The Mumbai-Nagpur Samruddhi expressway, started by the previous BJP-led government, will be named after Shiv Sena founder Balasaheb Thackeray, party leader and Maharashtra Minister Eknath Shinde said on Wednesday.
According to the reports, Shinde said that the Rs 46,000-crore project will be named after the late Shiv Sena chief Balasaheb Thackeray and the renaming proposal has the approval of all ministers in the cabinet, which included those from the Congress and the NCP.
Reportedly, the previous government, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party, had planned to name the expressway after late Atal Bihari Vajpayee and had even submitted the proposal for the same to then chief minister Devendra Fadnavis.
The total cost of the project is estimated to be around Rs 55,335 crore and the road construction will be completed within the next three years, Minister Eknath Shinde said after the cabinet meeting.
The Mumbai-Nagpur Super Communication Expressway, also known as Maharashtra Samruddhi Mahamarg, is an under-construction 701 km long, eight-lane corridor connecting the two key cities of Maharashtra. Nagpur, located in eastern Maharashtra, is the second capital of the state and biggest city of the Vidarbha region.
The project was conceived by former Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis’s government in which the Sena was an ally. The expressway once completed will run through 10 districts, 26 tehsils and 390 villages. It is expected to cut travel time between the two cities to just 8 hours from 15-16 hours now.
The project is expected to cost Rs 46,000 crore and requires the acquisition of 8,603 hectares of land. The Maharashtra government will be financing Rs 27,335 crore for the project and remaining funds will be coming from the Union government.
A top American diplomat had reportedly sent a letter to the chief of Pakistan’s Air Force, accusing of misusing the F16 fighter jets, supplied by the USA, against India in February 2019.
As per a report published by USNews.com, the documents obtained by them, the top US diplomat had accused Pakistan of jeopardising the security of both nations. As per the report, the letter was written by Andrea Thompson, the then-undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs in August this year. The letter reportedly states that it is a direct response to the concerns of the US regarding the use of F16s in air combat with India in February, though it does not specify the incident.
It is notable here that Pakistan is bound by terms of the contract with the US over the use of the F16s. The usage of US-supplied F16s in a potentially escalating conflict between two nuclear-powered nations was reportedly seen as a fundamental violation of the terms under which Pakistan had obtained those jets.
When Pakistan acquired F16s from the USA, it came with an end-use monitoring agreement that said that Pakistan could use the F16s to defend itself and its war, albeit a fictitious one, against terror. However, Pakistan could not use the F16s to escalate or for any form of aggression against a sovereign nation.
The said letter was reportedly sent to the head of the Pakistani air force, Air Chief Marshal Mujahid Anwar Khan, and mentioned State Department’s confirmation that Pakistan had moved the F16s and accompanying American-made missiles to unapproved forward operating bases in defiance of its agreement with the US. Thompson has since left the US government.
Thompson’s letter had reportedly warned Pakistan that their behaviour risked allowing these weapons to fall into the hands of malign actors and “could undermine the shared security platforms and infrastructure.”
Thompson, as per the report, had admonished Pakistan for having “relocated, maintained and operated” the American made F-16s and the AMRAAM missiles they use from forward operating bases not approved under the original terms of the sale.
It is notable here that the Indian Air Force had presented the remains of an AMRAAM missile which was used to attack Indian military installations in a press conference in February after the dogfight. These missiles are only carried on F16 jets. These parts were recovered east of Rajouri.
Indian pilot Abhinandan Varthaman’s Mig 21 Bison had shot down an F16. India had highlighted the usage of Pakistan’s US-supplied F16s and AMRAAM missiles against India in air combat. Following the incident, the US had also sought a report from Pakistan over the use of F16s against India.
Evidence provided by Indian Armed Forces of Pakistan using F16 to attack Indian military assets
Pakistan had categorically denied using F16s. The Indian Air Force displayed pieces of the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile that was used to target Indian military installations. The pieces of this missile were found next to Rajouri, in Indian territory. The air to air missile is an American made missile which can be carried only on the American made F16.
