Shocking visuals have emerged of the very build-up and subsequent handling of the situation at the Shahi mosque, where a survey team was sent in response to the claim that it was built on a temple site.
I recall that around the time of the Babri Masjid demolition, Khushwant Singh had asked BJP’s K.R. Malkani that how many more masjids would the Sangh target and demolish! Khushwant was far-sighted and was certain that the Babri Masjid destruction was the start of the Sangh’s agenda to carry forward destruction of many more structures, human and otherwise.
And when I interviewed Prof Irfan Habib, he warned: “Such a post-factor rationalization of what was done on 6 December 1992, would place in jeopardy the fate of numerous historical monuments all over the country, an increasing number of which are being targeted for destruction by the communal right-wing forces.”
This Aligarh-based internationally known historian – the former chairman of Indian Council of Historical Research and also the former Professor of History at the Centre for Advanced Study in History at AMU; author of books on the Mughal rule (prominent amongst them, Agrarian System of Mughal India, An Atlas of Mughal Empire, Prehistory) – was clear and forthright in his criticism of the right wing forces and the destruction of the Babri Masjid that took place.
“There are no ‘left’ or ‘right’ wing historians! All this is a creation of the BJP. If anyone speaks with a scientific outlook he’s called ‘leftist’ by them.” He had gone on to say, “There wasn’t a Hindu or Muslim reaction to the destruction of the Babri Masjid. The very destruction was an insult to the country and its citizens; an assault on the Indian secular consciousness. As an Indian, I felt insulted …it was a blow to the image of my country.”
Prof Habib minced no words in stating that destruction could be repeated. And with that, the chances of other mosques getting targeted cannot be ruled out. During the course of the interview I had asked him to comment on the Babri Masjid, whether it was built on a temple site or did it exist for centuries on that very site? Did the ASI conduct the excavation independently? Also, why those claims by the right-wing parties that they do possess evidence that the Ram Janambhoomi temple had been originally there?
“I can’t say much about the competence of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct rigorous, scientific and impartial excavations. One must remember that the archaeological finds are subject to a wide range of interpretations – if it is trying to find out whether the Babri Masjid was immediately built upon a temple, then any stratum of lime-mortar bound rubble or medieval baked bricks or glazed pottery below the mosque should be enough to prove that such was not the case. If the search is on anything that could possibly belong to a non-Muslim shrine of any sort of any earlier time, then almost anything could be defined as a temple relic: a pre-13 century carved stone or image or even a Kushana period brick, though such might easily have come from a domestic house. In that case the dispute could be unending; or could simply give the VHP the benefit of doubt and declare that ASI has spoken and decided in its favour.”
Today, in the winter of 2024, I’m writing this column in the backdrop of the communal violence that hit Sambhal in Uttar Pradesh. The context is the centuries old Shahi mosque of this town, which has suddenly come into focus with the right-wing alleging it was built on a temple site and a survey team was sent to the mosque. Disturbing and shocking shots have emerged of the very build-ups and of the very handling of the situation, resulting in deaths and destruction. This has left the minority community just too stunned and in a state of shock and dismay.
Opposition parties in Uttar Pradesh blamed the BJP for the violence in Sambhal, alleging the survey team was sent to the mosque by the party to nurture its “politics of hatred”. Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav lashed out at the BJP, saying its government and the administration orchestrated the violence “to divert attention from electoral malpractice…A survey team was deliberately sent in the morning to disrupt discussions about the election. The intention was to create chaos so that no debate on election issues could happen,”
UP Congress chief Ajay Rai said the incidents of violence were increasing day by day in the state under the Yogi Adityanath government.”When the Chief Minister of the state himself gives statements like ‘batenge toh katenge,’ then how can there be an atmosphere of peace in the state? This is a completely planned incident.”
The fact is that today, communal unleashes and blatant targeted attacks have crossed all limits. Instead of trying to find a way out from this deadly mess, the political rulers of the day have been coming up with hate-dripping speeches!
The hate speeches of the political rulers of the day are only accelerating. In fact, a couple of months ago, mid-August 2024, the Human Rights Watch had brought out a detailed report focusing on this. To quote, “Human Rights Watch analysed all 173 campaign speeches by PM Modi after the election code of conduct took effect on March 16. The code forbids appealing to “communal feelings for securing votes.” In at least 110 speeches, Modi made Islamophobic remarks apparently intended to undermine the political opposition, which he said only promoted Muslim rights, and to foster fear among the majority Hindu community through disinformation…”
The report gives not just details to those provocative hate speeches but also mentions the particular place and the date when those speeches were made. It also highlights this factor: “Modi regularly raised fears among Hindus through false claims that their faith and their places of worship, their wealth, their land, and the safety of girls and women in their community would be under threat from Muslims if the opposition parties came to power.”
As I mentioned, this report was released mid-August, and since then the hate speeches of the political rulers have only accelerated. Several of those speeches were dripping with communal taunts and provocations and slants. Yet no forum or commission is halting them, leaving one completely and thoroughly disillusioned with the system; on how it works and functions!
