There is to be a demonstration on Monday at 11.30am outside the Brent Civic Centre where Barry Gardiner MP for Brent North will be holding his surgery. The demonstration is against Gardiner's invitation, as Chair of Labour Friends of India, to Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujerat, to address the House of Commons. The demonstration is supported by South Asian Solidarity, Islamic Human Rights Committee, Brent Trades Council, Brent Labour Representation Committee and many individuals.
The exchange of letters below sets out the different viewpoints:
Barry Gardiner to Council of Indian Muslims (UK)
Dear Sirs,
Asalaam Aleyeekum
Thank you for your courtesy in sending to me a copy of
your open letter in which you refer to the invitation I issued to
Narendra Modi to speak on “The Future of Modern India” in front of an
invited audience in the House of Commons. I did this in my capacity as
Chairman of Labour Friends of India. I appreciate your giving me the
opportunity to set out my reasons for doing so.
Narendra Modi is the Chief Minister of Gujarat, which as
you know is where a large proportion of the Indian community in Britain
come from originally. He has been re-elected three times since first
becoming Chief Minister in 2001, most recently in 2012 with the
overwhelming support of both the Hindu and the Muslim community in the
State. Since 2001 he has stamped out corruption in the State
administration and is widely recognised (even by his enemies) to be
personally not corrupt and to live frugally. Many non-resident Indians
who hold him in high regard have a keen interest in maintaining their
family contacts in Gujarat and are therefore interested to hear his
views.
He has presided over what is often referred to as an
economic miracle in Gujarat, encouraging foreign direct investment and
improving roads, electricity and infrastructure whilst increasing
education and healthcare. In particular women’s education has increased
and death in childbirth has dropped by a third. All of this, he has done
in the aftermath of the devastating Gujarat earthquake which wrecked
the city of Bhuj and much of the surrounding villages and towns leaving
600,000 people homeless. The growth rate in the state from 2001 to 2012
has been almost 12% -- the highest of any state in India and as a result
of his governance Britain now has more foreign direct investment in
Gujarat than in the rest of India put together. He has been voted as the
most successful Chief Minister by India Today Magazine 6 years in a row
and has recently been made the Leader of the official Opposition Party,
the BJP. The BJP is a Hindu Nationalist Party and those are certainly
his uncompromising views (he would like India to be a Hindu State just
as Pakistan is a Muslim State). However he has always governed in line
with the secular constitution of India as did the BJP when it was the
party of government under Atal Bihari Vajpayee between 1998 and 2004.
I am of course aware of the allegations that he was
implicated in – some say that he organised – the appalling rioting that
took place in Gujarat in 2002. The riots took place in the immediate
aftermath of the murder of 64 Ram Sewaks (Hindu religious) who were
locked in a train that was set alight by Muslim extremists who objected
to the Ram Sewaks’ demands to build a Hindu temple at Ayodhya. Hindu
mobs then went on the rampage in revenge for this atrocity, burning out
Muslim shops and homes. The official figure of those killed at the time
was 850 but subsequent reports say that up to 2,000 Muslims were
murdered. You have quoted from a BBC report that referenced an analysis
prepared from contemporaneous accounts including the Human Rights Watch
Report compiled immediately afterwards which made it clear that police
and other officials had stood by and not tried to protect the Muslim
community. This led some to accuse the authorities of a planned
massacre.
Other contemporaneous reports in newspapers show that the
state government had imposed curfews, issued shoot-on-sight orders and
called for the army to prevent the violence from worsening. Clearly
there was a horrific failure in the implementation of those orders. In
April 2009, the Supreme Court of India appointed a Special Investigation
Team (SIT) to inquire into the Gujarat government and Narendra Modi's
role in the incidents of communal violence. The SIT reported to the
court in December 2010 submitting that they did not find any
incriminating evidence against Modi of willfully allowing communal
violence in the state. In all the rioting lasted for three days before
the police got things under control. (In this respect you may recall
that the rioting two years ago here in London took four days for the
police to bring under control and they too were accused of standing by
and doing nothing.)
