I am talking of Narendra Modi, of course. I don’t understand the argument that the Americans are “interfering” in our Internal Affairs. Yes, the fact that he is still the chief minister even after he explicitly gave instructions to his policemen not to protect the muslims who were being killed and raped by his partymen is our “internal affair”, to our eternal shame. But if the Americans won’t let such a man into their country, it is their internal affair too. Yes, he is the democratically elected chief minister of an Indian state, but that is not the Americans’ fault, it is ours.
The other arguments being offered by my countrymen are equally specious. Yes, the Americans are hypocrites, but that doesn’t make this decision wrong. The principle that you shouldn’t do the right thing once unless you do the right thing everytime is one impossible to uphold. Nitin Pai is arguing that this is wrong because they were motivated by politics rather than principle. Yes, of course, all government decisions are political decsions. This doesn’t make them wrong. Yes, probably Christian conservatives were behind this decision. It still does not make it wrong. There is nothing wrong in being concerned for your co-religionists in some other country.
Modi is asking why we shouldn’t deny President Bush a visa because of what he did in Iraq. Why, if we take the view that invading Iraq and installing a democratic government there is equivalent to killing 2000 muslims, then yes, we are at liberty to deny him entry into India. Do we want to get into that kind of a fight? Being ethically right is different from being physically stronger. In this case, we are weaker on both counts. I don’t see the sense of getting into a fight on this issue.
There are some cases where I’ll support my country even when I think that its decisions were unwise. For example, I am still seething about India backing off from the pipeline deal under Rice’s pressure, even though I thought that the pipeline deal was a stupid idea in the first place. This is not one of those cases.
Incidentally, I don’t think that the BJP can make much political capital out of this – though I may be mistaken in this. From what I know of the middle-class, they will be up in arms against this decision, but then the US government isn’t standing for elections in India. If anything, the Congress and the communists are even more anti-American than the BJP, so I am hard put to think what slogans the BJP can come up with on this issue. Burning American flags isn’t really a vote winner outside of West Bengal and Kerala. (Not because most Indians love the US or anything. It just isn’t enough of an emotional issue) The only way the BJP can make capital out of this is if they succeed in turning this into an Anti-Christian issue, but then, that is not much of an issue with the middle-class; only with the tribal belt where it is toughest to make this association.
As you have observed, the BJP is closer to the American Govt worldview than any other party in India. That makes this snub all the more interesting!
yes.
Apolitical as I strive (and choose) to be, a resounding YES.
You miss a prime reason for ire viz. that the denial, to say the least, an insult.
You acknowledge that denying the visa was a political decision by the US. After all, far worse offenders are given handshakes let alone visa denials.
This then entails that the perceived political minus of denying a visa
to an Indian Chief Minister, democratically elected by the Indian People, is less than the political plus of catering to those who want it denied. In other words, a middle finger to India’s growing political clout.
I agree with ravi kiran. It’s politics and not principle. State department does not do principles. Remember, they appointed John “Death Squad” Negreponte to several top positions including UN. ambassador.
Well Modi may have done many evil deeds but he must be brought to book within Inidia. We must not allow other countrys to pass judgements on our citizens.
If your argument is taken to its logical conclution then should people like Bush an Blair called war criminals an possibly enied visa into India. Will that be acceptable or courteous or correct.
No I think the NRI’s who invited Modi in the first place are wrong and USA denying visa is also not correct
Looks like some consider hypocrisy to be more serious crime than that of Modi! By the way, do people realize the irony of accusing US of hypocrisy? Are these accusers above hypocrisy themselves?
“even after he explicitly gave instructions to his policemen not to protect the muslims who were being killed and raped by his partymen”
Any reference for this?
“There is nothing wrong in being concerned for your co-religionists in some other country”
Two questions. One: is America is a Christian nation? Two: what is happening to America’s “coreliginosts” in some other nation that it has to be concerned?
I was referring to the Christian conservatives about their “co-religionists”
As for the explicit instructions, you can read the whole story here and here.
Note that Star News has a tape, so don’t wriggle out of this by claiming that those who wrote the report were pseudo-secularists
Did this so-called tribunal you elevate to the status of the arbiter of justice have defence lawyers and cross-examination of witnesses?
As we speak, the owner of that website, Sabrang, is herself facing an investigation for possibly misleading the Supreme Court on the Best Bakery issue.
“I was referring to the Christian conservatives about their “co-religionistsâ€
Yes, but a secular nation’s secular govt wouldn’t allow itself to be influenced by fundamentalist lobbies, correct?
Also, what is that these “conservatives” are “concerned” about, really?
Are you saying that Secular India should not listen to the VHP when they speak of the plight of Kashmiri Pandits or Bangladeshi Hindus?
And please note that I had already anticipated your question about Sabrang.
“Are you saying that Secular India should not listen to the VHP when they speak of the plight of Kashmiri Pandits or Bangladeshi Hindus?”
