Since thepartition of India in 1947, there have been several instances of religious violence againstMuslims. These incidents often take the form of violent attacks on Muslims byHindutva mobs, forming a pattern of sporadicsectarian violence betweenHindu and Muslim communities. From 1954 to 1982, nearly 7,000 incidents occurred, resulting in the deaths of over 10,000 people.[1][2]
The causes ofviolence against Muslims in the country are varied. The roots are thought to lie inIndian history, stemming from resentment towards theMuslim conquests in India during theMiddle Ages, the divisive policies implemented by the colonial government duringBritish rule, and the partition of the Indian subcontinent into a Muslim-majorityPakistan and anIndian state with a Muslim minority. Many scholars argue that anti-Muslim violence is politically motivated and part of an electoral strategy of mainstream political parties associated with theHindutva ideology, such as theBharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Other scholars contend that the violence is not widespread but is instead confined to certain urban regions due to local socio-political conditions.[3]
The roots of anti-Muslim violence can be traced to several events inIndian history, such as the resentment towards theMuslim conquests in India during theMiddle Ages, the divisive policies established by theBritish colonial government (particularly after the suppression of theIndian Rebellion of 1857, which saw Hindus and Muslims cooperate in revolt against the rulingEast India Company), and thepartition of India into a Muslim-majorityPakistan and a Hindu-majorityIndia with a Muslim minority.[4][5][6]
A major factor in the rise of anti-Muslim violence is the proliferation of theHindutva, aHindu nationalist ideology. TheRashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is an Indianfar-rightparamilitary organisation, which is the principal Hindutva entity in the country. The RSS is the founding and leading force behind theSangh Parivar, a group of Hindutva organisations, which includespolitical parties, religious organisations, and student unions, among others.[7][page needed] This is evident inthe writings of Golwalkar, the secondSarsanghchalak (Chief) of the RSS, in regards toNazi Germany, where he observed, "Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us inHindusthan to learn and profit by."[8] In the 1990s, theBharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaderL. K. Advani led a national political-religious rally named theRam Rath Yatra, which culminated in thedemolition of the Babri Masjid by a Hindutva mob, based on claims that the mosque was supposedly situated on the site of theRam Janmabhoomi, the birthplace of theHindu deityRama. Since then, Hindutva has become increasingly mainstream within Indian politics, coinciding with a rise in anti-Muslim violence. Scholars argue that anti-Muslim rhetoric, politics, and policies have proved electorally beneficial for Hindutva political parties and leaders, especially the BJP, and therefore can be said to be politically motivated.[9][10][11][12]
Violence against Muslims in India usually manifests in the form of mob attacks byHindus.[13][14] These attacks are referred to ascommunal riots in the country, and are considered to be part of a pattern of sporadicsectarian violence between the majority Hindu and minority Muslim communities. Furthermore, this has been seen as a part of the global rise inIslamophobia throughout the 20th and 21st centuries.[15] Most incidents have occurred in the northern and western states of India, whereas communal sentimentsin the south are less pronounced.[16] Some of the largest killings of Muslims in India include the1948 Hyderabad massacres, the1969 Gujarat riots, the1983 Nellie massacre,[17] the1984 Bhiwandi riot, the1985 Gujarat riots, the1989 Bhagalpur violence, the1992–93 Bombay riots, the2002 Gujarat violence, the2013 Muzaffarnagar riots, among others.