Given that the Indian Courts have fully investigated the
allegations about official complicity in the riots and have in fact
convicted some senior administrative and political figures, it is I
think all the more significant that they found that Modi was not
implicated in any way. This has of course not stopped people using the
allegations against him for political reasons; and they continue to do
so. That is no reason for us to regard them as justified and proven when
the Indian courts, under a Congress government, have found that there
is not even a case for him to answer.
My assessment in inviting Modi to speak in the UK is that
he is a hugely important figure in Indian politics. He is already
Leader of the Opposition and depending on the outcome of next year’s
elections he could become the Prime Minister of India. At the very least
he will continue to be a dominant influence on India’s future direction
one way or another. Britain has good relations with India and our trade
and education links are strong and growing. It is therefore in my view
entirely appropriate that British politicians and leaders of the Indian
community in the UK should have an interest in what he has to say about
the future direction of his country.
I trust that this clarifies the situation for you, and
once again want to thank you for affording me the opportunity to address
your concerns.
With Kindest Regards
Yours sincerely
Barry Gardiner MPMember of Parliament for Brent NorthChairman of Labour Friends of India
Council of Indian Muslims (UK) response:
Dear Right Hon. Mr. Gardiner,
Thank you for promptly responding to our concerns about
your invitation to Gujarat Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi. Please
forgive us for saying that we have been vindicated in our assessment
that you have been misinformed. Before we respond to the points raised
in your letter, let us start by providing some background on the most
serious charge against Mr. Modi, about his role in the Gujarat pogrom of
2002.
The viciousness and barbarism that marked the Gujarat
pogrom of 2002 including the burning alive of hundreds of people, and
brutal sexual violence against women, make the Gujarat riots among the
worst human rights violations in recent history. Over 2000 people were
killed, countless others wounded, and over 150,000 displaced from their
homes.
After their investigation of the violence, Human Rights Watch stated that the “attacks
against Muslims (and other religious minorities) in Gujarat have been
actively supported by state BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) government
officials and by the police.” [13]
The "Concerned Citizens Tribunal", established by
journalists, retired judges and intellectuals in India to investigate
the massacres in Gujarat, noted in its report:
The scrutiny of the evidence, which came before us,
also reveals that there was systematic preparation for unleashing the
violence all over the State. The attackers had with them the lists of
persons and properties of the victims. The lists could not have been
prepared without an access to government records and agencies like the
state intelligence, the sales tax department, the revenue department and
the state electoral rolls. The Muslim localities were identified
beforehand, as also the property and business houses belonging to the
Muslim community.
[Crime Against Humanity, Volume 1 - An Inquiry into the Carnage in Gujarat]
Babu Bajrangi, a convicted mass-killer of the Gujarat
pogrom, acknowledged on camera during a media sting operation, that the
pogrom would not have been possible without the support of Chief
Minister Narendra Modi [14].
There is much more evidence that we would be happy to provide, should you need us to corroborate our position against Mr. Modi.
We would now like to respond to your letter point by point.
1. Modi, “has been re-elected three times since first becoming Chief Minister in 2001”
This is not unusual in Indian electoral politics which is
often driven by sectarian loyalty rather than principle. Nor does it
mean that he is governing well. The Left Front government ruled the
state of West Bengal for 32 years until 2009. Naveen Patnaik (Orissa), Sheila Dikshit (Delhi)
also were re-elected three times in a row. You must be aware of the
fact that electoral arithmetic does not entirely depend on the persona
of any individual, especially in a Westminster model of democracy.
2. Muslims have voted for him in 2012
The Center for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS),
which collects electoral data collected using scientific survey
methodology, reported that only 18% of Muslims voted for BJP.
