CRITICS OF SONIA GANDHI:surrogates of communalism

CRITICS OF SONIA GANDHI: Surrogates of communalism

Ranjit Singh New York, October 11,07.

In the beginning of this month, Sonia Gandhi came to New York on
the invitation of the United Nations. This global organization,
the bulwark of the global peace, had recognized, though late,
that the non-violence is the soul of peace and that Mahatma
Gandhi is the latest apostle in the line of those who rise above
communal, racial and national narrow-mindedness and embrace
humanity. October 2nd is the birthday of this Mahatma (great
soul) and the United Nations declares this day as the global
Non-Violence Day. An honor to India! And yet another honor; the
leader of the party that was nurtured and brought to maturity by
none other than Mahatma Gandhi himself, was invited to launch
the day. Sonia Gandhi is the leader chosen for it.

A few NRI organizations in USA could not digest this honor to
the leader of Mahatma Gandhi's Party, an indirect honor to
India. They used (rather misused) their financial clout and
spent $ 125,000.00 (the average page price for the New York
Times' ad) to tell the Americans 8 points about Sonia Gandhi.

Apparently, one page advertisement in the New York Times,
Saturday, October, October 6, 07 (Page A-11) is an attack on
Sonia Gandhi's personality. But an honest observer and analyst
will see behind the wording, phraseology and style an intention
and an attempt to demolish a government and a movement that is
holding on to the culture and spirit of secularism and
co-existence in India.

The only safe conclusion that we shall draw is that these NRI
critics of Sonia Gandhi are acting as the surrogates of the
communal politicians in India. They are attacking Sonia Gandhi
as they know well at heart that it is she who halted the
onslaughts of the communal forces on the soil of Mother India.
Whatever the future historians write about her, they all will
agree with me that it is Sonia Gandhi who saved the citadel of
India's pluralism. No wonder that the LEFT in India, despite
serious differences with the UPA government, don't want to
abandon the boat, of which Sonia Gandhi is the captain.

However, just accusing Sonia Gandhi's critics and adversaries
and just praising her does not and will not carry weight with my
readers, unless I refute their charges one by one and point by
point.

But before I do that, I will not hesitate to fault them on one
point. Could they not think of some better and noble cause to
advertise for or spend money on, instead of spending $
125,000.00 to spread misinformation about a visiting national
leader, on a mission to take India to yet other heights of
popularity. I am not aware but I have a gut feeling that no
other nationality in America would resort to such tactics to
defame their leader among other communities. We do have
different stands, different opinions and different ideologies,
but shall we resort to character assassination to make our
stands and differences known. Sonia Gandhi's adversaries shall
sit and answer honestly: "Was it not unethical on their part?"
Well, they have their own hidden agenda and that ism as I have
explained above, to demolish pluralism and eliminate its
vanguards. So, let us come to the point and discuss eight
charges, they levied to defame Sonia Gandhi and spent $
125,000.00 to vainly reach their goal.

YOUR FIRST CHARGE: You say Sonia Maino Gandhi is not related to
Mahatma Gandhi and is just misappropriating it for political
mileage and international legitimacy.

MY REBUTTAL: You use "MAINO", intentionally to remind us of her
parentage and origin. It is a mischievous way of harping on a
point when we all know that she has never obscured her
nationality or parentage and that the Supreme Court has
validated her Indian nationality. And why shall she
misappropriate? Did she ever say that she is related to Mahatma
Gandhi? And is she the first one in her family to use the word
"Gandhi" with her name? Are you really ignorant of the fact that
late Shrimati Indira Gandhi was already using it before Sonia
came to India as a daughter-in-law of the former Prime Minister?
Are you really ignorant of the reality that many of our own
sisters or daughters stop carrying the suffix like "Patel,
Mehta, Bajwa" when they marry an American boy? The example is
Sunita William, the renowned astronaut of today.

Why shall Sonia Gandhi search for political mileage? She has
already won political ascendency by saving her party from going
into oblivion and by saving India from falling to communal
disruptions.. And this is the thorn that pricks her adversaries.