These patterns of violence have been well-established since partition, with dozens of studies documenting instances of mass violence against minority groups.[18] Overall, more than 10,000 people have been killed in Hindu-Muslim communal violence since 1950.[1] According to official figures, there were 6,933 instances of communal violence between 1954 and 1982. Between 1968 and 1980, 1,598 Muslims and 530 Hindus were killed, in a total of 3,949 instances of mass violence.[19] Beginning in the late 1980s and early 1990s, a consistent rise in incidents of mass violence, throughout north India, began.[20]
Praveen Swami, an Indian journalist and author, believes that these acts of violence have "scarred India's post independence history." He also considers them to have hindered India's cause inJammu and Kashmir, in regards to theKashmir conflict.[21]
In 2017, IndiaSpend reported that 84% of the victims ofcow vigilante violence in India from 2010 to 2017 were Muslims, and almost 97% of these attacks were reported after May 2014, whenNarendra Modi's BJP government first came to power.[22][23]
Scholars have described incidents of anti-Muslim violence as politically motivated and organised, with many describing them aspogroms,[24] or a form ofstate terrorism with "organised political massacres"[25] rather than mere "riots".[26] Others have argued that anti-Muslim violence is not as widespread as it appears, and is rather restricted to certain urban areas because of local socio-political conditions. There are many Indian cities where Muslims and Hindus live peacefully together, with almost no instances of sectarian violence.[27][28]
Many social scientists have argued that acts of anti-Muslim violence are institutionally supported, particularly by political parties and organisations connected to theRashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), afar-rightHindutvaparamilitary organisation. In particular, scholars fault theBharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and theShiv Sena for complicity in these incidents of violence[29][30][31][32] and of using violence against Muslims as part of a larger electoral strategy.[29][33] For example, research by Raheel Dhattiwala and Michael Biggs has stated that the killings of Muslims are far higher in areas where the BJP faces stiff electoral opposition, in comparison to areas where the party is more cemented.[1] Beginning in the late 1980s and early 1990s, northern India witnessed the beginning of a rise in anti-Muslim violence, with the BJP witnessing increased successes in local and state elections.[34]Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah, an Americansocial anthropologist, concludes that the violence inBhagalpur in 1989,Hashimpura in 1987, andMoradabad in 1980 were organised killings.[35] According toRam Puniyani, an Indian academic, the Shiv Sena was victorious in elections in Maharashtra due to the violence of the 1990s, and similarly the BJP was victorious in elections in Gujarat after theviolence of 2002.[36]Gyan Prakash, however, cautions that the BJP's actions in Gujarat do not equate to the entirety of India, and it remains to be seen if the Hindutva movement has been successful in the deployment of this strategy nationwide.[37] In recent years, anti-Muslim violence in India has increased significantly due to the Hindutva ideology which envisages citizens with other religious beliefs to havesecond‐class status.[38][39]
Hindu nationalists use the historicalsubjugation of India by Muslims as an excuse for violence. They feel that, since the Partition, Indian Muslims areallied to Pakistan and are possibly radicalised and, therefore, the Hindus must take defensive steps to avoid repeat of the past wrongs and reassert their pride.[original research?][40] The higher fertility rate among Muslims has been a recurring theme in the Hindu Right's rhetoric. They claim that thehigher birth rate among Muslims is part of a plan to turn the Hindus into a minority within their own country.[original research?][41]
Another reason given for these outbreaks of violence is the upward mobility oflower castes communities. Anti-Muslim violence has become a substitute for class and caste tensions. Hindu nationalists, rather than deal with claims from the lower class, instead shift to viewing Muslims and Christians as not "fully Indian" due to their religion,[42] and portray those who carry out attacks against them as "heroes" that "defend the majority" from who are considered to be "anti-nationals".[36] Muslims are viewed as suspects and their loyalty to the state is regularly questioned. According to the scholarOmar Khalidi:
Anti-Muslim violence is planned and executed to render Muslims economically and socially crippled and, as a outcome of that economic and social backwardness, assimilating them into lower rungs of Hindu society.[43]
