Barking up the wrong communal tree

Strangely, they coincide with extremism's revival in the opposite camp: Hindutva. The Bharatiya Janata Party is launching the misconceived "National Integration Twin Yatra" against "minorityism" and "terrorism," allegedly Islamist.

In Varanasi, the exhortation to fight "terrorism" is misplaced. There's no link between the bombings and Varanasi's Muslims. Similar events occurred at the Ayodhya, Akshardham, and Raghunath temples, and were attributed to Pakistan-sponsored groups.

In Varanasi, ordinary Muslims have demonstrated against the bombings. Muslim clerics in different cities have objected to terrorist groups using Islamic identities (e.g. Jaish-e-Mohammed).

Varanasi responded to the bombings by affirming its "Ganga-Jamuni" (Hindu-Muslim) culture, and holding over 50 inter-religious rallies. Every public figure, Hindu and Muslim, condemned the blasts. So many Muslims came forward to donate blood that the city's blood-banks were filled to the brim. The BJP-VHP's attempts to communally polarise Varanasi failed.

Leading the resistance were religious figures like Professor Veer Bhadra Mishra, chief mahant of the Sankat Mochan temple. Mishra sharply attacks Hindutva for its failure to "recognise the elasticity and assimilative character" of Hinduism.

Varanasi has a centuries-old tradition of peaceful Hindu-Muslim coexistence. This isn't a case of two communities "living together separately," but of actively participating in each other's religious and social events to enrich composite life. Most Hindus are proud that a great artiste like Bharat Ratna Bismillah Khan has played the shehnai at Varanasi's greatest temples all his life.

Recently, Hindu-Muslim bonds were strengthened by common interests in defending Varanasi's famous saree-weaving industry and tourism against disorder and violence.

The charge of growing Muslim "intolerance" derives from recent protests against the Danish newspaper cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed in bad light, demonstrations against Mr Bush's visit, and opposition to the UPA's capitulation to US pressure on Iran, as well as Mr Qureshi's disgraceful offer of a Rs 51-crore reward for killing the Danish cartoonists.

Mr Qureshi, incidentally, campaigned for Mr Narendra Modi after the Gujarat pogrom! He has been roundly condemned by countless Muslim leaders and organisations, including the normally-conservative All-India Muslim Personal Law Board. He must be sacked from the ministry and prosecuted. This hasn't happened -- but not because of Muslims.

The other accusations too don't carry weight. The UPA's position on Iran has been opposed by large numbers of people of different faiths. The consistently-secular Left was at the opposition's forefront. To attribute it to religious affiliation is irrational, indeed tendentious.

Recent opinion polls by Outlook and The Hindustan Times show that a majority of respondents, cutting across religious lines, believe that the Singh government has aligned India too close to the US.

It's heartening that Muslims have taken to the streets in much larger numbers on secular issues than on religion-related issues including the Babri demolition and Gujarat carnage. This is not a sign of "intolerance," but maturity.

Those who hold that opponents of the UPA's foreign policy are trying to "communalise" it are prisoners of a stereotype, which holds that Muslims can only relate to "identity" issues. The protests against Mr Bush were broad-based, and barring two, led by rainbow coalitions. Large numbers of Indians, across religious lines, joined them -- for secular reasons.

The anti-cartoon protests do involve a religious angle. The cartoons are obscene, tasteless, without humour, and calculated to malign Islam. Involved here is not freedom of expression, but hate speech. Hate speech must be demarcated from poetic licence, even blasphemy. It's a crime and deserves to be punished.

Those who accuse Muslims of "intolerance" because they question the "right" of some people to offend others through cartoons forget something. In a democracy, those offended have an equal right to protest peacefully. In India, all such protests have been peaceful.

Hindutva apologists see fanaticism in the protests. But they rarely condemn Shiv Sena-VHP-Bajrang Dal goons who routinely burn books, attack exhibitions, and assault people on flimsy excuses.

Hindutva's proponents wrongly think they've been gifted the "Muslim appeasement" platform. They cite the restoration of the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act in Assam, the Sachar Committee's now-scuttled proposal to survey Muslim representation in the armed forces, steps to preserve the minority character of Aligarh Muslim University, reserving 5 percent of government jobs for Muslims in Andhra, and the Banerjee Commission report on the 2002 Godhra tragedy.

The IMDT Act is the Assam minorities' sole protection against collusion between a hostile bureaucracy and the Assamese elite who are paranoid about being "overrun" by Bangladeshis. In the Act's absence, there'd be no appeal against summary deportation.

The Sachar Committee, as this column argued three weeks ago, was right to survey the defence forces. The Banerjee report reiterates what forensic experts have long held. The Coach S-6 fire was accidental. The AP reservation issue is controversial amongst Muslims. Many oppose reservations.

The BJP is playing a dangerous game. Instead of helping unite the nation against the Varanasi bombings, it chose to divide. The BJP is divided over the "twin yatra." The VHP opposes it. And the RSS is lukewarm. Through the yatra, Mr Advani will shamelessly exploit majoritarian sentiment.

The public is in no mood for such crude tactics. Yatra politics peaked in 1990. The BJP's later expeditions had no impact -- including Ekta Yatra (1991), Janadesh Yatra (1993), Su-raj Yatra (1996), Swarna Jayanti Yatra (1997), and Bharat Uday Yatra (2004). The people are interested in substantive livelihood issues. They are tired of greedy old men like Mr Advani stirring up trouble.

The last thing any well-wisher of India should do is to taunt and isolate moderates, especially Muslim moderates, who form the community's bulk. The demand that they "speak up" presumes that Muslims instinctively support extremism -- a shameful prejudice.

Praful Bidwai is an eminent Indian columnist.