At Penpoint
- Whether Assam or Kashmir, it’s about Muslims
It would almost seem that the BJP has bitten off more than it could chew. It first upset a precarious balance in the Northwest of India in August, by changing the status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, reducing it to two Union Territories. This month, it has upset the Northeast, by the Citizenship Act (Amendment) Bill, in an attempt to act as the protectors of Hindus and Sikhs in South Asia, plunging into protests which saw six killed on Sunday alone, following three killed on Thursday, all in Guwahati, the state capital of Assam.
Delhi is also seeing protests, but those are motivated by relatively abstract fears, that the CAB would sound a death knell for Indian secularism, that Muslims would feel left out, while those in Guwahati are motivated by a more concrete fear, of an invasion by Bangladeshi Hindus. The Bill fast-tracks citizenship applications by Hindus and Sikhs from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, but not Muslims. Hindu, Sikh and Jain applicants are supposed to be persecuted for their religion, but not Muslims. One result is that any East Pakistani Muslims who had fled to Assam while fleeing the unsettled conditions there in 1971 would have a lien on Indian citizenship, while Hindus who fled then, or later, would be able to make the claim.
However, what fate it foresees for the future, cannot be predicted with any certainty. However, the CAA indicates that India intends to be the regional arbiter and hegemon, willing to protect Hindu minorities, including therein Sikhs and Jains. Apart from an expanded definition of Hindu, it has also expanded its sphere of influence to Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. Pakistan will not find it simple to fend off this additional step
The supposed invasion of East Pakistani Muslims was one of the main claims of the Assamese militants who had gone into rebellion in 1979, and made an accord with the Rajiv government in 1985. Assam has been associated with East Pakistan from even before a district of Assam was given to East Pakistan, because it had been part of the united Bengal province that had been partitioned in 1905, and was given provincial status when that partition was annulled in 1912. The Indian government used the Register of Citizenship to identify Muslims and target them for expulsion. The Register was prepared in 1947, and updated only in Assam, where people were asked to show that they, or some elder, had been entered on the Register as a citizen. The idea was that those East Pakistanis who had sneaked across in 1971, and their descendants, would be exposed. However, the legislation indicates that East Pakistani Hindus were also identified. It also seems that while the BJP government had no problem with those Muslims identified as East Pakistanis being rendered stateless, it not only wanted to give the Hindus a state, but wanted them absorbed into the fabric of India. It seems that a lot of Assamese sees such absorption was wrong enough for them to protest.
The first aspect that comes to mind is that the BJP seems to be revising the concept of citizenship. All of South Asia inherited the British concept, which was essentially Westphalian, and which did not really fit in with either the Hindu or Muslim concept. The Westphalian model presumed a commonality of race, language, culture, and all that went along with that, including history, cuisine and all other aspects of civilisation. Congress went along with that, as did the Muslim League, though the latter insisted that religion was a marker. The original Westphalian states, those of Europe, have thus got birth on their territory as a prime qualification, but are now struggling with the concept of shared values. Burma does not accept Rohingya refugees as the anti-immigrant parties are trying to raise race as a marker.
The BJP seems to agree with the League, though there is a big difference. The League may have adapted for Pakistan the Westphalian model, which assumes that all resident in its territory have a common citizenship, but it has also got part of the Muslim model, in having separate electorates. The Muslim model is based on religion, as is the Hindu model (which the BJP seems to espouse). The difference is that while Islam is a permeable religion, Hinduism is not. In Islam, all you have to do to attain full citizenship is to convert, and for that no ceremony is required (like baptism for Christianity), and thus no authority (like a Christian priest or a Sikh granthi).
On the other hand, there is no real conversion in Hinduism, only reversion (which was the basis of the Shudhi and Sangathan movement of the early 20th century) and that too of the Arya Samaj, which is essentially Punjab-based. The Sanathan Dharm (which the BJP follows) does not acknowledge conversion, mainly because the question would then arise which caste the convert would belong to. This is a key question for the BJP, because that could lead to caste pollution, for if the convert was actually of a lower caste than he posed, then all his progeny would also not belong to the caste they thought they were in, and if they married in that caste, they would pollute it.
That has probably already happened, for the castes were based on race (the original word, varna, means colour), but there are plenty of dark-skinned Brahmins and even a sprinkling of light-skinned Sudras. The only recent example is that of Shivaji, who was originally a Shudra, but who was given a Sisodia Rajput ancestry by a Brahmin pandit, Gaga Bhatia of Varansi, and he underwent purification ceremonies in 1674, which preceded his coronation. Those ceremonies involved spending about Rs 5 million. Muslims seeking purification would probably not have to spend as much, not even in present-day rupees, let alone 1674 rupees, but perhaps the only way the BJP would let them stay in India would be for them to revert. True, those of Mughal, Persian or Arab descent could not revert as no ancestry could be found for them. Maybe they could be targeted for expulsion or being declared stateless.
Pakistan has reacted negatively to the CAA. It can do nothing really, but it might well see that the ultimate goal of the BJP is to have one state in South Asia. At the moment, it would like to have separate states to throw people in. Those declared non-Indian by the CAA would have to declared Bangladeshi citizens. Bangladesh might well not want this, as it already has problems handling the influx of Rohingya. Burma does not accept the Rohingya as Burmese, and claims that they are the descendants of emigrants. It is a paradox that the BJP is not inclined to consider the views of the present Bangladesh government, which is so pro-Indian as to be virtually subordinate. However, Assamese Muslims might be too much for it to handle.
However, what fate it foresees for the future, cannot be predicted with any certainty. However, the CAA indicates that India intends to be the regional arbiter and hegemon, willing to protect Hindu minorities, including therein Sikhs and Jains. Apart from an expanded definition of Hindu, it has also expanded its sphere of influence to Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. Pakistan will not find it simple to fend off this additional step.