I saw a video from a public speech delivered by you in your home state of Gujarat on Tuesday, May 27. To say the least, I, as a person from Northeast India, am still numb at your references to “small eyes” and with “eyes that don’t even open”.

Before I come to why, let me take this opportunity to convey to you that far from Gujarat, in my family home in Assam, ever since my school days, I have seen a sizeable photo of a certain Gujarati hanging on a wall of the drawing room. Every godhuli (dusk), an incense stick is stuck on to the photo frame by my father, just after he finishes the same ritual on all the frames containing various gods and goddesses hung across the house, while reciting his evening mantras. I am proud to say here, that the Gujarati prayed in my family is none other than the Mahatma – Mahatma Gandhi.

My father, now 93, still continues the daily ritual. He also never forgets to tell any first-time visitor with a tinge of pride that the Mahatma, during his maiden trip to Assam in 1921, had also paid a short visit to his now over-a-century-old family house. My grandfather was one of the first in that Upper Assam town to have signed up for a Congress membership at the call of the Mahatma then to fight the foreign powers, and yes, to refuse foreign goods too.

Prime Minister, I am sure you are aware of the great Naga freedom fighter Rani Gaidinliu. When there was no advocate to fight the case mounted against her by the British, my grandfather had traveled a challenging path all the way to the Rangoon high court with a set of fellow Nagas to fight for her release from jail. In a country under foreign powers then, it was no surprise that the advocate was also jailed along with Gaidinliu, a young accused then who had the gumption to stand up to the colonial powers for converting fellow Nagas to Christianity from their religion, Heraka. That fight, by the way, had made our first prime minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru bestow on Gaidinliu the prefix to her name, Rani (queen), as we know her today, and call her a freedom fighter.

These references, particularly to the Father of the Nation, are only to underline that the connections that we form with powerful leaders and change-makers who may belong to another region or community, just keeps alive the unity and solidarity of the people of this huge country that we are all part of, and so proud of. Tiny, daily rituals carried out in houses like mine also acknowledge that we may know little about a region that the leader or change-maker comes from or their people, but, as the constitution says, we are the same people – no matter how large or small the size of our eyes are (irrespective of race and creed, remember?).

Prime Minister, like several from the Northeast, I too have lived on those lines. I happened to choose a partner from outside the region. I never looked at the size of his eyes, and I am sure, he didn’t either. Let me tell you, what we saw in each other’s eyes was the same – love and respect.

*

In your May 27 speech, even if you had made an indirect reference to the Chinese when you had referred to Ganesha with “small eyes” and “eyes that don’t even open”, the remark cannot be overlooked. It cannot be not seen to apply to “small-eyed” Indians like me, those who come from the region I call home.

Prime Minister, even in the national capital, many from the Northeast (that includes me too) face racism and discrimination on the streets almost every day. Often in central Delhi, I am stopped by random strangers while walking, to ask in English which country I belong to – whether I am looking for a currency exchange booth, a cheaper hotel room, or a taxi for sightseeing.

For those who may ask, ‘What clothes were you wearing then’ – well, no ‘Indian’ dress has been able to help me ward off such casual street racism in Delhi yet. I am sure this must be the case in various other cities.

Also, I speak for many northeastern women living in mainland cities when I say that I almost never step out of my house without using kajal on my eyes, just because we don’t want to be on the streets with “small eyes”; eyes that are seen by others as “barely open”.

Sir, I am not sure if you are aware, it is also well documented in the report of the Bezbaruah Committee, set up by the Union government after the tragic death of an Arunachali youth, Nido Tania, in Delhi’s Lajpat Nagar, that the racist terms used on people from the Northeast in big cities includes words like ‘chinky’ and ‘Chinese’.

“Small eyes” too is a term used for us. At times, no words are needed but finger tips are used to press the corners of the attacker’s eyes to send us the message that we have “small eyes” and “eyes that barely open” – the same gesture you used in your speech. And exactly like that China-made Ganesha idol you had referred to in your speech.

