Frankenstein's Monsters will grow.... Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard/ November 15, 2015

Frankenstein's Monsters Will Grow if Sophistry Over Good and Bad Terror Doesn't End

Irony is the sub-text of mankind’s evolution through millennia. Today, liberalism appears to have become the scourge of the survival of civilised society. Various cultures practising diverse faiths have existed together and persevered for centuries. After market and money considerations began to dominate the global narrative, an unnatural spurt in the index of religious intolerance can be seen. Terror has become the biggest enemy of development and a cohesive world order. The mind-numbing massacre of over 150 innocents in Paris on Friday has exposed the lethal implications of promoting a naively inclusive social structure. The bloody evening in Paris has exposed Europe’s utopian liberals dismissing the actions of religious fundamentalists as social aberrations. Eight fully armed, highly trained killers in suicide vests murdered the spirit of peaceful social cohabitation in the continent. They died after quenching their thirst for blood. But their brutal actions have further exposed and weakened the Utopians who have been treating such acts of extreme terror as mere expressions of anger against capitalistic domination. Over the past decade, more than 100,000 people have lost their lives in direct or indirect terror attacks internationally. It is not a coincidence that over 99 per cent of the attacks were led by Islamic groups. According to published reports, during 2014 alone, there were over 33,000 casualties in 13,500 terror attacks worldwide. It is significant that of the 95 countries targeted, more than 60 per cent of attacks took place in five countries—Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and Nigeria; 78 per cent of terror fatalities happened in six—Iraq, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria and India. In terms of numbers, developing and under-developed nations are the worst victims of terror than the West. The Paris incident indicates that the stage is set for a decisive war between a savage, radical arm of Islam and the rest of the world.

For the West, the blood spilt by terrorists outside its borders is none of its business. Extremist pogroms in Africa, Asia and the Middle East do not shake the conscience of urbane Western leaders. But when it hits luxurious cities like Paris, Madrid and London, the entire world is united in its alarm about the escalating threat to humanity. Last month, two major terror attacks took place in Egypt and Beirut, killing more than 400 people. The West shed the ritualistic crocodile tears with a few condemnatory statements from its leading statesmen, who promised to fight the menace more effectively. But when Paris was bloodied, the whole world rose as one to mourn the victims. In reality, European and British liberal politicians and Leftist bleeding hearts are responsible for fomenting and encouraging fundamentalists, both at home and in East Asia. Most European countries have been financially and politically supporting dubious NGOs and religious organisations, which are engaged in promoting extremism. Many petro-governments have turned a blind eye to its billionaire citizens financing extremists groups targeting secular societies. Young people from educated families in England, the US and other developed economies have been seduced and indoctrinated by the Islamic State’s violent ideology and taken up arms in the name of a religion, which hardly ever espouses violence.

If Europe is today the prime target of Islamist radicals, the blame lies purely on its own doorstep. Most members of the European Union have been hyper-sympathetic towards indiscriminate Muslim immigration. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been the most outspoken proponent of letting refugees from West Asia into European nations. The UK and Europe have encouraged large-scale Muslim immigration in recent times by ignoring the possibility of a demographic time bomb exploding, which many experts feel will change the nations beyond recognition over the next two decades. For example, in 1998 only 3.2 per cent of Spain’s population was foreign-born. It rose to 14 per cent in 2010. According to recent studies, Europe’s Muslim population has more than doubled in the past 30 years and will have doubled again by 2015. Yet another study found that in “Brussels, the top seven baby boys’ names recently were Mohamed, Adam, Rayan, Ayoub, Mehdi, Amine and Hamza”.

Of late, various scholars and opinion-makers have been warning about the growing influence of Islamic extremism in European politics. Bestselling novel Submission by Michel Houellebecq published in France this year expresses the possibility of a docile French state reeling under rampant immigration and a rising Muslim birth rate, enabling Islamists to capture political power and replace French laws with Sharia. Many other frightening opinions predict that the majority of the population of over half of France’s cities will be Muslim by 2050.

It is not the question of demographic transformation that poses a serious threat to a civilised society. The non-Muslim world is caught in the crossfire between radical Muslim elements and feudal Arab and Islamic elitist establishment. The West has been promoting extremist factions in various Muslims countries to keep monarchies and dictatorships under control to promote their business interests. The US and its allies have been ignoring terror outfits in the Middle East and certain parts of Asia because they hardly pose a threat to them. The developed world is responsible for the growth of religious fundamentalism. Now, with all the resources and technology at its command, the superpowers are unable to plug the jihadi financial pipeline. Since most terror organisations possess modern weapons, communications equipment and mountains of foreign currency, it is obvious that innumerable clandestine warlords and unscrupulous tycoons have created enough channels for terrorists to acquire lethal power. Ironically, ever since the superpowers and other emerging economies came together to evolve a mechanism to deal with the terror menace, the messengers of death have acquired more legitimacy and viability. Global liberals have been treating terror as a canvas of philosophical romanticism. But sooner or later, they are the ones who are going to be the victims. It was New York earlier, Mumbai later and Paris now. If the illiberals do not abandon their cynical sophistry over good and bad terror, who knows which city or capital of ‘inclusive culture’ will resound next with the sound of bombs exploding, the ominous chatter of gunfire, the cries of the dying, and the silence of the dead.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Judiciary above Suspicion..............Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard/ July 26, 2015

