The fracas between Hindus and Muslims is one of the many characteristics of this region. When did this start? Many of us are prone to laying the blame on others and remaining unsullied and innocent. That is why we say the British colonialists used their ‘divide and rule policy’ to destroy communal harmony amongst us. Otherwise all would have been hunky-dory!
I think the matter is quite the opposite. What the British did was ‘unite and rule, divide and quit’. They had united India. The modern India state was moulded by them. They divided the country as they exited. This country divided in the backdrop of the worst ever Hindu-Muslim killings.
How were things a thousand years ago? This caught the eye of the eleventh century travellers who later the renowned expert on India, Al Biruni.
Al Biruni described a Hindu in the eyes of a Muslim: “The Hindus entirely differ from us in every respect. We believe in nothing they believe and vice versa… They differ from us to such a degree as to frighten their children with us… and as to declare our doings as the very opposite of all that is good and proper, ....they call all foreigners as mleccha, i.e. impure, and forbid having any connection with them, be it by intermarriage or any other kind of relationship, or by sitting, eating, and drinking with them, because thereby they think, they would be polluted… They are not allowed to receive anybody who does not belong to them, even if he wished it, or was inclined to their religion.”
After the partition of India, Pakistan became the Muslim state and India the Hindu state. Officially speaking India was a secular state, but that did not transpire in reality. Since partition perhaps not a single day can be pinpointed where some communal violence or the other has not occurred.
There were separate election systems in this country too at one point of time. Muslims would vote for Muslims and Hindus for Hindus. In 1953 the communal parties Awami Muslim League, Nezam-e-Islam Party and Khelafat Rabbani Party joined hands with the non-communal Krishak-Sramik Party to form the United Front (Jukta Front) and in the 1954 election jointly contested against the ruling Muslim League.
One of the United Front’s main demand and commitment was for a joint election system rather than a separate one. As a major party of the United Front, Awami League did not want a division of Hindu and Muslim votes. Hindu leaders, particularly Congress and Tafsili Federation, wanted Awami League to make a commitment that it would adhere to non-communal politics. Awami League gave its word.
As a result, the word ‘Muslim’ was dropped from the name Awami Muslim League at the party’s council session in 1955 and the entrance of non-Muslims into the party was given recognition. In the 1956 constitution of Pakistan, the provision for joint elections was included. This joint election system remained in place in the 1962, 1965 and 1970 elections.
The Lahore Resolution of 1940 spoke of a separate sovereign group of states comprising the Muslim majority provinces in India. In 1971 the Muslim state Pakistan was broken and the Bengali Muslim state Bangladesh was formed. The Lahore Resolution came to fruition.
Though Awami League included the word “secular” in the constitution, the state did not become secular. To Awami League, "secularism" meant reciting verses from the Gita along with verses from the Quran during state events as maintaining friendship with the "Hindu" India. Awami League's psyche would not actually emerge from the Islamic identities of the 1940s. Later it was seen that this party always tried to use the Hindus as a "vote bank".
When the rulers face any sort of crisis, they instigate communal violence to divert public attention. This is evident in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. Communalism spread throughout the region with the destruction of the Babri Mosque. Why? Because Muslims are a minority in India and they are branded as Pakistan-lovers. And Pakistan is India's enemy state. So an enemy can be attacked. Here the Hindu's are the minority. They are branded as India-lovers.
Destroying Babri Masjid was a political investment. BJP rose phenomenally in India by using this. This spread to other parties too. Parties deviate from their ideology to survive in the game of power. In Bangladesh, Muslims are the largest vote bank. Many use the "Hindu" and "India" card to clinch their votes. There is the effort to prove oneself to be a true Muslim. Election posters are replete with picture of the political leaders at prayer on their prayer mats.
Two major parties, Awami League and BNP, have ruledthe political scene in this country for four decades. Neither fell behind in using religious sentiment to lure in voters. The Hindu community finds Awami League comparatively more dependable. Awami League cashes in on this in an attempt to monopolise the Hindus as their vote bank.
BNP did not pay attention to this. This party had its eyes trained on the large vote bank, that is the Muslim votes. Let me give an example. On 12 May 1996 Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury dissolved his own party to join BNP. He became an extreme nationalist. He said, "The dreams of those who want to call their mother's sisters 'mashi' and father's sister's 'pishi' (terms normally used by Bengali Hindus), will be smashed. We want to drink 'pani' not 'jal' (terms used for 'water' by Muslim and Hindu Bengalis respectively). Bangladesh's nationalists take 'gosul' not 'snan' (words used for 'bath' by Muslim and Hindu Bengalis respectively)." (Source: Awami League: Utthanporbo 1948-1970, Prothoma Prokashon). BNP accepted him wholeheartedly. In 2001 when Khaleda Zia became prime minister, she made him her political advisor.
From 2009 Awami League clung on to power for 15 years. During this period the country saw the highest degree of communal violence. These incidents of violence took place one after the other in Ramu, Nasirnagar, Sunamganj, Gobindapur, Cumilla and Feni. Idols were smashed in temples. In all these places it was seen that Awami League persons were involved. Awami League wants to send a message out to the international community that militancy is on a steady rise in this country. There is no alternative to Awami League to prevent this. This is an example of just how low a party can stoop.
How can this vote bank issue be sorted out? An anti-Awami League 'Hindu' friend of mine said, it would be good to start a separate vote system again. Then the Hindus will be able to come to parliament in an adequate number. No party will be able to blackmail them. His proposal isn't bad. Then the so-called secular parties will be tested as to how many seats they are big-hearted enough to leave to members of the minority community.
Poet Kazi Nazrul Islam so many years ago wrote in a poem:
"Are they Hindu or Muslim? Who is asking?
Captain! Tell us, humans are drowning, children of our mothers!"
Nazrul is dead and at peace. We may have made him our national poet, but we continue to spew out venom at each other.
* Mohiuddin Ahmad is a writer and researcher
* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir