| Home | About | Introduction | Achives | Ideas & Comments | Documents | Today's Events | Contact Us |
 |
 |
||||
| Syed Shahabuddin is a well known in the political and academic circles as well as in the mass media and does not need an introduction. In his many incarnations he has been a university teacher, a diplomat, who served as an ambassador and a government official who was at the time of his seeking pre-mature retirement, the Joint Secretary in charge of South East Asia, the Indian Ocean and the Pacific in the Ministry of External Affairs. He was a MP for three terms between 1979 and 1996 and made a mark as a Parliamentarian. He has edited Muslim India, the monthly journal of research, documentation and reference from 1983 to 2002 and again from July 2006. He has been a regular contributor on current affairs in the media and a familiar participant in seminars and TV discussions. He has been a member of many learned bodies and associated with several Muslim institutions and organizations. More... |
||||
|
||||
|
| Who is Responsible for Muslim Backwardness? State / Government, Muslim Leadership or Muslim Masses? The political, educational, economic and social backwardness of the Muslim Indians have been all too visible and have now been well documented by the Sachar Report. That a community with a glorious past should come down to the level of SC/ST is indeed not only a tragedy but a disgrace for the community as well as for the nation. What is frustrating is to find that the country has steadily gone forward and the Muslim Indians have fallen increasingly behind the rest of the nation. Consequently, during the last 60 years, they have been making a disproportionately poor contribution to the progress and development of the country to the creation of knowledge and wealth or playing a role in its administration and management. In a developing country, the state plans, and provides the basic resources for, development. In a democratic policy, with commitment to secularism and social justice, state resources have to be so spent that development does not widen disparities or bypass any section of the people and every social group, whatever its identity, is assured of its participation in the process and of its legitimate share in the services and facilities provided by the state. In a situation where many groups & sub-groups are jostling for relatively sparse resources and services, the politically powerful, the economically dominant and the traditionally well-connected manage to get more than their due, because both production and distribution as well as politics and bureaucracy which serve as mediators, are controlled by them. It is they who wield power, make policies, write plans, devise schemes and programmes and implement them. Often these policies and programmes are tilted in favour of the powerful and provide loopholes through which the favoured target groups, which are pre-selected, are benefited at the cost of others. The result is that those at the margin of the system or those who are not organised enough to make their presence felt directly or through political parties and formations receive much less than their due. Often they are left by the wayside, picking up crumbs thrown by the caravans of progress, which pass them by. Unfortunately the Indian society has inherited social cleavages, marked by jealousy, bias and prejudice, sometimes amounting to intolerance, disdain and hatred. This explains the patent injustice in the distribution system that favours some and short-changes others. The state, the parties, the governments and the administration exist to ensure that justice is done to all groups. That is why laws are made, rules and regulations are crafted and guidelines are issued, to keep realising the mandates of the Preamble and Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution. But the promise of equality, justice and fraternity remains a distant dream. Such is the lot of all marginalized groups, particularly a religious minority which is regarded as a historic adversary and responsible for the Partition and nursing extra territorial loyalties & an ambition to restore Muslim rule. Equality and justice, 60 years later are but distant dreams. This is a national waste of energy & talent, a tragedy which saps our dynamism. In per capital assets and per capital income, the economists tell us, 10% of the people in the lowest slab own and receive practically nothing and 10% at the top, everything imaginable. There is a progressive variation as one goes up the vertical ladder the weaker sections like the Most Backward Classes, the SC/ST and the Muslims become rarer. This is a heritage of our feudal past, the colonial rule and the capitalist mode of development. The gap between the top and the bottom increases from year to year, from plan to plan and the proportion of the weaker sections in the lower slabs goes on adding. The state no doubt lays aside some resources for social services; minimum social security, some economic subsidy, in the name of poverty alleviation & employment generation, believing in the ‘trickle-down effect’. The masses continue to lead their dreary lives, in any case too weak to protest, to raise their voice so as to penetrate the glass-and-concrete walls that separate them from the elite and the powerful who believe that the people just want to be left alone to live and die in peace. But, thanks to democracy, the people are becoming more and more conscious of the social and economic disparities, and are raising their voice against deceit and betrayal. This is the general picture but if one looks closely at our heterogeneous and segmented and divided society one finds the situation much more complicated. India is multi-dimensional and most groups are stagnant while fears are moving up. The demographic distribution in any development slab, does not match the social demography of the nation. In all slabs, some are better represented some under- represented and some not represented at all. The slab demography can never be arithmetical or exact replica of national demography but no group should become rare in the higher slabs of education or employment or production and capital assets or capital. No social group, which is backward, can or should demand exclusive attention or even disproportionate investment in its uplift. But every backward group has a right to basic facilities, which make the difference between dignity and degradation. Hence, national laws, policies and programmes which reduce inter-group disparity, which remove obstacles from the path of development for those who are lagging and limping behind, which provide special measures for them to seek due representation in every slab, in every dimension of national existence. This prevalent inter-group miss-match increasingly rankles in the political consciousness of the marginalized groups. They begin to ask why the higher slabs should be dominated by particular groups defined by religion or denomination or caste. Disparities generate social strife. They begin to ask why the social and educational systems, why the political and economic machines are managed for the advancement of the few. This must change and that is why the quest for social justice in gaining momentum. And the Muslims are beginning to engage in the battle, rather than remain aloof, lament their fate or curse the ‘other’. Muslims are equal voters and equal citizens of India though they have little say in running the system. They are told that they are unreliable and unfit or do not have ‘merit’ to enter the corridor of power or employment market or even the portals of universities. But these are only excuses. One has to examine what the State has done for the Muslims, why