Judiciary Above Suspicion in Pronouncing Justice, Irrespective of Blood Colour of Criminals

Yakub Memon is not a religion. It’s a proper noun like other names, such as Kehar Singh who was hanged for the assassination of Indira Gandhi, and Renuka Shinde and sister Seema Gavit who are on death row for murdering five children. All of them belong to different faiths and communities. But they share one thing in common. All have committed the rarest of rare crimes and were sentenced to go to the gallows. Yet, some ill-liberals have chosen to splash communal paint on the verdicts as if some names are above the law while the owners of some others must face the noose if they have taken the lives of others. Unfortunately, such insensitive remarks are being raised by a couple of minority community leaders who forget that it is the Indian judiciary that has always corrected illegal distortions in its own system. Ever since the Supreme Court rejected Memon’s clemency petitions, the knives are out to destroy its credibility. Shamelessly spraying criminal justice with communal hues, a few self-appointed leaders belonging to India’s peace-loving Muslim community are questioning the independence of the judiciary. They choose to forget that it has taken over 22 years for the prosecuting agencies to get justice for the 257 innocents who were massacred in the 1993 Mumbai blasts. Starting from the trial court all the way to the apex court, Memon, helped by his advocates and ill-liberal accomplices, was given enough fair opportunities to prove his innocence. It is only in India that the judiciary and the executive take such time-consuming and vigorous scrutiny of each and every piece of evidence at multiple levels. Many times, the prosecution and the judiciary have been at the receiving end of vituperative vocabulary for unnecessarily delaying the delivery of criminal justice. It is quite possible that a section of the judiciary may have erred in some cases, but their intent has never been malicious or prejudiced.

Now, the Indian judiciary is being accused of a communal bias. It is stupendously shocking to note the rising tendency among conscience-peddlers to attack or support court verdicts selectively. Obstreperous social activists are sitting in judgment to decide the merit of judicial verdicts. Judges are expected to deliver sentences to suit the convictions of these amoral advocates of expedience, and not by the law book. If a verdict is against their political ideology or personal preferences they take to the streets, condemning it as unsound and illogical. For them, Yakub’s death sentence is not a correct interpretation of evidence. They conveniently forget that for one Yakub Memon, there are more than a hundred Pulaham Rama Raos, Kattar Singhs, Gurdeep Singhs, Babbanna Patils and Mukul Behari Lals who have been hanged during the past 70 years. Why don’t the liberal lamenters find fault with the judiciary for singling out Hindus for capital punishment? Of the 700-odd criminals hanged since Independence, not more than 65 are Muslims. In a majority-minority state like Jammu and Kashmir, not a single Muslim has ever been hanged. This doesn’t mean the local judiciary has spared criminals with any particular religious tag. In fact, it has considered each case on its merit and not by the name of the accused. For the past few months, even heinous crimes like rapes have acquired political and religious pigmentation. While rape and abduction cases in states like West Bengal are either ignored or underplayed by the ill-liberals, the spotlight is directed on the ones occurring in states run by NDA governments. From their commentaries on social media, it can be gleaned that the colour of Yakub’s blood is different from that of Sharma, Yadav, Reddy, Jacob, Singh and Tomar.

It is only the Indian judiciary, which keeps India’s inclusive character intact. The increase in opinionated attacks on the justice system is aimed at maiming the secular character of our Constitution. In the past, the judiciary has faced criticism for catering to class interests, but has rarely been accused of a communal bias. The idea behind questioning verdicts against terrorists like Yakub, Afzal Guru and Kasab smacks of a conspiracy to divide not only political parties but also the judiciary along communal lines. The latter has usually chosen the path of leniency or mild censure instead of taking penal action against even those who have made personal accusations against the integrity of senior judges. But, what is most dangerous for a vibrant and tolerant democracy like India is the rising agitational anarchy in the name of secularism which aims to deliberately link judicial pronouncements with vote banks.

It is usual for leaders of various political parties to take up cudgels on behalf of criminals belonging to a particular community in order to mobilise votes. Illogical arguments are bandied to condemn judicial decisions. For example, Yakub’s supporters are saying that while he is likely to be hanged, those behind other riots have been spared, or are treated with kid gloves. Some of the Memonites have even gone to ridiculous lengths to debate whether Yakub was actually arrested or whether he surrendered himself—as if this differentiation would atone for the loss of human lives.

