In the context of X.T.M’s post “Who can speak for the ‘Muslim minority’ of India?” , this video is extremely relevant.
I am often accused on BP of having an “anti-Indian” agenda when I state facts such as that the BJP doesn’t have a single elected Muslim parliamentarian. Yet, these are the exact same arguments being made by Najeeb Jung, who has been the Lt. Governor of Delhi and the Vice Chancellor of Jamia Milia Islamia and thus is not at all a Pakistani.
Today we focus on questions that few people are likely to address yet they are important and need to be honestly answered. What does it feel like to be a Muslim in Modi’s India? How do Muslims feel when they are lynched in the name of cow protection, accused of love jihad, hear calls to boycott their businesses, pilloried in campaign speeches and told to go to Pakistan? Does this suggest that Muslims are becoming second class citizens in India? As a result has the fraternity that binds India’s communities been fractured and weakened? And what is the Prime Minister’s response to this?
the following is a cut and paste from balbir punj’s tongue in cheek article in the pioneer.
https://www.dailypioneer.com/2025/columnists/muslims-have-been-insecure-in-india-for-a-long-time.html
During that period, Congress leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru, Acharya Kripalani, and Sardar Patel went to great lengths to reassure the ‘insecure’ Muslim community that it would be protected in independent India. Despite their heartfelt pleas, Muslims continued to feel ‘insecure’.The ‘insecure’ Muslims organised and led violent protests in support of their demand for an independent Islamic nation. The result: timeless India was divided, and Pakistan was born after an internecine bloodbath in which lakhs of innocents were killed, millions were uprooted, and limitless pain and humiliation were inflicted.So, the narrative that Muslims feel ‘insecure’ in India ruled by the Prime Minister is no surprise. Muslims have been ‘insecure’ long before even Modi or the RSS were born.Muslims in India-whether Shia or Sunni, Deobandi or Barelvi-enjoy not only equal rights but often greater constitutional protections than the Hindu majority. This is not merely a product of a “secular Constitution”. India’s pluralism is rooted in a civilisation that has, for millennia, embraced multiplicity and coexistence. In contrast, hundreds of Muslims are killed by fellow Muslims every year in fratricidal violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan.Why do present-day Muslims feel ‘insecure’ in India? No one holds today’s Muslims responsible for the atrocities committed against Hindus by successive Islamic invaders. But why does a significant section of the subcontinent’s Muslims glorify and identify with figures like Ghaznavi, Ghori, Babur, Aurangzeb, and Tipu Sultan? bCelebrating a character (mythical or historical) implies validation of its actions and a strong desire to emulate them. A recent development adds to the substance of this argument. On 6 December, suspended Trinamool Congress MLA Humayun Kabir laid the foundation stone for a “Babri Masjid” in Murshidabad, with a massive crowd in attendance. Building a mosque is not the issue-India’s pluralistic ethos welcomes all faiths. But why name it after Babur? His memory evokes the destruction of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi temple at Ayodhya by his associate, Mir Baqi, and the endless struggle by successive generations of Hindus to reclaim it, in the Indian psyche. Babur established Mughal rule through jihad, calling himself a “Ghazi”-an Islamic warrior dedicated to fighting infidels.Treating figures like Babur as role models initiates an endless cycle. Much of Muslim ‘insecurity’ results from this action-reaction syndrome. A segment of Muslims, influenced by ‘secularists’, seeks to celebrate Islamic ‘heroes’, aspires to imitate them and their deeds, which inevitably leads to conflict with a resurgent India determined to oppose this medieval, jihadi mindset.It is not rocket science to realise that building genuine friendships with Jews while praising Hitler and overlooking his horrific genocide is not a workable proposition.
Henry VIII led the Reformation and destroyed the wealth (and priceless heritage) of the Church.
He is a much loved figure in Britain.
After destroying Babri Masjid, which is a priceless heritage (5 centuries old, in Britain that would have been Grade 1 listed), the new anger is why rename it after Babur.
Very soon Akbar will be a dirty word.
if not dirty, all his actions will be made available for reading and he might become a contested figure like tipu.
this feels a little overwrought Kabir?
You said that the minority has the right to speak for itself.
Najeeb Jung is an extremely prominent Indian Muslim (former Lt. Governor of Delhi). He is expressing the sense of despair felt by many many Indian Muslims.
Yes but I feel ur posting just feels very anti-Modi & anti-BJP
Obviously, I’m anti BJP. I believe in India as a secular state of all its citizens.
I have a right to my political positions. As does anyone else who wants to post about whatever.
This interview is very relevant in the context of the whole discussion about the Muslim minority in India.
I realised I was friends with Najeeb’s daughter. What a small world
This is interesting:
“On Cultural Muslims”
By Selim Koru
https://kulturkampftr.substack.com/p/on-cultural-muslims
Disclosure: I’m a cultural Muslim