the course of development has been deliberately directed away from them. The State alone has the necessary resources and power. So, the responsibility for their backwardness lies squarely on it and those who manage the political parties, man governments and the bureaucracy. Every political party has a well-specified social constituency whose interest it serves and the main interest of every social group is to maintain or maximise its monopoly of power and wealth and management, through over representation in decision-making positions. Others only serve as voters at the time of election. The electoral system ensures that if a party, irrespective of the size of its core social constituency, receives the support of 30-40% of the voters forms the government. Those who vote in its favour are rewarded to some extent but others are simply taken off the political radar until the next elections. Almost all governments in India since independence, state or central, with a few exceptions, represent a minority of the people but serve the upper slabs. In the aftermath of the Sachar Report, it is being dinned into Muslim ears by those close to the system and anxious to earn the esteem of the government that the State is not at fault, neither for tardiness nor for neglect in times of crisis nor for inattention or inaction, and that the Muslim community is itself responsible for its backwardness. They do not even hint at a just role for the state in the future. They emphasise that the community itself has to do this or that for its survival and progress. No doubt every group has to make the best use of its own resources as well as take advantages of any government schemes for general benefit. No group shall gain if it sleeps while others move. Even under schemes of universalisation like the establishment of elementary schools, in accordance with national norms, in all nooks and corners of the country, the local community has to see to it that the schools are well-staffed and well-equipped, the children attend and the teachers take classes. Similarly, if the Muslims living below the poverty line are eligible for housing subsidy under Indra Awas Yojana, it is for eligible members, backed by local Muslim leadership to avail of it. Any number of examples can be cited that at the grass root level, at the operational level, at the level at which distribution of benefits under visible welfare scheme that targets individuals & families, the marginalized groups have to come forward and press their claim through their spokesmen. This is where the role of Muslim leadership comes and is found to be wanting. This is not to be confused with national leadership. A community as widespread as the Muslims, to be found at every level of governance has to throw up committed & selfless social workers at every level for the triple task of communication, facilitation and monitoring. At a slightly higher level if there are any flaws in the schemes to the disadvantage of the community or any injustice is perceived in their implementation, it is for Muslim elected representatives and legislators to draw the attention of the authorities, even to propose formulation of new schemes. But this is a role which should be taken up by all the parties which swear in the name of secularism and seek its votes, while every government committed to social justice should continuously introduce adjustments and accommodations to ensure due and adequate benefit for all deprived groups. If the State does not respond positively to the felt needs of any group or fails to look into their grievances and complaints, the Community leadership cannot remain a silent spectator. It has to articulate and be active, without thinking of success or failure or personal gain or loss. Unfortunately the so-called Muslim leadership since independence has largely consisted of self centred, party loyalists. Muslim politicians in various parties have been suffering from lack of confidence, conscious of their lack of power or influence. To keep the loyalty of the community, they make occasional speeches, statements and contacts but they have never tried to organise as an autonomous pressure group. It seeks political shelters and once inside it forgets its constituency & shuns unity. If the political parties do not encourage their faithful to represent the true state of affairs, their participation is reduced to a formality. Indeed eventually the system has landed the minorities in total dependence on the majority or the sweet will of the political bosses and administrative machinery. The so-called Muslim leaders have well learnt the art of survival and they can always know that with so many in the queue, they can always be replaced. Until 1971 the Muslim masses were still stooping under the burden of the past. They nursed a guilt complex for having supported the making of Pakistan. In 1971 whatever expectation they nursed towards Pakistan vanished. After a generation they began thinking of claiming a place under the Indian sun. They began speaking of their legitimate grievances. They threw up new spokesmen who would not act as party brokers but as Muslim representative in the inner councils of their parties. Gone were the days when they took shelter under the Congress umbrella; they decided to support the regional parties, excepting in states where there was a direct contest between Congress and the BJP. They adopted ‘tactical voting’ to secure the success of a secular candidate of their choice. They have now begun to question unjust delimitation and demand adequate number of Muslim candidates from secular parties. But they must learn to monitor the performance of Muslim leaders in the legislatures. They realise that politics is at the heart of the inequity, injustice and violence they have suffered for 60 years and which have perpetuated their deprivation. They have always proved their loyalty to the State, rising above bondage to parties. They are now overcoming their frustration. A new generation is coming forward and demands its due share and is anxious to prepare itself for the new role. This is the beginning of a new dawn. Yes, the Muslim masses have been at fault to some extent because for long they tolerated political parties steeped in hypocrisy and double talk and accepted a Muslim leadership, which danced to the tune of the masters. The next generation thinking not only in terms of acquiring knowledge, education and skills but commanding the political activists. If it does not succeed, the Community shall produce another generation. But always much will depend on the sincerity with which the government and society at large make Muslim backwardness a national question because it constitutes a drag on the forward movement of the country and because no country can reach its destiny ignoring one sixth of its people. To sum up, the main responsibility for Muslim backwardness of the past 60 years as that of other marginalized groups lies on the State & unsympathetic governments, their unfair policies, wrong priorities, and unjust implementation. The responsibility also lies on political parties, which encourages a state of Dependence on their Muslim agents while they did not recognise the Muslims except as voters. The Muslim masses also share the blame for accepting such parties and tolerating such intermediaries. Now the community has realised that politics is the key to Development, Equality and Social Justice. It is the key that it lost at the dawn of independence; it is the key that it must find and hold firmly, not only to redeem itself as the second largest community in the country but also to open the door to the escalators of progress, which have so far remained closed to them. New Delhi 1 July, 2007 |