It is only in India that freedom of expression is turned into an excuse to diminish the credibility of institutions. Since the Indian judiciary has stood the test of difficult times and stood steadfast with total independence, it acts as the only check on anarchist and undemocratic forces. It has judiciously applied the best standards of scrutiny on every criminal, irrespective of whether he or she was a Hindu, a Christian, a Muslim or from any other religion. Many a time, the judiciary has faced threats to its independence from the executive and the political establishment. Now, a formidable coalition of ill-liberals, communalists, internationalists and atheists are trying to intimidate it. Since there is no section in any law book that provides a palette of different colours for blood, the Indian judiciary is being pressured to pick one and deliver justice going by the colour of the blood of a criminal or a terrorist. Fortunately, in the Indian judiciary, justice is not blind.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard Magazine/September 11, 2011

The politics of terror cripples the nation

After successfully terrorising India’s financial capital, Mumbai, a couple of months ago, on Wednesday, it was the turn of New Delhi, India’s seat of power, to face the bloody wrath of terrorists. Emboldened by the inefficiency of Indian security agencies to track and nab them in advance, well-nurtured and well-protected enemies of the nation are now targeting even the institutions of justice. It was the second attack on Delhi High Court in less than three months. Cocking a snook at our intelligence system, terrorists had earlier targeted Jama Masjid, Red Fort and Parliament House.

It is evident that when it comes to New Delhi, their aim is not just ratcheting up the body count but also to maim and paralyse all the country’s symbols of healthy democracy and secularism. The judiciary, the legislature, hotels of international repute and places of worship have been chosen as targets to demolish India’s resolve to become a global super power. Predictably, all political parties made the correct noises; the Prime Minister, the home minister and chief ministers made yet another vow to defeat these evil forces in the future. By calling terrorists cowards, our leaders think they have done their duty. By warning each other in advance about another possible attack, they think they have done a great national service. But at the end of the day, dead bodies and crippled human beings are seeking answers to the same question: ‘Why are we being killed?’ But this legitimate question is only answered with more questions.

It is obvious that both our political system and the chatterati have failed to read the ominous message behind the killing of innocent people, month after month. We haven’t been able to identify or detect the perpetrators of any of the terror attacks—small or big—which took place in Maharashtra, Delhi and elsewhere during the past one year. There was a brief spell of two years when Home Minister P Chidambaram was able to drive fear into the mind of the terrorists. For over 26 months, none of them could strike at will. Chidambaram’s no-nonsense but low-key handling of the situation had forced various terror groups to retreat into their shells.



But for the past 18 months, political convenience has replaced strong administration. Even terror has been categorised into various colours—red, green, saffron and what not. Even before any of the investigative agencies finish writing their first report, opinion-makers start wielding their brushes to give a colour of their choice to the act of terror. Before any expert agency discloses the source of terror, candle-carrying peaceniks begin to advise the nation to not blame Pakistan or any of its nefarious agencies. The message, ‘India Divided on Terror,’ has derailed both our action and mission.

For the past one year, both the UPA and the BJP have been waging a battle against each other on the colour of terror. While the UPA leadership and some of its prominent leaders have chosen the discovery of few cases of saffron terror as a means to blunt the BJP’s monopoly over the terror cause, the latter has charged its opponents with minority appeasement. Even the laws enacted by a previous political establishment to deal with terrorism are either reversed or replaced with other laws by the next government on the pretext that the earlier laws targeted a particular community. If that wasn’t enough, the course of investigations took exactly the opposite direction to include people from another community to ensure objectivity.

Even the implementation of judicial verdicts has been stalled on the basis of the nametags of the persons involved. It is not just a matter of bureaucratic red tape that not a single person has been hanged during the past decade for his or her acts of terror, even after the Supreme Court has given its final verdict. While terrorists take only 10 seconds to kill hundreds of people, our system takes more than 10 years to decide whether to hang them or not. Only in India, chief ministers, Union ministers and top political leaders can openly plead for granting mercy to those who have mercilessly killed a prime minister and hundreds of poor and innocent people. For the past seven years, none of the parties have transcended their political motives and discussed the ways and means to tackle the terror menace. There has never been a consensus on a stringent law to enable the police to carry out preventive detention. Our prosecution agencies are neither badly equipped nor under-staffed; they are only hamstrung by weak laws, as compared to the ones in other countries. In the name of human rights, the right to life of unarmed people has been happily compromised. Competitive politics has not only vertically split the establishment but it has also united the nation’s enemies.

Even after a decade of uninterrupted mercenary mayhem, our well-heeled political class is wary of discussing laws and other steps to contain the terror scourge. Nowhere in the world has terrorism become a tool in the hands of the political establishment to kill each other. India is perhaps the only holy exception.