Courting India’s Muslim Vote

[BanglaBhoot]

India’s Muslim minority could have a powerful impact on the elections. Who will they vote for?

By Sudha Ramachandran
April 03, 2014

In just a few days from now India will begin voting in its multi-phase, 16th general election. Opinion pollssuggest that the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) will emerge as the single largest party but may fall short of a majority on its own, requiring it to secure support from other parties to form the next government.

Its prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi seems to have galvanized voters across class and caste. However, the “Modi wave” that is reportedly sweeping the country seems not to have touched India’s Muslims

Muslims have not voted for the BJP in previous elections. “We will not do so in this election either,” a Muslim community leader in Bangalore says. Speaking to The Diplomat on condition of anonymity, he describes a BJP victory and the prospects of a government headed by Modi as “the worst possible scenario for Muslims.”

Modi is the chief minister of the western Indian state of Gujarat. It was under his watch that mobs led by members of the Sangh Parivar (a family of Hindu organizations of which the BJP is a part) unleashed horrific violence against Muslims in 2002.

His government did little to stop that violence. Worse, Modi is believed to have encouraged it, issuing orders at a meeting of police officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger with Muslims over an attack on a train a few days earlier that left 59 Hindu pilgrims dead.

More than a thousand people – mostly Muslims – were killed in that pogrom, and tens of thousands were displaced.

Muslims have always perceived the BJP (and its forerunner, the Jana Sangh) as an anti-Muslim party. Indeed, the BJP and its fraternal organizations espouse Hindutva, an ideology that regards India as a Hindu nation, and Muslims and Christians as populations to be violently co-opted or assimilated into the nation, or else expunged as foreign elements.

This ideology has manifested itself in an array of ways, including calls for a Uniform Civil Code, the destruction of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in December 1992 and anti-Muslim violence as in Mumbai in 1992-93 and Gujarat in 2002.

In previous elections, the BJP has campaigned on Hindutva issues close to its heart, promising voters it will construct a temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya, enact legislation to halt religious conversions and so on.

Modi’s speeches in particular were notorious not just for the ridicule they heaped on Muslims but for the incendiary rhetoric they frequently contained.

This time, however, the BJP has avoided harping on the Hindutva agenda. Importantly, Modi has moderated his tone. A “systematic silence” has marked his recent election speeches, observes political analyst Ashutosh Varshney. “Quite remarkably, Hindu nationalism has been absent from his speeches,” he says.

Modi has avoided jibes against Muslims, touting instead a development agenda that will provide them too with prosperity.

“But we are not impressed,” Aadil Khan, a Muslim engineer based in Bangalore says.

The violence in Gujarat remains deeply etched in the Muslim memory. A. Faizur Rahman, an independent Islamic researcher and Secretary-General of the Chennai-based Islamic Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought told The Diplomat, “It will be difficult for Muslims as well as secular Hindus to forget the 2002 riots or to absolve Modi of any moral responsibility.”

In the circumstances, Muslims are apprehensive of a BJP victory.

Muslim organizations are mobilizing actively against the BJP. “We are working to defeat the BJP and its potential allies, focusing our attention on those constituencies where our vote can determine the result,” the community leader said.

Muslims may be a minority country-wide – they constitute 13.4 percent of India’s 1.2 billion people – but they are a majority in the state of Jammu and in Kashmir, and account for roughly a fourth of the population in Assam, West Bengal and Kerala. In the electorally crucial state of Uttar Pradesh – which alone accounts for a fifth of the 543 seats in the Lok Sabha, India’s lower house of parliament – Muslims constitute 18 percent of the population.

According to pollster and C-Voter editor Yashwant Deshmukh, of the 543 constituencies that will go to the polls in the coming weeks, Muslims constitute more than 30 percent of the population in 35 constituencies, 21-30 percent in 38, 11-20 percent in another 145, and fewer than 10 percent in 325 constituencies.