YOUR SECOND CHARGE: You say Sonia Gandhi is vindictive and
undemocratic and that her party uses various mechanisms
including raids to subjugate opposition.

MY REBUTTAL: Well, accusation is no argument. Come clean with
facts. What the NRIs in America hear through news channels are
about the raids on a certain Malhotra, a petty canteen
contractor, who has grabbed landed property worth ten crore
rupees, has thirty luxury cars with VIP plate numbers parked
outside his house. We are hearing about raids on an army General
with disproportionate wealth at his disposal. Do you want to
stop these raids? Do you sympathize with these criminals who
loot our national wealth? Can you give just one example when an
opposition politician or activist was tax-raided and silenced?
Then what do you mean when you talk of raids to subjugate
opposition? I have not heard of a single such example? Where did
you get this news from?

YOUR THIRD CHARGE: You say that Sonia Gandhi's Party has
pro-terrorist policies and that is why India has the highest
number of terrorist victims after Iraq. Her Party is requesting
clemency for Afzal Guru, the master mind behind attack on
Parliament, for vote bank.

MY REBUTTAL: Perhaps, your charge emanates from the fact that
the UPA regime repealed POTA, which was imposed on India by the
NDA regime. It is an open secret that POTA resulted in fake
encounters and the profiling of minorities, particularly of the
Muslims. It spread a nation-wide fear of police, with
unfortunately no reprieve from terrorism. Attack on our
Parliament was during the non-Congress regime.

What label or tag you will fix on this event when a Union
Minister of NDA government escorted some terrorists to be
released in Kabul in exchange for 116 Indian passengers locked
in a hijacked Indian Airline plan? I will be the last man to
criticize this move. In my opinion, it was the only best option
left with the government to get back alive our passengers on
board and to spare their relatives back home of an agony, beyond
words.. Nor will I blame the NDA regime as "soft to terrorists",
simply becauseit was then that the terrorists made an attempt to
raze our Parliament to ground.

I only want to shake the critics of Sonia Gandhi to understand
and realize that the terrorists attack India because India is a
pluralistic state and the terrorists don't tolerate co-existence
of the Hindus and Muslims. They disrupt pluralism in order to
create Taliban type regimes. On the terrorist front, India can't
boast of successes and one reason, which is hard to digest, is
the domestic communal hatred, we ourselves encourage.

The terrorists are our unidentified and invisible enemies. But
you are our own people. At least, you shall not disrupt
pluralism by instigating Sikhs and Hindus as is clear from your
following two charges. In this way, your goals are true replica
of the goals of terrorists-to disrupt pluralism. Only strategies
differ. If you love India, you better abandon this disruption
strategy and work for pluralism..

You want to hear about Afzal Guru.. Trust me, I am ignorant of
the sequence of events. I read that Afzal Guru says that he was
framed. Is framing not a usual practice of India's police
system? It will continue till the system is completely
overhauled. Afzal Guru may be speaking truth or telling lies. I
don't know. But one thing I do know that as an Indian citizen,
he has the constitutional right to reach any level in search of
justice, request for clemency no exception. It is a human right
and those who talk of human rights shall respect this right for
every one, irrespective of caste, creed, gender. Nathu Ram Godse
killed Mahatma Gandhi. Was he denied the right to fight a legal
battle?

YOUR CHARGES # 4,5 & 6. In these charges relating to communal
instigation, you instigate Sikhs by reminding them that an
instigator of 1984 anti-Sikh riots was given a ministerial berth
in the Union Cabinet. You instigate Hindus on the Ram Setu issue
and you scare them that their religion is in danger because of
force conversions going on in India with the tacit support of
Sonia Gandhi.

MY REBUTTAL: Despite being away from India, you are clearly
parroting the communal politicians of India, with whom scaring
in the name of religion is the only strategy to seize political
power.

