global workplaces and collaboration in highly niche sectors like AI, drone manufacture, datacentres, and space exploration delivered in a ‘you need us more than we need you’ tone, took up most of the lecture.

Even the Q&A seemed curated with pre-selected questions to bolster this progressive and dominating image of the country.

The students were not disappointed. Every attempt at humour in the minister’s measured manner was met with laughter and delight. Every word clung to with rapt attention. My new friend laughed especially hard and clapped the loudest at the end of the talk. Looking around the audience, projecting my nausea for Dr. Jaishankar’s undeserved adulation, I realised a lot of the students were just happy to see someone in their corner. An hour before, while I waited in the queue outside the auditorium, I remembered being struck by the attire of the students around me. Most Indian students wear very basic winter jackets here. They come in dull colours, are of flimsy material, rarely fit, and are worn for the sake of warmth rather than style.

It’s not easy for Indian students studying abroad. Unlike the diversity focused college brochures, the study abroad experience for Indians is usually a lonely one, where students find themselves struggling to integrate into a new culture. They pay extraordinarily high fees (on loan) in a highly disparate currency, work stressful part-time jobs, and are for the most part broke the entire time. Their courses are chosen not out of passion, but to match the country’s Critical Skills List for the prospect of securing relevant jobs and permanent residence. They endure years of hardship to achieve one objective — making it, in a developed nation. In such conditions, symbolic gestures such as Dr. Jaishankar’s visit don’t go unappreciated.

Students cheered when Dr. Jaishankar called for a friendly visa-policy in the EU, and considered increasing shorter flights from Delhi to Dublin. These things matter to students. Hate politics, massive inequality, and upheaval of constitutional institutions back home aren’t relevant to their aspirations. If they manage to secure high-paying jobs and pay off their loans, then for all purposes, real or inflated, the government has done its work. Effectively, the government’s politics are benign and can be overlooked as long as growth, or at least the illusion of it, continued. It is selfish, wilfully ignorant, and prejudiced, but it works.

For the Indian diaspora there is another level of complexity, which is an internal feeling of cultural and racial insecurity. Indians want to be seen at par with everyone else. They wish to shed the timid, shy, thickly accented, English fumbling, and impoverished image the world has of them. Hence, the obsession with representation.

It was enough that Dr. Jaishankar was a high ranking minister, a charming man in a suite who spoke with erudition and was highly educated (He is an author of several books and has a Ph.D in International Relations). He deserved adulation not because of what he said or did, but because of what he represented to us on that stage. Speaking in front of Irish officials and university authorities, he represented what Indians could be — powerful and respected.

The BJP’s idea of development and progress is the same — symbolic gestures that indulge the aspirations and deep insecurities of the Indian psyche. The Vande Bharat train, grand airports, the perfunctory language of globalism, high growth, data, drones, and AI, are developmentally symbolic efforts to make India worthy of itself in the Western gaze. India’s view of the world is really India’s view of itself. To the Indian student subsisting on supermarket bought sandwiches and renting a dingy room in the suburbs, the narrative of the unstoppable Indian is something to draw hope and inspiration from. It validates their struggle.

The humiliating spectacle of Indian citizens handcuffed, shackled at their feet and dragged through a runway, and the governments’ failure to address it, is a case for cosmic irony. What can India say against ill-treatment of Indians overseas when it has itself become a model for far-right nationalism under the Hindutva project? Disdain for DEI policies in American Companies (which affect Ireland as well), curtailing H1Bs, and the ‘Normalise Indian hate’ climate currently unfolding in the Trumpian dystopia hurts Indians abroad. India has lost its moral ground in voicing out against racism because of what it does to its own, because nationalism is based on the consolidation of identities and suppression of all others. As countries progress toward the right and ire against immigrants rises, India shouldn’t be surprised when it points the finger and finds three pointing back — Muslim, Dalit, and Christian.

I don’t think my friend hated minorities. But the privilege of not being at the receiving end, occupied in his own aspirational struggle led him to have a certain blindness. In this case, we’ll call it prejudice. It doesn’t occur to him that Indians do well regardless of the hype of supremacy, because we are a brilliant people, and succeed wherever we go.

(The author is a student at the University College Dublin-UCD)

Related:

Why is the Govt of India silent on the spurt of attacks on Muslims, Adivasis?

Targeted attacks continue as Bajrang Dal’s disturbing trend of violence against Muslims goes unchecked

Multiple incidents of Muslims being targeted by extremist reported, attacks included hate speech and discrimination

The post The paradox of nationalism & Indian representation abroad: S. Jaishankar’s visit to my university appeared first on SabrangIndia.

• Why did I use the term Islamist instead of Islamic?

My Response: The term Islamic is a broad, neutral adjective that refers to anything related to Islam—its religion, culture, civilization, and traditions. It applies to concepts like Islamic art (art influenced by Islamic culture) and Islamic law (Sharia, the ethical and legal framework derived from Islamic principles). This term does not carry any inherent political meaning.

Islamist, on the other hand, is a more specific term with political connotations. It refers to individuals, movements, or ideologies that seek to implement Islamic principles in governance and society, often advocating for a political order based on their interpretation of Islam. While some Islamists pursue their goals through democratic means, others adopt more radical or militant approaches. Importantly, Islamist does not equate to Islamic—not all Muslims are Islamists, and Islamism represents a distinct political ideology rather than the religion itself.

The choice of Islamist in my article was deliberate. It accurately reflects the political dimension of the subject being discussed, distinguishing it from the broader religious or cultural aspects of Islam. Precision in terminology is essential, especially when addressing political ideologies or movements within the Islamic world.

• Another criticism levelled at my work is that it merely presents others’ viewpoints without a clear, cohesive argument.

My Response: This critique misinterprets the article’s purpose. Far from lacking direction, my work deliberately highlights the diversity of perspectives on secularism and Islam—concepts that are inherently contested and open to multiple interpretations. The absence of a rigid, singular definition is not a flaw but a reflection of the discourse itself.

Contrary to the claim that my argument is unclear, I explicitly advocate for secularism as religious neutrality and Sarva Dharma Samabhava—equal respect for all religions. This framework stands in direct opposition to theocratic visions promoted by Islamist groups, which reject pluralism in favour of a monolithic religious order.

Rather than weakening my case, the inclusion of diverse perspectives strengthens it. By engaging with a spectrum of viewpoints, I demonstrate the complexity of the debate while reinforcing secularism as the most viable model for a pluralistic society like India. My article is not a passive compilation of opinions but a structured, purposeful defence of secularism—one that gains depth, not dilution, from the multiplicity of voices it engages.

• What we now call secular values—human rights, equality, compassion, and justice—are deeply rooted in religious morality. Modern secular societies did not emerge in isolation; rather, they evolved from centuries of religious teachings that laid the groundwork for these principles. Paradoxical as it may seem, secular values originate from religion itself, making secularism an inherent part of religious traditions rather than a departure from them.

My Response: I do agree. Secularism is not inherently anti-religious but can align with religious values by promoting neutrality, freedom, and equality. It ensures the state doesn’t favour any religion, protecting religious diversity and allowing all faiths to coexist peacefully. This aligns with religious principles like freedom of conscience (e.g., “no compulsion in religion” in Islam) and treating others with respect (e.g., “love thy neighbour” in Christianity). Secularism also fosters collaboration on shared goals like social justice, reflecting religious values of compassion and service. By separating religion from state power, it prevents extremism and respects moral autonomy, allowing individuals to practice their faith freely. In essence, secularism supports religious values by creating a fair, inclusive society where diverse beliefs thrive.

• The term “Islamism” originated in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Initially, it was used in European languages as a neutral synonym for Islam, much like “Christianism” for Christianity. Early Western writers, including Voltaire and Encyclopædia Britannica (first edition, 1771), used “Islamism” simply to refer to the religion of Islam.

My Response: Islamism and Islam are used interchangeably. Most Islamophobes adopts this method. This approach is wrong. This is equal to equating of Hindutva with Hinduism and Zionism with Judaism.

• Islam itself is however already an “-ism” – given this, why did European languages create “Islamism” instead of just using “Islam”?

My Response: The term “Islamism” was indeed coined in European languages to create a clear distinction between Islam as a religion and the political movements or ideologies that seek to implement Islamic principles in governance and society. While “Islam” refers to the faith, spirituality, and practices of Muslims, “Islamism” specifically denotes political ideologies that advocate for the implementation of Islamic law (Sharia) and the establishment of Islamic-based political systems. This distinction emerged in the late 20th century as a way to analyse the political dimensions of Islam separately from its spiritual and theological aspects, providing clarity in discussions about religion versus ideology.

However, the distinction between Islam and Islamism is not always clear-cut, and the term “Islamism” itself has been subject to debate. It can oversimplify the diversity of political movements within the Muslim world and may be used to stigmatize legitimate political expressions of Islamic identity.

The interpretation of Islamic values is a topic of ongoing debate, particularly between Islamists and those who prioritize Quranic values. Islamists often focus on implementing Sharia law, emphasizing legalistic interpretations over broader ethical values. In contrast, the Quran highlights values such as justice, mercy, compassion, and human dignity. One of the fundamental principles of the Quran is freedom of religion, as stated in verse 2:256, “There is no compulsion in religion.” However, some Islamist movements have been accused of imposing religious practices, undermining this principle.

The Quran also promotes fraternity and equality, envisioning the ummah (global Muslim community) as a brotherhood of equals. Nevertheless, some Islamist regimes have faced criticism for fostering sectarianism and discrimination. Individual self-determinism is another key value in the Quran, emphasizing personal responsibility and individual accountability. In contrast, Islamist ideologies often prioritize collective identity over individual freedoms. The Quran is clear in its advocacy for justice, fairness, and human rights, including those of women and minorities. However, some Islamist policies have been criticized for being discriminatory or unjust, particularly toward women and religious minorities. In addition, the Quran encourages coexistence and dialogue among diverse groups, promoting pluralism and diversity. Unfortunately, some Islamist movements reject pluralism, seeking to establish homogeneous Islamic states. The Quran promotes peace and reconciliation, yet some Islamist groups have been linked to violent extremism, contradicting these principles.

