mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
With Modi Rising, BJP Fans The Flames in Uttar Pradesh

The district of Muzaffarnagar, 80 miles north of Delhi, is still reeling from riots that killed 40 people and gravely injured many more this weekend. Thousands of police officers patrol the streets and curfew is strict.

The details of the chaos are still emerging. The authorities claim that after two Hindu youths were killed two weeks ago, a provocative video purporting to show them being lynched went viral. The video turned out to be fake, but it didn’t matter. 5,000 farmers gathered on Saturday to demand that something be done about the killings, and several local politicians gave speeches to the crowd, including 4 members of the BJP, the most powerful opposition party in the national parliament.

These politicians are now under investigation by the police for inciting anti-Muslim hatred and urging the farmers to violence. The politicians deny those accusations and top BJP leaders instead put the blame on the Uttar Pradesh chief minister, an ally of the Congress party. The chief minister, they say, allowed communal tension to build up in the district and did nothing to protect the people.

Communal violence on this scale is rare in India, though smaller incidents happen all the time. “Among India’s states,” the New York Times reports, “Uttar Pradesh has had the highest number of deaths from religious violence in the past three years — 73 killed in 323 outbreaks, according to government statistics. Two thousand such episodes were recorded throughout the country during that period.” Compared to Pakistan, where religious violence seems to be on display every week, India looks a thousand times more peaceful—and in fact it is.

Nevertheless, the fact that BJP officials are allegedly involved in this ugliness makes this story of particular importance to American readers. This week the BJP is expected to unveil Narendra Modi as its candidate for prime minister for next year’s elections. The US government still refuses to allow Modi to visit because of his role in the 2002 anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat in which hundreds were killed. But with the economy in shambles and the Congress-led government mired in corruption scandals, the BJP is riding a wave of momentum and has a chance to make big gains in parliament. The US should start planning for the uncomfortable possibility of a Prime Minister Modi and an Indian parliament led by a strong BJP.

Features Icon
show comments
  • wigwag

    Remind me again why the United States is willing to talk to a holocaust denier like Abbas, a Jew hater like Erdogan and a thug like Putin (who leveled Chechnya in a manner eerily remimiscent of Assad’s behavior in Syria) but won’t even let Modi into our country.

    • Corlyss

      If Modi wins, the US will do the logical legal fictional equivalent of our refusal to call the Egyptian coup a coup. We would be more stupid than I give even this administration credit for being if we made a big stand against India, the largest democracy on the planet, over some idiotic human rights thing.

  • Dippakay

    American interests lie in understanding India that is Bharat. Once the current phase of Macaulite India gets dissolved, India will become Bharat that it is always has been.

    Bharatiya leaders do not need lessons on governance and human rights from United States. The history is of USA is nothing but complete annihilation of Native American civilization and flora fauna, followed by the reality of slavery.

    Islamists of today’s world dream of hurting Indian interests for long. But like their ancestors, they too will be defeated.

    Thanks, but NO thanks for your pontification.

    • Tom

      That’s probably not going to end well for you.
      And by that, I mean there’s a decent chance that Pakistan will fire its nukes if it sees its coreligionists being slaughtered.

      • Rudradev Brf

        Tom, what “coreligionists” would those be? As even Mead, in the full glare of his anti-Hindu bias, admits: India is a thousand times more peaceful (for Muslims) than Pakistan. More Muslims sre killed by Muslims in Pakistan’s relentless orgies of Salafi-on-Barelvi, Sunni-on-Shia, Everyone-on-Ahmediyya violence in an average week than Muslims get killed by anyone else in India in years.

        But yes, I can only hope Pakistan (for all its bluster) would be stupid enough to do that. India, you see, will survive such an exchange. In the medium term that would end rather well for us.

        • Tom

          Oh, you’ll survive. You’ll also be so far behind China that you won’t catch up within the next three centuries.
          And, if India does become “Bharat,” that seems to imply that the Muslims will be gone.