The impact the Muslim vote has on election results is more complex than these figures would suggest.

According to Deshmukh, in constituencies where Muslims constitute more than 20 percent of the population – roughly 70 seats – the Muslim vote is “decisive,” but it sets off a “counter-polarization of Hindu votes” that “will help BJP in any election divided on communal lines.” It is in constituencies where Muslims constitute around 10 percent of the population that the Muslim vote is “enough to become a deciding factor in who they will vote for but not enough to trigger a counter-polarization towards BJP among Hindu voters.”

This means that in 150-odd seats Muslims can determine the result.

But for this to happen, Muslims will have to vote together in each of these 150 constituencies.

Muslims are widely perceived in India to constitute a “vote-bank,” in other words as a community that votes en bloc for a party or a candidate. However, voting patterns in previous elections suggest that this is not always so.

In the early post-Independence decades, it was the Congress Party that drew Muslim votes. But secular, regional parties emerged in the 1980s and 90s, and Muslims have voted for these parties as well. In Uttar Pradesh, for instance, they vote for the Congress, the Samajwadi Party (SP) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP). In Karnataka, they have voted for the Congress and the Janata Dal-Secular.

It is in Uttar Pradesh that the power of the Muslim vote has repeatedly been in evidence. Muslims rallied behind the BSP in the 2007 state assembly elections and the SP in the 2012 elections, contributing significantly to these parties forming governments on their own, notes Deshmukh. In the 2009 general elections, they voted “tactically” in the state “to help the best possible candidates from SP, BSP and Congress win against BJP.” Of the 80 seats from Uttar Pradesh, 70 went to non-BJP parties in this election. “Muslim voters were instrumental in this verdict,” he says.

So how will Muslims vote in General Election 2014?

Analysts say that Muslim votes will be divided between the Congress and the recently formed Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), benefiting the BJP.

Muslim organizations are working to ensure this does not happen, the community leader said, adding that they were hoping that Muslims will exercise their franchise tactically as they did in Uttar Pradesh in 2009.

Elaborating on their strategy, he said that the party Muslims back could vary from constituency to constituency but “within a constituency their votes need to consolidate behind a single candidate for the Muslim impact on the result to be felt.” Consequently, Muslim organizations are “urging voters to back the Congress in one constituency, AAP in another, the SP in the third and so on, depending on who is best placed to defeat the BJP.”

The bottom-line appears to be that “Muslims will vote for secular candidates, who are most likely to defeat communal ones,” says Rahman.

There are Muslims who have come out in support of Modi. But their number is “miniscule,” Rahman says. Many are from Gujarat. Why they flaunt their support for Modi offers interesting insights into their insecurities.

In a patronage system such as that in India, staying close to power centers in the government is important for economic survival, writes Raheel Dhattiwalla. This explains why Muslim businessmen in Gujarat trumpet their support for Modi. Also figuring prominently among Modi’s Muslim supporters are religious clerics. Muslim clerics are vulnerable to being labeled as “fundamentalists,” “anti-national” and “terrorists.” It is to avoid these tags that several are singing Modi’s praises.

In Ahmedabad’s Juhapura neighborhood, a Muslim ghetto that saw some of the worst violence in 2002, BJP flags have fluttered for a decade. “Muslims hoisted saffron flags here to proclaim their loyalty to Modi,” Khan points out. It was a form of insurance against violence.

“We fear that in the event of Modi becoming prime minister the pressure on us to prove our loyalty to him will be severe and unrelenting,” the community leader says. Modi’s moderate makeover, he predicts, “will not last long.”

For Muslims and secular Indians, the upcoming general election is among the most crucial ever. The idea of India, its very survival as an inclusive, secular democracy, hinges on its outcome.

