South Asia: a region of rising intolerance

Muslims protest against the verdict of India’s Supreme Court to award Hindus control of the bitterly disputed Ayodhya holy site for a Hindu temple, widely seen as a victory for Narendra Modi’s ruling BJP. (Photo: Arun Sankar/AFP)

“When a fire engulfs the city, even the temple cannot escape.” That is an old proverb but it still resonates strongly in a world today that is overshadowed by increasing intolerance and extremism.

The proxy wars in the Middle East, the constant global export of extremist Salafist Islam by some Persian Gulf countries, the deadly terrorism of transnational jihadist outfits like Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, the state-sponsored campaign of annihilation of Uyghur Muslims in China and the brutal ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. The list is ever-increasing.

South Asia is home to more than a quarter of the world’s population and is well advanced in intolerance and extremism, having exited British colonial rule (1757-1947), during which time the imperialists adopted a divide-and-rule policy that stoked communal tensions and led to the bloody 1947 partition of India and Pakistan along religious lines.

Bangladesh fails to control hidden radicalism

Islamist activists protest in Dhaka on Oct. 21, a day after deadly clashes following a Facebook post that allegedly defamed the Prophet Muhammad. The failure to punish extremists threatens religious harmony. (Photo by Munir Uz Zaman/AFP)

An unusual but most welcome calm prevailed at Borhanuddin in Bhola district of southern Bangladesh on Oct. 20.

Tensions had run high in the area over two days, involving the Muslim majority but also a handful of Hindus, over a Facebook messenger post that defamed Islam and the Prophet Muhammad.

A radical Islamic group, Touhidi Janata (Movement for Islamic Uprising), vowed to avenge the "hurtful religious sentiments" and declared a mass protest gathering on Oct. 20.

Biplob Chandra Shuvo, a Hindu man, was in the eye of the storm for allegedly spreading the messages. He told police on Oct. 19 that his account had been hacked and two Muslims were quickly arrested for the crime, allegedly carried out for the purpose of extortion.

Police engaged with Muslim clerics to assure them that action was being taken and asked them to cancel the impending gathering to avoid likely violence.

The clerics agreed but failed to stop Muslims from joining the protesters, who soon became a violent mob chanting Islamic slogans and demanding the death penalty for the Hindu man.

They vandalized Hindu temples and Hindu people's homes before attacking police with bamboo and bricks. Officers fired back — four rioters were killed and more than 100 people, including police, were injured.

News of the deaths infuriated Islamic hardliners. In Chittagong, clerics and students from the Hathazari Mosque and madrasa organized another march and attacked the local police station.

The escalating tension was only defused after Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina warned of "stern action" against anyone attempting to create "anarchy" over the situation.

Three men, including the Hindu, remained in police custody a week later, while police arrested hundreds of unnamed rioters in connection with the violence.

Islamic revival threatens Bangladesh's identity

Protesters in Dhaka, Bangladesh demanding the death penalty for war criminals in this file photo. (Photo by Mehdi Hasan Khan)

Four decades is enough for an independent nation to determine its true identity. 

However, recent political manoeuvrings, gradually influenced by a small but strong group of Islamist hardliners and a lethal rise of radicalism in recent years, show the struggle for a true national identity for Bangladesh is intensifying. 

Major political parties vie for power by appeasing hardliners and their supporters, while an increasingly authoritarian government tries to solidify power with unfair policies and laws disregarding democracy and greater public interests.

Militancy has weakened amid a crackdown by the government, but it has not withered as a recent event proves. 

A battle for the soul of Bangladesh

Religion and nationalism are locked in a bloody battle for primacy in Bangladesh

Bangladesh is going through turbulent times.

It can partly be blamed on the ongoing political struggle between the main political rivals, the ruling Awami League and the opposition alliance led by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). As national elections loom, this impasse has sparked a series of bloody street clashes.

But as well as the usual party political friction, there is also a war of ideology sweeping through the nation between radical Islamists and secularists. It’s a question of primacy: which should come first, religion or nation?

Last weekend, radicals from the Hifazat-e-Islam group marched en masse through Dhaka to parade their staunchly Islamic 13-point agenda.