          • avery12

            Oh you mean they will be offered the choice they have forced on so many others, convert or die?

          • Tom

            Given what happened during the partition, I’m not sure that they’ll be given the choice.

          • cubanbob

            As if the Pakistanis are any better or the Arabs for that matter.

          • Tom

            Do they deserve wholesale slaughter?

          • Dippakay

            Did Iraqi armed forces and Taliban deserve wholesale slaughter during 2001-2011 for the decisions of Saddam Hussain and Mullah Omar?

            The answer is yes and no. It depends on how many take up arms against Bharatiya Interests. They will be treated as “Enemy Combatants”.

            Luckily USA being the world leader has shown the way for Bharat in the guise of “John Phillip Walker Lindh”

          • Dippakay

            By USA being USA and invading Afghanistan and Iraq, did its Muslims disappear from USA?

            The Bharatiya Muslims made a choice against Pakistan in 1947 itself and have been moving away from Pakistan everyday since then.

            It is Pakistan that is not able to move away from Bharat, even after it made a conscious decision for being so. That shows the weakness of Pakistan.

            If USA, continues to carry the same level of intelligence as Pakistan, then it too will see the same future as Pakistan.

            USA and Soviet Union had enough nukes to wipe each other out of earth many thousand times.

            But now, there is no Soviet Union on the map without a single nuke fired at USA or on its own territory.

            Thus Pakistan too will disappear from the face of earth one day.

            Now it is in American Interests to figure out who it wants to live with. A Bharat or a Pakistan.

            Looks like you are advising USA in the wrong direction. That is your call. But do not hide your thoughts by imposing your world view on Bharat.


          • Tom

            There was never a desire on the part of the United States to take and hold any of those places as part of the United States.
            Never in those cases did we intend to wage a people’s war.
            You appear to be proposing both of those things, for Pakistan will not consent to join you of its own accord.

          • Dippakay

            I think you are mixing two things.

            First one is Pakistan, which by definition is NOT Bharat.

            The other one is Indian Muslims, which is already Bharat.

            In your article you tried to mix these two things as if Bharat acting on its interests vis.a.vis Indian Muslims is a war with Pakistan; and Pakistan is somehow Indian Muslims with Nukes.

            Both of them are incorrect.

            To make you understand it better, this is like equating Indian Americans with India and claiming that any action w.r.t Indian Americans would mean a nuclear war with India and somehow America will become weaker than Russia. This is called fear mongering and living in a la-la land.

            That is how American Interests lie with Bharat than Pakistan.

          • Tom

            You’re the one who proposed that Pakistan was going to go away. Not me.

  • VictorBR

    It is incredible to see the amount of disinformation being peddled. Most of the initial violence was inflicted by a community (which opposes BJP) who used guns to attack people traveling to a gathering (panchayat). The panchayat itself was called because the local government was not doing anything to catch the culprits. The Indian media was silent about the killings unless a journalist affiliated with CNN was also shot dead in the mindless violence. Incidentally the people who indulge in violence are not the types who know what Facebook is. The violence is being sponsored by the ruling Samajwadi Party which wants to lock in its Muslim vote-bank since the lack of governance under the role is alienating the average guy.

    • Rudradev Brf

      Not to mention Mead’s allusion to “[Modi’s] role in the 2002 anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat in which hundreds were killed.” The Supreme Court of India held a Special Investigative Tribunal which found that there was no basis to even charge Modi with any involvement, yet Mead apparently considers him guilty!

      By the way, Mr. Mead, what is an “anti-Muslim riot?” Do the 2002 Gujarat riots, in which nearly a third of the dead were Hindu, fit that description? Not to mention the fact that more Hindu rioters fell to bullets fired by Mr. Modi’s police in that incident, than were killed by law enforcement in any other riot in India’s history. The sheer audacity of inconvenient facts, to fly in the face of your preconceived notions!

  • Corlyss
© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service