*

Prime Minister, it is also well documented that during the COVID-19 pandemic, many from my region were thrown out of stores and rented accommodations, some even attacked physically and spat at, just because they looked ‘Chinese’ and the epidemic had stemmed from China.

In such a dark reality, if you, as the prime minister, lampoon “small eyes” publicly, in our eyes, you are seen backing those nameless people in many mainland cities who call us “Chinky” and “Chinese”.

Anyway, it doesn’t behove the stature of an Indian prime minister to deploy such racist language about any community or set of people, whether Indian or not. What I understood also from your speech is that India’s contest is economic and versus China, and rightly so. In such a fight, there should be no space for the size of the eyes. Like it didn’t matter in diplomacy, when you set your big eyes on the “small-eyed” Chinese premier Xi Jinping while sitting on a swing and chuckling together by the Sabarmati some years ago.

Prime Minister, let me remind you here, that even in your own cabinet, there are ministers with ‘small eyes’. I am referring to Sarbananda Sonowal and Kiren Rijiju. In 2018, when your government, reportedly due to Chinese insistence, kept Rijiju out of an official function in New Delhi, many in my region were upset and sad that New Delhi didn’t stand up to the Chinese pressure. Arunachal Pradesh, Rijiju’s home state, is an Indian state, and shall remain so.

Also, doesn’t at least one of your important cabinet ministers, who is in the CCS, have a partner whose eyes are “small” due to her race? Personal preferences aside, racist outbursts by the country’s top leader should have no space in a public speech in today’s day and time; they are bad for both domestic and international optics. Remember how US president Donald Trump was chided by the world for having questioned the attire of Ukrainian president Zelenskyy.

*

Prime Minister, here is something about Lord Ganesha having “small eyes”.

If you take into account the fact that Ganesha is also a Buddhist deity, revered across South Asia where people have “small eyes”. Even in several Indian monasteries, say, Alchi, said to be the oldest monastery in Ladakh, Ganesha exists in miniature paintings on its walls – and yes, with small eyes! The Vinayaka or the Ganapati cult within various sects of Buddhism exists beyond India, across the South and South-East Asia’s  geography. Finding a Ganesha sculpture in a museum, therefore, in these countries where Buddhism has been a strong religious influence, is not a rarity. By the way, Ganesha is the only Hindu god regarded as Bodhisatva. 

Even in China, there have been Ganapati rituals. French Buddhism expert Robert Duquenne in his note, ‘Ganapathi Rituals in Chinese’, had pointed out that “Not less than twelve texts in the Chinese Buddhist Canon are dedicated to Vinayaka or Ganapati.” The author had noted, “The alternative and more usual name Ganesa never occurs here.”

Here, let me also inform you that some of our goddesses may in all likelihood have “small eyes”. Assam’s revered goddess Kesaikhati is a tribal goddess. We don’t often draw Ma Kamakhya, but as per new research, she too might have a tribal (Khasi) origin.

In Assam, we also celebrate the annual arrival of the monsoons, no less than that of a goddess. We call her Bordoisila. Every monsoon, we keep out a small mirror, a bottle of hair oil and a comb, for her to look at; the belief is, the rains are strong because she is rushing home to see her mother. Since the name Bordoisila has been drawn from the Bodo community, of Tibeto Burman origin, that goddess also, racially speaking, should have “small eyes”.

*

Prime Minister, I fully agree with you that a country which is aspiring to become a developed nation by 2047, must start its self-sufficiency journey on a war footing. You had implied China in your speech and I agree that we must stay away from using not just cheaper Chinese goods like Diwali lights and Holi colours and Lakshmi and Ganesha idols, but also all foreign goods that have a decent equivalent which is Made in India.

This country had seen a time when people had booked their HMT watches and waited for months for them to be delivered; same with India-made cars and scooters. But should that journey not start with you? Like it did with Gandhi when he gave a call to quit using foreign goods?

Therefore, if you still wear that Movado watch, that pair of Maybach sunglasses, that Mont Blanc pen, etc., which several media reports speak of regularly, please replace them with Made in India equivalents. Show the path.

*

And that western hat you wore while visiting a wildlife park?

I have a suggestion for its replacement too. In the Northeast, each community has its own hat; you can truly promote indigenous traditions and Made in India products if you choose to replace that cowboy-like hat with one from my region. The choices are too many, I promise.

Before I end, I must also say why I took the liberty to write an open letter to you. This is in keeping with my understanding of what you often say, India is not just the world’s largest democracy but the mother of all democracies. In such a democracy, a common citizen must then have the right to question her elected Prime Minister. So have I here, just as a common citizen who comes from the Northeast. I have questioned you about a sensitivity that you clearly overlooked in your May 27 public speech, and as a “small eyed” Indian, I am offended.

I hope you ponder over it and course correct, because India’s prime minister must not be seen just talking about the need for fellow Indians to treat people from the Northeast without discrimination; but must be seen doing so too, both in his words and deeds so that he becomes an example for others to emulate.

With best regards,

Yours sincerely,
Sangeeta Barooah Pisharoty,
A humble citizen of India who is never allowed to forget that she has “small eyes”, but who manages to keep them open and look clearly ahead.

(Post script: Sir, looking at the times that we are in, I hope I don’t get arrested for writing an open letter to you. Getting trolled on social media would anyway follow, and who knows, fellow north-easterners belonging to your party may also be sent after me for taking umbrage at your comment, and I may eventually end up being called a ‘China sympathiser’.) 

Courtesy: The Wire

The post An Open Letter: ‘I Have Small Eyes, Mr Prime Minister’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sylvester Nongtneger, Meghalaya’s Superintendent of Police (anti-infiltration) told Hindustan Times, “From September 1 to till September 26, 1,241 persons were detected without valid documents. They were directed to bring documents and visit Meghalaya.” Officers at the check points along the long border Meghalaya shares with Assam are checking for NRC status of people before letting them in. Earlier Chief Minister Conrad Sangma had expressed concerns about people left out of the NRC in Assam making their way into Meghalaya. In Fact, the Khasi Student Union had also set up check points at the Assam-Meghalaya border to check NRC status of visitors after the draft NRC was released in 2018.

Meanwhile in Mizoram, that also shares a border with Assam, things are a little more complicated. An Inner Line Permit (ILP) is required to enter the state and ILP violators are turned away from border check-points. In Kolasib, an important check-point, ILP is not issued without checking NRC status of visitors. Kolasib SP Vanlalfaka Ralte told Hindustan Times that between September 1 and 16, 282 ILP violators were caught and pushed back from 5 border check-points. As many as 150 of them were caught on September 2 alone!

At a public meeting on September 24, Mizoram home minister Lalchamliana was quoted as saying, “Mobile patrolling was being conducted in several roads where people not included in NRC could have sneaked in and the police found a few hundred of such people. They were pushed back.” There is now talk of computerising the ILP system so that documents can be verified at all check-points. Vanlalruata, President of the People’s Representation for Identity and Status of Mizoram (PRISM) has backed the move. He told Inside NE, “I completely support the government in this regard. I want to push back all the foreigners and we endlessly press the government to push them back.”

And the citizenship conundrum isn’t just limited to the aftermath of the NRC. With the possibility of the CAB being reintroduced in Parliament in November, protests against the CAB are planned on October 3. The decision was taken at a meeting of civil society members and organisations on Sunday, September 29.

 “People in the Northeast States are fuming over the one nation, one language theory. The people in Manipur have been agitating all these days contending that when enacted this Bill will be against the interest of the indigenous peoples of this region,” said Dilipkumar Yumnamcha, convener of the Manipur People Against Citizenship Amendment Bill (MANPAC), which is a collective of 84 civil society organisations in Manipur.

There is also a little anxiety over the likely signing of the forthcoming accord between the Indian government and National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM). The fears are with respect to the words “without territorial limits” in the agreement. Manipur fears this could threaten the unity and integrity of the state.
 

The post NRC and CAB: The cauldron boils over in the NE appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The electoral arena in the 90s has taken a qualitative turn for the worse. The earlier electoral equation, Congress vs. the Janata Dal/Janata Party and its allies, has been replaced by a triangle with first the BJP and now the BJP and its allies as the base of the triangle. Of the two other arms of the triangle, one is the Congress and other is the declining Third Front.

Progressive groups and individuals are faced with a serious dilemma as far as voting in various constituencies and campaigning is concerned. Barring the Left parties — whose secular and democratic credentials are strong — and the other earlier constituents of Third Front — though they had earlier stood on secular and democratic ground, many of them now seem to be wavering — both the major combatants in the electoral battle field are tainted with communalism of different varieties. It is in this context that the stance of the Left in singling out the BJP as THE communal force, to be isolated and dumped on a priority basis, has come for criticism from certain friends and groups from the liberal, progressive and left spectrum. Bringing to our attention the gory deeds of Congress in subtly tolerating communalism, these radical elements are advocating equi–distance from the BJP and the Congress. I would like to examine the pitfalls of this equi–distance thesis in this article. Congress and Communalism: Right since its inception, the main thrust of the Indian National Congress has been to struggle for a democratic, secular India at the formal level. At the same time, there has always been a weakness to accommodate and tolerate communal elements, more so Hindu communal elements. Some of the major leaders of the Congress had strong streaks of Hindu nationalism. The important ones in this category include Lala Lajpat Rai, Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya and Dr. Munje (one of the founders of RSS). Many leaders of the Hindu Mahasabha were also the members of the Congress. Dr. K. B. Hedgewar, the first Sarsanghchalak (supremo) of the RSS founded in 1927 was formally in the Congress till 1934. In the pre-Independence era, the Congress acted merely as a platform, the dominant part of it being secular and democratic as represented by the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Nehru. 

Undoubtedly, Hindu communal elements within the Congress put pressure from within to supplement the agenda of the Hindu Mahasabha and RSS, to act as the opposite and parallel of Muslim communalism represented mainly by the Muslim League. With Partition, formation of Pakistan and the migration of theMuslim elite from different parts of the country to Pakistan, Muslim communalism in a way got deflated.But it did survive in the Indian polity, assuming strident postures at crucial times like the Shah Bano case etc, to provide much needed prop to Hindu communalism. 

The Congress underwent major transformation in the mid–sixties. Though it continued to pay lip service to secular rhetoric, apart from appeasing the fundamentalist sections of Muslim community, it did little to ameliorate the conditions of minorities. Also, the state apparatus started getting infiltrated by the Hindu communal elements — RSS trainees — who at the grass root level started giving a Hindu slant to the policies of a formally secular state. It is due to these factors that Muslims started getting discriminated against in jobs and social opportunities. They also became victims of anti–Muslim violence led by Hindu communal organisations, supported and abetted by a  ommunally infected State. The Congress was not principled enough to oppose and curtail this as a section of its leadership was either ‘soft communal’ or had no qualms in compromising with and promoting Hindu  communalism. 

During these years the principal project of the Congress was to build a strong Indian State. In this process it started suppressing ethnic and regional aspirations and imposed the Indian identity and laws on many
ethnic groups and regions by force. The Congress pursued the policy of relentless centralisation and intervened in state affairs at every minor pretext. This led to situations of insurgency in the Northeast, Kashmir and Punjab. In Punjab and Kashmir, the worsening situation was allowed to take a communal turn. The anti–Sikh pogrom led by the Congress in 1984 can be said to belong to this category of repression of ethnic aspirations of Sikhs. 

But as Aijaz Ahmed pointed out some years ago, Congress communalism is a pragmatic one that has been used by it time and again to ‘solve’ some other problem, for example, suppressing  thno–regional aspirations (Economic and Political Weekly, June 1,1996, Pg. 1329). They have to be contrasted with the systematic and sustained anti–Muslim violence whose ideological roots lie in the very concept of Hindu Rashtra. 