Courting India’s Muslim Vote | The Diplomat

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The timing could probably not be worse for the BJP but a Times of India report released on April 4, 2014 suggests that the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 by Hindu fanatics was not a spontaneous act but was planned well in advance by senior leaders of the party. This will likely enflame Muslim anger and distrust of the BJP during this election season and endure long after. If such incidents like Babri were to occur again after a BJP victory and lead to mass bloodshed as in Gujarat in 2002 it will likely also impact on relations with Pakistan and Bangladesh and potentially have a destabilizing effect on the region. For more on these issues and the likely implication for South Asia please read my book The India Doctrine -

The India Doctrine (1947-2007) | Mohammad Munshi - Academia.edu

 

[third eye]

The timing of disclosure in no coincidence and neither is it source unknown.

As regards the votes, Muslims led by their religious leaders have acted immaturely in the past by voting in droves.

 

[Pakistanisage]

Those Muslims who even think about voting for this " Murderous Thug " Modi should consider the serious consequences to their Safety and Welfare. Muslims are better off under Congress Banner.

Modi is a " WOLF in SHEEP's Clothing " , but this maniac is not fooling anyone. Muslims of India are aware of his real AGENDA.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Can anyone stop Narendra Modi?

From the print edition

WHO does not marvel at the prospect of India going to the polls? Starting on April 7th, illiterate villagers and destitute slum-dwellers will have an equal say alongside Mumbai’s millionaires in picking their government. Almost 815m citizens are eligible to cast their ballots in nine phases of voting over five weeks—the largest collective democratic act in history.

But who does not also deplore the fecklessness and venality of India’s politicians? The country is teeming with problems, but a decade under a coalition led by the Congress party has left it rudderless. Growth has fallen by half, to about 5%—too low to provide work for the millions of young Indians joining the job market each year. Reforms go undone, roads and electricity remain unavailable, children are left uneducated. Meanwhile politicians and officials are reckoned to have taken bribes worth between $4 billion and $12 billion during Congress’s tenure. The business of politics, Indians conclude, is corruption.

No wonder that the overwhelming favourite to become India’s next prime minister is the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Narendra Modi. He could not be more different from Rahul Gandhi, his Congress party rival. The great-grandson of Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first premier, Mr Gandhi would ascend to office as if by divine right. Mr Modi is a former teaseller propelled to the top by sheer ability. Mr Gandhi seems not to know his own mind—even whether he wants power. Mr Modi’s performance as chief minister of Gujarat shows that he is set on economic development and can make it happen. Mr Gandhi’s coalition is tainted by corruption. By comparison Mr Modi is clean.

So there is much to admire. Despite that, this newspaper cannot bring itself to back Mr Modi for India’s highest office.

Modi’s odium

The reason begins with a Hindu rampage against Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, in which at least 1,000 people were slaughtered. The orgy of murder and rape in Ahmedabad and the surrounding towns and villages was revenge for the killing of 59 Hindu pilgrims on a train by Muslims.

Mr Modi had helped organise a march on the holy site at Ayodhya in 1990 which, two years later, led to the deaths of 2,000 in Hindu-Muslim clashes. A lifelong member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a Hindu nationalist group in whose cause he has vowed lifelong celibacy, he made speeches early in his career that shamelessly whipped up Hindus against Muslims. In 2002 Mr Modi was chief minister and he was accused of allowing or even abetting the pogrom.

Mr Modi’s defenders, and there are many, especially among the business elite, point to two things. First, repeated investigations—including by the admirably independent Supreme Court—have found nothing to charge their man with. And second, they say, Mr Modi has changed. He has worked tirelessly to attract investment and to boost business for the benefit of Hindus and Muslims alike. Think, they say, of the huge gains to poor Muslims across India of a well-run economy.

On both counts, that is too generous. One reason why the inquiries into the riots were inconclusive is that a great deal of evidence was lost or wilfully destroyed. And if the facts in 2002 are murky, so are Mr Modi’s views now. He could put the pogroms behind him by explaining what happened and apologising. Yet he refuses to answer questions about them. In a rare comment last year he said he regretted Muslims’ suffering as he would that of a puppy run over by a car. Amid the uproar, he said he meant only that Hindus care about all life. Muslims—and chauvinist Hindus—heard a different message. Unlike other BJP leaders, Mr Modi has refused to wear a Muslim skullcap and failed to condemn riots in Uttar Pradesh in 2013 when most of the victims were Muslim.

