Sunday, December 29, 2019

Mahathir tok-kok on matters in India


Dr M backs secular principles only when Muslims are minorities

by P Ramasamy

Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammed might be less and less right on international affairs than he was ever before.

The argument of interference into the internal affairs of countries cannot be sustained because leaders have the moral right to speak on matters concerning the moral, humanitarian, social and economic deprivation of communities and ethnic and religious groups.

However, there is a caveat to such commentaries as they must be based on facts, not on political expediency.

Mahathir has recently raised his concerns about the plight of the Muslims in Jammu-Kashmir as result of the imposition of direct rule by New Delhi and the impact on the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) on Muslims, but he has refrained from raising the matter of the discrimination of non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated states like Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan and others.

Where Muslims are minorities, he thinks that the best form of government should be based on principles of secularism but it is legitimate to have theocratic states where Muslims are in the majority.

Now, what kind of logic is this?

Mahathir wants to act as a spokesperson of Muslim matters in the global arena.

Nothing wrong with this as the archaic principle of non-interference must give way the discussion of humanitarian issues.

But unfortunately, with the exception of China, Mahathir seems more predisposed in talking about the plight of Muslims in countries that have Muslims as minorities.

Of late, India with its huge Hindu majority has been the target of Mahathir’s criticisms.

Interference into the affairs of other countries can be defended if facts are right.

Again, when it comes to the twin issues of Jammu-Kashmir and the new citizenship law, Mahathir has not been well informed.

How could he talk of India’s invasion of the territory when the state was ceded to India in the immediate aftermath of independence.

It was Pakistan that invaded the province only to be repulsed by India. Who are the real invaders of this territory?

How can the new law on citizenship which seeks to address years of discrimination of non-Muslims in the Muslim theocratic states of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan can be termed as anti-Muslim?

As it is, no Muslims or non-Muslims are deprived of applying through the normal channels as provided for in India’s secular constitution.

The new citizenship law is a special one meant to address a specific long-standing problem of religious discrimination, forced conversions and displacement in the theocratic countries mentioned.

The CAA is not perfect as it does not address the plight of other minorities in countries like Myanmar and Sri Lanka.

More than one hundred thousand refugees are in refugees’ camps in India with no prospect of going back to Sri Lanka. Shouldn’t something be done to resolve their long-standing problem?

Mahathir as every right to raise matters in international fora, but he must be seen as fair and responsible.

He just can’t raise matters based on political expediency or to enhance his reputation in the Muslim world.

He cannot side-step the discrimination of Uyghurs in China or the desperate situation of Yemenis as a result of the assault by Saudi Arabia and others.

The Muslim world is not perfect as the denominational warfare between the Sunni and Shia shows no signs of let-up.

It is hardly appropriate for some analysts to take the present appeasement politics in India as a sure sign of disenchantment with the Narendra Modi government. Indian democracy provides more room for dissent than any other countries.

In a specific sense, the leaders of the Congress Party have no moral standing in opposition to the new citizenship law as they cannot hide their role in the division of India on a religious basis.

While Pakistan and Bangladesh, the then East Pakistan, embraced Islam as the basis of political governance, India remained as the bastion of secularism and home to the second-largest Muslim population in the world, second to Indonesia.

Who said that Muslims have no place in India? They have as much right as the Hindus under the country’s constitution, the supreme law of the land.

It is not the question of a blind right to say things, but whether such a right can be justified on high moral principles and whether the right to say is backed by solid facts.

In the absence of these two criteria, there is no automatic right to say things and get away with it.

P RAMASAMY is Perai assemblyperson and deputy chief minister II of Penang


  1. ramasamy is india spokeman, n here we hv ccp spokeman.

    1. & u - a demoncratic spokesman!

      An irrational one too.

    2. Dangdut man is USA spokeman. But when the fakery of the US loud cry of demoncracy and human rights and freedom are exposed, not a pip from this OCBC Dangdut, utterly impotent to rebut reasonably...instead he will shut his trap and go hide, then emerged on another day to snip at CCP again and again, wakakaka...maybe too much dangdut tapai alcohol done gone mess up the brain, LOL

  2. In so-called secular India, it's getting tougher to be Muslim

    Just like the Malaysian Chinese who are Chinese first, blindly aligned with China on all matters, I see Ramasamy as knee-jerk defending his ancestral India, and Indian first.

    1. Another brainless analysis incubated via the ketuanan agenda of zombieicism first!

    2. About 40 years ago, the Malays were heartbroken when they discovered to their huge dismay that their Islamic prophet Muhammad wasn't a Malay, born in this Tanah Orang Asli.

      However, all is not lost....if the Arab leader ain't Melayoo, the Melayoo can be Arab, good enough la. ( Something like if Muhammad can't go to the mountain, the mountain will come to Muhammad ) LOL That's why we get all these Arabinized names and words, Arab dressing and much more...the more Arab, the more holier, can get straight pass to shurga, 72 virgins a-waiting, wakakakaka

  3. Mahathir not well informed about what is happening in India? I don't think so. He simply chose to ignore facts to "enhance" his muslim credentials.

    It is no wonder that nobody has dared to criticise Hadi about what he has said recently - that non-malays, non-muslims should basically just swallow what people like him(hadi) says.

    1. No!

      Mamak just want to do what an ummat SHOULD do to reinforce his Muslim credentials.

      He has to be seen to be more Muslim than Muslim! His claim of been melayu is built on the clause 160(2) of the FedConst.

      All melayu palsu have a very strong inbuilt urge to be more melayu than melayu!

      Otherwise, he is Nothing!

    2. religion fail hadi to attain power now he make use of race, a pity so called pios fella.