Cultural nationalism has also been identified as a reason for instances of violence carried out by political parties such as theShiv Sena, which initially claimed to speak for the people ofMaharashtra but quickly turned theirrhetoric toinciting violence against Muslims. The Shiv Sena was complicit in the violencein 1984 in the town of Bhiwandi, and againin the violence in Bombay in 1992 and 1993.[20] Further violence has been incited by the party in 1971 and 1986.[44][34] According to academicSudipta Kaviraj, theVishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) is still engaged in religious conflicts which began in medieval times.[45]
Anti-Muslim violence creates a security risk for Hindus residing outside of India. Since the 1950s, there have been retaliatory attacks on Hindus in Pakistan andBangladesh in response to anti-Muslim violence in India. After the 1992 violence in Bombay, Hindu temples were attacked inBritain andThailand, as well as cities such asDubai.[46] This recurring violence has created a significant divide between the Muslim and Hindu communities.[47]
Jamaat-e-Islami Hind has spoken out against these communal clashes, as it believes that the violence not only impacts Muslims, but India as a whole. They further believe the violence damages India's development prospects.[48] In Gujarat, theTerrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) was utilised in incidents pertaining to communal violence in 1992 and 1993. The majority of those arrested under the act were Muslim. Conversely, TADA was not used after the violence carried out against Muslims during theBombay riots.[49]
BJP politicians, as well as those of other parties, argue thatdemographics play an essential role in Indian elections. The BJP believes that the higher the number of Muslims within a constituency, the higher the chances of centrist parties to acquiesce to minority groups' requests, which lowers the chances of Muslims "building bridges" with their Hindu neighbours. As such, according to this argument "Muslim appeasement" is the root cause of communal violence.[50]Susanne andLloyd Rudolph argue that economic disparity is a reason for the aggression shown towards Muslims by Hindus. As India's economy developed due toglobalisation andinvestment from overseas companies, the expectations of the Hindu population were not met in reality.Hindutva advocates then encouraged the perception of Muslims as the source of the troubles of the Hindus.[51]
The actions of anti-Hindu andanti-India militant groups inKashmir and Pakistan have reinforced anti-Muslim sentiments in the country, which has strengthened the Hindutva movement. Hindutva discourse portrays Muslims as traitors and state enemies, whose patriotism is questioned.[52]Sumit Ganguly, a political scientist, argues that the rise in terrorism cannot solely be attributed tosocioeconomic factors, but also to the violence perpetrated by Hindutva forces.[53]
In1964, riots occurred inCalcutta,West Bengal, betweenHindus andMuslims. The violence left over 100 people dead, with 438 people injured. Over 7,000 people were arrested. 70,000 Muslims fled their homes and 55,000 were provided protection by theIndian army. Muslims in Kolkata became moreghettoised than ever before in the aftermath. Furthermore, violence was also seen in rural West Bengal.[54]
On18 February 1983, around 1,600 to 2,000Muslims of East Bengal origin, known as theMiya people, from various villages under theNellie police station in Assam'sNagaon district, were killed by their tribal and lower caste Hindu village neighbours.[55][56] The incident began in early morning, when groups of villagers burned down the homes of the victims. With no place to hide, the outnumbered victims rushed towards the direction of aCentral Reserve Police Force (CRPF) camp, with the perpetrators pursuing and hacking to death those who fell back.[57] From those that died, around 70% were women, 20% were elderly people, and 10% were men.[58]
This massacre happened in the context of theAssam Movement, which demanded the deletion of foreigners' names from the electoral roll. The Congress-led Indian government decided to go ahead with the1983 Assembly elections without revising the electoral roll,[59] which the leaders of the movement decided to boycott with widespread support from the local populace.[60] The Miya people decided to support the Congress party, in the hopes of ending the movement.[61] The call for boycott triggered widespread violence,[62] with different ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups clashing against each other. Muslim communities of Nellie, anticipating an attack, had reported the possibility of one to the police several times before the incident; and though police officers visited Muslim villages to assure their safety, no police personnel was deputed for their protection.[63]