The lesser of two evils

“Dog-whistle” politics is deplorable in any country. But in India violence between Hindus and Muslims is never far from the surface. At partition, when British India fractured, about 12m people were uprooted and hundreds of thousands perished. Since 2002 communal violence has died down, but there are hundreds of incidents and scores of deaths each year. Sometimes, as in Uttar Pradesh, the violence is on an alarming scale. The spark could also come from outside. In Mumbai in 2008 India suffered horrific attacks by terrorists from Muslim Pakistan—a nagging, nuclear-armed presence next door.

By refusing to put Muslim fears to rest, Mr Modi feeds them. By clinging to the anti-Muslim vote, he nurtures it. India at its finest is a joyous cacophony of peoples and faiths, of holy men and rebels. The best of them, such as the late columnist Khushwant Singh (seearticle) are painfully aware of the damage caused by communal hatred. Mr Modi might start well in Delhi but sooner or later he will have to cope with a sectarian slaughter or a crisis with Pakistan—and nobody, least of all the modernisers praising him now, knows what he will do nor how Muslims, in turn, will react to such a divisive man.

If Mr Modi were to explain his role in the violence and show genuine remorse, we would consider backing him, but he never has; it would be wrong for a man who has thrived on division to become prime minister of a country as fissile as India. We do not find the prospect of a government led by Congress under Mr Gandhi an inspiring one. But we have to recommend it to Indians as the less disturbing option.

If Congress wins, which is unlikely, it must strive to renew itself and to reform India. Mr Gandhi should make a virtue of his diffidence by stepping back from politics and promoting modernisers to the fore. There are plenty of them and modernity is what Indian voters increasingly demand (see article). If, more probably, victory goes to the BJP, its coalition partners should hold out for a prime minister other than Mr Modi.

And if they still choose Mr Modi? We would wish him well, and we would be delighted for him to prove us wrong by governing India in a modern, honest and fair way. But for now he should be judged on his record—which is that of a man who is still associated with sectarian hatred. There is nothing modern, honest or fair about that. India deserves better.

India’s election: Can anyone stop Narendra Modi? | The Economist

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Can anyone stop Narendra Modi?

From the print edition

WHO does not marvel at the prospect of India going to the polls? Starting on April 7th, illiterate villagers and destitute slum-dwellers will have an equal say alongside Mumbai’s millionaires in picking their government. Almost 815m citizens are eligible to cast their ballots in nine phases of voting over five weeks—the largest collective democratic act in history.

But who does not also deplore the fecklessness and venality of India’s politicians? The country is teeming with problems, but a decade under a coalition led by the Congress party has left it rudderless. Growth has fallen by half, to about 5%—too low to provide work for the millions of young Indians joining the job market each year. Reforms go undone, roads and electricity remain unavailable, children are left uneducated. Meanwhile politicians and officials are reckoned to have taken bribes worth between $4 billion and $12 billion during Congress’s tenure. The business of politics, Indians conclude, is corruption.

No wonder that the overwhelming favourite to become India’s next prime minister is the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Narendra Modi. He could not be more different from Rahul Gandhi, his Congress party rival. The great-grandson of Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first premier, Mr Gandhi would ascend to office as if by divine right. Mr Modi is a former teaseller propelled to the top by sheer ability. Mr Gandhi seems not to know his own mind—even whether he wants power. Mr Modi’s performance as chief minister of Gujarat shows that he is set on economic development and can make it happen. Mr Gandhi’s coalition is tainted by corruption. By comparison Mr Modi is clean.

So there is much to admire. Despite that, this newspaper cannot bring itself to back Mr Modi for India’s highest office.

Modi’s odium

The reason begins with a Hindu rampage against Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, in which at least 1,000 people were slaughtered. The orgy of murder and rape in Ahmedabad and the surrounding towns and villages was revenge for the killing of 59 Hindu pilgrims on a train by Muslims.

Mr Modi had helped organise a march on the holy site at Ayodhya in 1990 which, two years later, led to the deaths of 2,000 in Hindu-Muslim clashes. A lifelong member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a Hindu nationalist group in whose cause he has vowed lifelong celibacy, he made speeches early in his career that shamelessly whipped up Hindus against Muslims. In 2002 Mr Modi was chief minister and he was accused of allowing or even abetting the pogrom.

Mr Modi’s defenders, and there are many, especially among the business elite, point to two things. First, repeated investigations—including by the admirably independent Supreme Court—have found nothing to charge their man with. And second, they say, Mr Modi has changed. He has worked tirelessly to attract investment and to boost business for the benefit of Hindus and Muslims alike. Think, they say, of the huge gains to poor Muslims across India of a well-run economy.

On both counts, that is too generous. One reason why the inquiries into the riots were inconclusive is that a great deal of evidence was lost or wilfully destroyed. And if the facts in 2002 are murky, so are Mr Modi’s views now. He could put the pogroms behind him by explaining what happened and apologising. Yet he refuses to answer questions about them. In a rare comment last year he said he regretted Muslims’ suffering as he would that of a puppy run over by a car. Amid the uproar, he said he meant only that Hindus care about all life. Muslims—and chauvinist Hindus—heard a different message. Unlike other BJP leaders, Mr Modi has refused to wear a Muslim skullcap and failed to condemn riots in Uttar Pradesh in 2013 when most of the victims were Muslim.

The lesser of two evils

“Dog-whistle” politics is deplorable in any country. But in India violence between Hindus and Muslims is never far from the surface. At partition, when British India fractured, about 12m people were uprooted and hundreds of thousands perished. Since 2002 communal violence has died down, but there are hundreds of incidents and scores of deaths each year. Sometimes, as in Uttar Pradesh, the violence is on an alarming scale. The spark could also come from outside. In Mumbai in 2008 India suffered horrific attacks by terrorists from Muslim Pakistan—a nagging, nuclear-armed presence next door.

By refusing to put Muslim fears to rest, Mr Modi feeds them. By clinging to the anti-Muslim vote, he nurtures it. India at its finest is a joyous cacophony of peoples and faiths, of holy men and rebels. The best of them, such as the late columnist Khushwant Singh (seearticle) are painfully aware of the damage caused by communal hatred. Mr Modi might start well in Delhi but sooner or later he will have to cope with a sectarian slaughter or a crisis with Pakistan—and nobody, least of all the modernisers praising him now, knows what he will do nor how Muslims, in turn, will react to such a divisive man.

If Mr Modi were to explain his role in the violence and show genuine remorse, we would consider backing him, but he never has; it would be wrong for a man who has thrived on division to become prime minister of a country as fissile as India. We do not find the prospect of a government led by Congress under Mr Gandhi an inspiring one. But we have to recommend it to Indians as the less disturbing option.

If Congress wins, which is unlikely, it must strive to renew itself and to reform India. Mr Gandhi should make a virtue of his diffidence by stepping back from politics and promoting modernisers to the fore. There are plenty of them and modernity is what Indian voters increasingly demand (see article). If, more probably, victory goes to the BJP, its coalition partners should hold out for a prime minister other than Mr Modi.

And if they still choose Mr Modi? We would wish him well, and we would be delighted for him to prove us wrong by governing India in a modern, honest and fair way. But for now he should be judged on his record—which is that of a man who is still associated with sectarian hatred. There is nothing modern, honest or fair about that. India deserves better.

India’s election: Can anyone stop Narendra Modi? | The Economist

You did a mistake there false flagger, a very serious mistake - something a trained guy like you should not have made.

'From the print edition'
The hyperlink for this line is pointing to anonymouse.org. So why is this relevant?

