From: rajesh@Tandem.com (Rajesh Srivastava)
Subject: Re: WSJ Article by Imran Anwar
Organization: Tandem Computers
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 23:10:40 GMT



>At the time of this writting more than 1200 people have already died in the
>riots triggered by Hindu militants' destruction of the mosque at Ayodhya; 
>the vast majority of the victims were muslims. Western journalists have 
>confirmed that law-enforcement organizations also took the opportunity to
>side with the Hindu majority, proving once again that India's claims of a
>secular country are farcical.

	Yes! I could not agree more on the non secular nature of Indian 
	constitution and that is why there are the following existing in 
	India today:

	1. Muslim laws fabricated only for the benefit of Muslims in SECULAR 
	   India.
	2. Allowing Muslims to run religious schools ( Madrasa ) while Hindus 
	   are not allowed to do so in SECULAR India.
 
	This probably is the basic issue of today's conflict.

>The Muslims were willing to take a separate homeland even though it meant a
>new country created in two separate entites, East and West Pakistan, 
>separated by the entire mass of the remaining India.  They were willing to pay
>an economic cost by migrating because they knew that in a United India
>there would be a lose-lose situation.  Economic and educational opportunities
>would be limited, and religious persecution would be widespread.

	For the information of FOREIGNERS, Economic and Educational opportunities 
	in India are not limited to a group. It is open to any one who is competent.
	For your information, no University has a quota based on religion ( I am
	not sure about Aligarh Muslim University - will someone clarify that)

>This is borne out by the fact that even though Muslim are 12% of the Indian
>population, their share in everything from top government job to post-
>graduate degree opportunity is smaller.

	You cannot force people to become graduates. The laws and opportunities 
	are same for every one. One should be willing to utilize the opportunity.

>Even to India's forefather, the obvious threats to unity of an Indian nation
>were relegious differences.   They knew that even with the mass exodus of
>Muslims to Pakistan, there would still be the likelihood of religious 
>trouble later.  It was with this in mind that the Indian leaders raised
>the flag of secularism.  They must have hoped that secular dream would keep 
>the Indian unit intact, but both their fears and the hypocrisy of indian
>secularist statements are exposed today.

	Yes! it is hypocrate and we should change it - No special laws for any
     	community.

>Your writers credit Indian Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao "with his free-
>market reform program" as some kind of visionary who brought his vision to
>Indian leadership.  The sad truth is that from the time of independence
>until recently, India aggressively follwed the Soviet agenda, including
>adherence to the socialist economic model.  As a result of running of
>options, the self-destruction of the socialist model, and neighbouring
>Pakistan's aggressive privatization and economic liberalization program, 
>India woke up too.  Mr. Rao may have ideas of his own, but in this case he
>has simply been reactive, not proactive.  He did what any other person
>in this situation would have to do, to prevent India from going bankrupt.

	It is debatable who has followed whom. The question is not who does
	it first. The question is who does is successfully. Let's assume even
	if Pakistan was first to implement the Free Market policy How successful
	it has been on Economic front?
	
	You run a successful IT business in Pakistan and US, you should know
	this better. Has it come out of your grudge for Successful Indian IT
	companies?
 
>A reuters news report said Prime Minister Rao called the demolition of the
>Mosque preplanned and his Congress Party blamed the BJP, the main 
>opposition in Parliament, for trying to capture power by arousing
>religious frenzy among India's majority Hindus.  Yet, Mr. Rao did not do
>what any other leader in his position would have, and should have done.  He
>did not take any measures to safeguard the mosque in Ayodhya, and the lives
>of Muslims.  He allowed the genocide to take place.

	Where were your comments when Temples were first razed in Afganistan by 
	warring Muslims. Are you secular Mr. Anwar?

>The Muslim minority does not represent an economic threat to the hindu 
>majority, nor does the destruction of mosques and the killing of Muslims
>open up new avenues of economic prosperity for Hindus. Instead, it just
>sends out a signal that ethnic cleansing has commenced, and now no mosques
>or Muslims are safe.

	A very popular paragraph used frequently when describing, Isreal, Yugoslavia,
	Germany and now India. Have you gone into the depths to do the root
	cause analysis.

>This also points out the ugly truth about religious domination in India.
>Upper caste Hindus, the Brahmins, have dominated throught history and 
>continue to dominate the top position of power. They persecute and exploit
>of people of the lower castes of their own religion, so the Muslim's -
>who have a completely separate, monothesitic religion and who had been
>India's rulers for hundreds of years - get even worse treatment.

	Indian caste system has got nothing to do with Muslims. 

>As the Indian prime minister said, the mosque's desctruction was preplanned.
>It was not the act of a mob of economically deprived Hindus going out of
>control against a well-off Muslim minority.  Instead, the whole effort
>was orchestrated by rich Hindus to achieve their goal of a Hindu empire
>to make up "Mother India".  When you see that one of the main characters
>in this case is V.H.Dalmia, whose family owns one of the well-known
>industrial groups in India, you can understand how "economic" problems
>are just an excuse.

	Nobody could be less human than you Mr. Anwar who easily ignored
	of millions of Muslim Rickshaw pullers, Pan Wallas, Taxi Drivers,
	labourers etc. You cannot describe that as a well off minority 
	except those who obtain jobs in Middle East countries because they
	are Muslims.

	I wonder what will happen if a cheaper substitute for OIL is discovered.
	Probably, it will change the face of International politics.

	As a foreigner, please get well informed and then write articles like
	this. We Indians are awake now and are participating more positively 
        than ever in the construction of India.