In the aftermath, both the Indian government and the movement leaders blamed each other for the responsibility for the massacre.[64] The government instituted the Tewary Commission, to investigate the incident.[65] Though the report has been finished, it has not been released to the public.[66] The leaders of the Assam Movement boycotted the Tewary Commission, and supported a non-official judicially inquired commission instead, led by T. U. Mehta, a retired chief justice of a high court.[67] Both the commissions are seen as biased and aligned to either the government or the movement leaders' perspective, and there exists no third-party report. After the incident, hundreds of cases were filed, and hundreds of charge sheets were submitted by the police. However, after the movement leaders came to power in Assam two years later, in 1985, all cases concerning the 1983 election were subsequently closed, and no one has been punished for the incident thereafter.[68] Both the survivors and the perpetrators went back to their villages, though not in complete harmony.[69]
During the1969 Gujarat riots, it is estimated that 630 people lost their lives.[70] The1970 Bhiwandi Riots, which occurred between 7 and 8 May in theMaharashtrian towns ofBhiwandi,Jalgaon, andMahad. There were large amounts of arson and vandalism of Muslim-owned properties. In 1980, inMoradabad, an estimated 2,500 people were killed due to religious sectarian violence.[71] Local police were directly implicated in planning the instances of violence.[72]
Communal riots between Hindus and Muslimsoccurred in Meerut,Uttar Pradesh, in 1987. During these riots 19 personnel of theProvincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) allegedly rounded up 42 Muslim youth from the Hashimpura locality of the city, and took them in truck to its outskirts, nearMuradnagarGhaziabad district, where they were subsequently shot and their bodiesdumped in water canals. The bodies were found a few days later. In May 2000, 16 of the 19 accused surrendered, and were later released on bail, while 3 were already dead. In 2002, the trial of the case was transferred by theSupreme Court of India, fromGhaziabad to aSessions Court atthe Tis Hazari complex inDelhi.[73][74] The case faced regular delays, becoming the oldest pending case in Delhi.[75] On 21 March 2015, all 16 accused men were acquitted due to insufficient evidence.[76] Reportedly, the court emphasised that the survivors could not recognise any of the accused PAC personnel. However, on 31 October 2018, theDelhi High Court convicted the 16 personnel of the PAC, who were then sentenced to life imprisonment, overturning the previous verdict.[77][78][79]
In the year 1989, inBhagalpur,Bihar, an estimated 1,000 people lost their lives in violent attacks,[70] believed to be a result of the religious tensions raised over theAyodhya dispute, and the processions carried out by the VHP, which were to be a "show of strength" and to serve as a warning to minority communities.[80] Beginning on 24 October 1989, violent incidents occurred for over two months. The violence affected theBhagalpur city as well as 250 villages around it. Over 1,000 people were killed, and another 50,000 were displaced as a result of the violence. It was considered the worst Hindu-Muslim violence in independent India at the time.[81][82]
The destruction of theBabri Mosque by afar-rightHindu mob directly led to the1992–93 Bombay riots.[83][84] According to an article published inThe Hindu'sFrontline magazine, titledGory Winter, "officially, 900 people were killed in mob rioting and firing by the police, 2,036 injured and thousands internally displaced."[85] BBC correspondent Toral Varia called the riots "a pre-planned pogrom", that had been in the making since 1990, and stated that the destruction of the mosque was "the final provocation".[86]
Several scholars have likewise concluded that the riots were pre-planned, and that Hindu rioters had been given access to information about the locations of Muslim-owned homes and businesses from non-public sources.[87] This violence is widely reported as having been orchestrated by theShiv Sena, a Hindutva political party led byBal Thackeray.[88] A high-ranking member of the special branch, V. Deshmukh, gave evidence to the commission tasked with probing the riots. He said that the failures in intelligence and prevention had been due to political assurances that the mosque inAyodhya would be protected, that the police were fully aware of the Shiv Sena's capabilities to commit acts of violence, and that the party had a history of inciting hate against minority communities.[89]
Since the partition, Muslim communities have been subject to, and engaged in, violence inGujarat.[26] In2002, in an incident described as an act of "fascistic state terror",[90] Hinduextremists carried out acts of violence against the minority Muslim population.[91]