The same data reports that BJP did not field any Muslim
candidate in the last Gujarat election. There were areas where Muslims
had no option but to vote for the other candidate. This has nothing to
do with Modi. Muslims were forced to express, under
threat or intimidation by BJP/RSS, their support for him but there is
nothing to suggest that they have voted for him as a community. [3]
3. Since 2001 he has stamped out corruption in the State administration”
This is false – an example of Mr. Modi’s expensive
propaganda machine at work. If corruption has been stamped out, why then
did the Modi administration resist the appointment of state Lok Ayukta
(anti-corruption ombudsman) since 2003? When the State Governor
appointed one, the Modi administration contested it up to the Supreme
Court where it lost.
4. Modi, “is widely recognized (even by his enemies) to be personally not corrupt and to live frugally.”
Our objections to Mr. Modi's politics concern his fascist
traits in politics and government, not his personal lifestyle, which
incidentally is also not above board.
5. “Many non-resident Indians who hold him in high
regard have a keen interest in maintaining their family contacts in
Gujarat and are therefore interested to hear his views.”
This is no reason to justify implicit support for his
views by providing him with a platform. Emigrants all over the world
maintain contact with their families and relatives back home. There may
be many in the UK who support other leaders with fascist views and would
be very interested to hear them.
6. “He has presided over what is often referred to as
an economic miracle in Gujarat, encouraging foreign direct investment
and improving roads, electricity and infrastructure whilst increasing
education and healthcare....”
Gujarat has not been a leading state in foreign direct investment (FDI).
The Gujarat government claims that it signed nearly $1 trillion worth
of memoranda of understanding (MoU), putting the state ahead of China!
The real numbers tell a different story. Most of the MoUs never come to
fruition. Gujarat's actual FDI is only sixth in the country and slightly
ahead of (until recently communist ruled) West Bengal. Mr. Modi’s
formidable PR armada led by APCO has created the fiction of Modi’s magic
in Gujarat’s prosperity. Even if it were true, how much does a pound of
human flesh cost?
7. Britain now has more foreign direct investment in Gujarat than in the rest of India put together.
This is a rather unfortunate admission in that it implies
that economic interests are more important than human rights. Please
note that the massacres he gave free rein to in 2002 also took the lives
of three British citizens. These facts, if underlined, would anger the
general British population as well. Under these circumstances, it would
be highly regrettable for a British politician to be associated with and
seen as endorsing Mr. Modi.
8. He has been voted as the most successful Chief Minister in India by Today Magazine 6 years in a row.
India Today is an English language magazine. English is
spoken by 2-3% people in India (per the national census of 2001) - the
poll therefore does not carry much weight as representing a significant
proportion of Indian citizens.
9. He has recently been made the Leader of the Official Opposition Party
The Leader of the Official Opposition Party is in fact Mr.
Rajnath Singh; Mr. Modi is simply in charge of the election campaign
for 2014 elections.
10. The BJP is a Hindu Nationalist Party. And those are
certainly his uncompromising views (he would like India to be a Hindu
State just as Pakistan is a Muslim State.)
Thank you for pointing this out. The issue is that the Hindu Nationalist charter goes above and beyond India as a Hindu state a la Pakistan as a Muslim state.
The VHP and RSS who are the ideological sources of the Hindu
Nationalist movement were strongly influenced by Nazis in their
formative years. University of Chicago Professor Martha Nussbaum calls
the movement the most successful proto-fascist movement of modern times [1]. To quote Prof. Nussbaum:
“Since long before the 2002 Gujarat riots--in which
nearly two thousand Muslims were killed by Hindu extremists--the power
of the Hindu right has been growing, threatening India's hard-won
constitutional practices of democracy, tolerance, and religious
pluralism. Led politically by the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Hindu
right has sought the subordination of other religious groups and has
directed particular vitriol against Muslims, who are cast as devils in
need of purging.”
The Hindu Nationalist movement not only threatens the
Muslims in India, but Christians, Dalits, Sikhs, Buddhists, and other
minorities as well. In the long run, they will threaten other regional
powers (Because India, according to them, extends from Afghanistan to
Burma and from Tibet to Sri Lanka.)