Finally, the Quran advocates for economic justice, prohibiting usury and mandating charity (zakat). While Islamist attempts to implement Islamic economic systems have had mixed success in achieving justice, the importance of economic fairness remains a core Islamic value.

• The term “Islamist” has developed a pejorative connotation, especially in modern political discourse. While Islamic governance has existed for centuries—without the need for a distinct label—”Islamism” emerged in Western discourse to specifically refer to political movements advocating for governance based on Islamic principles, with an implicit tone of disapproval.

My Response: You are right. The term “Islamist” has become a focal point in the broader issue of Islamophobia, reflecting and reinforcing deeply ingrained biases in Western discourse. Historically, the West’s engagement with the Islamic world—from colonialism to the Cold War and the post-9/11 era—has shaped a narrative that associates Islam with backwardness, violence, and authoritarianism. This narrative has been perpetuated through the pejorative use of “Islamist,” which is often applied indiscriminately to a wide range of Islamic political movements, from moderate reformers to extremist groups. By conflating these diverse movements under a single, stigmatized label, the term contributes to a perception that Islam itself is inherently incompatible with democracy or modernity. This framing not only delegitimizes legitimate political expressions of Islam but also fuels Islamophobia by portraying Muslims as a monolithic group prone to extremism. The lack of equivalent terms for religiously motivated movements in other faiths, such as “Christian democracy” or “Hindu nationalism,” underscores the double standard at play, further entrenching stereotypes and fostering fear and mistrust of Muslim communities.

• Your article is about “Why Quranic Principles Advocate Secular Democracy Over Theocracy” is not about “making a compelling case for secularism as the best model for a pluralistic society like India.” India is not even mentioned in the article and rightly so because what has India to do with Why Quranic Principles Advocate Secular Democracy Over Theocracy? You seem to have lost track of what the article is about.

My Response: My critique presents a theoretical and theological challenge to the imposition of Sharia within political Islam, examining its far-reaching implications for societal structures, governance frameworks, and individual liberties. At its core, my argument questions whether enforcing Sharia as state law aligns with fundamental principles of legal pluralism, human rights, and the separation of religion and state.

A critical analysis reveals that such enforcement poses significant risks, including marginalizing non-Muslim communities and silencing dissenting voices within Muslim societies. It also risks clashing with universal human rights standards, particularly in areas such as gender equality, freedom of religion, and freedom of expression.

From a theological perspective, my critique emphasizes that Sharia is not a monolithic entity, but rather a complex and dynamic system subject to diverse interpretations shaped by historical, cultural, and contextual factors. Rigid enforcement of Sharia within modern political systems disregards its inherent adaptability, distorting its original principles and fostering authoritarianism—where religious elites consolidate power, stifling intellectual and social progress.

Politically, my critique contests the exploitation of Sharia as a means of consolidating power and exerting control over populations, thereby exacerbating societal fractures and eroding social cohesion. A comprehensive review of historical precedents and comparative analyses demonstrates that imposing religious law often leads to the suppression of dissenting voices and the erosion of individual liberties.

Ultimately, my critique calls for a critical reassessment of Sharia’s role in modern governance. It advocates a framework that safeguards legal pluralism, human rights, and the separation of religion and state—fostering a more inclusive, tolerant, and equitable society.

• The (Iranian) regime is not corrupt; it is principled. It has prioritized principles over political compromises. It faces sanctions because it supports Palestine—ironically, as a Shia state, it is the only one backing Sunni Palestine. The suffering of its citizens is primarily due to sanctions and military spending for national defence. Iran remains the only Muslim state capable of standing up to the U.S. in conventional warfare, making it the last bastion that the U.S. and Israel seek to bring down.

My Response: While Iran adheres to a distinct ideological framework, its governance is driven by both principled and pragmatic considerations, with internal power struggles and instances of corruption undermining the system’s integrity. The significant economic influence wielded by the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and political elites has raised allegations of nepotism and financial malfeasance. Moreover, prioritizing principles over pragmatic political compromises is not inherently virtuous if it results in widespread hardship for citizens.

A balanced approach is essential—one that upholds fundamental principles while carefully considering their impact on human welfare. Iran’s troubling human rights record, as seen in the case of Mahsa Amini, highlights the urgent need for such scrutiny.

While sanctions and military expenditures contribute significantly to economic difficulties, internal economic mismanagement and political repression also play substantial roles. Many Iranians hold their government accountable for economic struggles, citing corruption, lack of transparency, and crackdowns on dissent. The government’s resource allocation, such as funding regional militias versus domestic welfare initiatives, is a contentious issue debated among Iranians themselves. Rather than being merely a victim of external pressures, the Iranian regime actively shapes its domestic and regional realities, with consequences both positive and negative.

• “The notion that Islam requires the integration of religion and state is a historical development, not a Quranic mandate.” “Fight until there is no more oppression and injustice and the Law of Allah prevails.” (Q.8:39)

My Response: This verse can be interpreted in another way. A humanistic interpretation of Q.8:39 would focus on the broader ethical and moral principles it conveys, emphasizing themes of justice, freedom, and the pursuit of a harmonious society. From this perspective, the verse could be understood as a call to resist oppression and work toward a world where human dignity, equality, and fairness are upheld. The “Law of Allah” could be interpreted symbolically as a universal moral order that aligns with humanistic values such as compassion, justice, and the common good. The emphasis on ceasing hostilities if the opposition stops (“if they desist”) could be seen as a call for reconciliation and peace, highlighting the importance of resolving conflicts through dialogue and mutual understanding rather than violence. This aligns with humanistic ideals of nonviolence and the belief in the potential for positive change in human behaviour. The reading would focus on the underlying message of striving for a just and equitable world, where all individuals are free from oppression and can live in dignity and peace. It would encourage reflection on how these principles can be applied in contemporary contexts to promote social justice and human flourishing.

• Q. 5:44 clearly affirms that governance must align with divine law.

My Response: Q.5:44 emphasizes the importance of divine guidance in governance and justice, reflecting the principle that laws should align with moral and ethical values rooted in faith. From a Quranic perspective, this verse can be understood as a call for governance that upholds justice, compassion, and the dignity of all human beings. Divine law, in this context, is not merely a rigid set of rules but a framework that seeks to promote the well-being of individuals and society. It emphasizes accountability, fairness, and the protection of human rights, which are universal values shared across cultures and faiths. I interpret divine law as a means to foster a just and equitable society where the welfare of people is prioritized. It encourages leaders to govern with wisdom, mercy, and a deep sense of responsibility toward all members of society, regardless of their faith or background. This aligns with the broader Islamic principle of Rahmah (mercy) and the concept of Maqasid al-Shariah (the higher objectives of Islamic law), which include the preservation of life, intellect, faith, lineage, and property. In essence, governance aligned with divine law, from an Islamic humanistic viewpoint, is one that serves humanity, promotes justice, and ensures the dignity and rights of all individuals are respected and protected. It is a call to integrate spiritual and ethical principles into leadership, ensuring that power is exercised with humility and a commitment to the common good.

• Islamic governance, in both theory and practice, incorporated consultation, judicial impartiality, and legal pluralism—values that align with modern democratic ideals.

My Response: My critique of contemporary political Islamists centres on their deviation from the historical and ethical principles of Islamic governance, rather than an attack on Islam itself. Many modern political Islamist movements have distorted these principles, centralizing power, side-lining diverse voices, and imposing rigid, exclusionary interpretations of Sharia. These movements often prioritize ideological purity over practical governance, using religion as a tool for political control rather than a means to promote justice and welfare. For example, the concept of hakimiyyah (sovereignty of God) has been weaponized to justify authoritarian rule, while the dynamic and adaptive spirit of early Islamic law, exemplified by ijtihad (independent reasoning), is often ignored. This rigidity leads to the suppression of dissent, the marginalization of women and minorities, and a failure to address pressing socio-economic challenges. Moreover, the politicization of religion by these groups undermines the spiritual and ethical dimensions of Islam, reducing it to a mechanism for power consolidation. By rejecting democratic principles as “Western impositions,” many political Islamists alienate broader populations, particularly the youth, who seek inclusive and pragmatic solutions to modern problems. My critique targets the authoritarian, exclusionary, and rigid practices of contemporary political Islamists, which diverge sharply from the pluralistic, consultative, and justice-oriented spirit of early Islamic governance. By reclaiming these historical principles, it is possible to envision a form of governance that is both authentically Islamic and aligned with the aspirations of modern societies for fairness, inclusivity, and good governance.

(V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. He can be reached at vamashrof@gmail.com)

Courtesy: New Age Islam

The post The inherent problem with political Islam appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Distinguished Chairperson of this august gathering and Secretary of the Marx Memorial Library (MML) Professor Mary Davis, Her Excellency the Ambassador of Cuba to the UK Ismara Vargas Walter, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Britain (CPB) Robert Griffiths, Chairperson of the MML Alex Gordon, Treasurer of the MML Harsev Bains, distinguished representatives from the Embassies of China, Vietnam, Laos, Venezuela, Sri Lanka, leaders of various fraternal Communist and Workers’ Parties, and my dear comrades and friends,

At the outset, I profusely thank the leadership of the CPB and the MML for giving me this great honour and privilege of delivering the 2025 Marx Oration to mark the death anniversary of the greatest revolutionary thinker who ever lived, Karl Marx. On behalf of the one million members of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), and the 15 million members of the All India Kisan Sabha, I convey my warmest revolutionary greetings to you all.

On March 17, 1883, 142 years ago, the great Frederick Engels was here, at this very spot, paying homage at the fresh grave of his closest comrade and friend. Engels said, “Marx was before all else a revolutionist…His name will endure through the ages, and so also will his work.”

Seminal contribution of Marx  

How prophetic Engels was! The name and work of Marx has not only endured, but has greatly enhanced, through the ages. Marx wrote in his youth, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” His scientific, critical, and revolutionary method of the analysis of society has indeed changed the world, and there is no doubt that it will change it even more.

His discovery of the science of dialectical and historical materialism, the theory of surplus value which uncovers the reality of exploitation, and his stress on the necessity of a political class struggle to achieve revolution, liberation, and socialism, have been borne out by the actual experience of gigantic struggles. The historic saga of various socialist revolutions and their spectacular achievements, and of the iconic and victorious struggle of the former Soviet Union against world fascism, will always live on through the ages.

