India believes in the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries, which is in line with contemporary international law and resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly.
However, this principle has been repeatedly violated in practice. The United Nations itself, despite Article 2(7) of its Charter, on human rights and minority issues in India, including sporadic cases of no international import, whether at the level of the UN Commission on Human Rights or the Office of the UN Secretary-General.
In particular the US pronounces authoritatively on India’s internal issues in annual reports on questions such as human rights, democracy, treatment of minorities, specific Indian domestic laws, and so on. The UK debates these issues in its Parliament.
Pakistan in our neighborhood has violently interfered in India’s affairs using terrorism as an instrument of state policy. It has been campaigning internationally against us for decades on the treatment of minorities in India. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) attacks India liberally on human rights in Kashmir at the behest of Pakistan, especially with the support of Turkey. In addition to condemning Hinduism, Pakistan’s Prime Minister regularly raises the issue of alleged persecution of Muslims in Kashmir and India at the United Nations. India sometimes retaliates by criticizing Pakistan as a nursery of terrorism and for fostering Islamic fundamentalism.
Nepal has traditionally complained about India’s interference in its internal affairs. Internal politics play into this emotional issue. Sri Lanka complains against India for interfering in its internal affairs on the Tamil question.
Although accused of interference in its internal affairs by some of its neighbours, India is sensitive to interference and opposition in its internal affairs. However, it must be said as a general policy that India does not interfere in the internal affairs of the country. It can easily pronounce on the internal affairs of Western countries who are responsible for many issues that criticize India. But India is not a crusader for promoting democracy and human rights around the world. It is also opposed to the politicization of these issues in international forums.
India sees an international campaign against the rise of Hindutva in Western education, media, think tanks and even at the official level in the Anglo-Saxon world. There is a wide debate on this issue in India itself, which transcends Indian borders due to our diaspora maintaining active relations with self-defined secular forces in India.
Since Hindutva is the assertion of India’s Hindu identity, this campaign falls into an attack against Hinduism. With the rise of India, this claim is introducing a new element in civilizational, cultural and religious discourses and contests on the global stage. India observes that the international debate on religious tolerance is limited to Islam and other Abrahamic religions, and not to non-Abrahamics who suffer persecution and intolerance. This makes India more aware of the need to protect Hinduism.
India was divided on religious lines, so for all the secular discourse, the religious element is strong in subcontinental politics. Today, the Hindu population in Pakistan is minuscule, about 5.2 million people, making up 2.17 percent of its total population. In what was then East Pakistan and now Bangladesh, the Hindu population remained substantial but has been declining over time (in East Bengal in 1947, Hindus were 28 percent of the population, today it is only 7.95 percent).
Against this backdrop, to which has been added the significant illegal migration of Muslims from Bangladesh over the years, particularly in the neighboring states of West Bengal and Assam where the demographics have changed, the welfare, safety and treatment of Hindus in Bangladesh is highly sensitive. Case for India. The mass exodus of Bangladeshis, including Hindus, in 1971 to escape the tyranny of the Pakistani army reminds them of the need to protect them from renewed attacks by the Islamist forces involved in the violent operations of the Pakistani army in Bangladesh. Local people regaining political power. These elements include the repudiation of Bangladesh’s freedom struggle and plans to rewrite the country’s constitution to make the country’s constitution more Islamically offensive to minority communities, and are therefore a matter of concern for India.
Muhammad Yunus’s interim setup is playing down the extent of the pressure on Hindu Bangladeshis, and this has raised questions about his willingness to seriously address the issue. In a message to Yunus after Prime Minister Narendra Modi took over the interim charge on August 8, he expressed concern about the safety of Hindus and other minorities in Bangladesh. On October 12, the Ministry of External Affairs called on Bangladesh to ensure the safety and security of Hindus and all minorities and their places of worship. On November 26, the MEA expressed deep concern over the arrest and denial of bail to ISKCON priest Chinmoy Krishna Das, following several attacks on Hindus and other minorities by extremist elements in Bangladesh, including desecration of deities and temples.
India has more reason to express its deep concern when other countries have also raised it. US President-elect Donald Trump on October 31st “strongly condemned the barbaric violence against Hindus, Christians and other minorities in Bangladesh”. British parliamentarians have raised the issue of the attack on the Hindu community in Bangladesh.
The author is a former foreign secretary