BJP is the political wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a fascist group whose leader M. S. Golwalkar in his book We; Our Nationhood Defined, laid down the aims and objectives of this group in these words, “...the
foreign races [read non Hindus] in Hindusthan [India] must either adopt
the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in
reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the
glorification of the Hindu race and culture...must lose their separate
existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly
subordinated to the Hindu Nation...We are an old nation; let us deal,
as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races...” Otherwise, “...To
keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the
world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Germany
has also shown how well impossible it is for Races and cultures, having
differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a
good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”
India has a remarkably successful constitution. Modi’s
uncompromising views are constitutionally inappropriate and legally
unjustifiable.
11. I am of course aware of the allegations that he was
implicated in – some say that he organised – the appalling rioting that
took place in Gujarat in 2002… train that was set alight by Muslim
extremists who objected to the Ram Sewaks’ demands to build a Hindu
temple at Ayodhya
The official probe conducted by Indian Railways concluded
that there was no attack from outside, that the fire started inside the
coach; the claim that the fire was started by the Muslims’ as a
retaliation to the temple at Ayodhya is a fiction and perhaps uttered
here for the first time.
Muslims do not oppose the construction of a Ram Temple. What they are against is the occupation of Waqf
(Muslim trust) land, where once stood a historic mosque and that was
pulled down by extremist Hindus under the full gaze of the media.
12. “Hindu mobs... planned massacre”
As has been pointed out, all evidence points to a planned
and systematic ethnic cleansing that could not have been possible
without the overt support of the state machinery. A former minister in
Modi cabinet Maya Kodnani was convicted by the High Court in Gujarat for
her role in the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 [12].
This alone is a damning indictment and proof that the pogrom was planned
and executed with direction from the highest levels of the state
administration.
13. “Given that the Indian Courts... Modi was not implicated in any way”
The truth about Modi will be known only when he is out of
office and unable to use government machinery to silence his critics–
please see what he does to officers who expose his role like Sanjiv Bhat.
14. “This has of course not stopped people using the allegations against him for political reasons; and they continue to do so... That is no reason... there is not even a case for him to answer”
Even the Supreme court has made these allegations [2,
10]. Are you, sir, suggesting that the Indian Supreme court has
political agenda?
Mr. Modi has refused to condemn the attack on Muslims; he
has instead focused his efforts on denying relief and assistance to the
victims [11]. He has polarized Gujarati and Indian society along
religious lines, leading to social and commercial boycott of Muslims,
walls separating Muslim and Hindu areas in cities and towns and
“Muslim-free” villages. There are still tens of thousands of the
displaced during 2002 living in shanty towns and temporary refugee camps
too afraid to return to their homes and villages.
The amicus curiae appointed by the Supreme Court has
asserted that Modi can be prosecuted [2]. There is enough evidence
against him that the United States denies him entry [5,6]. It is
difficult to file a case against a Chief Minister everywhere and
especially in India.
15. My assessment in inviting Modi to speak in the UK
is that he is a hugely important figure in Indian politics. He is
already Leader of the Opposition and depending on the outcome of next
year’s elections he could become the Prime Minister of India. At the
very least he will continue to be a dominant influence on India’s future
direction one way or another. Britain has good relations with India and
our trade and education links are strong and growing. It is therefore
in my view entirely appropriate that British politicians and leaders of
the Indian community in the UK should have an interest in what he has to
say about the future direction of his country.
As we have pointed out before, Modi is not the leader of the Opposition. He is not as popular as you have been told [9]. Humanity has nothing to gain from a fascist leader, however alluring his promises may seem.
We hope we have convinced you that the facts and arguments
provided to you by Modi supporters are false and reprehensibly so. We
would like to expand on why we oppose Mr. Modi and his propaganda of a
Gujarat `miracle.’
He inherited a rich state which was richer than the rest
of India even before independence - in comparison to other Indian states
Gujarat has always been an economically better [4].