Whose plight are the American “conservatives” speaking of? Any references to the said plight?
“And please note that I had already anticipated your question about Sabrang.”
Moot point, because I’m not contesting your smartness. But I also expected you to know the difference between due legal process and the running of kangaroo courts by those who themselves are under a cloud.
Well, there is the minor matter of burning of a missionary, attacks on various Churches, that are carried out by members of the same organization Modi belongs to. I don’t blame the Christian Conservatives for deciding that a man like him is a symbol of the people who are attacking their co-religionists.
But that is beside the point. The only point worth asking about is whether Narendra Modi is guilty of those things or not. Given the state of the courts in the country, it makes no sense to wait for the official verdicts – I have to consider what evidence is available myself. I think that Narendra Modi is guilty to the same extent as H K L Bhagat and Sajjan Kumar were in the 1984 riots. If you choose not to believe the evidence, it is upto you.
“Well, there is the minor matter of burning of a missionary, attacks on various Churches, that are carried out by members of the same organization Modi belongs to.”
Evidence for this. A court judgement would be lovely.
And there is also the minor matter of the report of a certain legally appointed commission called Wadhwa Commission, which did unusual things like calling for witnesses and examining evidence etc — things which I’m sure will not find favour with that “concerned” “citizens'” “tribunal” of Sabrang — debunks your thesis.
But let’s take your bizarre argument at its face value and probe further: if the said organization as a whole causes American Christian “conservatives” to vent bile, question arises: why specifically Modi, and why 6 years after the said incident, when, in the mean time,
1. he did tour the US, when in fact the incident was more recent in memory than now,
2. so did Keshubhai Patel, who was the CM of Gujarat when the said incident occured in Orissa.
3. so did many members of the “same organiztion” that Modi belongs to toured the US too, after the said incident?
“I have to consider what evidence is available myself”
But we are not going by your standards of evidence, which are pretty much evident given you seem to think kangaroo courts and the jettisoning of a due legal process are ok.
We want evidence as vetted by state-run courts.
If we were to go by the standards of evidence of, say, the “concerned citizens’ tribunal”, we might have to hang the Best Bakery accused to death rightaway, with no further delay. But fortunately for them, there’s a flicker of hope, because there’s a due process of law, however creaky it is and prone to hijacking by vested interests.
I am not asking the Indian government to hang people based on my conclusions. I am forming conclusions based on what I see as the evidence. You are at liberty to disagree, just as the US government is at liberty to disagree with you.
As I’ve mentioned, I do not care for what motivated the Christian conservatives to act as they did.
As it happens, I also disagree with what the Banerjee commision has concluded about the Godhra incident. I presume you agree with the judge because he is a duly constituted authority?
“I am not asking the Indian government to hang people based on my conclusions.”
Why not? After all, you’re damn sure you know the whole truth. You’re a picture of conviction. What holds you back, then?
“just as the US government is at liberty to disagree with you.”
But the US government is not a blogger peddling the strange logic that things such as evidence as obtained by due process of law are NOT needed to pronounce a person guilty; and that he maybe demonized eventhough no court has proclaimed him guilty.
The US claims to uphold, both at home and abroad, the Law — with such attendant niceties as the constitution, courts, judges, lawyers etc that your standards may find wholly unnecessary. It is tomtommed, by Americans as well as non-Americans alike, that teh US is a country where law cannot be bent to suit one’s convenience, that there’s a due process.
“As I’ve mentioned, I do not care for what motivated the Christian conservatives to act as they did.”
But you think it is ok for them to act the way they did.
Why not also say that you’re not going to offer any
reasoned argument and be done with it? You are not
this illogical generally.
” I also disagree with what the Banerjee commision has concluded about the Godhra incident”
Feel free to point out precisely what points of Wahdwa Commission are wrong and why.
I agree with ABC. Many times I have read blogs of “libertarians” like Gaurav Sabnis and others who claim that Congress and Marxists are the harbingers of hope and BJP and its allies are a blot on democracy. And most of the time, the judgement is passed even without due knowledge of what happened or even before the judiciary passes its judgement on the case. Take for example, the case of Babri Masjid demolition – everyone had put blame on Advani among others as conspirators but later a former IB person revealed that Congress has suppressed the tape that proved that Advani was not involved. Also, there have been many confessions from caught Naxalities that they are being funded by Marxists and CPI-M’s of West Bengal but I never find a single post on your blogs implicating them. For ‘secularists’, these parties are the ‘ones’ who defend democracy.
Nerd, you’ve managed to stumble on our secret. We libertarians are all Marxists at heart. When the glorious revolution comes, your back will be against the wall and the Cartel will form the firing squad.
I find it really amusing when many people talk that Modi was denied visa by Christian Conservatives. BTW, the efforts to deny visa was not made by Republicans (who are those Christian conservatives) but by members of the democratic party.
Sorry for the delayed comment on an old topic. I came across this site only today 🙂