By M Ghazali Khan
Some of the well known international figures who have undergone tough and humiliating body search for boarding US airlines, detention at the American airports and sometimes deportation, include former Indian President APJ Abdul Kalam, Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan and British singer Yusuf Islam. Similarly known figures banned from entering into Britain include Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Indian televangelist Dr Zakir Abdul Karim Naik.
Rithambara with Malegaon blast accused Pragya Thakur
The secular and liberal credentials of Dr Kalam and Shahrukh Khan hardly need any comment. The support to terrorism by Qardawi, Zakir Naik and Yusuf Islam depends on one’s own prejudice as well as the perception and interpretation of their statements. The established fact however about them remains that none of them has ever been personally involved in terrorism.
Compare these personalities with Sadhvi Rithambhra, (http://www.sadhviritambhara.com/) a militant Hindu priestess held guilty by the government of India appointed Liberhan Commission (ttp://www.mha.nic.in/uniquepage.asp?Id_Pk=571) of the demolition of 16th century Babri Mosque (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/6/newsid_3712000/3712777.stm) in Ayodhya on 6 December 1992 and the subsequent violence that killed some 3,000 people across the country. For her role in Babri Mosque destruction she still has cases (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/Hearing-in-Babri-case-deferred-again/articleshow/6267798.cms) against her in Indian courts. She also has close association with Hindu militants detained and being investigated for their involvement in various bomb blasts in India.
The priestess on the other hand, after being allowed unhindered to enter the US is currently on a nationwide tour and has been freely addressing mass gatherings of her hard line followers. She is said to be collecting millions of dollars from her devotees. After her US tour Sadhvi is planning to visit Canada and UK sometimes in September.
Although application form for British visa requires a declaration whether the applicant has ever been involved in any criminal or militant activities, Sadhvi was allowed to come to Britain and address public meetings held in temples in July 2007 (http://www.coimuk.org/content/british-indian-muslims-dismayed-sadhvi-ritambharas-visit), at a time when she, along with her 67 accomplices, was being tried in India for her role in the demolition of Babri Mosque and ensuing killings of Muslims.
Looking at Britain’s record of granting visas to Hindu militants, it could be said that Sadhvi should feel no problem in entering into UK and go ahead with her planned tour.
In 2002 BJP leader and the then Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani (http://hindu.com/2002/08/23/stories/2002082303871200.htm), despite his role in creating a culture of anti-Muslim and anti-Christian hatred in India, officially visited the UK. His active participation in the destruction of Babri Mosque and his unwavering support to Gujarat’s Chief Minister Narendra Modi during the massacre of Muslims in 2002 was never taken into consideration when allowing him into the country.
Despite being reminded by the Council of Indian Muslims (UK) (http://www.coimuk.org/content/butcher-gujarat-greeted-angry-slogans) that Modi, as the Chief Minister of Gujarat, had engineered the macabre killings of Gujarati Muslims, British Government allowed him, in August 2003, to be welcomed (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/18/india.uk) on British soil.
There can be only two explanations to this dichotomy:
(1) Double standards and an unwritten definition of terrorism under which merely bearing a Muslim name makes one a terrorist regardless of his personal convictions and beliefs.
(2) Presence of a strong pro-Hindutva lobby in British parliament, led by the like of Barry Gardiner (http://www.barrygardiner.com/) MP for Brent North.
For the 2002 Gujarat massacre (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1951471.stm), Narendra Modi is usually referred to as the “Butcher of Gujarat” but in a “Vibrant Gujarat” function organised by Modi Government on 12-13 January, 2008, Mr Gardiner praised him as the “lion of Gujarat”. Prior to this Mr Gardiner had initiated an Eardly Day Motion (EDM) that was signed by 117 MPs. This is despite the fact that Modi has on his hands the blood of two British citizens (http://www.dawoodcampaign.org/).
Breaking his own record in his recent election campaign Mr Gardiner stooped as low as trying to win the votes of a particular section by uploading on his website a message from Narendra Modi along his photograph, something that the Election Commission should have taken notice of.
Mr Gardiner should have at least taken notice of the principled stand of his fellow parliamentarian Andrew George (http://www.andrewgeorge.org.uk/), MP for West Cornwall, who, in 2007, in an EDM, did not only sympathise with the victims and their families but also applauded (http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=33294), “the recent decision of the United States not to grant a visa to the Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi for severe violations of religious freedoms; further notes that the Chief Minister of Gujarat is the subject of a civil prosecution for genocide and crimes against humanity.”
In contrast to Mr Gardiner’s propitious leaning, during their visit to Gujarat in April this year two German MPs (http://www.ucanews.com/2010/04/09/germans-justify-eu-ban-on-gujarat-minister/), Ms. Ute Granold of ruling Christian Democratic Union and her colleague Pascal Kober of the Free Democratic Party were so outraged from what they saw in the state that they drew parallels between Gujarat under Modi and Germany under Hitler and observed that in India not everyone was entitled to protection under the rule of law and to choose their religion freely.
Regardless of the crimes of Hindutvites (http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19990101/0015010.html), and also because Sadhvi Rithambhra has already been allowed entry into the US plus the pressure of Hindutva supporters in the House of Commons, the chances are that she will be given the “privilege” (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10349564) of being welcomed in Britain. Let it be said, however, that like her previous (http://www.rediff.com/us/2002/jul/27us.htm) US visit Sadhvi’s recent (http://www.hindustantimes.com/Indian-Americans-urged-to-dissociate-from-Sadhvi-Ritambhara/Article1-585529.aspx) tour has not gone that smoothly.
Interestingly, under the Genocide Convention, 1957 and Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (http://untreaty.un.org/cod/icc/statute/99_corr/cstatute.htm), 1998, US and Britain are obliged to prevent and punish international crimes such as genocide and crimes against humanity and by allowing a known terrorist to go around freely and create hatred they are violating these treaties.