Even so, income disparity in Gujarat is one of the most
extreme in India. Per data released by the planning commission of India,
31.8% are still below poverty line. Note that poverty means those who
do not earn Rs. 20 (GBP 0.20) per day!
Responding to a question on malnutrition in Gujarat, Narendra Modi, on 29 August 2012, said: "The
middle class is more beauty-conscious than health-conscious that is a
challenge…If a mother tells her daughter to have milk, they'll have a
fight-she'll tell her mother, 'I won't drink milk. I'll get fat."
We would like to emphasize that Mr. Modi refused to
condemn the 2002 riots, let alone apologize to the victims. He walked
out of an interview with Karan Thapar when pressed on this. On the
contrary he continues to evoke the 2002 case to create his image as a
nationalist!
We have tried our best to answer you point by point. We
specially request you to watch and read the links and references
provided in our responses. If that is difficult, please ask an unbiased
and credible source about the facts presented here. At stake are values
that are common to both the United Kingdom and India and indeed to all
civilized nations [7, 8].
Regards,
Munaf Zeena
Notes and References
[1] “The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence, and India's Future” Martha Nussbaum Belknap Press of Harvard University Press (2009)
[3] “Muslims solidly against Modi: Katju
[4] Growth Rate: As per the Planning Commission data,
this is true that in the period of 1995-2000 and 2001-10, Gujarat
increased its annual rate of growth from 8.01% to 8.68%.
But look at other states Andhra Pradesh,
Haryana, Maharashtra, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh. In fact,
Gujarat was ranked second after Rajasthan (8.34%) in the first period
and third after Uttarakhand (11.81%)
and Haryana (8.95%) in the second period. Even Bihar and Orissa, the
two most backward states of the country, have also shown growth pick up
from 4.70% and 4.42% in the first period to 8.02% and 8.13% in the
second period. Even smaller states like Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh have
registered growth of 11.01% and 8.96%, respectively. In 2011, Gujarat
ranked sixth among major states with PCI of Rs 63,996, after Haryana (Rs
92,327), Maharashtra (Rs 83,471), Punjab (Rs 67,473), Tamil Nadu (Rs
72,993) and Uttarakhand (Rs 68,292).
25 US lawmakers have urged US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to continue with America's move.
http://in.news.yahoo.com/keep-denying-visa-to-modi--us-lawmakers-052424447.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/10250928/US-official-warns-against-giving-Indias-Narendra-Modi-a-visa.html
“India will not be able to survive because it has so much diversity, so many religions, castes, languages, ethnic groups, etc.
http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/GUJ-AHD-india-would-not-survive-if-modi-becomes-pm-markandey-katju-4191218-NOR.html
Martha C Nussbaum is the Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago.
"Modi has long been denied a visa to enter the US because
of his complicity in the 2002 pogrom, as ascertained by the US State
Department. But now, the Naroda Patiya verdicts make official the fact
that responsibility for heinous crimes goes very high up in his
government," she notes.
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-12-24/news/35991670_1_gujarat-chief-minister-gujarat-riots-naroda-patiya
"We do not agree with the content of your seminar and
invitation of Narendra Modi as a chief guest," he said. "As a magazine
and as a publishing house in India with more than 12 years of standing,
we stand by the principles of good taste, decency, progressive values,
democratic principles and above all, the Constitution of India. As
editor of PrintWeek India, I don't think Narendra Modi stands by these
values; and hence the withdrawal of support," Ramnathan said.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/printers-protest-narendra-modi-as-chief-guest-pullout-from-conference/1079417/
Passing strictures against the state government, the
court said, "Gujarat Government's inadequate response and inaction (to
contain the riots) resulted in an anarchic situation which continued
unabated for days on".
In a major blow to the Narendra Modi government, the
Gujarat High Court today censured it for "inaction and negligence"
during the 2002 post-Godhra riots, holding that this had resulted in an
"anarchic" situation.
[13]"We have no orders to save you" - Report by Human Rights Watch
[14] The Truth – Gujarat 2002: Babu Bajrangi
