From: ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed)
Subject: Re: India vs. Bangladesh (Re: We Need A Hindu-Muslim Dialog)
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 19:59:07 GMT


In article <1992Apr16.180921.13293@watson.ibm.com>, kundu@watson.ibm.com (Sandip Kundu) writes:
> In article <1992Apr12.044222.24146@cs.yale.edu> ahmed-shakil@CS.YALE.EDU (Shakil Waiz Ahmed) writes:
> 
>      What I object to is that you pick two "Islamic" societies and use this
>      as a basis for lumping all Islamic societies together.  You correctly
>      note above that you didn't say anything nasty about Bangladesh.  Why?
>      Malaysia and Bangladesh are both Islamic societies, and yet their
>      problems with minorities seem less numerous than those in India.
>      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> I would welcome any numeric proof of the statement. On the other hand
> I claim that Bangladesh is highly repressive of its minorities.

Clearly, "highly" is a very relative term.  In India, we witness major
riots every year in which thousands of Muslims perish.  In Kashmir,
for example, this happens almost on a daily basis and has become an
accepted state of affairs, as if it is the most natural thing in the
world.  Riots with fatalities are commonplace in India -- one needs
only open a newspaper to note that.  In comparison, Bangladesh has
witnessed very few riots in its history.  You correctly point to the
Babri Masjid example in noting that there were some riots relating to
that in Bangladesh.  But you will note that that is the only example
you could come up with for the simple reason that it *is* the only
example in recent years.  The riots were quickly supressed and there
haven't been any problems since then.

Unlike in India, where there are large Muslim communities, Hindus in
Bangladesh generally do not live in ghettos or their own communities.
Instead, they are reasonably well assimilated in society, and they
have lived in this manner in *peace*.

The question being addressed had to do with tensions between religious
groups, not quite the same as discrimination.  I did not claim that
there is institutionalized discrimination against Muslims in India.
My point was that many of the usual reasons cited for the tensions in
India apply equally well to other communities where the tensions are
not as strong.  I used Bangladesh and Malaysia as examples, and if you
look at the reports on riots and day-to-day violence, I think the
examples were justified.

>    There are more than 50,000 refugees from CHT, camping in southern 
> Tripura, including two former MPs of Bangladesh Parliament, Upendra Lal Chakma
> and Bhagya Charan Chakma. 

This is a figure claimed by the Indian government.  The Bangladesh
government claims different figures.  Whom are we to believe?  Since
India is offering free training to the terrorist organization Shanti
Bahini, it makes sense that they operate from Indian territory, which
is why they are present in India in large numbers.

>    If I were to list the minority places of worship, that were destroyed
> since 1971 in Bangladesh, one a day, it would take me more than a year 
> to do so. By then there would be several more. A list is available from 
> 
>           Bangladesh Hindu-Bouddha-Christian Oikya Parishad
>           53 W. Tetjuri Bazar, Tejgaon, Dhaka-1215, Bangladesh
> 
> on payment of, I think $5.00 (more for pictures to be included).

It is interesting to note that this organization itself is operating
from within Bangladesh.  Surely, if there was an organized repression
and destruction of places of worship, this would be the first target?
Does the allowance of distribution of such documents not imply
religious freedom?  In what way were these palces of worship
destroyed?  Were they acquired through legal means and then converted
to other things, or were they burned down in riots such as the ones we
witness in India?

> The details is in the format :
> 
>      Evening of November 11, 1989, 400 year old Kali temple at Chinishpur
>      in District of Narsingdi was looted and set fire.
> 
> In 1989 when Babri-Masjid and Ram-Mandir controversy was at peak in India,
> a riot erupted in Bangladesh in which more than 1000 houses belonging to
> Hindus were destroyed and more than 100 temples were destroyed. I have not
> heard of a single Masjid being destroyed in India in 1989. Correct me if I
> am wrong.

I do not have any statistics to prove you wrong or right.  But it
seems questionable to me that you point to temple destruction in
Bangladesh (the 100 figure seems inflated to me) when the very cause
of the trouble was the proposed destruction of a longstanding mosque
in India on no legitimate grounds at all.

> According to Bangladesh Govt's own statistics, minority population in 
> Bangladesh :
> 
>             year        muslims    minorities
> 
>             1941        70.3       29.7
>             1951        76.9       23.1
>             1961        80.4       19.6
>             1974        85.4       14.6
>             1981        86.6       13.4
> 
> In absolute numbers there were 1.2 million fewer minorities in Bangladesh
> in 1981 than in 1974. (Interesting to note that Bangladesh does not
> officially acknowledge any emigration to India).

Does this necessarily mean that there is an organized effort to drive
minorities out?

> In my considered opinion, the reason why we do not hear 
> as much about repression of minorities in Bangladesh as in India is because
> minorities in India have a greater collective voice. 

Consider the various minorities in India and the causes they are
fighting for, Khalistan, Nagaland, liberation of Assam, Kashmir, the
list is endless.  You would like us to belive that they all have a
collective voice?  Obviously not.  Then why is it that we hear so much
more about them?  The reason why we hear more about repression of
minorities in India than in Bangladesh is because, on a relative
scale, the occurences are considerably more frequent in India.  This
does not mean that repression does not occur in Bangladesh, but my
original claim never was that.  My original claim was that tension
with minorities is less pronounced in Bangladesh and Malaysia than in
India.

> Religious minorities constitute about 28% of all military officers in Indian
> Forces. In Bangladesh (govt statistics 1987) :
> 
>            posts        strength   number of minorities
> 
>            Second Lt    900        3
>            Captain      1300       8
>            Major        1000       40
>            Lt Colonel   450        8
>            Colonel      70         1
>            Brigadier    65         0
>            Maj. Gen     22         0
> 
>            Total        3807       62
>             
> There are no minority ambassadors/ high commisioners in Bangladesh missions
> abroad. There are only _TWO_ low ranking officers. Anybody remebers the name
> of Indian Ambassador to US :)-
> 
> I think any discussion of minorities Bangladesh Vs. India, based on pure
> statistics is very interesting. I have more stats to present, but
> not enough time to post.

Statistics, as I'm sure we all know, can be used in all sorts of ways
to show all kinds of things, often in misleading ways.  Do the above
statistics imply discrimination?  Not necessarily.  If there is
discrimination, the above statistics make sense.  But if there isn't,
statistics like the above are still possible.  There are entire
businesses in Bangladesh such as the laundry industry, for example,
where minorities are very strongly represented.  If we were to look
purely at the statistics of those industries, we could show that the
*majority* is discriminated against as far as that particular market
segment goes.  Clearly, that is deceiving logic.  We have to be
careful with statistics.  There are many social factors which may lead
to certain ethnic groups preferring particular professions to others.
They don't necessarily imply discrimination.  Having said that,
however, I will say that this is not the first time I have heard of
accusations directed at the armed forces on discrimination, so there
may well be some substance to that.  Statistics on their own, however,
don't show anything.


-- Shakil