Unless more sane voices prevail, certain faith groups will continue to use religion as a tool of political expediency
Perhaps one of the
most troubling legacies of the twentieth century is that of fractious
identities. The turbulent socio-political exigencies of a post-colonial
world demanded a re-evaluation and often re-configurations of ideas of
nationhood. India is still in the process of imagining a unified
nation-state in a country with a diverse and layered history. Israel is
still trying to develop a coherent idea of what underlies its history
and future trajectory as a nation-state.
Both countries face mounting pressure
from similar movements, which if left unchecked, can only exacerbate
sectarian tensions and prevent any semblance of peace in their
respective regions. The argument for re-asserting the rights of a ‘lost
civilisation’ is shared both by extreme Zionists as well as advocates
of Hindutva. Mark Sofer the Israeli Ambasssador in India, in a recent
interview, talked of the ‘awe and admiration in Israel for Indian
history, culture and mentality.’ The fact is that there is no one
Indian civilisation, culture or mentality. The only people who like to
make such claims are those groups that are adamant on propagating their
version of a ‘Hindu’ India. Perhaps it is with these groups that some
people in Israel have found resonance. The Holy Land is seen by some
Zionists as exclusively belonging to the Jews. Similarly the
ideological progenitors of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS),
a group that provides ideological direction to the Bhartiya Janata
Party (BJP), the right-wing Hindu nationalist main opposition party,
wrote about Christians and Muslims that “they are born in this land, no
doubt. But are they true to its salt?...No.”
Perhaps the most crucial similarity
between the two movements is the effort to sacralise the nation-state
and therefore give it divine sanction. Proponents of Hindutva conceive
of India as Bharat Mata, Mother India and therefore deify the nation.
Zionism argues that the Torah demands that it is incumbent upon Jews to
create a sovereign commonwealth in which the Halakha, or ‘sacred law’
is implemented. Implicit in this sacralisation of the nation-state is
the tendency to conflate political opposition with anti-nationalism and
therefore ‘anti-Hinduism’ or ‘anti-Semitism.’
This is well illustrated by two
examples. In India, the house of the author Arundhati Roy was attacked
by BJP women activists demanding that she be tried for sedition for her
statements about Kashmir. Roy had stated at a conference that Kashmiris
have the right to decide whether they should be independent. Branding
this statement as anti-national, the BJP in effect has also accused her
of ‘blasphemy’ for she had questioned the very integrity of Bharat
Mata. Interestingly when the chief of the RSS blamed the Indian
Constitution as the root-cause of India’s ills, no charges of sedition
were leveled against him. The recent controversy over whether citizens
should swear allegiance to Israel as a Jewish State is symptomatic of a
similar problem wherein, by conflating the identity of the country with
being Jewish, any political opposition effectively becomes twisted into
a form of religious opposition. Anti-Zionism becomes anti-Semitism.
Thus, the burden of upholding secularism does not fall upon religious
majorities but is borne by religious minorities, in this instance, the
Muslims.
The proponents of these ideologies
make for strange bed-fellows. One of the first proponents of Hindutva,
Veer Savarkar, wrote that ‘the Jews are a brave and intelligent people…
although their State looks like a child before our great state of
Bharat we must emulate its example.’ Today, members of the RSS, the
current flag-bearers of Hindutva, like ex-Deputy Prime Minister Advani,
are openly courted by organisations like the American Jewish Committee.
It is ironic that one of the founders of the RSS, Golwalkar, openly
supported the abhorrent treatment of Jews by the Nazis in order to
create a pure Aryan state. Even the structure of the RSS was modeled on
the Italian Fascist Organisation and the founders had a particularly
warped admiration for the SS. Despite this, the ties between supporters
of Hindutva and radical Zionists are surprisingly close.
In a joint conference hosted by the US
Indian Political Action Committee, the American Jewish Committee and
The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, Indian and Israeli
officials and US politicians discussed the ‘symbiotic’ and ‘unique’
status of Indo-Jewish relations and the similarity of the problems they
faced. Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-New York) articulated the fears of
the proponents of Hindutva and radical Zionism succinctly. He stated
that the real problem was that Israel was “surrounded by 120 million
Muslims” while “India has 120 million.” The newfound comfort between
the proponents of these divisive ideologies seems to be more to do with
politics than religion.
There are major divides within Judaism and within Hinduism. The RSS and BJP are not representative of all the Hindus. Similarly, right-wing Zionists cannot be representative of all the Jews. However, until more sane voices prevail, groups like these will continue to use religion as a tool of political expediency. (varsity.co.uk)
There are major divides within Judaism and within Hinduism. The RSS and BJP are not representative of all the Hindus. Similarly, right-wing Zionists cannot be representative of all the Jews. However, until more sane voices prevail, groups like these will continue to use religion as a tool of political expediency. (varsity.co.uk)
No comments:
Post a Comment