Labeling
Terrorists
By Ram Puniyani
11 July, 2007
Countercurrents.org
"We
should not fix labels like Muslims or non-Muslims.it won't help us in
understanding the situation or dealing with it. A terrorist is a terrorist;
he has no religion or community.As a Sikh, I understand the trauma (of
being labeled)." These words of Dr. Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister
of India, in the wake of Glasgow bombings (July 6, 2007) more than sum
up the present perceptions about the acts of terrorism and also that
these acts of terror have nothing to do with one's belonging to any
nation or religion. Coincidentally currently in Pakistan the army is
cracking down on the Lal Masjid, jihad of its leader, Maulana Abdul
Aziz. The people involved in the Glasgow bombing are doctors, who happen
to be of Indian origin and who also happen to be Muslims. This may reinforce
the popular perception that all terrorists are Muslims. Currently some
people do add to this and say that there is some thing inherent in Islam,
which leads to acts of terror and which results in the terrorists coming
up.
Dr. Singh reminds us of the
travails of Sikh community in the wake of Indira Gandhi's assassination
by her two Sikh bodyguards, who had links with Khalistani movement.
Terrorism was rampant in Punjab and parts of north India at that point
of time. Just imagine had Indian government taken the policy to label
the Sikhs as terrorists and implemented the norm that henceforth no
Sikhs will be allowed in Indian army or in positions of responsibility,
what would have happened by now? There is a subtle hint in the air that
the immigration checks and profiling of Muslims will have to be resorted
to more intensely to control the acts of terror. What has terrorism
to do with religion? One knows that the values of the religions teach
us love, compassion and tolerance. One also knows that terrorists have
come from all the religions though not due to religions. Be it the Irish
Republican Army, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam, the Buddhist monks
resorting to political violence in Sri Lank or Thailand or ULFA in North
East one can easily make out that terrorists have come from all the
religions.
Why do some people resort
to these insane acts, which lead to the death of innocent civilians
apart from other losses? Is it that they are born like that or is it
due to political economic and social reasons that such acts are undertaken?
In contemporary history various reasons have operated for the making
of the psyche which not only kills others but is also willing to sacrifice
one's own life while undertaking these cruel acts. Lets imagine the
psychological build up of Dhanu, who acted as a live bomb to kill Rajiv
Gandhi or Laila Khalid who resorted to terror to avenge the injustices
perpetrated on the Palestinians once they were forced to leave Palestine
with the formation of Israel.
Broadly one can put terrorists in two categories. The first category
is of those who strongly feel a sense of injustice being done to them
or their community and who also feel that there is no hope of getting
justice. This psychology operates at personal, family or social level.
It also assumes the shape of political outfit at times, like LTTE, ULFA,
and IRA. One recalls the murder of Saunders undertaken in the aftermath
of the killing of Lala Lajpat Rai, by the lathi blows of British police.
Such acts by Indian revolutionaries fall in this category where the
personal identity is merged with the identity of the nation or the whole
community. The bomb blasts carried on in Mumbai in 1993 and than in
2002, both were preceded by the strong anti minority violence first
in Mumbai and than in Gujarat. What happened to Muslim community in
Mumbai or in Gujarat must have sown the seeds of this insanity amongst
many a youth goes without saying. That must have created a fertile ground
because of which many an educated well to do youth also might have volunteered
to be part of these dastardly designs.
The second rough category
is the one where the identity of religion is invoked to play one's political
game. And this latter was consciously executed by US in the wake of
Russian armies invading Afghanistan. In the bipolar World during the
cold war era, the equation of power shifted and US policy makers wanted
to undo the same for strategic reasons. It was the time when the defeat
of US, US army, in Vietnam was fresh in the mind of US psyche and they
did not want to send their own army to counterbalance the Russian move.
The papers of CIA policies and other documents referred to by various
scholarly studies reveal as to how US through CIA, in collaboration
with ISI set up Madrassas in Pakistan to indoctrinate the Muslim youth
to undertake jihad, i.e. kill the communist kafirs in Afghanistan. That's
how Al Qaeda, today's most dreaded organization, came up. Osama bin
Laden came to become the leader of Al Qaeda and this organization was
given millions of dollars and tons of armaments including sophisticated
stringer missiles to attack Russian armies occupying Afghanistan.
Having done their job, there
was no exit as far as indoctrinated minds are concerned. The same Al
Qaeda later turned its guns on World Trade Center. Its another matter
that there are various interpretations of the same. Those in Lal Masjid
are the left over of this Al Qaeda and associated outfits. During Zia
ul Haq's regime when Pakistan was playing the game of US in West Asia,
Lal Masjid was the major place for indoctrination program and was a
conduit for sending Mujahidins to Afghanistan. It was being run by Maulan
Abdullah, father of the present Maulan, who was close to Zia ul Haq.
Clock has tuned full circle. Today these Al Qaeda associates are not
needed by Pakistani establishment so the whole game has changed its
direction. It must be pointed out that the so called terrorists who
are smashing the jeeps or aero planes are small fries in the bigger
game which began with the lust of oil. The unfortunate part is that
religion has been dragged into the murky world of greed by the imperialist
powers and these small pawns in the big game not only bring bad name
to their religion but also to the religious community to which they
belong. They neither represent the moral values of that religion, neither
are they the representative of that religious community.
One can understand the anguish
of Dr. Man Mohan Singh as during the decade of eighties most of the
Sikhs were branded as terrorists and during the massive anti Sikh pogrom
even the high and mighty Sikhs were insecure. One just hopes that the
major powers of the World put an end to attacking one country after
the other, Afghanistan, Iraq, and threatening Iran on permanent basis,
stop the atrocities on the people of those countries, and the sectarian
violence is stopped here in India, so that the likes of Dr. Mohammad
Haneef and Dr. Sabeel Ahmad do their profession of saving lives rather
than undertaking the things which take the lives of innocents.
(Writer, former Prof. IIT
Mumbai is currently Secretary of All India Secular forum)
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.