Rise of Hindu Fundamentalism
Dr Manzur Ejaz

It seems that India has not only edged out Pakistan in the entertainment industry, it has surpassed Pakistan in religious fanaticism and fundamentalism as well. Pakistan may be accused of supporting religious fundamentalists but no group has ever threatened any foreign sport teams or forced the government to shift the venue of a match. Indian liberal intellectuals may argue that Hindu fundamentalist groups like Shive Sena are marginal groups. But this argument does not stand the test of scrutiny because the same thing can be said about Pakistan’s situation: fundamentalist groups are marginal there too. India’s image as a secular state is withering away in Washington circles and Pakistan’s apprehensions are now better appreciated in this context.

In recent days, the mainstream American media has been highlighting the cricket issue between India and Pakistan and how the Hindu fundamentalists groups are trying to block it. Most of the newspapers, including the Washington Post, TV and radio news reports have been describing the tremendous power of the Shiv Sena and other such groups in India. The Indian government of Atal Behari Vajpayee is being portrayed as helpless in controlling these groups who, at will, can dig out a cricket ground, ransack the headquarters of the Indian Cricket Board and can attack Christian churches. Primarily, these reports bring out the venomous characters of these Hindu fundamentalist groups.

The Indian government’s functionaries in Washington have not been able to put any spin on this ugly situation created by the Shiv Sena as it leaves them with little room to present these events in any different light. Of course, every government tries to put a sober face in such situation on the international level. This time around their main problem is that they cannot blame Pakistan for these subversive activities because Pakistan is the main target of these violent groups. However, it has been mentioned that these groups are retaliating against Pakistan’s alleged intervention in Kashmir. But this argument is unsustainable because these groups are attacking churches also which do not belong to Pakistan or the Muslims.

Pakistani religious groups have also committed similar crimes of destroying churches and attacking different minority communities. Nevertheless, Pakistan’s religious groups are not holding the state power in any province like the Shiv Sena, which controls the most important Indian industrial state of Maharashtra. Furthermore, Pakistan’s religious groups have not been able to block cricket matches or other events intended to normalise relations between these two countries. On the contrary, India had to cancel or shift the location of cricket matches several time in last few years. Even now, Pakistani policymakers have made a wise move by not cancelling the planned cricket team’s trip to India. This puts more burden on India to prove its credentials as a peace-loving country.

The campaign against Indo-Pakistan cricket match by Hindu religious groups have helped to highlight Pakistan’s concerns over its security. Now, the public opinion in the West cannot blame only Pakistan for purporting religious fundamentalism. And, down the road, India will face a much difficult task on swaying the international opinion against Pakistan. India will have to accept some kind of equilibrium on security issues. Certainly, the violence unleashed by the Shiv Sena and other Hindu fundamentalist groups has sensitized the public opinion in the United States over the dangerous trend of events in India and its impact on the region.

Normalisation of Indo-Pakistan relations is one of the top-most priorities of the Clinton administration for nonproliferation of nuclear arms in the region and to protect the interests of its multinational corporations. In his State of the Union address President Bill Clinton mentioned several key foreign policy issues that were related to the subcontinent. Besides mentioning the terrorism threat (and of course Osama bin Laden), President Clinton brought up the issue of nonproliferation in South Asia as an area of concern. Incidentally, other than India and Pakistan, there were very few countries mentioned by name in his address.

Pakistan may have been exonerated of being the sole hotbed of fundamentalism. However, an interesting question is: why so many new forms of fundamentalism are arising fast in the subcontinent? If one disregards the boundaries of nation-states of India and Pakistan and examines the macro trends in the entire region, it becomes obvious that despite different political systems and seemingly different circumstances, similar types of religious fundamentalist groups have emerged in India and Pakistan.

The state of Pakistan can be, and has been, blamed for the rise of fundamentalism in the country by adopting religion as its ideology. India, on the contrary, has been adhering to the secular ideology as for as the state institutions are concerned. Nevertheless, state’s secular ideology has not helped to cultivate a secular socio-political culture in the country. First, the Khalistan movement in East Punjab became so strong that the state was paralysed. Then, an indigenous liberation movement, with religious ideological underpinnings, came to surface in Kashmir for which half million Indian troops are stationed there. India could blame Pakistan for these politico-religious uprisings and Pakistan may have taken advantage of the situations like India played a role in East Pakistan. But, most of these groups were product of indigenous circumstances within India.

For example, the emergence of Hindu fundamentalism cannot be explained very easily as a result of external factors. It is much more like the emergence of militant sectarian groups in Pakistan where several hundred lives have been lost in violent attacks. In the beginning these sectarian groups targeted Ahmedis and Christians. But then they started targeting each other in the form of Shia-Sunni killings. Looking from a broader perspective there is something common in the emergence of these religious groups irrespective of their country or province, or their stated goals. The answers may be found in the evolution of political economy of the region in the last 50 years.

Both countries can (and will) blame each other for instigating ethnic and religious violence in their provinces and cities. Both countries may be involved in taking advantage of each other’s misery by aiding ethnic and religious groups. However, this phenomenon is much more universal than is being realised by the governments of these countries and on the international level.