Of Nationalism & Anti-nationalism
Major General Mrinal Suman
If India has
been ruled by foreign powers for centuries, our penchant for according primacy
to personal interests over national concerns has been a key contributory
factor. India has been adept at spawning throngs of people who can stoop
down to despicable levels of anti-nationalism for their petty gains. They
encourage disruptive forces and revel in India’s discomfiture at every juncture. Even today,
fading political leaders, pseudo-intellectuals and presstitutes get
rewarded handsomely for their perfidious acts by the forces inimical to Indian
interests.
The issue
of nationalism and anti-nationalism has been the subject of intense debate for
the last three years. In fact, every occurrence, act, statement and view point is
subjected to similar typecasting (national or anti-national), thereby
generating questions about the very concept of nationalism. A significant
section of Indian media and intelligentsia considers Indian nationhood to be a
nebulous proposition. For them, freedom of speech/action is of far more import
and criticality. Therefore, they give precedence to individual freedom over the
perceived national interests.
The question arises as to what is nationalism
and how does an act/activity qualify to be termed anti-national.
Notwithstanding multiple definitions given by politico-social scientists,
nationalism in its simplest form means – ‘an
unflinching belief that the interests of one’s nation-state are supreme and
take precedence over everything else’. Conversely, anti-nationalism denotes
attitudes and acts associated with an opposition to nationalism. Anti-nationalism
flows from an attitude of repugnance for the concept of nation states, thereby
assigning overriding primacy to individual rights over all other
considerations.
Coming to anti-nationalism, it’s gamut is
vast. On one end, there are overt acts of violence to include social unrest,
agitations, terrorism, insurrection and insurgency. Covert activities occupy
the other end of the spectrum and include far more seditious subterfuges that
cause social disharmony, generate dissentions amongst the people, make citizens
lose confidence in the governing regime and defame the country internationally.
Being dreadfully lethal, they have the potential of causing severe damage to
the soul and body of a nation-state.
Anti-nationalism
has two key imperatives. One, it does not exist in innocence but contains
malicious intent and ulterior motives, albeit camouflaged under high sounding ideological phrases. Two,
anti-national acts are carried out by the perpetrators in full knowledge of the
ensuing detrimental impact on national interests.
Judging against
the above two criteria, Hamid Ansari’s last
interview as the Vice-President of India certainly qualifies for the tag of
anti-nationalism. After having enjoyed all the perks and privileges of office
for the last ten years (three years under the present government), his
conscience troubled him only on the last day in office. His assertion that
India’s Muslims are living with a
"feeling of unease" and “a sense of insecurity is creeping in among
them” was certainly malevolent in intent and designed to damage India’s secular
image.
Undoubtedly,
facilitation of illegal immigrants from Bangla Desh has been the gravest
anti-national mischief in Independent India. To create a loyal vote bank, the
ruling party passed ‘Illegal Migrants – Determination by Tribunals (IMDT) Act
of 1984 for Assam’. It shifted the onus of proving illegal status of a
suspected immigrant to the accuser, which was virtually impossible. As a
result, immense damage has been done to the demography of Assam. Nearly 30
Islamic groups are thriving in the area to further their Islamist and Pan
Bangla Desh agenda.
Perhaps, India is the only country that has an
ignominious track record of producing Home Ministers who readily shamed the
country to please their master. One concocted theories of saffron terrorism
while the second one declared a terrorist to be innocent in an affidavit to the
court to ensnare the opposition
leaders in a false case. Government’s linking of the Samjhauta Express blasts to a Hindu group, whereas most
initial reports suggested involvement of the Islamic groups Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. In the process,
they provided anti-India ammunition to the hostile foreign media. Similarly, terming of Batla House encounter that led to the death of two
terrorists and one police officer to be stage-managed made Pak media ecstatic.
It keeps mocking India to date.
Some of our leaders of suspect loyalties, predisposed intelligentsia
and presstitutes display compassion for the stone-pelters who abet terrorism
but never shed a tear for the hapless soldiers and policemen braving them. Use
of young boys and women as human shield to thwart anti-terrorist operations is
acceptable to them but not the ingenuity of an officer to ensure safe passage
through hostile mobs. A section of the intelligentsia has been demanding that Jammu and Kashmir be allowed to separate from
India if it wishes to do so.
The self-proclaimed secular intelligentsia has done maximum
damage to India’s prestige and standing. Some of them appear to be fifth
columnists anti-nationals masquerading as progressive intellectuals. It can be said with certainty that the well-orchestrated
campaign of intolerance was totally
malicious in intent. The sole objective was to stall all progressive reforms by
tarnishing the image of the government.
Seditious acts and utterances that bring
disgrace and disrepute to the country are always anti-national in intent. When a political leader declares ‘it's safer to be a cow than to
be a Muslim in India today’, he puts the whole country to shame. The world
media flashes such headlines with sinister pleasure. Many
social-media activists indulge in spreading negativity in the environment. Their
sole pursuit is to search out and propagate any news or article that is
critical of the regime, howsoever innocuous or ill-informed it may be. For
them, India is a cheerless country with no hope. They see darkness and spread pessimism.
As stated above, the concept of nationalism is
based on the premise that national interests are supreme and allegiance to them
is absolute. Opposition to the government policies, criticism of its
performance and differences with the
majority view cannot be termed as anti-national activities. In fact, they are
essential for the survival of democracy in India. Freedom of speech falls under
the same convention. The concept of ‘good faith’ being the sole measure.
Finally, if India has to survive and flourish as a nation; anti-nationalism has to be
dealt with ruthlessly. Anyone promoting hatred between communities or undertaking
divisive actions should be punished for anti-national activities (or even
treason/sedition), as internal dissentions are the start point of all civil
strife. Similarly, any act or statement that harms national interests should be
viewed as anti-nationalism and censured accordingly. Human rights and personal
freedom cannot be allowed to be misused to pose a threat to national
wellbeing.*****
