Beyond The Headlines: Why The West Gets India Wrong?

 A spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said on 9th August that the global body stands against attacks on Hindu minorities in Bangladesh amid the ongoing violence.

“What we've made clear is we want to make sure that the violence that has been occurring in Bangladesh in recent weeks is tamped down. Certainly, we stand against any racially based attacks or racially based incitement to violence,” said Farhan Haq, deputy spokesperson for the Secretary-General.

In the past week, numerous videos and pictures have surfaced on the internet documenting the burning of temples, businesses, and homes owned by the Hindu community. This unrest follows Shaikh Hasina’s resignation and flight from the country amid violent protests.

Despite this assertion, the media and Western nations have been non-vocal. There is silence from the alleged "saviours of human rights and democracy." Just consider what may have happened in the Western media and in Western nations if the circumstances had been reversed and Muslims had been attacked. We have previously witnessed their treatment of India, especially in relation to Jammu and Kashmir.

A recent article published by the New York Times demonstrates how these individuals are misrepresenting India's history. Western nations, and the United States in particular, have frequently displayed their partial behaviour.

We haven't heard the phrase "All Eyes on Bangladesh" since the sectarian violence that has broken out in Bangladesh just now.

 Looking back, the US disregarded messages delivered by one of its own officers in Bangladesh during the Bangladesh Liberation Movement in 1971.

 "With the support of the Pak Military, the Non-Bengali Muslims are systematically attacking poor people's quarters and murdering Bengalis and Hindus." This was one of the several telegrams sent by the American counsel in Dhaka, Archer Blood, on March 27, 1971, desperately seeking intervention from the US President.

Then came the Blood Telegram, the strongest-worded protest letter in US Foreign Service history. Signed by twenty US diplomats in Dhaka, including attorney Archer Blood, it was a dissent note criticizing the Nixon administration for remaining silent during the mass slaughter.

An approximate estimate of the number of Bengalis killed in the genocide perpetrated by Pakistani forces in the early 1970s is close to 3 million. The systematic killing by the Pakistani army targeted Hindu men, academics, and professionals; women were spared murder, but almost 400,000 were raped and forced into sexual slavery.
President Richard Nixon and his National Security Advisor, Henry Kissinger, responded to the US Consul General's letters to the American brass with a stoic silence. They ignored the cries for assistance from their own officials because they were playing a dirty game to win over China. The past reveals the prejudiced side of American policies.

Amidst the current crisis, the principal opposition party in Bangladesh declared that Sheikh Hasina, the prime minister who was removed, should be prosecuted domestically. The party also cautioned India that by providing sanctuary to the former leader, it may potentially sour relations with its neighbour.

 

Bangladesh's Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President AM Mahbub Uddin Khokon called on India to arrest former prime minister Sheikh Hasina and her sister Sheikh Rehana, and send them back to Bangladesh, Daily Star reported. In a statement, he said, "We want to maintain a good relationship with the people of India. Please, arrest Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Rehana, who fled the country, and send them back to Bangladesh.

We now need to wait and see what India does. Sheikh Hasina is still present, and she will determine whether or not to proceed with a wait-and-see approach. But I have a question in mind. With so many Muslim countries, why did she travel to India?. Could it be the fact that it is nearest or she has good relations.
I think there is an easy solution. India, one of the world's oldest nations with a strong moral foundation, has traditionally held the view that "Anyone who asks for help or surrenders should be given shelter." Simply flip through the pages of history to uncover countless times be it the case of Sindhis from Pakistan, Zoroastrians and Bora Muslims or even those that were sheltered during the partition.  It is certain that India is firm on its own policy and goes on its own way.

Jai Hind!

Harsh Pargat

Please share and follow me.

Your comments are welcome.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hindus Hold Massive Protest in Canada

Fractured Relations: What’s Next for India and Canada?

Understanding Kamala Harris’s Defeat