Japan is not a very large country. With a population of approximately 124 million people, in terms of population, it is less than half the size of Uttar Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh, India, has a population of approximately 257 million. In 2011, the Muslim population of Uttar Pradesh was roughly upwards of 38 million. 13 years on, in 2024, it could well be way above 50 million. In contrast, the Muslim population of Japan is estimated to be a little north of 2,30,000. In 2001, there were just 24 mosques in Japan. In 2019, it was estimated to be 110. Since the asinine article published in Japan speaks of Delhi, for a little context, there were 2.5 million Muslims in Delhi in 2011 (the numbers have increased exponentially since then).
It is perhaps for this reason that The Japan Times truly has no idea how a substantial Muslim population behaves. It may find out in the next couple of decades as their population growth halts and the Muslim population increases, but right now, they are thoroughly clueless. With the Muslim population of an average Jumma congregation in Uttar Pradesh, Japan has displayed remarkable confidence in interpreting the behavior of Delhi’s Muslim population 4 years after the Delhi anti-Hindu riots.
In what can be arguably called the dumbest article to have ever been published, The Japan Times, in their article headlined, “In Modi’s Delhi, Muslims Self-Segregate for Security”, essentially said that after the Delhi Riots, which were targeted against Hindus, the Muslims have been feeling so unsafe that they are migrating to Muslim-only areas to feel safer.
They supposedly spoke to some Muslim residents from Shiv Vihar – an area that saw widespread violence during the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots. In the article, The Japan Times argues that the Muslims of Shiv Vihar are migrating to Loni – which has a large Muslim population – so they can feel safe from the terrible Hindus.
To put things in perspective, Shiv Vihar is an area that saw massive violence against Hindus. It was in Shiv Vihar that a Muslim-owned school was used as a launch pad for violence against Hindus – including a neighboring Hindu-owned school and unsuspecting Hindus from the area. The Muslim school had, in fact, sent home Muslim children early that day – as if they knew violence was going to erupt – and why wouldn’t they – they had petrol bombs and catapults installed on their roof.
The crux of the matter is this – A strong Muslim mob bombed, pelted stones, and shot at the Hindus from the Rajdhani school and over 300 Muslims barged into DRP school (Hindu-owned) and gutted it.
The violence during the Delhi anti-Hindu riots had started from Chand Bagh – where Tahir Hussain and thousands of his men targeted “Kafirs” (his own words) and Ankit Sharma was stabbed multiple times by the Jihadists – stabbed till his intestines lay out of his body.
The Japan Times, however, thinks that it is the Muslims who feel unsafe in Delhi and are moving to areas with predominantly Muslim populations to feel safe.
The article also mentions that many Muslims from other parts of Delhi are congregating in Jamia Nagar because they feel unsafe among Hindus – so much so – that Jamia Nagar is running out of space. Jamia Nagar has for decades been a Muslim-majority area – with a population of Muslims of over 98%. In fact, one could argue that the number of Muslims in Jamia Nagar exceeds the number of Muslims in Japan in its entirety.
Perhaps that is why the Japan Times does not have a clue that ghettoization is not a phenomenon that started after PM Modi came to power because Muslims felt “unsafe” among the very Hindus that some of them had previously targeted, but it is a phenomenon seen the world over in every country with a substantial Muslim population. It could be argued that Muslims feel safer living in areas where the population is skewed in their favour – however, that is perhaps the case with every ethnic group. People, humans, generally feel far more comfortable living with those who share their values, culture and lifestyle – regardless of religion or creed.
However, the problem of Muslims huddling together in overcrowded areas is not merely about human behavior – especially in India. It is pertinent to remind The Japan Times that an overwhelming majority of Muslims in India were in favor of the partition of India based on religious lines – actually – based on the tenets of Islam specifically. The two-nation theory that Muslims believed in professed that Islam was a nation unto itself and therefore, Muslims deserve their own land since they cannot co-exist with Hindus.
Syed Ahmad Khan said 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.”
Twelve years later, he stated, “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.”
Truth be told, the idea that Islam encapsulates a separate nation is even more ancient than that. Karl Marx, the Father of Communism, stated 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.”
It is, therefore, an established fact that embedded in Islam itself is the concept of Ummah – which says that Islam is a separate nation unto itself, incapable of co-existing with non-Muslims – especially Hindus.
For Japan Times to insinuate that Muslim ghettos are a phenomenon that has come to exist only after PM Modi was elected to power because Muslims felt unsafe among Hindus is one that is so outlandish that the only explanation one can think of is that Japan has no idea how a substantial Muslim population behaves in a non-Muslim nation.
Perhaps we could forgive Japan Times for their naivete, but as it has been seen time and again, such bile against the Hindu population of India is not a product of ignorance, but certified malice.
The Japan Times carefully ignores how Hindus have repeatedly come under attack by the Islamists residing in these very ghettos. When they say the Muslims are trying to find ‘strength in numbers’, they also fail to realize that in many cases, in most cases, actually, the ‘strength’ they seek is not for defense but offense. From Delhi anti-Hindu riots to several Hindu religious processions coming under attack and Hindus being lynched – it is the Hindus who need to seek ‘strength in numbers’ from the Islamist lynch mobs – not the Muslims.
Perhaps in a few decades, when Japan sees a further rise in its Muslim population – most of it migrants from various other nations – they would know exactly why ghettoization is not a phenomenon that is a result of Muslim victimhood, but one which is a historic product of the famed Muslim Ummah which deems non-Muslims sub-human.