The Pakistani jets had ventured into Indian airspace following the airstrike by Indian Air Force on the JeM terrorist camps in Balakot, deep inside Pakistan’s territory. After the usage of US-supplied F16 against India in violation of the terms were exposed, Pakistan had desperately tried to save face by claiming that the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile was purchased from Taiwan.
The Taiwan Air Force had denied ever selling the said missile to Pakistan, saying that the US-made missiles were for the usage of their military and not for sale.
As both houses of Parliament passes the historic Citizenship Amendment Bill to grant citizens to persecuted religious minorities in the three neighbouring countries, a concerted campaign to discredit the legislation has already begun by certain individuals who are now resorting to pushing half-truths to discredit the bill. After few intellectuals and activists indulged in fear-mongering, in a similar act, a Maharashtra cadre IPS officer Abdur Rahman has also joined this bandwagon claiming that he has decided to resign from the service as a protest against the “blatantly communal and unconstitutional” Citizenship Amendment Bill.
Following the passing of the Citizenship Amendment Bill, IPS officer Abdur Rahman, posted as special IGP in Mumbai, issued a statement stating that he will not attend office from Thursday in “civil disobedience” against the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2019, which according to him went “against the basic feature of the Constitution.” Rahman on Wednesday sent his resignation letter to Chairman Maharashtra Human Rights Commission.
“This bill (Citizenship Amendment Bill) is against the religious pluralism of India. I request all justice-loving people to oppose the bill in a democratic manner. It runs against the very basic feature of the Constitution,” IPS officer Rehman said.
“The bill is against the basic feature of the Constitution. I condemn this bill. In civil disobedience, I have decided not to attend office from tomorrow. I am finally quitting the service,” Rahman said in the statement.
It is pertinent to note that Abdur Rahman, who is currently Special IGP, States Human Rights Commission of Maharashtra had already applied for a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) in August citing ‘personal reasons’. However, his application was not accepted by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in October this year.
Interestingly, the officer had also filed an application in the Central Administrative Tribunal in November 2019 against MHA for rejecting his VRS application.
In his letter to Maharashtra Additional Chief Secretary, Abdur Rahman has stated that his resignation had been rejected “in haste, by not applying the mind, with clear prejudice, unfairly and abusing power of authority and discretion” as there was no pending departmental inquiry against him.
He claimed that he said that he had applied for VRS “owing to my personal reasons”, he would not be able to attend office on and from December 12.
With his VRS application already being rejected by the Home Ministry, the IPS officer has now chosen to ‘resign’ from the post for the second time from his post in the last five months after he claimed that he will not be attending the office from Thursday. It is interesting to note here that Abdur Rehman was already planning to retire since August. How this resignation is now being touted as a move against CAB simply to get mileage is rather baffling.
Addition to this, the integrity and conduct of IPS officer Abdur Rahman has been questioned several times in the past including allegations against him for supporting his community i.e Muslims over others.
In relation to the same, a criminal offence under various sections of IPC and Mumbai Police Act was registered in 2011 against Abdur Rahman casting aspersion over his moral turpitude and integrity. Attached to the complaint, the complainant had placed findings of the inquiry officer against Rahman’s inclination to his community. What that would essentially mean is that Rehman favoured candidates who were Muslim over other communities.
Reportedly, Rahman has also committed irregularities in the police constable conducted in Yavatmal during his tenure to ensure special privilege and benefit to Muslim community candidates.
While questions are being raised against the official conduct of Abdur Rahman in the past, it is also important to note that how can he resign from a post for which he had already sought voluntary retirement. The officer whose VRS application was rejected by MHA has now chosen to call it his last day at work citing “civil disobedience” and CAB as a reason.
Further, it also raises questions on the conduct of the IPS officer who chose to indulge in propaganda against the historic Citizenship Amendment Bill by posturing that he had resigned from the post as a matter of ‘dissent’ despite the fact that he has already applied for the VRS scheme earlier.
It is also shocking to observe that the senior IPS officer with questionable morality is using such a sensitive time to push his ‘agenda’ by fear-mongering among the public, especially Muslims of the country by peddling half-truths regarding the Citizenship Amendment Bill.
After a long and heated debate, both the houses of Parliament has passed the Citizenship Amendment Bill. On Monday, the bill was passed in the Lok Sabha. The Rajya Sabha has passed the CAB with 125 votes in favour and 105 against. The Bill will now be law once the President signs on it.
The historic Citizenship Amendment Bill, after being passed by Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha both, paves the way for hundreds and thousands of persecuted minorities from the three neighbouring countries who have been residing in India for the past many years.
In a blistering riposte, Union Home Minister Amit Shah slammed the Congress party for opposing the Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019. Shah said that the Congress party echoed Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in questioning CAB while adding that the party also opposed the Enemy Property Bill that enabled and regulated the appropriation of property in India owned by Pakistani nationals.
HM Amit Shah: On #CitizenshipAmmendmentBill2019, Pak PM’s comment and Congress’s comment- both are alike. Why are you (Congress) rattled?…. I want to ask why did Congress oppose the Enemy Property Bill. pic.twitter.com/ettfToJcJX
Allaying the anti-Muslim misgivings stoked by the Congress party, Shah assured the Muslim population of the country that nobody can snatch their citizenship away from them. “Kapil Sibal said that Muslims don’t fear me. They should not. Neither should you be worried about them. Nobody is stripping Indian Muslims of their citizenship. This Bill is about granting of citizenship, not about the cancellation of it,” Shah thundered in the Rajya Sabha.
HM Amit Shah: Kapil Sibal Ji said “Muslim aapse nahi darte”. Unhe bhi nahi darna chahiye. Aur aap daraiye bhi mat. Bharat ke musalman ki nagrikta koi cheen nahi raha hai. Yeh nagrikta dene ka Bill hai, nagrikta lene ka nahi. pic.twitter.com/LoOqMxoa5t
Shah also rubbished the claims made by the Congress party that the BJP government has institutionally ostracised the Indian Muslims by pursuing anti-Muslim policies. “Neither CAB is anti-Muslim, nor abrogation of Article 370 is anti-Muslim, Triple Talaq Bill is not anti-Muslim either. Triple Talaq Bill empowers crores of Muslim women in the country,” Shah said.
Regarding the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state, Shah said that the invalidation of the archaic Article affects the non-Muslim minorities in Kashmir in the same manner as the majority-Muslims and the opposition claim that it was anti-Muslim is completely baseless.
Exposing the Congress party on its charade of secularism, Shah said why weren’t questions raised when the Rajasthan government wrote to the then HM P Chidambaram about the outstanding issue of 13000 Pakistani refugees from Hindu and Sikh communities during the UPA tenure. The Union Home Minister said that while during the Congress regime only two communities benefitted while the bill proposed by them stands to benefit 6 persecuted communities.
On the question of why Rohingyas were not included in the list of communities who can seek asylum in India through CAB, Shah responded that Rohingyas did not enter India directly but they infiltrated via Bangladesh and therefore they were excluded from the bill.
Amit Shah did not shy away from questioning his erstwhile alliance partner-Shiv Sena on its flip-flop on the Citizenship Amendment Bill. Insinuating that Shiv Sena was taking orders from their new alliance partners, Shah asked the Uddhav Thackeray’s party to explain what transpired in a single night that after unequivocally supporting the CAB bill in the Lok Sabha, they have reversed their stand in Rajya Sabha.
After a long and heated debate, voting on the Citizenship Amendment Bill in the Upper House of the Parliament (Rajya Sabha) has finally been completed. The Rajya Sabha has passed the CAB with 125 votes in favour and 105 against. The Bill will now be law once the President signs on it.
The historic Citizenship Amendment Bill, after being passed by Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha both, paves the way for hundreds and thousands of persecuted minorities from the three neighbouring countries who have been residing in India for the past many years.
The Bill had faced intense opposition from the Congress and like-minded parties who had earlier vouched for the provisions enshrined in the Bill during past regimes before doing a complete U-Turn in 2019. Shiv Sena, a party that claims to be a Hindutva party, walked out as the voting began.
‘Activists’ and ‘Intellectuals’ had joined the liberal mob in opposition to the Bill. Numerous bizarre arguments have been made to oppose the Bill. Certain people have deemed it to be anti-Muslim even though the Bill had nothing to do with Indian Muslims.
There was a meltdown among the ‘Liberal’ crowd on social media after the Bill was tabled and eventually passed in the Lok Sabha. Such opposition to the Bill has been rejected by both Houses of the Parliament and President Kovind will soon sign the historic Bill into law.
A minor girl, a victim of gang rape in Ghazipur area of Fatehpur district, has filed a complaint with the police claiming that the family members of the accused have threatened her with “Unnao-like” fate if she did not withdraw her complaint against the accused.
According to the police sources, about 25 days ago, a 16-year-old Dalit teenager from a village under Ghazipur police station was allegedly abducted and raped by four youth belonging to the same village. After registering a complaint with the charges of gang-rape, the police arrested the main accused Pradeep and sent him to jail, while the remaining three accused are still absconding. The police have intensified their search operations to locate the remaining three accused.
On Tuesday, the gang-rape victim, along with her entire family, reached the office of the Additional Superintendent of Police and lodged a complaint against the family of the accused for threatening to kill her like the Unnao gang-rape victim if she did not withdraw her complaint.
Jafarganj Circle Officer Shripal Yadav said that the probe is underway to determine if the victim was threatened. If the facts mentioned in the complaint are found out to be true, a fresh case of criminal intimidation will be registered against the accused, he said.
The father of the victim has alleged that the family members of the accused, who hail from the same village, are pressurising him into accepting money for settling the case. “The families of the accused are intimidating my daughter of dire fate like the Unnao gang-rape victim if she does not reconcile the matter,” he said.
On the early hours of Thursday, December 5, the 23-year-old Unnao rape survivor was set on fire by pouring kerosene on her by five men, including the duo who are accused of raping her a year ago. The incident occurred at Sindupur village under the Bihar police station area on the wee hours of Thursday and has caused tension in the area.
The rape accused and his friends dragged the woman outside of her village, took her into the fields and doused her in petrol before setting her on fire. She was raped by the five men in March while the police could manage to arrest only three of them and two others were still on the run.
Home Minister Amit Shah revealed that the Narendra Modi-led NDA government has provided citizenship to 566 Muslims since it came to power in 2014. The revelation made by Amit Shah dispels the narrative that persecuted Muslims from the three neighbouring Islamic States will not be able to acquire Indian Citizenship going forward.
#CitizenshipAmendmentBill2019 | Present laws have provision for giving citizenship to persecuted Muslims; 566 Muslims given Indian citizenship, says Home Minister Amit Shah at Rajya Sabha
Home Minister Amit Shah has always maintained that the CAB, introduced by the Modi government is by no-means anti-Muslims. The Bill only seeks to provide Citizenship to the persecuted minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan on a priority basis. The Muslims from these countries can still seek citizenship from India but they have to follow due process, failing which they will be treated as illegal immigrants.
CAB is a special one-time measure for the religious minorities who have already come to India after facing persecution in the three specified countries. The amendment does not cancel the existing naturalisation laws.
Any person from any foreign country seeking to be Indian citizen can apply for the same under the existing laws. There is no bar on Muslims from anywhere in the world to seek Indian citizenship under existing laws, CAB does not prohibit that. They can apply for Indian citizenship under section 6 of the Citizenship Act, which deals with citizenship by naturalization.
Even as the upper house of the Indian parliament discusses and deliberates the provisions of the newly proposed Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019 (CAB), the protest against the legislation have taken an ugly turn in the Northeastern state of Assam. Thousands of protestors opposing the CAB took to the streets of Assam and clashed with police. Angry protestors indulged in arson to register their opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019.
The civil administration in Tripura and Assam have requisitioned three Army columns to contain the violence accompanying the protests. Indefinite curfew has been imposed in the city of Guwahati to prevent the situation from escalating further.
Mobile Internet services have been suspended for 24 hours from 7 pm today to 7 pm December 12 in Lakhimpur, Tinsukia, Dhemaji, Dibrugarh, Charaideo, Sivasagar, Jorhat, Golaghat, Kamrup(Metro) and Kamrup districts of Assam.
Mobile Internet suspended for 24 hours from 7pm, today to 7pm, 12 December in Lakhimpur, Tinsukia, Dhemaji, Dibrugarh, Charaideo, Sivasagar, Jorhat, Golaghat, Kamrup (Metro) and Kamrup districts of Assam. #CitizenshipAmendmentBill2019pic.twitter.com/9rBAiSqEjj
The order issued by the government of Assam says that in order to prevent the misuse of social media platforms such as Whatsapp, Facebook, Twitter in the propagation of rumours and lies, the decision to suspend the Mobile Internet/Data services in select districts for 24 hours has been taken.
The District Magistrate Dibrugarh has also ordered shutting down of liquor licensed premises from 4 pm today for ‘preservation of public peace and tranquillity’.
Residents in ethnically diverse northeastern states have launched a protest against the CAB bill as it stands to grant citizenship to a large number of minorities who have migrated from Bangladesh in the past decades. Numerous trains have been cancelled as a consequence of the protests and exams scheduled till December 16 in Gauhati University and Dibrugarh University have been postponed.
A 22-year-old man was allegedly raped on early hours of Monday, by four people who used a post put up by the victim on his Instagram account to trace his location and later abduct him. According to the Mumbai Police, the youth was allegedly assaulted in a moving car for almost three hours before being dumped on the road by the accused on Sunday night.
According to a report by India Today, the Mumbai Police has registered a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 377 (unnatural sex) of the Indian Penal Code and has arrested all the four suspects. One of the suspects, who is a minor, has been sent to a child remand home.
According to police officers from the VB Nagar police station, the four accused stalked the 22-year-old victim on Instagram. On Sunday, the man, who lives in the central suburbs of Mumbai, had posted a selfie outside a restaurant in the city.
The four accused used the details of the restaurant on his post to trace the victim’s location. The four then allegedly reached the restaurant and approached the man, telling him that they followed him on Instagram and were huge “fans” of him. After he fell for the trick, the accused took him for a bike ride.
The five people, including the four accused and the victim, rode for around 20 minutes until they reached a hotel near the Mumbai airport. There the victim was forced into a car, which was driven off by the accused. They then allegedly raped the victim in the moving car for three hours before dumping him on a road.
The victim then called his parents and along with them approached the police and registered a complaint. The police managed to nab all the four suspects later that day. While the three adults were produced in a court and sent to police custody, the minor accused was sent to a child remand home.
Senior police officer Madhuri Pokle of the VB Nagar police station said further investigations are on. “All the accused are remanded to police custody. We are taking down further statements in the case and investigating the sequence. We are awaiting reports from the hospital as well,” she said.
A dubious attempt is underway in the opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Bill. Efforts are being, especially by Congress, made to either put the entire blame on Savarkar and proponents of Hindutva for the ‘two-nation theory’ that led to the partition of the country in 1947 or share the blame equally between Hindu Nationalists and Islamic fundamentalists.
Kapil Sibal said in the Rajya Sabha that the CAB will realize “Savarkar’s two-nation theory”. Sitaram Yechury called the CAB a “bill of Jinnah and Savarkar’s dreams”. Anand Sharma of the Congress went a step further and absolved the Radical Muslims of all sins and put the blame for the partition of the country at Savarkar’s feet. He said, “Two nation theory was never brought in by Jinnah…it was introduced by Hindu Mahasabha in Gujarat in 1937”.