The state of the world today proves the relevance of Marx’ analysis. Let us take just three brief quotations from Marx and see how perfectly they apply today.

In ‘Capital’, Volume 1 (1867), Marx writes, “If money, according to Augier, ‘comes into the world with a congenital blood-stain on one cheek,’ capital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and dirt.” Here, Marx adds a footnote quoting T J Dunning, “With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 per cent will ensure its employment anywhere; a certain 20 per cent will produce eagerness; 50 per cent, positive audacity; 100 per cent will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent, and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk that it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged. If turbulence and strife will bring a profit, it will freely encourage both.”

In ‘Capital’, Volume 1, again, Marx writes, “Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at the same time, accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation at the opposite pole, i.e. on the side of the class that produces its own product in the form of capital.”

In the ‘Communist Manifesto’ (1848), Marx and Engels write, “The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.” Marx and Engels in this prescient passage, hint at the globalization to come – a full 177 years ago!

With the development of capitalism, Lenin enriched this concept of Marx in his seminal work, ‘Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism’ (1917).

Relevance of today

What do we see in the world today, which underlines the relevance of Marx?

Gross and obscene inequalities abound, a direct result of economic exploitation and social oppression. The world’s richest 1 per cent own more wealth than the bottom 95 per cent of humanity. Since 2020, the richest 1 per cent have grabbed nearly 67 per cent of all new wealth – nearly twice as much as the bottom 99 per cent. Billionaire fortunes are rising by $2.7 billion a day, even as inflation outpaces the wages of 1.7 billion workers.

On the other hand, in 2023, 46 per cent of the world’s population, or over 3 billion people, are living under the global poverty line of $ 6.85 (2017 purchasing power parity) per day. Of these, 700 million people live in extreme poverty, surviving on less than $ 2.15 per day. 10.7 per cent of the world population (864.1 million) is affected by severe food insecurity, and of these 60 per cent who go hungry are women and girls.

The global unemployment rate today is 5 per cent, and the global youth unemployment rate is 13 per cent. Newer technologies and artificial intelligence are aggravating unemployment and exploitation, and leading to still greater super-profits for the large monopolies and corporate houses. Runaway inflation, and wages not keeping up with it, have led to a severe cost of living crisis in several countries, for both the working class and the middle class. In 2024, 54 countries were in a debt crisis, and net resource transfers from developing to developed countries have averaged $ 700 billion per year.

There is not a shadow of doubt that all the above stark facts are a direct result of the policies of neo-liberalism and imperialist globalization, which have intensified in the last four decades. These policies met with a rude shock in 2008 with the global financial crisis which began in the USA, spread to Europe and all over the world, and forced many capitalist world leaders to turn to none other than whom Engels described as the ‘best hated and most calumniated’ Marx to get a credible explanation for these events! What a poetic irony that was!

The rising social unrest as a result of these extreme global inequalities between the Global North and the Global South, economic and social inequalities within each nation, and the attacks of the ruling classes on the working people through ‘austerity measures’, is being broadly channelized in two directions, depending upon the concrete situation in each country.

One is the rightward shift in many countries, which sometimes takes the form of far-right and neo-fascist attacks on racial, religious, and other minorities, including immigrants. Ironically, this same policy of Hitler then is being faithfully copied by Netanyahu now, and also by some others. In many countries, the political-ideological bankruptcy of social democratic parties and their unprincipled compromises have helped the far-right to advance.

The opposite trend is the significant left victories in important countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Uruguay, and recently in Sri Lanka, where left forces could win over large sections of the people.

Donald Trump of the USA is the latest and classic example of the far-right, neo-fascist, authoritarian offensive. There is a method in his madness. It is a systematic last-ditch attempt to arrest the inexorable decline of the USA. This attempt is bound to fail. Under Trump, the likes of Elon Musk and other large corporate cronies are now directly calling the shots in the US government. This will make it even more plutocratic, neo-liberal, anti-people, and anti-democratic. Neo-liberalism thus creates the conditions for neo-fascism.

Trump’s ridiculous claims on Greenland, Canada, Panama Canal, and Gaza, and the tariff and trade wars that he has unleashed, are being strongly resisted all over the world. His decisions of the withdrawal of the US from the Paris Climate Accords, and also from the World Health Organisation of the United Nations, are also being opposed tooth and nail by many forces. His stand on the Ukraine war has now ranged the governments of Western Europe against him. But on the inhuman Imperialist-backed Zionist genocide by Israel against the courageous Palestinian people of Gaza, leading to the deaths of nearly 50,000 people, with 60 per cent of them being women and children, the entire imperialist camp is fully united behind Israel.

Rays of hope 

On this occasion, we salute the socialist countries like Cuba, China, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, and the left-led countries of Latin America and Sri Lanka, who are working hard to ensure the rapid and just socio-economic progress of their people, and many are also boldly opposing Imperialism and Zionism. We give our special red salute to the people of Cuba led by their Communist Party, established by heroes like Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, and Raul Castro. The people are courageously fighting against the savage new attacks of the Trump administration.

In other countries too, struggles and resistance are increasing. In my country India, we saw in 2020-21 a truly iconic and united nationwide struggle by millions of farmers who blocked the national highways leading to the nation’s capital Delhi for a full one year and fifteen days. They were fighting against the three pro-corporate, anti-farmer Farm Laws imposed by the central government at the height of the Covid pandemic. Over 700 farmers were martyred. This struggle forced the government to repeal the three Farm Laws, leading to a historic victory.

Now the same central government in India is trying to implement the draconian four Labour Codes, which are equally pro-corporate and anti-worker. A massive united nationwide general strike by the working class, supported by a rural strike of the peasantry, in which several million workers and peasants will participate, is being planned for the month of May 2025 against this serious assault.

The World Social Forum (WSF) has an attractive slogan signifying hope: Another World is Possible! At the graveside of the towering revolutionary Karl Marx on his death anniversary, we need to modify it a bit to: A Socialist World is Possible! Socialism for the 21st Century is the only Alternative!

Marx and Engels concluded the Communist Manifesto with these resounding words, “The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.”

Comrades and friends: Let us all work unitedly to vindicate Marx yet again! Let us bend all our efforts to win over the minds and the hearts of our people! Let us fight with all our energy, strength, power, intelligence, and imagination, to win this world!

Thank you very much.

Down with Imperialism! Down with Neo-Fascism!

Down with Capitalism! Down with Feudalism!

Long Live Democracy! Long Live Socialism!

Long Live Revolution! Long Live Marxism!

Also Read:

M’tra: A blow to BJP-NDA, a shot in the arm for MVA-INDIA

To Ahilya Rangnekar, an intrepid revolutionary, April 19, on her death anniversary

SKM-CTU Call for a countrywide united worker-peasant struggle for both regime change and policy change

The post A socialist world is possible: 2025 Marx Oration appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Unfortunately this has not been seen recently in the context of the worsening situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), a country where millions have perished during the last three decades in conflicts. While there are several worrying factors at work here, the most concern has been regarding an attack in the eastern parts of DRC from the side of Rwanda, killing thousands and displacing perhaps about 3 million people (including those who were already in shelter camps) over a period of slightly over a year.

Disturbing as these figures are, the situation is in fact even more threatening than what is conveyed by them as several old hostilities can be re-ignited by the latest wave of aggression. In the waves of violence here women have suffered a lot (including sexual violence), so this is an additional and very important cause for concern.

DRC’s exceptionally rich mineral wealth has led time and again to exploiting and plundering elements unleashing violence on common people to gain access to minerals. First Belgium and its king caused untold distress to the people of Congo, and when the country became free around 1960, before it could even dream of a new future, it’s most promising leader and Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba was killed under a joint conspiracy by Belgium and USA’s CIA. This paved the way for the brutal dictatorship of Mobotu Seko who renamed the country Zaire. Mobutu enjoyed the hospitality of top western leaders, including three US Presidents Nixon, Reagan, and Bush Sr. as the west turned away its eyes from his repressions and tortures to enjoy the fruits of mineral exploitation as facilitated by a friendly dictator.

Hence the emergence of democratic institutions and traditions in initial years of freedom was strangled, while several discontents instead got channelized in the emergence of armed groups who could also seek assistance from neighbouring countries to carve out their own areas of control over mineral wealth, whether gold and diamonds, or the increasing valuable industrial minerals like cobalt or coltan. In due course of time, China also got increasingly involved in the DRC economy.

The 100 day genocide in the neighbouring country of Rwanda in 1994 in which extremist Hutus assisted by armed forces killed about half to 1 million Tutsis and moderate Hutus was an extremely tragic and shocking event of this region. In addition it had wider impacts which continued to rock the region over a longer time. Rwanda’s attacks on neighbouring eastern parts of the DRC, for example, were attributed to protecting the Tutsis experiencing discrimination or injustice here, or else to targeting the genocide perpetrators some of whom had escaped here. In addition, however, there was always the lure of trying to capture and control some of the gold mines here. Similarly forces came from Uganda for objectives like helping the Rwandan forces in the stated objective of protecting Tutsis, but getting involved in gold mines as well, something emerging in competitive rather than friendship roles with the Rwandan forces. Meanwhile, the DRC authorities kept protesting against all such foreign intrusions.   During the late 1990s these and other factors led to two big wars and the second one (1998-2003) proved to be particularly very destructive as many countries of Africa became involved on one side or the other. It has been estimated that in the actual fighting and the ensuing humanitarian disaster and denial of basic needs nearly 5 million people died in this war.

Even later when the wars were over and there was leadership change, several resentments lingered on as it was widely believed that Rwanda and Uganda were obtaining significant amounts of gold from DRC’s eastern mines.

It was against this background  that alarm bells started ringing when last year again the Rwandan militia M23 started making advances in the eastern parts of DRC and more recently this advance became very rapid with the capture of Goma and Bakavu cities and threats appearing to other cities and mining areas. It has been alleged that this rapid advance is possible because the militia is being helped by regular Rwandan armed forces. Complicating the situation is a senior DRC former official now emerging as a rebel leader and assisting the attacking force with the goal of unseating the current DRC President. There are other senior former leadership figures including former presidents who would like a leadership change. In addition there are serious internal dissensions within the DRC army and a proliferation of other armed groups. Keeping in view the fragility of his own position, the DRC President Tshisekedi, in keeping with the spirit of these times, has made an offer of giving high control to USA over mineral wealth in return for security guarantee. However before rushing in USA and allies have to protect their existing good relations with Rwanda too, while DRC too may be keeping open the option of making a similar deal of some other powerful or influential country.

