Under the guise of providing a “financial assistance” of Rs5 lakh to these victims, the state seems to be running a scheme to empty refugee camps as soon as possible, whatever the human cost.
“I and my family members left our village from fear due to the violent events that took place there, leaving our house and village. Under no circumstances will we ever return to our village and home again,” reads one of the three prominent conditions those availing the UP government’s financial aid have to sign off on.
The Samajwadi Party government’s apprehensions seem to be about the continued presence Muslims in camps, not the terrible conditions prevailing in them, or even the reasons for this present crisis. It also seems to be ignorant of the identity crisis that has taken root among the Jats, (around 14 per cent of western UP’s population), and a key reason why the area has become engulfed in violence.
That the government is unmindful of the crisis is clear from another condition it has placed in these affidavits: Those who avail of the state’s aid will not be allowed to live in any refugee camp thereafter. Nor will they be able to live “illegally” on houses constructed in the village lands, or government-owned lands. This begs the question—where in this area will a Muslim find land and housing worth Rs5 lakh?
The money, the state has made clear in the affidavits, is meant to be used to construct a house. But here too, a condition has been imposed: “After my family or any member of my family avails this one-time financial assistance, we will not try to recoup any loss of immovable property in our village or in any other place.”
In effect, these conditions ensure that those who were forced out of their homes will forego all their properties for Rs5 lakh, regardless of what they owned, or lost in the riots. This sum is to be paid in only one instalment, into their bank accounts, after which the state intends to wash its hands off the matter. For many people, this will be a far lower compensation than the rich agricultural land of this part of the state is worth.
It is confirmed that such affidavits have been signed by many residents who have taken shelter in the camps at Shahpur Bassi. The entire camp consists of Muslims who fled for fear of their lives after the violence that broke out on September 8.
Muslims in a relief camp in Shahpur, Muzzafarnagar
Villagers in Shahpur and around say they are not sure what the government intends to do with the properties that Muslims have left behind in their villages. Many report that their properties have been burnt down, broken into, and appropriated by other villagers. Haroon and his son Ilyas picked up their meagre belongings, next to tears, at Kakada on Tuesday: “Look at this, they have taken away everything of value that I owned,” he sobbed. Going by the affidavits they are now expected to sign, they will lose any right to claim damages against those who trespass into their homes or occupy their land.
These affidavits do not specify the religion of the beneficiaries, however, the composition of camps makes it clear that only Muslims have sought shelter in them. No camps are known to have come up housing Jat victims or any other community.
Muslims in a relief camp in Shahpur, Muzzafarnagar.
Around 50,000 people fled from villages around Muzaffarnagar in the immediate aftermath of riots that broke out two months ago. The numbers of refugees has now come down, as per unofficial estimates, to around 20,000. Those who remain consist mainly of people who faced the worst of the violence. Many of them are steadfast against returning to villages they fled from.
“The homeless victims have left everything behind in their villages. They are eking out a miserable existence in these camps, and say they are doing so with no assistance from the state after the first couple of weeks,” says Mohd Shaukat, a member of the town committee at Shahpur, who is also managing affairs at the Bassi camp, housing about a 1,000 people in two locations.
Mohd. Salim, who was working as a mistry at Kawal village, says he owned several buffaloes and a plot of land too, but the livestock has been taken by the neighbours by now. “People have taken over everything I left behind at my village,” he says. He is too terrified to return for now. Like several other residents, he hopes to return for a short trip in a while, just to pick up his movable belongings. As for the land: He just hasn’t thought that far. “All my days at the camp go in looking for work,” he says.
While the state government is imposing tough conditions on these hapless victims, it appears to be ineffectual against sporadic bouts of violence, and seems to have run out of ideas to refresh the dwindling farm economy of the region.
On Wednesday fresh violence broke out in Shahpur after Irfan, from the Bassi camp, identified a man, Yogendra, he had seen participating in the violence at Kutba and Kutbi villages. Yogendra was beaten up by a crowd on the spot. A while later, Irfan, too, was shot dead at nearby Rasulpur village. In the melee, a shop belonging to a local, Dr Harveer Arya, was burnt down. It is not clear by whom.
In a strange twist to this latest violent episode, farm leader Naresh Tikait, a leading figure among the Jats, son of late Mahendra Singh Tikait, and now chairman of Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), announced on November 8 that Muslims involved in the latest round of violence must be arrested within 24 hours—he said the government is being “ek-tarfa”—one-sided. His brother Rakesh Tikait told Outlook earlier that the ongoing violence is not just between Jats and Muslims. Though no community other than Muslims and Jats has taken any part in the violence since September, he says, “It is a Hindu-Muslim fight.”
While leaders of various hues try to add fresh communal touches to the clashes, the panchayats are being accused of having failed to restore confidence among Muslims refugees to return to their villages.
“The panchayat leadership at present has failed. It will take years before a new leadership that is convincing and vigilant of farmer’s needs will arrive on the scene here,” says Harinder Singh Malik, a former Congress Member of Parliament and prominent figure in the local Jat politics. He, too, attended the earliest ‘mahapanchayat’ of Jats, in the events following which all hell broke loose. He denied having addressed that meeting. Both Malik and Rakesh Tikait insisted that the panchayat was a “shok sabha”, held to mourn the deaths of two Jats at Kawal village.
The absence of a viable Jat leadership makes the role of Akhilesh Yadav’s government even more critical at this juncture. More than 80 per cent of Jats are farmers, who find that the size of their holdings is shrinking. Their main crop is sugarcane but their payments are delayed by mills, sometimes by over two years.
Diesel and fertilizer subsidies are being withdrawn, putting immense pressure on farmers’ costs. Besides, most Jats only study up to school and the community has not taken to technical education. Most of the youth joins the Army or police force. In fact, despite the ongoing fighting, the highways are lined with row after row of boys jogging: They are preparing for the physical fitness tests compulsory before joining the forces.
Due to the Arya Samaj influence, Jats have not diversified from farming into poultry-keeping or piggeries: They are mostly vegetarian, and against killing. Meanwhile the veterinary hospitals in the area are largely without doctors, making it next to impossible to maintain livestock.
Member of Parliament from Bijnor and Muzaffarnagar resident Sanjay Singh Chauhan told Outlook that both Muslims and the Jats are “disappointed” with the ongoing events, and want to live side-by-side again, but the Panchayats may be in no position to find the appropriate solution this time. “There is a reason for this. The Panchayats are only attended by leaders who agree that the village should be restored to its original composition. Those who disagree—the lumpen elements who caused the rift, who spark off the violence, are not even present at the panchayat meets,” he says. He says the law and order problem needs to be solved by the state machinery—the Jat-dominated police and constabulary.
Indeed, this is one reason why the state has failed to prevent khap meeting after meeting. At Mohammadpur Raisingh, the Gathwala khap has announced a Khap gathering on the 10th of November. This has been put off until the next day—November 11, once the SP government agreed to fulfil its demands to arrest Muslims accused of rioting. One wonders why the same SP government is taking away the right of evicted Muslims to recoup their only real asset: their land and buildings.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
People look for reasons to find excuses for terrorism in India. This is what IM claimed in its own e-mail. From today's Indian express.
The IM manifesto released said,
"Raising the illustrious banner of jehad against the Hindus and all those who fight and resist us, and here we begin our revenge with the help and permission of Allah..." The manifesto called upon Hindus to "realise that falsehood of your 33 crore dirty mud idols and the blasphemy of your deaf, dumb, mute and naked idols of Ram, Krishna and Hanuman are not going to save your neck from being slaughtered by our hand".
The justification for terrorism is found in the pages and scriptures that IM claims to gain inspiration form and the same political/religious thought that resulted in genocide of non-muslims in all muslim majority and ruled areas of Indian subcontinent and then have the audacity and perfidy to claim "religion of peace' when exactly the opposite are the facts of history.
The truth is bitter but must be said and faced. Resolution wont come by hiding behind a tissue of lies.
Listen the way a section of Indians are treating the issue of internally displaced people is disgusting and dangerous.
Yes the way Pandits were forced out by Jehadis in Kashmir was shamefull and deplorable.
Till date that remains to be addressed,But remember that in no way justifies the way victims of 2002 and Muzaffar nagar are bieng treated.
If you apply the same rule then we must accept that given the fact that we ignored the displaced Pandits ,we ignore the displaced Muslims as well.Thats a fair message.
Like any journalists, Pragya Singh is striving to get published. If she does not adopt this kind of journalism-showing surity of Hindu crimes but creating doubts of Muslim crimes-she would not stand any chance to get published, especially in Outlook. So go easy on her. Look how hard she worked? She must have prepared many drafts and torn up many drafts before she came up to an article to Outlooks' satisfaction.
In Gujarat NGOs convinced the refugees not to return to their residence with some false promises of them (NGOs) forcing government's hands. Plus almost all refugees were from cities. Gujarat's record is clear that not very many racial riots occured and if these refugees had reurned to their respective residence, nothing would have happened to them.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT