A Seminar with the title “Babri Masjid, Saffronized India, and the Concerns” was held at the Institute of

Policy Studies on December 17, 2019. The session was chaired by Executive President IPS Khalid Rahman.
Ambassador (r) Zamir Akram was the keynote speaker and Dr Mujeeb Afzal (Quaid-e-Azam University,
Islamabad and author of Bhartiya Janata Party and Indian Muslims), and Amir Abdullah Abbasi Advocate
High Court were in the panel. Audience included a select gathering consisted of academicians, lawyers,
students, and other concerned citizens.

Advocate Amir Ambassador (r)

Abdullah Abbasi
introduced the
audience with the
background of the
conflict over Babri
Masjid which was
constructed in 1528
and related to which
Advocate Amir Abdullah Abbasi legal options had
already been
consumed. While discussing the legal aspects of the
Indian Supreme Court’s verdict delivered on 9th of
November this year regarding the site of the Babri
Masjid, the speaker said that it was strange that the
verdict was based on the argument that Muslims
haven’t been able to provide documentary evidence
that prayer was offered in the Mosque from 1528 to
1857 when grill brick wall was set up by Britishers.
The verdict stands on the Archaeological Survey of
India’s report which, in fact, was just an opinion and
not a legal document. He pointed out that Indian top
court had admitted that the demolition of Babri Masjid
in 1992 was illegal, but it strongly protects the right to
construct a temple on the ruins of this illegal act. The
judgment neither specifies the name of the judge(s)
who have authored the judgment nor of the judge who
dissented from the judgment; and this gives an
impression of duress involved.
Zamir Akram, in his
keynote address,
started by drawing
attention that the
opening of Kartarpur
Corridor by Pakistan
for pilgrims from
India and verdict for
Ambassador (r) Zamir Akram construction of Ram
Mandir at the site of
Babri Masjid in Ayodhia had come on the same day
and both events taken together indicate contrasting
approaches towards other faiths in the Islamic Republic
of Pakistan and the secular Republic of India. Adoption
of a secular approach was the political necessity for
Gandhi and Nehru to keep together the diverse cultures
and ethnicities at the time of independence. But India
had never been secular in its essence. When Ram idols
were placed inside Babri Masjid in 1949 to incite a
conflict, it was Nehru himself who instead of taking the
idols out, locked it even for Muslims. At the time of
Mosque’s demolition too, Indian National Congress
was in power.
It is rather ironic, that the apex court of India
questioned Muslims’ right to possession of the land
because they had not been offering prayer there since
long despite the fact that the mosque had been locked
officially since 1949. The claim of Hindus that the

[1]
controversial land is birthplace of their Lord Ram is
highly questionable too as Ram is not a historical
personality but a fictional character. The judgement
has set a precedent for the extremist Hindus to
demolish or destroy whatever sign or building comes
the way of their understanding of faith while being
protected by the law, and they are going to do so.
L-R: EP-IPS Khalid Rahman and Amb (r) Zamir Akram
While analyzing the mentality behind Babri Masjid
demolition, the veteran diplomat pointed out that the
Bhartiya Janata Party—BJP had only two seats in the
Indian Lok Sabha till 1987. They needed an issue to
generate political support for themselves. And the first
elections held after demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992
brought BJP into the power in 1996. This divisive
approach was so strong that it managed to sideline a
rather inclusive faction led by the former PM Atal
Bihari Wajpai and the more extremist, exclusive and
rigid group led by L. K. Advani dominated the party.
The same approach finally brought forth Narendra
Modi and Amit Shah into the power, who both have a
criminal record. They gradually created the situation in
which Godhra Train Tragedy and the massacre of
Muslims in Gujarat became inevitable. BJP leaders
opposing the mindset behind Gujarat massacre had
either disappeared or assassinated. Such incidents
contributed towards creating fear on one hand and
aggression on the other which ultimately led to the
current wave of Hindutva. It is not in spite of, rather
because of such incidents that Modi became the prime
minister.
BJP could lose election this year because of the
economic misadventures of PM Modi. But the series of
blame game against Pakistan after Pulwama incident
and the anti-Muslim wave in India under government
shelter gave Modi a convincing victory. Emboldened,
Modi undertook adventures like abrogation of Article
370, NRC in Assam, and Citizenship Amendment Law
in the recent days.
[2]
Ambassador criticized the Western political elite and
the academia for their superficial understanding of
India. The West holds Modi responsible of
undermining secularism in the country, but the fact is
that secularism has never been part of the Indian polity.
Absence of religion from public policy is the essence
of secularism, while Hinduism and Hindutva is
reigning India since its inception.
While discussing the future prospects, he said that
Modi and Amit Shah will continue targeting Muslims
and Pakistan through creating and exploiting a national
hysteria. This hysteria, which started from the political
offices has become visible in the executive, judicial
and the military institutions now. The more deplorable
the Indian economy gets, the faster the hysteria grows.
Pakistan should have no illusions. India will keep
blaming Pakistan as it did after Pulwama incident and
the global power politics suits them. Pakistan needs to
take due measures for national security.
Dr Mujeeb Afzal presented his views on Transitioning
state and Society of India. Analyzing the trends that are
competing in India, he said that Indian version of
secularism was never conceived as a neutrality of state
from the religion.
Rather it aimed at
creating an equality
between divergent
religions and cultures.
Secularism was used
by the constitutional
institutions to balance
the relations of
majority and minority.
But in the recent
Dr Mujeeb Afzal
scenario, India has
been moving from Indian Majoritarianism to a Hindu
Majoritarianism, and from the equality and balance to
the subordination of other faiths before Hinduism.
India was constitutionally made a diverse state. The
diversity was accommodated in order to prevent the
fear of further fragmentation. But the emerging middle
class in India remained unhappy with this soft India as,
to them, it had been misrepresenting India as a lenient
country not able to be the part of any adventure at
regional and international levels. Recent Hinduism and
Hindutva is determined to wipe out this soft mask of
India and portray it as a strong country having a kill
factor, and capable enough to impose its domination.
Federalism and the constitutional electoral system
were the two distinct features which kept so diverse a
society united. But with the constitutional move on
Kashmir, India has seriously damaged federalism. The
damage is going on with controversial developments
like Citizenship Amendment Act and National Register
for Citizens etc. By doing so, the political leadership is
creating insecurity among the country’s federating
units. Bengal and Tamil Nadu can be the next targets
of this wave.
At the foreign policy front, Modi government is aimed
at ending India’s longstanding policy of softness. India,
for the time being remained non-align and thus
irrelevant from the scenario created by the Cold War.
Now they want to get rid of it by shifting towards an
aggressive masculine policy in the region. The Capital,
armament and technological resources needed for this
purpose can only be provided by the US. Alliance with
Soviet Union and later on with Russia has not produced
an aggressive India to create its hegemony over South
Asia. So it is now reaching out to the US in order to
show its aggressive face. In return, US demands India
to fulfil American agenda in the South China Sea. India
has given up its good terms with Iran to come under the
US umbrella. These entanglements can create a serious
crisis for India in future.
Khalid Rahman, Chair of the session, emphasized the
need to view all recent developments in India not in
isolation, but as part of a greater series of incidents.
RSS’ establishment and continuity of its existence in
spite of having a declared hostile agenda for Indian
religious minorities and so much activity in the recent
years show that secularism is mere a label for Indian
society and politics. Protecting and portraying India as
the largest secular democracy at global level is perhaps
the need for the Western powers in order to keep their
economic and political stakes preserved. Current
fascist image of India should be enough for all of us to
be clear about the creation of Pakistan as a right, well-
timed and inevitable step. It is very unfortunate that
despite this all being a reinforcement of Pakistan’s
narrative, we are unable to generate a comprehensive
intellectual discussion in the academic and policy
circles within and without. It is time now to come out
of traditional blame game within Pakistan and
confidently expose human rights violations in Kashmir
and internal parts of India through aggressive
diplomatic initiatives.
In exposing India’s
state policy towards
minorities, we need
to focus on the
public opinion
globally because,
despite the fact that
governments are not
very much
concerned due to
EP-IPS Khalid Rahman
their interests
connected with India, public opinion in the present
times can affect government policies to a much larger
extent than past. All that is going on in India is
strengthening Pakistan’s position over Kashmir, we
need to make sure that the internal incidents in India
and discourse over them must not overshadow the right
of Kashmiri people for self-determination.
Executive President expressed thanks to the speakers
and audience for generating such a fruitful discussion.

Prepared by:

Hafiz Usama Hameed

Editorial Assistant
Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), Islamabad.

For queries:

Syed Nadeem Farhat

Senior Research Officer
nadeem@ips.net.pk | www.ips.org.pk

[3]