On the whole, there are several factors which make the situation here highly volatile, and there is great urgency for peace steps to be scaled up here and strengthened. The UN has been present here for all these decades with its peace keeping mission now called MONUSCO, but the UN has to play a much more important role in attending to not just rescue and rehabilitation but also to contribute to more durable peace. Without engaging all the stakeholders in much higher commitment to peace, the existing situation can more easily deteriorate further than it can improve. Hence the United Nations assisted by all countries should play a much bigger role in securing peace at a relatively earlier stage as well as in increasing and improving the humanitarian aid effort.

The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Man over Machine, Earth without Borders, A Day in 2071 and Planet in Peril.       

The post DRC-Rwanda: A region with repeated conflict-driven deaths requires that the escalating new crisis here must be resolved with urgency appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The seriousness of the situation compelled the US and Russia to call for an urgent meeting of the 15-member UNSC.

IMSD’s statement has been endorsed by leading civil society organizations and prominent individuals supportive of the rights of minorities, irrespective of caste and creed. Included among them are important office bearers of the CPI and CPI(M).

While the Alawites (a sub-sect among Shia Muslims) are the main target of the Islamists, Christians and Shias too are being targeted in the Sunni majority country. It must emphasised that Sunnis who are offering protection to their compatriots too are being targeted. A protest called in Damascus by all sections of Syrian society, was dispersed by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) gunmen.

The Islamist jihadists from the various factions of the HTS, Al Qaeda and ISIS ran amok as they killed the defenceless civilians in cold blood. Many of these jihadists are of non-Syrian origin; they come from Turkey, Albania, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Uyghurs from Xinjiang (China), and this has only worsened the dire situation.

IMSD calls for an independent inquiry into the pogroms, by the UNHRC, as the Jolani regime has extremely low credibility among the afflicted communities.

The killings by the Islamists are fuelled by an ideology of religious sectarianism and extremism. Slogans such as, “Alawite and Shia to the grave and Christians to Beirut”, are commonly heard in Wahhabi/Salafist mosques and in street protests.

Indian Muslims must speak out against the massacres being perpetrated by extremists in the name of Islam during this holy month of Ramzan. We also appeal to all Indians as well as the global community to speak out against the horrendous killings of religious minorities in Syria.

We call for a dialogue and reconciliation within Syrian society and for them to do the utmost to prevent the ‘Al Qaeda-isation’ or ‘ISIS-isation’ of Syria. It is our belief that the greater majority of the Syrian people are committed to an inclusive, pluralistic, secular democratic Syria. In these difficult times, the world stands with the Syrian nation.

Full statement with signatories here below or copy attached:

March 15, 2025

PRESS STATEMENT

Indian Muslims condemn the mass killings of Syrian minorities by extremist Islamists

Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy (IMSD) condemns the mass killing of civilians in the latest clashes between loyalists of the toppled Bashar al-Assad and the security forces of the present regime allied with extremist Islamist forces in north-west Syria. One may have differing opinions on the former government of Bashar al-Assad, but we speak out unequivocally against the targeted pogroms and murder of the minority communities, namely the Alawites, Christians and Shiites.

IMSD’s statement has been endorsed by leading civil society organizations and prominent individuals supportive of the rights of minorities, irrespective of caste and creed. Included among them are important office bearers of the CPI and CPI(M).

The crisis is so stark that US and Russia had to call for an urgent closed door meeting of the 15-member UNSC. US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, strongly condemned “radical Islamist terrorists, including foreign jihadis” committing the massacres, and reaffirmed Washington’s support for Syria’s religious and ethnic minorities, including Christians, Druze, Alawites, and Kurds. Moreover, Rubio demanded accountability from Syria’s interim government.

Moscow’s ambassador to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said that both Moscow and Washington are in contact on the issue and that, “The council was united in what we discussed… everyone spoke out. I wouldn’t say with one voice, but everyone emphasized the same elements: the inadmissibility of what happened, the mass murders, and violence.”

The UN Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, has condemned what he calls “extremely disturbing” reports of brutal “revenge killings”, in which “entire families, including women and children” have been savagely butchered. Of the more than 1,000 people who have reportedly been killed, more than 750 are civilians. Certain media reports mention figures up to 4,500 and more.

While the Alawites (a sub-sect among Shia Muslims) are the main target of the Islamists, Christians and Shias too are being targeted in the Sunni majority country. It must emphasised that Sunnis who are offering protection to their compatriots too are being targeted. A protest called in Damascus by all sections of Syrian society, was dispersed by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) gunmen.

The Islamist jihadists from the various factions of the HTS, Al Qaeda and ISIS ran amok as they killed the defenceless civilians in cold blood. Many of these jihadists are of non-Syrian origin; they come from Turkey, Albania, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Uyghurs from Xinjiang (China), and this has only worsened the dire situation.

Following the international outcry, Syria’s interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa (formerly Jolani, leader of the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a breakaway faction from Al Qaeda) announced the formation of an independent committee to “investigate the violations against civilians and identify those responsible for them.” In a Reuters interview, Sharaa said mass killings of Alawites were a threat to his mission to unite the country, and promised to punish those responsible, including his own allies if necessary.

IMSD calls for an independent inquiry into the pogroms, by the UNHRC, as the Jolani regime has extremely low credibility among the afflicted communities.

The killings by the Islamists are fuelled by an ideology of religious sectarianism and extremism. Slogans such as, “Alawite and Shia to the grave and Christians to Beirut”, are commonly heard in Wahhabi/Salafist mosques and in street protests.

Indian Muslims must speak out against the massacres being perpetrated by extremist Muslims in the name of Islam during this holy month of Ramzan. We also appeal to all Indians as well as the global community to speak out against the horrendous killings of religious minorities in Syria.

We call for a dialogue and reconciliation within Syrian society and for them to do the utmost to prevent the ‘Al Qaeda-isation’ or ‘ISIS-isation’ of Syria. It is our belief that the greater majority of the Syrian people are committed to an inclusive, pluralistic, secular democratic Syria. In these difficult times, the world stands with the Syrian nation.

Signatories:

1)    Afaq Azad, Musician, IMSD, Mumbai

2)    Ahmad Rashid Sherwani, Managing Trustee, Bharat Sewa Trust, Hyderabad

3)    A. J. Jawad, Co-convener IMSD, Advocate, Hyderabad

4)    (Prof.) A. K. Pasha, JNU, Delhi

5)    Aishwarya R, Bengaluru for Justice and Peace, Bengaluru

6)    Akhilesh Yadav, Nav Bharat Nirman, Lucknow

7)    Ali Bhojani, Hum Bharat Ke Log, Parbhani

8)    Alok, Nav Bharat Nirman, Lucknow

9)    Akbar Shaikh, Bhartiya Muslimj Yuva Andolan, Solapur

10)  Amir Rizvi, IMSD, Designer, Mumbai

11)  Anand Patwardhan, IMSD, Documentary filmmaker, Mumbai

12)  (Dr.) Anand Prakash Tiwari, Editor, Bahujan Samvad, Varanasi

13)  (Fr.) Anand, Souhard Peace Centre, Varanasi

14)  (Dr.) Anil Hebbar, Trustee, Baba Amte Ekta Abhiyan, Mumbai

15)  Anjum Rajabali, IMSD, Filmwriter, Mumbai

16)  Annu Yadav, Social Activist, Lucknow

17)  Anvar Rajan, IMSD, Social Activist, Pune

18)  Aravind Unni, Urban practitioner and researcher, Delhi

19)  Arun Srivastava, Samajwadi Samagam, Delhi

20)  Arshad Alam, Co-convener IMSD, Columnist, Delhi

21)  Ashraf Zaidi, Editor, Leaders Magazine, Delhi

22)  Ashish Shukla, Nav Bharat Nirman, Lucknow 

23)  Askari Zaidi, IMSD, Senior journalist, Delhi

24)  Binu Mathew, Editor, countercurrents.org

25)  (Fr.) Cedric Prakash, PRASHANT, Initiative for Human Rights Justice & Peace, Ahmedabad,

26)  (Com.) Charul Joshi, Progressive Writers Association, Convener, Mumbai

27)  Dhananjay Shinde, IT expert, political activist, Mumbai

28)  Dolphy D’souza, Bombay Catholic Sabha, Mumbai

29)  (Sister) Dorothy Fernandes, Patna

30)  (Rev.) E. Immanuel Nehemiah, CSI KCD, Bengaluru

31)  Evita Das, Urban Rights Activist, Delhi

32)  Farouk Mapkar, Social Activist, Mumbai

33)  Feroz Abbas Khan, Theatre and film director, playwright and screenwriter, Mumbai

34)  Feroze Mithiborwala, Co-Convener, IMSD, Mumbai

35)  Gauhar Raza, ANHAD, Poet, Delhi

36)  Dr G. G. Parikh, Veteran freedom fighter, President, Yusuf Meherali Centre, Mumbai

37)  Guddi S.L., Yusuf Meherali Centre, Mumbai

38)  Gulab Pasha, Swaraj India, Bengaluru

39)  Hasan Ibrahim, Pasha, IMSD, Writer, Prayagraj

40)  Irfan Engineer, CSSS, Co-convener IMSD, Mumbai

41)  (Fr.) Jacob Peenikaparambil, Universal Solidarity Movement, Indore

42)  Jatin Desai, Senior journalist, Peace Activist, Mumbai

43)  Javed Anand, Convener, IMSD, CJP, Mumbai

44)  John D’Souza, CED, Mumbai

45)  (Fr.) Joseph Neetilal, Lok Chetna Samiti, Varanasi

46)  Kasim Sait, IMSD, Businessman, Chennai

47)  Khadija Farooqi, IMSD, Delhi

48)  Khatoon Sheikh, Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, Mumbai