The beginning of the incident was theGodhra train burning, which was allegedly done by Muslims.[92] During the anti-Muslim violence, young girls weresexually assaulted,burned, or hacked to death.[93] These instances of violence were condoned by the ruling BJP,[94][95] whose refusal to intervene led to the displacement of over 200,000 people.[96] Death toll figures range from the official estimate of 254 Hindus and 790 to over 2,000 Muslims killed.[97] Then Chief MinisterNarendra Modi has also been accused of initiating and condoning the violence, as have the police and government officials who took part, as they had directed the rioters and gave them lists of Muslim-owned properties.[98]
PoliticianMallika Sarabhai, who had complained over state complicity in the violence, was harassed, intimidated, and falsely accused ofhuman trafficking by the BJP.[99] Three police officers were given punitive transfers by the BJP after they had successfully put down the rioting in their wards, so as not to interfere further in preventing the violence.[100] According to Brass, the only conclusion from available evidence points to a methodicalpogrom, which was carried out with "exceptional brutality and was highly coordinated".[101]
In 2007,Tehelka magazine released "The Truth: Gujarat 2002", a report which implicated the state government in the violence, and claimed that what had been called a spontaneous act of revenge was, in reality, a "state-sanctioned pogrom".[102] According toHuman Rights Watch, the violence in Gujarat in 2002 was pre-planned, and the police and state government participated in the violence.[103] In 2012, Modi was cleared of complicity in the violence by a Special Investigation Team appointed by the Supreme Court. The Muslim community is reported to have reacted with "anger and disbelief", and activistTeesta Setalvad has said the legal fight was not yet over, as they had the right to appeal.[104] Human Rights Watch has reported on acts of exceptional heroism by Hindus,Dalits, and tribals, who tried to protect Muslims from the violence.[105]
From August to September 2013, conflicts between the Hindus and Muslims occurred in theMuzaffarnagar district ofUttar Pradesh.These riots resulted in at least 62 deaths, including 42 Muslims and 20 Hindus. The riots further left over 200 injured and more than 50,000 displaced.
The2020 Delhi riots left 36 Muslims and 15 Hindus dead, with over 200 injured.[106] They were triggered byprotests against acitizenship law seen by many critics as anti-Muslim and part of prime ministerNarendra Modi'sHindutva agenda.[107][108][109][110][111]
According toThomas Blom Hansen, aStanford University professor, across India "a lot of the violence perpetrated against Muslims these days is actually perpetrated by subsidiaries of theHindu nationalist movement". According to him, the police harassment of Muslims in Muslim neighbourhoods in the run-up to the Delhi riots is "very well-documented".[112] According toSumantra Bose, aLondon School of Economics professor, sinceNarendra Modi'sreelection in May 2019, hisgovernment has "moved on to larger-scale, if still localised,state-sanctioned mob violence".[112]
According toAshutosh Varshney, the director of the Center for Contemporary South Asia atBrown University, "on the whole, the Delhi riots ... are now beginning to look like apogrom, à laGujarat 2002 andDelhi 1984".[113] According to Subir Sinha, a senior lecturer at theSOAS University of London, thenorth andnortheast areas of Delhi were a focus of "highly inflammatory speeches from top BJP ministers and politicians" in the run-up to theDelhi election. Sinha continues that "the pent-up anger of BJP supporters" who lost the election in Delhi, effectively took it out on "the Muslim residents of these relatively poor parts of the city".[114]
But fears of India becoming a Hindu authoritarian state have been voiced after Narendra Modi of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power in New Delhi in 2014. The party's Hindutva philosophy—the creation of a great Hindu state—envisages a Hindu state where citizens with other religious beliefs are tolerated but have second‐class status. The BJP has been associated with hundreds of violent Hindu‐Muslim riots over the decades, the latest being in Delhi in February 2020, which claimed 54 lives.
In recent years, anti-Muslim violence in India has increased alarmingly. Underlying this violence is the Hindutva ideology, which aims at making secular India a Hindu state.
"This is the oldest case pending in Delhi and yet the prosecuting agency is still slow.." – ASJ Kaushik, 22 July 2007.[dead link]
one of the most horrific instances of fascistic state terror took place in Gujarat in 2002
not a spontaneous uprising, it was a carefully orchestrated attack against Muslims. The attacks were planned in advance and organised with extensive participation of the police and state government officials
| By group | |
|---|---|
| Methods |
|
| Events |
|