It includes the death penalty for bloggers who defame Islam and the Prophet Mohammed. They also want an anti-blasphemy law, a mandatory Islamic education system, exclusion of members of the Ahmadi sect from the Muslim faith, abolition of a pro-women development policy and the restoration of a pledge to Allah in the constitution.

It’s a manifesto that would make the country a fully fledged Islamic state, perhaps even a Taliban state.

On Monday, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina said 'no' to their demand for a blasphemy law. This, unsurprisingly, led to another round of violent clashes and wildcat strikes.

The sworn opponents of the Islamic radicals comprise activists, progressives and secular groups. This loosely connected coalition, which has attracted attention from the international press and garnered massive public support, is no less trenchant in its views or pugnacious in its demands.

It called loudly for the death penalty for those found guilty in the recent war crimes tribunals, most of whom are leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami, the country’s largest Islamic political party, It also wants confiscation of Jamaat-owned institutions and a ban on Jamaat and religion-based politics.

Its advocates will tell you the nation has suffered repression and victimization in the name of religion for far too long, from the orthodox Hindu Sena era a millennium ago to the effective rule of pro-Islamist West Pakistan in the mid-20^th century.

They will also tell you that Jamaat and its forebears historically supported attacks on Bengali culture and nationalism in the name of Islam; that they sided with the Pakistan army during the 1971 war of independence; and that they have consistently persecuted religious minorities and even moderate Muslims.

Yet although these radical Islamists only represent around 5 percent of the population, their medieval ideologies continue to torment Bangladesh.

And even though the majority of people dislike the country’s dysfunctional political culture, it seems we just can’t get rid of it.

Which brings us back to the endless wrangles between the major political parties – the Awami League, the BNP and the others. For the sake of winning a vote, they will claim to be both nationalist and/or religious – whichever they think people want to hear at the time – although of course they are neither. They are just opportunist politicians who trade on nationalism and religion for personal gain.

Tragically, the history of Bangladesh is littered with monumental blunders; the British partition of India and Pakistan on religious grounds was possibly the biggest of them all. It’s a pity those reactionary forces that still hold us to ransom don’t seem to have learned a thing from those blunders.

The Third Eye is the pseudonym of a commentator based in Dhaka

Click to view original post- A battle for the soul of Bangladesh 

A bad example doesn’t make a bad religion

Recently, I picked a war of words with one of my close friends over his derogatory remarks on Islam. “Not all Muslims are bad people, but Islam is a religion with wrong principles,” he said to my utter disgust.

We were talking about widespread corruption and other social vices in Bangladesh and trying to find out their socio-historic roots. One of the discussion topics was the recent attack on a Buddhist community here, by an angry Muslim mob.

Hundreds of years ago lower caste Hindus converted to Islam en masse, largely to escape injustice and torture by the upper class in a society heavily based on social caste system. My friend says the decision to embrace Islam was wrong.

“No religion is inherently bad, because every religion teaches people to be good,” I said, but he didn’t change his stance. He countered by saying he had read Qu’ran and found its teaching ‘unacceptable’.

I tried to find some practical reasons behind his prejudice and misconceptions.

My friend has been a non-practicing Catholic for a long time, since even before we met four years ago; he was born in a Catholic parish to a Catholic father and Protestant mother. The family moved to a predominantly Muslim area due to his father’s job and he grew up in that area.

There was no Catholic church nearby, only a small evangelical Protestant church with about a hundred believers. Most of the children he knew were Muslims and some of them treated him like a crow among peacocks. So, he grew into adulthood hating Muslim, but also with ignorance about his own religious faith.

Then, a few months ago, his world came crashing down when a bad road accident left his right leg smashed. Most people didn’t think he would walk again, and he didn’t think so either, but he made it within six months. It was around then that he started believing ‘God does exist’!

But the more he turned to the Church, the more critical he became about Islam and Muslims.
While my friend’s case has unique aspects, most Christians in the country share the same views on Islam.

Taking sporadic cases of injustice and torture by opportunist Muslims, most Christians vilify the whole Muslim world. Is that fair?

Original Post: A bad example doesn’t make a bad religion