We know, induction in the cabinet is the Prime Minister's
prerogative. Yes, that is true that an instigator of 1984 riots
was given a high position in Union cabinet. But it goes to the
credit of the government that the sentiments of the Sikh
community were respected and exit of the minister was assured to
assuage the feelings. Respect for the human rights is best
explained by the initiatives of the Manmohan Singh government in
rehabilitating the victims of 1984 riots. Compare it with the
plight of the Muslims, who fell victims to the anti-Muslim riots
in Gujarat. Were not both these communities victims to the
similar religious fanaticism? Then why have the Muslims'
rehabilitation been ignored and who is responsible? If you raise
the issue of the Sikhs, you shall be just enough to raise the
issue of the Muslims. If you don't do it, you are just resorting
to instigation in the name of human rights.

Your allegations against the UPA government on the Ram Setu are
equally instigational. You know it well that the government has
respected and honored the sentiments of the Hindus, even facing
the wrath of DMK supremo, Karunanidhi.

You act like bogeymen spreading scare when you talk of force
conversions to Christianize India. Are you telling the nation
that whole of our government machinery has been tipped in favor
of conversion? Are their no Hindu Chief Ministers, State
Secretaries, Police Chiefs or magistrates who can protect the
Hindus from a handful of Christian missionaries? You were
talking of force conversions even at a time when Sonia Gandhi
had not joined politics or perhaps even before she came to
India. Now, you are transferring the same blame to her.

Awaken with one point. When a senate in an American State opens
its session with Vedic hymns, your joy knows no bounds. But if a
Christian is found distributing the Bible in India, your people
there just behead him. That is why Mahatma Gandhi is much above
you all, as he put Ishwar and Allah at one level.

YOUR CHARGES # 7 & 8. You say that Rajiv Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi
and also Rahul Gandhi "looted the country on large scale." Money
came from Bofor, Food for Oil Scam and that $ 200 million have
been deposited in secret Swiss bank accounts.

MY REBUTTAL: Folks, I am using common sense while defending
Sonia Gandhi, while you have not used it while accusing her.

You are talking of secret bank accounts. Where is the secret if
you know it and you are even telling the figures? If you know
the figures, you might be knowing the name of the banks also,
where money is parked, and also the sources and trails of money.
Do you know that a minor sting operation by a few journalists,
catching a few Parliamentarians accepting bribe for asking
questions (Cash for Querry Scandal) resulted in the dismissal of
the MPs. You are sitting on such a big sting operation and doing
nothing. Why is it so? Are you being merciful to Sonia Gandhi or
just resorting to rumor-mongering ? Those who read your
advertisement in the New York Times would expect an explanation
from you.

You have mentioned Food for Oil Scam. For just a blot on his
personality, Sonia Gandhi's Party, the INC, ensured the exit of
K.Natwar Singh from the Union Cabinet. Compare it with your
politicians in the NDA government. The Petrol Pump allotment
Scam that came under the scanner resulted in the cancellation of
allotment by the Supreme Court. Was any minister or politician
involved removed from any position? This is the difference
between the leadership of one Party that does not tolerate
indiscipline and the other that allows its stalwarts to do what
they please.

You and your ilk talk too much of the Bofor, whenever you talk
of Sonia Gandhi.. History tells us that after Rajiv, there was
VP Singh government, then there were two coalition governments,
there were two-time regimes of Vajpayee, and also Supreme Court
verdict on Bofor. What were all these governments doing? If the
Supreme Court verdict does not convince you and if your
governments and politicians cannot provide you with dependable
evidence, then the people of India have no option but to be
convinced that when people like you talk against Sonia Gandhi,
they talk only fiction, not facts.

NOT A REBUTTAL BUT A DUTY: My duty as a devotee of secularism
and forces of secularism will not be complete if I fail to
analyze the environment in which such falsehood is propagated.
My observation is that the NRIs in America are more communal
than Indians in India. Pro-Sonia Gandhi secular organizations,
either don't exist or exist meekly. There are strong secular
Indians but no strong secular organizations and hence they fail
miserably in the face of such onslaughts by communal forces.

About the author:
Freelance journalist; Managing Editor, the Better India; Social
justice issues