brand logo

Learning from big brother’s Islamophobia

10 Jun 2022

India is under fire over controversial comments made by ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Spokesperson Nupur Sharma, about the Islamic Prophet Muhammad, and the country’s political powers seem to be trying to pacify the situation before it could worsen. She made these remarks during a television debate on 26 May, where she commented on the Prophet’s wife, Aisha, which attracted the wrath of Muslims both in India and in other parts of the world. One force that came forth to express its opposition in this regard is the Organisation for Islamic Co-operation (OIC), an inter-governmental organisation with 57 member countries representing Islamic countries, which said that the said comment shows a growing culture of anti-Muslim hatred fuelled by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Government. This is particularly alarming for India, according to the Indian media, and the pressure from the OIC resulted in Sharma being suspended from the BJP.   This incident took place at a time when the country is struggling to deal with growing anti-Muslim discrimination, which has resulted in attacks and discriminatory remarks against Muslims. These comments coming from the BJP is also a red flag, because the BJP is a well known Hindu nationalist party. What is more, BJP member and incumbent Indian Premier Modi is considered a leader who came to power almost entirely with the help of Hindu voters.  This string of events is important to Sri Lanka, not only because India is Sri Lanka’s neighbour, but also because Sri Lanka can relate to it, even though Sri Lanka did not face the same pressure that India did.  Sri Lanka made a mistake two years ago, which triggered concerns about inter-ethnic rifts in various contexts, especially in the political arena. That was the Government’s decision to make it mandatory to cremate those who died of Covid-19, which the country’s Muslim community saw as a violation of their religious rights, because that religion requires bodies of Muslims to be buried. This decision was called an arbitrary decision, because the Government did it amidst World Health Organisation-issued guidelines that identified burials as a safe option to dispose of the bodies of those who died of Covid-19. As seen in India’s case, Sri Lanka’s political powers’ biases were a reason that worsened the “cremation only” regulation. This was particularly owing to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and his brother and predecessor Mahinda Rajapaksa having gained a name, through their actions and statements, as Sinhala Buddhist leaders. At the same time, the Rajapaksa Government, having secured strong support from Sinhala Buddhist extremist groups – including those who allegedly fuelled the infamous Dr. Shafi Shihabdeen sterilisation drama and triggered several Sinhala-Muslim conflicts – had already blunted the people’s faith in the Government, and therefore, baseless decisions that affected Muslims being interpreted as outright anti-Muslim acts was unavoidable.  The saddest part about this situation is the fact that both India and Sri Lanka did not pay heed to their own citizens, who opposed the two incidents. However, when international pressure arose, the two governments took action. These situations are harmful to any nation, especially a nation like Sri Lanka that is struggling to heal ethnic rifts that caused countless deaths and property damage through the war between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and Government-led Defense Forces and also through inter-ethnic conflicts which largely involved civilians. Despite the fact that the war ended 13 years ago, these issues still exist, and seem to be worsening among various communities, especially between the Sinhala community and the Tamil and Muslim communities. The negative international attention these issues attracted is another major concern, at a time when the country is desperately trying to get international support to get out of the economic crisis. The main lesson that leaders should learn from the said situations in India and in Sri Lanka is that leaders should serve the nation, the population, and the people’s collective interests – irrespective of the religious and ethnic ideologies possessed by said leaders. Perhaps, at least now, the Government as well as political powers and activists should finally learn the many vital lessons Sri Lanka was supposed to learn from the ethnic rifts the country suffered through. It is true that these issues have already caused massive damage; however, if we do not take action now, in 20 years from now, we will still be discussing how to alleviate ethnic tensions.  


More News..