49)  Kumar Prashant, Chairman, Gandhi Peace Foundation, Delhi

50)  Lara Jesani, National Secretary, PUCL, Advocate, Mumbai

51)  Mansoor Sardar, IMSD, Bhiwandi

52)  M. A. Khalid, Social Activist, Mumbai

53)  Medha Patkar, Writer, Environmental Activist, Bhopal

54)  (Dr.) Meenakshi Sharma, Samvad Prakriya, Moradabad

55)  (Com.) Milind Ranade, General Secretary, Mumbai CPI, Mumbai 

56)  Mihir Desai, Human Rights Lawyer, Mumbai

57)  Mohammad Imran, PIO, USA

58)  Mohammed Zakirulla Baig, concerned citizen, Bengaluru

59)  Najid Hussain, Oceanographer, PIO, USA

60)  Nasreen Fazelbhoy, IMSD, Mumbai

61)  Naazish Shah, Environmental Activist

62)  Noorjahan Safia Niyaz, Co-convenor, Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan

63)  Pakeezeh (Padmini) Baruah, NLSIU, Bengaluru

64)  Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Journalist, Delhi

65)  (Com.) Prakash Reddy, political leader, CPI, Mumbai

66)  Prashant Bhushan, Advocate SC, Author, Public Interest Lawyer, Delhi

67)  (Sister) Prema Chwallur, Guwahati

68)  Putul Didi, Samvad Prakriya, Lucknow

69)  Qaisar Sultana, IMSD, Homemaker, Prayagraj

70)  Qutub Jahan, NEEDA, IMSD, Mumbai

71)  (Dr.) Radha Kumar, Academic, Feminist, Author, Chennai

72)  Rajkumari Asthana, Documentary Filmmaker, Dehradun

73)  (Prof) Rakesh Rafique, Author, Samvad Prakriya, Moradabad

74)  (Dr.) Ram Puniyani, Author, All India Secular Forum, Mumbai

75)  Rashida Tapadar, Writer, Educationist and Activist, Assam

76)  Ravi Nair, Investigative Journalist, Delhi

77)  (Sister) Roseline SCN, Gaya

78)  Sabah Khan, Parcham, Thane

79)  Sajjad Kargili, Political Activist, Ladakh

80)  (Dr.) Saif Mehmood, IMSD, SC Lawyer, Delhi

81)  (Com.) S. K. Rege, State Secretary, Mumbai

82)  Salim, Saboowala, Social Activist, Mumbai

83)  Salim Yusuf, IMSD, Lawyer, Bhiwandi

84)  Sandeep Pandey, Socialist Party of India, National President, Lucknow

85)  (Dr.) Sanjay M G, Member National Working Group (NWG), (NAPM)

86)  Santosh Ambekar, Mahatma Phule, OBC Vichar Manch, Mumbai

87)  Satyapal Malik, former Governor of Jammu & Kashmir, Bihar, Goa & Meghalaya, Delhi

88)  (Dr) Satyavrat, Mairtee Ashram, Lucknow

89)  Shabana Dean, IMSD, Pune

90)  Shabnam Hashmi, ANHAD, Delhi

91)  Shahid Pradhan, Educationist, Pune

92)  Shafaat Khan, IMSD, Playwright, Mumbai

93)  (Dr.) Shamsuddin Tamboli, President, Muslim Satyashodhak Mandal, Pune

94)  Shamsul Islam, Author, Activist, Delhi

95)  Shalini Dhawan, Designer, Mumbai

96)  Shama Zaidi, IMSD, Screenplay Writer, Documentary Filmmaker,, Mumbai

97)  Sharad Kadam, Hum Bharat Ke Log, Mumbai

98)  Shujaat Ali Quadri, India Palestine Solidarity Forum, Vice-President, Delhi

99)  Sukla Sen, Social Activist, Mumbai

100)       Sultan Shahin, Editor-in-Chief, New Age Islam, Delhi

101)       (Dr.) Sunilam, President, Kisan Sangarsh Samiti, Gwalior

102)       (Dr.) Suresh Khairnar, Writer, Nagpur

103)       Syed Muntazir Mehdi, PDP leader Kashmir

104)       Teesta Setalvad, Secretary CJP, IMSD, Mumbai

105)       Tushar Gandhi, Hum Bharat Ke Log, National President, Mumbai

106)       (Com.) Uday Narkar, Central Committee Member, CPI(M), Kolhapur

107)       Usha Vishwakarma, Nav Bharat Nirman, Lucknow

108)       Vibhuti Narain Rai, IMSD, IPS (retd), writer, Noida

109)       Vrijendra, Educationist, Social Activist, Mumbai

110)       Yashodhan Paranjpe, Hum Bharat Ke Log, Navi Mumbai

111)       Zakia Soman, Co-convenor, Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, Delhi

112)       Zulekha Jabeen, IMSD, Delhi

113)       Zeenat Shaukatali, Islamic Scholar, DG, Wisdom Foundation, IMSD, Mumbai

The post Indian Muslims condemn the mass killings of Syrian minorities by extremist Islamists appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“This land is your land, and this land is my land

From California to the New York island

From the Redwood Forest to the Gulf Stream waters

This land was made for you and me”

A special stanza of the song was:

“There was a big, high wall there that tried to stop me

A sign was painted said ‘Private Property’

But on the backside, it didn’t say nothing

This land was made for you and me.”

The song is essentially a protest song, first composed by the American folk singer Woody Guthrie in 1940. It was a critical response to Irving Berlin’s ‘God Bless America’ Its melody is based on a Carter Family tune called ‘When the World’s on Fire’. The song was a hit then, particularly during World War II; over the years, the lyrics of the song have undergone several changes and adaptations. The essence however remains the same, “this land was made for you and me.” In 2025, it was listed at No. 11 of ‘The 100 Best Protest Songs of All Time.’ Given the context of the highly polarised and divided world we live in– this song is definitely all the more relevant today!

About a week ago, on Sunday 2 March, at the 97^th Academy Awards, ‘No Other Land’ won the coveted Oscar for the Best Documentary Film. The film has been made by four Israeli and Palestinian activists (Basel Adra, Hamdan Ballal, Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor) and is a powerful examination of life under occupation. It is their directorial debut. They describe the film as an act of resistance on the path to justice during the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

‘No Other Land’ is a portrait of a West Bank village under Israeli military occupation. The documentary film gets its title from a statement by a long-time Masafer Yatta resident who says, “we have no other land. It is our land. That is why we suffer for it.” For the ones who have seen this path-breaking documentary. ‘No Other Land’ is a breathtakingly powerful chronicle of what it means to live with the constant threat of eviction. The film captures with heartrending detail the relentlessness of Israel’s effort to remove any trace of Palestinian presence in the West Bank. This reality is what the world painfully witnesses today and yet does not dare to address collectively!

The documentary has the friendship between Basel and Yuval as a backgrounder. Their relationship is filled with intense emotions. Basel is very anxious over the fate of his family and village, to the point of exhaustion. Yuval expresses guilt and sorrow over being unable to prevent imminent destruction or to persuade his fellow- Israelis to see reason. There is a sad but grim irony when Basel says that he has a law degree, but can only find work as a construction labourer in Israel. The manner in which the judiciary can be used to redesignate land use and thus enable unfeeling eviction policies points to a familiar playbook predicated on absolute denial of basic human rights.

In their acceptance speech, two of the film’s four directors pleaded for an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Basel Adra, a Palestinian activist who is from Masafer Yatta, a region of the West Bank said, “About two months ago, I became a father, and my hope to my daughter [is] that she will not have to live the same life I’m living now – always fearing settlers’ violence, home demolitions and forceful displacements that my community, Masafer Yatta, is living and facing every day under the Israeli occupation.…We call on the world to take serious actions to stop the injustice and to stop the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people.” Adra also described the issues faced by his village, including home demolitions and displacement.

Yuval Abraham, an Israeli investigative journalist, co-director of the film said, “When I look at Basel, I see my brother, but we are unequal. We live in a regime where I am free under civilian law, and Basel is under military laws that destroy his life and he cannot control. Israelis and Palestinians are ‘intertwined’; my people can be truly safe if Basel’s people are truly free and safe.”

In February 2024, at the 74th Berlin International Film Festival, ‘No Other Land’ won the Berlinale Documentary Award and the Panorama Audience Award for Best Documentary Film. During his acceptance speech then, Abraham criticized Israel saying, “We are standing in front of you now, me and Basel are the same age. I am Israeli; Basel is Palestinian. And in two days we will go back to a land where we are not equal. I am living under a civilian law and Basel is under military law. We live 30 minutes from one another, but I have voting rights. Basel is not having voting rights. I’m free to move where I want in this land. Basel is, like millions of Palestinians, locked in the occupied West Bank. This situation of apartheid between us, this inequality, it has to end”.

Adra chipped in saying, “It’s our first movie; since many years my community, my family has been filming our community being erased by this brutal occupation. I am here celebrating the award, but also very hard for me to celebrate when there are tens of thousands of my people being slaughtered and massacred by Israel in Gaza. Masafer Yatta, my community, is being also razed by Israeli bulldozers. I ask one thing: for Germany, as I am in Berlin here, to respect the U.N. calls and stop sending weapons to Israel.”

Since its release in February 2024, the documentary has won numerous awards and accolades from all over the world. However, for obvious reasons it has not been screened in India. Even its entry to certain Film Festivals here, has been inexplicably cancelled. The fascist regime which rules the country today will not allow Freedom of Speech and Expression to its citizens. A film which shows the Israeli regime in poor light, is in India, a certain ‘no-no’! Even in the United States, the film has failed to find a distributor because it reveals truths that Americans should not see! When the film won the Oscar, it was natural that some Israelis were outraged, using every trick in the book to denigrate the directors of the film and the cast.

‘No Other Land’ is about divisiveness and discrimination, about demonization and denigration, about demolition and destruction! At the receiving end are the Palestinian people – the ‘other’! It is not without reason that Pope Francis has been praying every single day for them and regularly speaking to those affected in Gaza. It is a film which is a powerful manifestation of the terrible reality faced by millions all over the world. Here in India, the Kuki-zo people of Manipur and the minorities (particularly Muslims and Christians) have to face this reality daily!

As the bull-dozers, continue to go on rampage demolishing and destroying the lives and homes of the vulnerable, it is time that the fascist and dictatorial rulers of the world realise that “this land was made for you and me” and wake up to the statement by the Masafer Yatta resident “we have no other land. It is our land. That is why we suffer for it.”  Yes, there is No Other Land! 

(Fr. Cedric Prakash SJ is a human rights, reconciliation and peace activist/ writer. Contact: cedricprakash@gmail.com  )

The post No Other Land! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to the report, the Hindutva movement is not just an ideological or political force – it is also a financial powerhouse, sustained by billion-dollar contributions from India’s biggest industrialists and tax-exempt charities abroad. The BJP’s dominance in electoral fundraising, enabled by the now-invalidated electoral bonds scheme, has created an unequal playing field where corporate interests align directly with Hindu nationalist policies. The report also highlights how foreign-based Hindutva organisations, particularly in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, act as financial lifelines for Hindu nationalist initiatives in India. The impact of this financial nexus is most acutely felt by minorities, as Hindutva funding is channelled into anti-Muslim violence, casteist policies, and the displacement of Adivasi communities in favour of corporate-led land grabs.

By uncovering the economic machinery behind Hindu supremacism, the report raises serious concerns about the erosion of democratic institutions, unchecked corporate influence in politics, and the complicity of international actors in sustaining authoritarianism in India. It ultimately argues that corporate funding of Hindutva politics must be scrutinised, regulated, and held accountable at both domestic and international levels.

Chapter 1: The Hindutva-Corporate Nexus – PM Modi’s rise through illicit finance

The report traces the ideological and financial roots of Hindutva, beginning with Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s 1923 book, “Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?”, which articulated the vision of India as a Hindu-only nation. This exclusionary ideology was institutionalised with the formation of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in 1925, which became the largest paramilitary organisation in India, operating through over 57,000 shakhas (branches) and millions of volunteers. The RSS, through its political wing, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has been instrumental in mainstreaming Hindu majoritarianism, undermining democratic institutions, and silencing dissent.

PM Narendra Modi’s rise to political prominence is deeply tied to this Hindutva network. However, his role in the 2002 Gujarat pogrom, which led to the mass killing of Muslims under his watch as Chief Minister, made him a global pariah, with countries like the United States and the United Kingdom imposing travel bans on him. To rebuild his image and prepare for his bid as Prime Minister, Modi aligned himself with India’s wealthiest business tycoons. The Vibrant Gujarat summit, a high-profile investment platform, was designed not only to attract corporate investments but also to rebrand Modi as a pro-business leader while maintaining his Hindu nationalist credentials. With backing from industrialists like Gautam Adani, Mukesh Ambani, and the Ruias, Modi was able to shift the focus from his Hindutva extremism to economic development, making him more palatable to international investors and political leaders.

Since taking office as Prime Minister in 2014, Modi has fostered an economic environment that benefits a select group of corporations while simultaneously weaponising state institutions against his critics. His tenure has been marked by mass privatisation of public assets, deregulation of industries, and the systematic weakening of oversight mechanisms to favour industrialists aligned with the BJP. The Adani Group, in particular, has seen an unprecedented expansion, securing billion-dollar loans from public banks and acquiring crucial infrastructure projects under questionable circumstances. Modi’s government has also introduced legislative changes to enable unchecked corporate donations, transforming India’s political finance system into a pay-to-play model where businesses fund the BJP in exchange for political and economic favours.

The report emphasises that this Hindutva-corporate nexus is not just a by-product of economic policy but a deliberate strategy to consolidate authoritarian rule. By securing financial dominance through corporate partnerships, Modi has ensured that opposition parties struggle to compete, media outlets remain subservient, and state institutions are co-opted to serve the interests of Hindu nationalism.

Chapter 2: Corporate Funding and Political Finance – The electoral bonds scam

One of the most critical aspects of illicit political financing exposed in the report is the Electoral Bonds Scheme, introduced in 2017 by the Modi government. This legally sanctioned mechanism allowed anonymous corporate donations to political parties, disproportionately benefiting the BJP. Between 2018 and 2023, a staggering ₹12,930 crore (USD 1.5 billion) was funnelled into BJP accounts through this opaque system. The scheme ensured that over 52% of total political donations flowed to the ruling party, reinforcing its financial stranglehold over Indian elections.

The report highlights that many of the largest contributors to the BJP through electoral bonds were corporations facing investigations by India’s enforcement agencies, raising serious concerns about quid pro quo arrangements. Companies that had been raided by tax authorities or subject to scrutiny by the Enforcement Directorate suddenly became major political donors, suggesting that political funding was being used as a tool of coercion and corporate appeasement.

In February 2024, the Supreme Court of India struck down the Electoral Bonds Scheme, declaring it unconstitutional. The court ruled that such a system allowed for an unfair financial advantage, subverted democratic processes, and created opportunities for corruption and undue influence. However, the damage had already been done—the BJP had already amassed billions, using this legalised loophole to build an unprecedented financial war chest.

While electoral bonds have been dismantled, the corporate-political nexus remains intact through alternative funding mechanisms. The Electoral Trusts system, which predates electoral bonds, continues to operate, allowing companies to donate to political parties with minimal transparency. The Prudent Electoral Trust, linked to the Bharti Group, has emerged as the biggest funder of the BJP, funnelling hundreds of crores into the party’s accounts. The report points out that several corporations donated to the BJP only after facing tax raids or regulatory scrutiny, reinforcing suspicions of state-sponsored extortion tactics.

Chapter 3: The Global Hindutva Ecosystem – Transnational funding and charities

The Hindutva movement is not just an Indian phenomenon; it is a global enterprise, deeply embedded in diaspora communities, international charitable organisations, and corporate networks that operate beyond India’s borders. The report highlights how millions of dollars flow into Hindu supremacist movements through tax-exempt charities and corporate entities based in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. These funds, often collected under the pretext of cultural preservation, disaster relief, or religious activities, are redirected to political mobilisation, propaganda, and the expansion of Hindutva-aligned educational institutions. The transnational Hindutva network is highly organised, mirroring the structure of the RSS in India, and maintains a symbiotic relationship with the ruling BJP, influencing both Indian domestic policies and diaspora political engagement.

One of the primary vehicles for Hindutva financing abroad is the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS), the international wing of the RSS. HSS branches operate in over 40 countries, with particularly strong footholds in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. While HSS presents itself as a cultural and educational organisation, it has been directly linked to RSS ideology, Hindu nationalist rhetoric, and sectarian mobilisation. The report details how HSS-run events indoctrinate young Hindus with supremacist ideology, train them in paramilitary-style drills, and cultivate political loyalty towards the BJP and RSS. These activities serve a dual function: they strengthen the Hindu nationalist movement globally while also ensuring that diaspora communities remain politically and financially invested in the BJP’s dominance in India.

Another key player in the global Hindutva ecosystem is the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), an organisation with a long history of involvement in anti-Muslim violence, religious radicalisation, and caste-based discrimination. In India, the VHP is known for its direct role in organising anti-Muslim riots, spearheading the demolition of the Babri Masjid, and enforcing moral policing on Dalits and religious minorities. Internationally, however, VHP operates under a charitable façade, collecting donations to ostensibly fund humanitarian efforts and Hindu religious institutions. The report reveals that large portions of these funds are diverted to RSS-affiliated organisations in India, where they are used for sectarian political campaigns, legal battles against minority rights, and the expansion of Hindu nationalist propaganda networks.

Similarly, Sewa International, another RSS-affiliated organisation, has played a crucial role in financing Hindutva movements under the guise of humanitarian work. Originally founded to provide disaster relief, Sewa International has been implicated in funnelling millions of dollars into Hindutva causes, including funding organisations linked to anti-Muslim violence, casteist policies, and the erasure of Adivasi cultures. The report provides evidence that during times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, Sewa International used relief funds to promote Hindutva political objectives, prioritising aid for Hindus while discriminating against Muslims and Dalits.

Another significant arm of the global Hindutva financial network is the Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation, which operates over 100,000 schools in India, largely in Adivasi and Dalit-majority areas. While these schools are ostensibly meant to improve literacy rates among tribal communities, the report exposes how they function as indoctrination centres, replacing indigenous traditions with Hindu nationalist teachings and discouraging conversions away from Hinduism. Funded primarily by US-based corporations and diaspora donors, these institutions are key to the RSS-BJP’s long-term strategy of cultural assimilation and religious conversion of India’s most marginalised groups.

The report also reveals that several multinational corporations and wealthy diaspora families are complicit in supporting these Hindutva-affiliated charities, using tax-exempt donations to funnel millions into right-wing Hindu nationalist causes. Companies such as Star Pipe Products (US), Park Square Homes (Canada), and The Shah Companies (UK) have all been linked to large financial contributions towards Hindutva charities, despite their claims of being non-political entities. The financial opacity of these transactions makes it difficult to track the full extent of corporate involvement, but the report establishes a clear pattern of corporate complicity in sustaining Hindu supremacism on a global scale.

Chapter 4: Hindutva and Minorities – The human cost of illicit funding

The Hindutva movement’s vast financial resources are not just used to secure electoral dominance; they have a direct and devastating impact on India’s most vulnerable communities. The report details how Hindutva funding is weaponised to marginalise, oppress, and brutalise religious minorities, Dalits, and Adivasis, both through state policies and vigilante violence. The consequences of this financial-political nexus are felt across multiple dimensions, from mob lynchings and economic boycotts to caste-based exclusion and large-scale land dispossession.

Muslims have been the primary targets of Hindutva violence, with political funding often being used to support hate speech, anti-Muslim pogroms, and discriminatory policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The report documents how corporate-backed Hindutva groups play a role in funding misinformation campaigns that incite communal hatred, enabling the rise of violent Hindu extremist groups that carry out lynchings and attacks on Muslim communities. In many cases, these attacks are tactically timed to coincide with elections, ensuring that communal polarisation benefits the BJP electorally.

Dalits face systematic exclusion from political representation, economic opportunities, and social mobility, with RSS-aligned organisations actively lobbying against caste-based affirmative action in India and abroad. In countries like the United States, Hindutva-aligned groups have opposed anti-caste discrimination legislation, particularly in tech industries dominated by upper-caste Indian diaspora elites. The financial strength of these Hindutva organisations enables them to suppress discourse on caste oppression, ensuring that Dalit voices are marginalised both in India and internationally.

Adivasi communities have suffered some of the worst consequences of Hindutva-corporate collaboration, particularly in the form of land dispossession and environmental destruction. The report details how mining conglomerates like Adani and Vedanta have leveraged their ties to the BJP to forcibly displace Adivasis from their ancestral lands, often in direct violation of environmental and land rights laws. These companies, many of which are major contributors to electoral trusts and Hindutva-affiliated charities, have been granted exclusive access to forests, mineral-rich regions, and indigenous territories, leaving Adivasi communities vulnerable to cultural annihilation and economic exploitation.

Conclusion and recommendations

The report presents an urgent call for intervention to dismantle the Hindutva-finance nexus, arguing that the unchecked flow of corporate money into Hindu supremacist politics is one of the greatest threats to democracy in India today. It provides a multi-pronged set of recommendations aimed at increasing financial transparency, holding corporations accountable, and countering the global influence of Hindutva networks.

1. Global scrutiny of Hindutva charities: Western governments and international financial watchdogs must investigate tax-exempt organisations linked to Hindutva financing. Countries like the US, UK, Canada, and Australia must review the financial records of organisations like HSS, VHP, Sewa International, and Ekal Vidyalaya to ensure that their funds are not being used to fuel sectarian violence in India.

2. Stricter regulations on corporate donations: India’s political finance laws must be reformed to prevent the kind of unchecked corporate funding that was enabled by electoral bonds. Companies that make political donations should be required to disclose their contributions publicly, and foreign investments into Indian political parties must be subject to greater scrutiny.

3. Legal action against Hindutva-linked violence: Governments and international human rights bodies must hold Hindutva groups accountable for their role in human rights abuses. Companies found funding hate speech or violence should face legal consequences, including restrictions on their operations.

4. Strengthening caste and minority protections: Stronger legal protections for Dalits, Muslims, and Adivasis must be enacted, both within India and in the diaspora. Efforts to suppress caste-based anti-discrimination laws abroad must be actively resisted.

The complete report may be accessed below:

Related:

India saw 84 internet shutdowns in 2024: Access Now Report

The Rise of the Far-Right in Europe: From margins to mainstream

Academic Freedoms at Risk: Federalism and autonomy challenged by UGC’s VC appointment guidelines

The post The Global Financing of Hindu Supremacism: How corporations and diaspora networks fuel Hindutva’s rise appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The signs of the rise of the Right are evident across Europe. In France, the National Rally, despite not winning a majority in the end, became a key party in France winning 142 seats out of the National Assembly’s 577 seats. In January 2025, Jean-Marie Le Pen, one of Europe’s most prominent right-wing figures and founder of the National Rally, died aged 96. His daughter, Marine Le Pen, had long led the party he founded in 1972—the National Front (renamed National Rally in 2018). Jean-Marie was expelled from his party in August 2015 amidst a feud with his daughter.

In the National Front’s early days, Jean-Marie Le Pen was a pariah, his radical views on immigration and nationalism relegating him to France’s political fringes. His first presidential bid in 1974 garnered less than 1% of the vote, highlighting his marginal status at the time. In stark contrast, the 2002 election marked a significant leap for Le Pen, as he secured over 15% of the votes in the first round, propelling him into the second round against Jacques Chirac. This dramatic increase in support underscored the growing influence of his far-right ideology and the National Front’s rise from the political fringes to a major force in French politics.

Marine Le Pen transformed the party into a major force, renaming it National Rally to shed its racist and anti-Semitic associations. She softened its rhetoric, distanced it from her father’s extremist views, and rebranded it as a mainstream alternative. This “de-demonization” strategy enabled electoral breakthroughs. The journey from Jean-Marie’s early irrelevance to Marine’s mainstreaming of far-right ideology encapsulates this article’s theme: the rise of far-right movements in Europe, their evolution from marginal to influential players, and the disruptions they pose to the existing world order.

Historical Context

The rise of far-right movements was shaped by socio-economic anxieties, cultural shifts, and political opportunities. Post-war Western Europe experienced economic growth, wealth distribution, and social stability, but as this stability eroded, right-wing extremism and populism found new openings. Immigration, national identity, and sovereignty became central issues for far-right mobilization. The 1973 oil crisis marked the end of post-WWII prosperity, fuelling discontent. Rising opposition to the welfare state, and tax systems, and increased xenophobia amid non-European immigration further accelerated this trend.

Global Catalysts

Several world events reinforced far-right expansion. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 heightened anxieties over national identity and border security. Globalization caused economic disruptions, leaving many feelings marginalized. The rise of multiculturalism and the perceived decline of traditional values triggered a cultural backlash, which far-right movements exploited. These factors deepened insecurity and alienation, making certain segments of the population receptive to far-right rhetoric. It is within these conditions we find homophobia, racism, etc. today in Europe.

National Variations

The far right rose differently across Europe. In Germany, reunification in 1990 created economic and social strains, which the extreme right leveraged. In Austria, Jörg Haider’s Freedom Party (FPÖ) gained influence, entering government in 2000. In France, Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front capitalized on economic discontent and anti-immigrant sentiment. These cases illustrate how far-right movements adapted to specific national contexts, exploiting existing grievances to reshape political landscapes.

Current Political Landscape

The contemporary rise of far-right parties across Europe is marked by significant electoral gains and increased visibility. In Italy, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy has emerged as a dominant nationalist force. Recently, speaking at the United States’ Conservative Political Action Conference, she criticized what she saw as a double standard, noting that when Bill Clinton and Tony Blair built a global left-liberal network in the 1990s, they were hailed as statesmen, whereas figures like Trump, Meloni, Milei (Argentina’s President), and possibly Modi are now labelled as threats to democracy. Giorgia Meloni is arguably the most prominent face of the right-wing conservative parties in Europe although she has been described by some as pragmatic and shrewd in her politics.

In Germany, the AfD has become the second-largest party, capitalizing on economic grievances and anti-immigrant sentiments. Hungary’s Viktor Orbán has embraced far-right policies, consolidating power through nationalist and anti-immigrant rhetoric. And in France, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally continues to challenge mainstream parties.

Frustration with the welfare state and tax policies, perceived as excessive, has further driven national populism. The failure of centrist parties to address these concerns has created a political vacuum that far-right movements exploit.

Cultural and social factors also play a key role. The 2015 migration crisis intensified fears of cultural displacement and strengthened anti-immigrant sentiments. Many national populist voters seek to reassert national identity, viewing globalization and international institutions as threats to their communities and traditions.

Political factors further enable the rise of the far right. The erosion of liberal and social democratic traditions has weakened centrist alternatives, while anti-establishment sentiment and political distrust push voters toward radical right-wing populism. Crises—whether economic, social, or security-related—provide fertile ground for far-right movements, which thrive on instability, inequality, and mistrust of mainstream politicians.

Understanding the reasons for the rise of Right

Gramscian hegemony provides a lens through which we can view the rise of the far-right as a challenge to the established cultural and political dominance of centrist ideologies. Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Marxist theorist, argued that hegemony is the process by which a dominant group maintains its power not just through coercion, but also through consent. This consent is achieved through cultural and ideological means, making the dominant group’s worldview seem natural and inevitable.

In the context of contemporary Europe, the far-right can be seen as a counter-hegemonic force. They challenge the hegemonic narratives of centrist ideologies, which have long dominated European politics. By questioning the established order and offering alternative visions, far-right movements tap into the frustrations and grievances of segments of the population who feel marginalized or ignored by mainstream politics.

The neoliberal backlash theory suggests that the economic policies of the past few decades have created conditions ripe for far-right populism. Neoliberalism, characterized by free-market policies, deregulation, and reduced government intervention, has led to increased economic inequality and job insecurity. These economic conditions have driven voters to seek alternative solutions, making them more susceptible to the messages of far-right parties.

Far-right movements often capitalize on these economic anxieties by promising to restore economic stability and national pride. They appeal to voters who feel left behind by globalization and economic liberalization, offering a narrative that blames external forces and marginalized groups for their economic hardships.

Empirical research supports these theoretical perspectives. For instance, studies have shown that economic inequality and job insecurity are significant predictors of support for far-right parties.[1] Additionally, qualitative and quantitative analyses of right-wing populist groups across various European countries reveal common themes of anti-immigration sentiment, nationalism, and a rejection of the political establishment.[2]

The formation of the European Union (EU) has had a profound impact on cultural nationalism in Europe. The EU was designed to foster economic and political integration, creating a unified European identity. However, this process has also led to a sense of cultural homogenization, where local traditions and identities are sometimes overshadowed by a broader European culture. This has created a tension between the desire for a unified Europe and the need to preserve national and regional cultural identities.

Eurocentrism and Cultural Nationalism

The dominance of homogenized Western culture, particularly American influence, has further complicated the cultural landscape in Europe. The spread of Western media and multinational corporations has led to concerns about cultural erosion and the dilution of local traditions. This has fuelled a backlash against globalization and has provided fertile ground for cultural nationalist movements. These movements often position themselves as defenders of national identity against external influences, appealing to those who feel their cultural heritage is under threat.

The Rise of Right-Wing Political Parties

The rise of right-wing political parties in Europe can be seen as a response to these cultural and economic anxieties. These parties often capitalize on fears of cultural erosion and economic insecurity, promising to restore national pride and protect traditional values. For example, the refugee crisis in Europe, which brought over a million asylum seekers to Germany between 2015 and 2016, amplified fears of cultural and economic instability, leading to the rise of nationalist parties like Alternative for Germany (AfD). Similar anxieties have driven support for right-wing movements in Scandinavia, where concerns over immigration and cultural identity have surged.

What happened to the Left in Europe?

The European left has declined due to economic shifts, internal divisions, and cultural nationalism. Once dominant, left-wing parties have lost their traditional working-class base, leading to fragmentation between social democrats and progressives. Economic changes, such as the decline of industrial jobs and the rise of precarious labour, have weakened solidarity, while concerns over immigration and national identity have further eroded leftist appeal. Many voters see left-wing parties as ineffective in addressing these issues, fuelling distrust in their leadership.