1. You are using a proxy to even read a news paper!
2. You want all your tracks to be hidden. As far as I know - The Economist is not banned anywhere, so using a proxy is ridiculous.

 

[surya kiran]

Those Muslims who even think about voting for this " Murderous Thug " Modi should consider the serious consequences to their Safety and Welfare. Muslims are better off under Congress Banner.

Modi is a " WOLF in SHEEP's Clothing " , but this maniac is not fooling anyone. Muslims of India are aware of his real AGENDA.

Yes and in Gujarat they voted for him

 

[BanglaBhoot]

You did a mistake there false flagger, a very serious mistake - something a trained guy like you should not have made.

'From the print edition'
The hyperlink for this line is pointing to anonymouse.org. So why is this relevant?

1. You are using a proxy to even read a news paper!
2. You want all your tracks to be hidden. As far as I know - The Economist is not banned anywhere, so using a proxy is ridiculous.

No actually I was using a proxy for a different reason and which is none of your business. You can read the article can't you?

 

[ni8mare]

Muslims are better off under Congress Banner.

thats what every mulism of this subcontinent want.....keeping india weak from inside both economically, military ,socially..... good for enemies ...that why every bodies @ss on fire

 

[surya kiran]

You did a mistake there false flagger, a very serious mistake - something a trained guy like you should not have made.

'From the print edition'
The hyperlink for this line is pointing to anonymouse.org. So why is this relevant?

1. You are using a proxy to even read a news paper!
2. You want all your tracks to be hidden. As far as I know - The Economist is not banned anywhere, so using a proxy is ridiculous.

He's probably using it since, Economist lets your read 2 or 3 articles a week before asking you to register and hence, you need to keep clearing your cache (a very painful experience, if I may add). Using the proxy, circumvents that.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

No actually I was using a proxy for a different reason and which is none of your business. You can read the article can't you?

I repeat. That is not the appropriate way to speak to your 'master'.

*as you repeatedly say

He's probably using it since, Economist lets your read 2 or 3 articles a week before asking you to register and hence, you need to keep clearing your cache (a very painful experience, if I may add). Using the proxy, circumvents that.

I know. I just pointed out his mistake

The reasons I quoted is the same as Munshi's book(please do read, at least try). Both are brainfarts.

 

[utraash]

Why just Muslim taking the onus of secular India where is other minority or real minority of this country......? Why media not covering the views of other minority. ....? How come khoongress can be better for Muslim which had a long history of riots since independence during its rule in various parts of the country. .......?
It seems Muslims has set criteria of shear failures of various khoongress gov to curb such riotous situation to qualify for their support n votes......
I have seen many Muslims hardly has a point against bjp or modi except 2002 or babari case .....
But majority population of India has many valid points to kick the khongress.....
In Election time all kind of tactics would be played to demonise other rivals......

 

[utraash]

Those Muslims who even think about voting for this " Murderous Thug " Modi should consider the serious consequences to their Safety and Welfare. Muslims are better off under Congress Banner.

Modi is a " WOLF in SHEEP's Clothing " , but this maniac is not fooling anyone. Muslims of India are aware of his real AGENDA.

Dear bjp ruled states are better in law n order situation than Khoongress n co parties .... Little stress in memory can give you hint... Muzzaffarnagar case....... Assam case n many other cases .......
Lastly you just want to see every bad incidents from your blind Muslim brotherhood ........
Ask your brothers to follow the teachings of your n my avataar than listening crap.......

Doubt everything find your own light...Buddha. ....

 

[A Town]

Those Muslims who even think about voting for this " Murderous Thug " Modi should consider the serious consequences to their Safety and Welfare. Muslims are better off under Congress Banner.

Modi is a " WOLF in SHEEP's Clothing " , but this maniac is not fooling anyone. Muslims of India are aware of his real AGENDA.

Are you the guy who claims to be a direct descendant of Aurangzeb?