The Two-Nation Theory was introduced by the Founder of AMU
The stand taken by the respective opposition parties reflects a gross denial of history and facts. In reality, the ‘two-nation theory’, as is understood conventionally, was first touted by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. Even Pakistani textbooks credit him for the founding of the theory. He was, of course, the founder of the Aligarh Muslim University.
Syed Ahmed said as far back as in 1876, “I am convinced now that Hindus and Muslims could never become one nation as their religion and way of life was quite distinct from each other.” Seven years later, he voiced similar sentiments. He said, “Friends, in India, there live two prominent nations which are distinguished by the names of Hindus and Mussalmans…To be a Hindu or a Muslim is a matter of internal faith which has nothing to do with mutual relationships and external conditions…Hence, leave God’s share to God and concern yourself with the share that is yours…India is the home of both of us…By living so long in India, the blood of both have [sic] changed.”
Source: ‘Tinderbox: The Past and Future of Pakistan’ by MJ Akbar
He continued, “The colour of both have become similar. The faces of both, having changed, have become similar. The Muslims have acquired hundreds of customs from the Hindus and the Hindus have also learned hundreds of things from the Mussalmans. We mixed with each other so much that we produced a new language – Urdu, which was neither our language nor theirs. Thus, if we ignore that aspect of ours which we owe to God, both of us, on the basis of being common inhabitants of India, actually constitute one nation; and the progress of this country and that of both of us is possible through mutual cooperation, sympathy and love. We shall only destroy ourselves by mutual disunity and animosity and ill will[…]”
The first segment was made in 1876 and the second in January 1883. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was born in May 1883. It appears that the opposition parties want us to believe that Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was a supernatural entity who was capable of introducing a theory years before he was even conceived in his mother’s womb or while he was still an unborn baby.
In 1888, Syed Ahmed Khan again said, “Now, suppose that the English community and the army were to leave India, taking with them all their cannons and their splendid weapons and all else, who then would be the rulers of India?… Is it possible that under these circumstances two nations—the Mohammedans and the Hindus—could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not. It is necessary that one of them should conquer the other. To hope that both could remain equal is to desire the impossible and the inconceivable. But until one nation has conquered the other and made it obedient, peace cannot reign in the land.”
Will the Congress party now argue that Veer Savarkar came up with the ‘two-nation theory’ as a five-year-old?
Muhammad Iqbal and the Two-Nation Theory
Muhammad Iqbal took forward Syed Ahmed Khan’s idea and advocated for the creation of Pakistan as well. He said, “India is a continent of human beings belonging to different languages and professing different religions…I, therefore, demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim state in the best interests of the Muslims of India and Islam.” He made the statement in his presidential address at the 25th Annual Session of the All India Muslim League on the 29th of December, 1930. He is believed to be the first politician to advocate for the two-nation theory.
In the same address, Muhammad Iqbal also said, “I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.”
Even as Iqbal exalted India, it became clear that it’s only the Muslims that he cared about. He stated, “We have a duty towards India where we are destined to live and die. We have a duty towards Asia, especially Muslim Asia. And since 70 millions of Muslims in a single country constitute a far more valuable asset to Islam than all the countries of Muslim Asia put together, we must look at the Indian problem not only from the Muslim point of view but also from the standpoint of the Indian Muslim as such.”
It is a grave insult to India’s honour that the opposition parties only remember Iqbal for his ‘Saarey Jahaan Se Achcha’ but work hard to whitewash his contribution towards the partition of India on a religious basis and the consequent civil war and genocide. Jinnah, of course, took the ideas to their natural conclusion.
Islam and Hinduism: Always Two Nations?
A section of Pakistani historians often traces the origins of the ‘two-nation theory’ to medieval history. From Muhammad Bin Qasim to Mahmud Ghaznavi, there are numerous Islamic invaders which certain Pakistanis consider as the progenitors of the theory that led to the creation of Pakistan. Other Islamic scholars such as Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi and Shah Wali Ullah who lived during the Mughal era are also credited as the founders of the theory. The textbooks, however, continue to maintain that the theory was first propounded by Syed Ahmad Khan, the founder of AMU.
However, the idea that Islam and Hinduism constitute two different nations has also been asserted by numerous other philosophers and intellectuals of yore. Karl Marx, the Godfather of Communism and an intellectual the Congress party undoubtedly loves, said as far back as in 1854, “The Koran and the Mussulman legislation emanating from it reduce the geography and ethnography of the various people to the simple and convenient distinction of two nations and of two countries; those of the Faithful and of the Infidels. The Infidel is “harby,” i.e. the enemy. Islamism proscribes the nation of the Infidels, constituting a state of permanent hostility between the Mussulman and the unbeliever.”
What Karl Marx said
Thus, in many ways, the source of the ‘two-nation theory’ lies in the religious scriptures of Islam itself. Over time, it has been observed by non-Muslims and preached by Muslims such as Syed Ahmad Khan at different points in history. To take Karl Marx’s notions of Islam to its logical conclusion, the ‘two-nation theory’ is not only a feature of Islam but also Christianity and Judaism.
We see this playing out perfectly in Pakistan. While Ahmaddiyas and Balochs and Shias got the Islamic State they so craved, they are now being persecuted for their identity by the Sunni population of Pakistan. It’s an inevitable consequence of the nature of Islam and Monotheism in general. There will always be another nation to persecute. The Muslims in Pakistan carved a separate state for themselves in 1947, therefore, now they are oppressing other Muslims along with non-Muslims.
The creation of Bangladesh in 1971 was the most obvious evidence of the fact that the ‘two-nation theory’ is integral to Islam. On certain occasions, the two nations are Hindus and Muslims. And on others, the two nations are Bengali-speaking Muslims and Urdu-speaking Muslims.
Demonizing Hindus: A characteristic feature of the Congress party
One would have thought that the Congress party had fallen as low as it possibly could when it tried to bring into existence the mythical ‘Hindu Terror’ by using the entire might of the state machinery. However, it appears there’s always a new low that the Congress can sink to. Even the partition of India in 1947 is now sought to be blamed on Hindus. Syed Ahmed Khan came up with the ‘two-nation theory’, Muhammad Iqbal carried it forward and Jinnah ensured the creation of Pakistan.
In all of this, the Congress party sing odes to Syed Ahmad Khan, cannot look beyond ‘Saarey Jahaan Se Achcha’ when it comes to Iqbal, its leaders praise Jinnah and then blame Savarkar for the partition of the country. It is rather disgusting to even claim that Hindu Nationalists are responsible for the partition of the country when it was the ‘Secular’ heroes of the liberal establishment that ruled the roost at the time.
Furthermore, it is also argued that the Congress party never agreed to the ‘two-nation theory’. It is also claimed that the Congress party accepted the partition but never accepted the ‘two-nation theory. Such arguments are nothing more than clutching at straws. Acceptance of the creation of Pakistan is an agreement with the ‘two-nation theory’ and every other argument is nonsense. The creation of Pakistan was based on the ‘two-nation theory’, how could anyone then accept Pakistan’s creation but not the argument on which it was based?
Of course, the Congress party and their followers would argue that such a contradiction is possible. But the fact remains that the Congress party did officially recognize the ‘two-nation theory’ the moment it conceded to the creation of Pakistan. Without the ‘two-nation theory’, there was no valid argument for the creation of an Islamic State at that point of time. Therefore, that the Congress party still chooses to blame Hindu Nationalists for the partition only goes on to demonstrate the ingrained Hinduphobia that has gripped the party and perfectly explains its capitulation in the General Elections.