Right-wing nationalism has surged by capitalizing on cultural anxieties, emphasizing sovereignty, and positioning itself as a defender of national identity. Left-wing parties struggle to counter this narrative, as their focus on economic justice and globalization often overlooks cultural concerns. While some resistance exists—seen in Portugal’s socialist government, Sweden’s centrist-left coalition against the far right, and Italian opposition to Giorgia Meloni—these efforts remain limited.

More recently—in the German elections—while AfD fared well, the Left Party also improved its performance by securing more than 8% of the vote. Although it is lesser than the AfD or the Conservatives, 25% of the young population between the ages of 18-24 voted for the Left Party in Germany. This shows a polarised electorate and indicates that the younger population’s support is up for grabs if the left can put efforts to secure it.

Implications of the Right’s Rise in the EU

The global rise of far-right movements challenges the post-WWII liberal order, undermining cooperation, human rights, and democratic norms. Nationalist policies promote protectionism and isolationism, weakening international institutions and efforts to address global issues like climate change. In Germany, the AfD’s opposition to climate action threatens international agreements. These risks create a fragmented world order where unity and global cooperation become increasingly difficult.

Challenges and Future Outlook

Despite their gains, far-right movements face several challenges. Electoral volatility is a significant factor, as their support can be fickle, often tied to specific issues or crises. Policy implementation is another hurdle, as the far-right’s radical proposals often face resistance from established institutions and the broader electorate. Additionally, shifting demographics, particularly the increasing diversity of European societies, may limit their long-term appeal.

Conclusion

The rise of the far-right in Europe is a complex phenomenon, rooted in historical grievances, economic anxieties, and cultural concerns. The rise of far-right movements in Europe is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a global tide of right-wing nationalism. From India to Argentina and the United States, right-wing parties are forming transnational networks to amplify their influence. Examples include Elon Musk’s support for Germany’s far-right AfD, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s appearance at the U.S. Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), where she framed herself as part of a global conservative coalition alongside figures like Donald Trump and Narendra Modi. These alliances reflect a strategic effort to legitimize far-right ideologies on the global stage.

Yet, the challenges facing these right-wing coalitions are significant. Their agendas—marked by climate denialism, opposition to immigration, and scepticism toward international cooperation—often clash with urgent global priorities like poverty alleviation and climate action. As scholars like Thomas Piketty have argued, there is a general movement in the world toward more equality and social change. Indeed, the internal contradictions within right-wing movements—such as tensions between economic liberalism and cultural nationalism—may limit their long-term viability.

Moreover, the far right’s reliance on fear and division risks alienating broader electorates, particularly as demographic shifts and civil society resistance intensify. While these parties may temporarily capitalize on instability, their inability to address systemic issues like climate change or inequality without undermining their core ideologies suggests their dominance could be short-lived. As history shows, movements built on exclusion rarely sustain themselves in an interconnected world. The future may yet belong to coalitions that prioritize inclusivity, equity, and global cooperation.

(The author is a legal researcher with the organisation)

[1] Gagatek, W. (n.d.). Explaining the Rise of the Radical Right in Europe 2. [online] Available at: https://www.martenscentre.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Martens-Centre-Policy-Brief.pdf.

[2] Wodak, R., KhosraviNik, M. and Mral, B., 2013. Right-wing populism in Europe: Politics and discourse (p. 179). Bloomsbury Academic.

The post The Rise of the Far-Right in Europe: From margins to mainstream appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In context, the Court’s decision is a part of its ongoing investigation into genocide and crimes against humanity committed against the Rohingya in Myanmar from 2012 to 2018. Welcomed as an impartial and independent decision by international human rights organisations, this decision marks a critical moment in the long and challenging pursuit of justice for the Rohingya: This is the first time that arrest warrants have been ordered in relation to the Myanmar military’s genocide against the Rohingya in 2017.

A perusal of this order issuing arrest warrants show that they are not determinative of guilt or responsibility for these international crimes, but instead aim to summon the 25 named individuals to testify before the Court as part of its investigation. We believe these individuals will be treated in accordance with standards of international justice, including the affordance of due process and the opportunity to present evidence in their defence.

If these warrants are taken to their logical end, an impartial inquiry into justice and accountability, not only for the Rohingya but for all people of Myanmar, the Argentinian government has now been called upon to request Interpol to issue Red Notices for the 25 named individuals to initiate their extradition to Argentina.

Details of the suit under universal jurisdiction

Tomas Ojea Quintana is the human rights lawyer who served as U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar between 2008 and 2014. In this case, he has represented the Burmese Rohingya Organization U.K., which filed a case in an Argentine court in 2019 that allege genocide and crimes against humanity were committed by senior Myanmar military officials against Rohingya Muslims. An interview with him may be read here.

The arrest warrants were issued for those named in the suit including the de facto leader of the democratically-elected government, Aung San Suu Kyi. Aung San Suu Kyi was

Removed from power when the military took over the country in a 2021 coup and is reportedly under house arrest but the junta has not disclosed her exact location. Interestingly, the Argentine suit was filed under the principle of “universal jurisdiction” enshrined in Argentina’s constitution, which holds that some crimes are so heinous that alleged perpetrators thousands of miles away can be tried. The reasons why members of the now deposed civilian government are named in the suit because they were in charge of the government in 2017, and Aung San Suu Kyi defended the military’s actions in 2019 to the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands. However, members of Myanmar’s shadow National Unity Government, made up of other leaders deposed by the coup and their allies, have requested that Suu Kyi and other civilian leaders be removed from the arrest warrant because the Rohingya could be unfairly blamed for adding a blemish to the reputation of Myanmar’s most popular political figure. But Quintana said the court decided that she and the others must be included to show that the court is impartial. 

Independent International Fact-Finding Report, 2018, UN response

A report by the United Nations in September 2018 severely indicted the Myamar military on the mass persecution of the Rohingyas. The present development therefore follows the release of a report into the circumstances surrounding the mass exodus of more than 700,000 Rohingya people from Myanmar, beginning in mid-August 2017 – events previously described by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”.

The crimes committed include murder, rape, torture, sexual slavery, persecution and enslavement, according to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar.

Speaking to journalists in Geneva, the investigators – Marzuki Darusman, Radhika Coomaraswamy and Christopher Sidoti – underlined the horrific and organised nature of the brutality meted out on civilians in Myanmar’s Rakhine state since 2011, as well as Kachin and Shan states. “The fact-finding Mission has concluded, on reasonable grounds, that the patterns of gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law that it is found, amount to the gravest crime under international law,” Mr. Sidoti said.

“These have principally been committed by the military, the Tatmadaw,” he added, referring to Myanmar’s armed forces. “The Mission has concluded that criminal investigation and prosecution is warranted, focusing on the top Tatmadaw generals, in relation to the three categories of crimes under international law; genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.”

This case

According to the news available with the United Nations on this crucial matter affecting human rights, in November 2019, the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK filed a petition on behalf of Rohingya victims requesting the Argentinian courts to open an investigation into the role of Myanmar’s military and civilian leaders in committing genocide and crimes against humanity against the Rohingya. The details are available here. Two years later, on November 2021, an investigative judge of the Federal Criminal Court of Argentina commenced investigations, and in 2022, delegated investigative powers to the Federal Prosecutor’s office. Since then, the Mechanism has been assisting and sharing evidence with the Prosecutor’s office following a request for its support. In pursuance of the matter, last year, in June 2024, the Federal Prosecutor petitioned the Federal Criminal Court to issue 25 arrest warrants for 25 suspects from the Myanmar military, security forces and civilian government.  Thereafter, on February 13, 2025, the Federal Criminal Court ordered the arrest of these suspects. The arrests aim to bring the suspects before the court for a preliminary hearing, which is part of the investigative stage. The court may then decide whether to refer any suspects to trial on specific charges.

What is universal jurisdiction?

This principle means that some crimes are so serious in nature that a national court may, depending on their laws, prosecute alleged perpetrators even if there is no connection between the crime and that country. Based on universal jurisdiction, perpetrators of serious international crimes may be prosecuted by a national court irrespective of where the crimes were committed or the nationality of the perpetrator or victim. For more information, see the OHCHR website.

How does the Mechanism support universal jurisdiction cases?

The Mechanism has a mandate to support universal jurisdiction cases that concern serious international crimes committed in Myanmar through sharing evidence and analysis with relevant investigative, prosecutorial or judicial authorities, as long as the jurisdiction in question provides basic guarantees for a fair trial that meets international standards and cannot impose the death penalty. Since 2021, the Mechanism has been an Associate Member of the European Network for investigation and prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, also known as the European Genocide Network. This enables cooperation with national investigative and prosecutorial authorities across Europe and other jurisdictions.

Related developments

Turkey: In March 2022, the Myanmar Accountability Project submitted a complaint to the Prosecutor’s Office in Istanbul concerning crimes committed by the military following the coup. The Turkish authorities have yet to announce any response to the complaint.

Germany: In January 2023, 16 applicants from Myanmar, supported by the non-governmental organization Fortify Rights, submitted a criminal complaint to the Federal Public Prosecutor General of Germany against senior military officials and others. The Federal Prosecutor has rejected this complaint in September 2023.

Philippines: In October 2023, five victims and their families filed a joint criminal complaint before the National Prosecution Services in the Philippines alleging the commission of certain war crimes in Chin State, Myanmar, in 2021. The Philippines authorities have yet to announce its response to the complaint.

United Kingdom: The Counter Terrorism Command of the UK Metropolitan Police has opened structural investigations for each of the situations under investigation by the International Criminal Court, which includes Bangladesh/Myanmar. This means that the case is ongoing, under investigation and they are identifying potential witnesses and examining the alleged crimes.

Related:

Killing by Hunger: Rohingya Muslims starved after Cyclone Mocha in Rakhine state, UN denied access: Myanmar

Cut in WFP funding threatens Rohingyas with hunger, deprivation: Bangladesh

Rohingyas sue Facebook for $150 billion over failing to police communal hate speech

The post Rohingya Genocide 2012-2018: Argentinian Court issues arrest warrants to Myanmar military leaders appeared first on SabrangIndia.