Hindu Communal Politics: The basic premise of the RSS is to work towards the goal of Hindu Rashtra and as its political arm, the BJP, is committed to help in the realisation of that goal. Since 1986, the BJP has pursued the aggressive agenda of Hindu Rashtra through the Ramjanambhoomi campaign leading to the demolition of Babri Mosque, post–demolition communal violence etc. Most of the inquiry commission reports on communal violence (Jagmohan Reddy, Justice Madon, Vithayathil, Srikrishna and Venugopal) have proved without any shadow of doubt that the various constituents of the sangh parivar have been the major actors in anti–Muslim communal violence. More recently, the National Human Rights Commission, National Minorities Commission and independent human rights groups have highlighted the role of most of the progenies of the RSS in anti–Christian violence. Lately, after realising that it cannot grab power at the Centre on its own on a communal, the BJP has ‘cleverly’ been talking of the need for a ‘National Agenda of Governance’ and a ‘National Democratic Alliance’ to woo the regional parties whose narrow regional interests and tubular vision does not permit them to see the core communal project of BJP. This temporary democratic posture of the BJP is merely for the sake of gradually increasing its vote bank/social base to be able to come to power at Centre on its own so that the agenda of Hindu Rashtra ‘in toto’ can be imposed on society. Till then the decent looking agenda will remain sprinkled with hidden agendas.

In the long term this elite, middle class party will freeze society in the existent social dynamics, taking away the rights of exploited, oppressed and those on lower rungs of hierarchy to struggle for social, economic and gender justice. The communalism of BJP is a cover for a gradually evolving fascism, with the aim of foisting Brahminical Hindu politics on the country. In the words of Aijaz Ahmed, the sangh parivar’s and the BJP’s is a programmatic communalism. 

Equi–distance and comparisons: It is not to say that the other parties are desirable, ideal and capable of sustaining the secular democratic programme. We have seen that the Congress could impose Emergency with ease and pass various anti–democratic legislation time and again. It has often compromised with and aided Hindu communalism. The other parties have also shown manifest inadequacies as far as perusal of democratic principles is concerned.

But all said and done, none of them is driven by the engine of RSS, a fascist organisation wedded to the concept of Hindu Rashtra — a Brahminical–Hinduism based nationalism akin to race based nationalism or Muslim nationalism. This is what makes the BJP a different cup of tea – nay, poison. Historical Precedents: As I have argued elsewhere(Fascism of Sangh Parivar, EKTA, Mumbai, 1999), the sangh parivar is a fascist variant with a number of similarities to European fascism which got strengthened, post–Mandal, in reaction to Dalit, OBC assertion in 1990s. 

In Germany, Hitler rapidly increased his social and electoral base by projecting the fear of a strong workers movement. The triangle there was: communists, Hitler’s National Socialists (fascists) and the Centrists – Social Democrats, akin to the Congress in India. In spite of seeing the methods and dangerous potential of Hitler, communists, who were a substantial force, in a way followed the electoral policy of
equi–distance from Social Democrats (whom they called social fascists) and the National Socialists (Hitler’s party). Though Hitler did not have majority he was able to come to power through negotiations as the opponents had shifting and divided aims and were unable to focus on the real essentials of power while Nazis had unwavering aims and had a firm grasp on ‘real politics’.

The Imminent Dangers: In view of what I have argued above, the BJP should totally be out of reckoning as far as electoral choice is concerned. Just because there is a vacuum of parties with decent secular and democratic credentials does not mean that one lands up supporting a party whose fascist potential is there without any shadow of doubt? What if the Congress, which time and again has used communalism to fulfil its political ambition, benefits from it? Surely, it is an evil whose magnitude is ‘n’ times lower than thedangers of BJP being in power. 

The equi—distance position stance holds no water. The BJP cannot be equated with any other party; it has to be an ‘untouchable’ for us — Historical revenge of the untouchables!

Archived from Communalism Combat, July 1999, Year 6  No. 51, Debate

The post Left is right appeared first on SabrangIndia.