The Fragile Fabric Of Secularism: India’s Political Shift And Its Consequences – OpEd
In the last decade, India has experienced a significant shift in its approach to religious diversity, marked by controversial policies that have led to increased alienation and discrimination against religious minorities. This article explores key political actions, including the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the abrogation of Article 370, that highlight India’s growing religious bias under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government. The implications of these actions are analyzed, both within India and across South Asia, underscoring the risk they pose to regional unity. By examining these issues, the article also emphasizes the importance of secularism and inclusivity for India’s global reputation and offers recommendations for promoting religious harmony.
India, known historically for its religious pluralism, now faces concerns over its secular identity due to a series of political measures perceived as biased against minorities. The rise of Hindu nationalism, particularly under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, has spurred debates on India’s commitment to secularism as enshrined in its constitution. This article examines the impact of specific legislative and executive actions that illustrate India’s deviation from religious neutrality, investigating how these measures affect India’s domestic and international standing, particularly within South Asia. Given the globalized context, India’s handling of religious diversity bears broader implications, as regional allies observe and respond to the nation’s internal shifts.
The discourse on religious nationalism in India highlights a departure from the country’s secular foundations, with scholars emphasizing how Hindu nationalism has grown to influence politics and policy. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the abrogation of Article 370 have been identified as two major actions reflecting this shift, each with profound impacts on religious minorities, especially Muslims. Studies by organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented the consequences of these policies on marginalized groups and criticized the Indian government for fostering intolerance. Further, researchers have noted how India’s religious policies could destabilize relations within South Asia, where religious dynamics often fuel interstate tensions.
The CAA allows citizenship for refugees from neighboring countries, specifically Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians, but explicitly excludes Muslims. This policy has been seen as a clear departure from India’s secular stance, leading to mass protests nationwide. Critics argue that the CAA undermines India’s commitment to equality by using religious criteria to determine citizenship, a move that contradicts Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. By excluding Muslims, the CAA has created a climate of fear and division, increasing societal distrust and alienating one of India’s largest minority groups. Recent updates include the government’s notification of the Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024, which aims to facilitate the citizenship application process for eligible individuals under the CAA, including an online system for application and processing. However, the CAA continues to face significant opposition and legal challenges, with widespread protests expressing concerns over its discriminatory nature and potential violations of constitutional rights.
In August 2019, the Indian government revoked Article 370, effectively removing Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomous status. This decision disproportionately affected the Muslim-majority population of the region, resulting in heightened tensions and widespread unrest. Many scholars argue that the abrogation was aimed specifically at altering the region’s demographic composition and reducing the influence of its Muslim population. Consequently, international human rights organizations have condemned the subsequent lockdown and military presence, which severely restricted freedoms in the region, further deteriorating India’s image as a secular and inclusive state.
Moreover, anti-conversion laws, implemented in states such as Uttar Pradesh, target interfaith relationships, specifically those involving Muslim men and Hindu women. These laws are grounded in the unsubstantiated notion of “love jihad,” a conspiracy theory alleging that Muslim men lure Hindu women into marriage to convert them to Islam. Such measures disproportionately target Muslim communities and infringe on individuals’ freedom to marry across religious boundaries. Human rights advocates argue that these laws institutionalize discrimination and violate basic civil rights, thus fostering a hostile environment for religious minorities.
Furthermore, India’s treatment of its Muslim population has strained relations with Pakistan, which has historically expressed concerns over the rights of Muslims in India, especially in Kashmir. The abrogation of Article 370 has deepened distrust, with Pakistan condemning India’s actions as oppressive. This distrust has reverberated throughout South Asia, potentially destabilizing a region already marked by complex religious and ethnic tensions.
In addition, India’s policies toward religious minorities have raised alarms in the Middle East, where Indian expatriates constitute a substantial part of the workforce. Nations such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, with strong ties to India, are beginning to voice concerns over India’s domestic religious policies. Any sustained tension could disrupt trade and diplomatic relations, thereby impacting India’s economic interests in the region.
Moreover, international human rights organizations, including the United Nations Human Rights Council, have documented India’s increasing religious intolerance, which has severely impacted India’s global reputation. Consequently, India’s image as a secular democracy is at risk, affecting its influence within global multilateral organizations. This reputational damage also limits India’s soft power appeal, as its actions contradict its historical advocacy for non-discrimination and human rights.
Given these challenges, South Asia, already susceptible to religious tensions, is particularly vulnerable to further divisions if India continues to move toward religious exclusivity. Retaliatory discrimination against Hindu minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh could follow, contributing to an atmosphere of intolerance across borders and threatening regional stability.
To address these pressing issues, India should consider repealing or amending laws like the CAA and anti-conversion policies to ensure adherence to constitutional principles. Such reforms would signal India’s commitment to secularism and inclusivity, fostering domestic unity and mitigating regional tensions. Additionally, India could lead initiatives promoting interfaith harmony, both domestically and across South Asia, through regional forums focused on religious tolerance. This proactive stance could improve diplomatic ties and counter the spread of extremism, which threatens peace in South Asia.
Furthermore, India’s adherence to international human rights standards is crucial for maintaining its global reputation. By aligning domestic policies with these standards, India could restore its credibility and assert itself as a responsible actor on the world stage.
Ultimately, India’s recent political actions reflect an unsettling shift away from secularism, which threatens both domestic unity and regional stability. The exclusionary policies implemented under the current government jeopardize India’s democratic principles and reduce its appeal as a multicultural society. In a globalized world, India’s ability to lead by example in promoting religious inclusivity is imperative—not only for its own interests but also for fostering unity in South Asia. Embracing these values is essential for India’s continued relevance and leadership on the global stage
References
- Ahmed, S., & Roy, K. (2023). Religious Nationalism and Regional Tensions in South Asia. Journal of International Affairs, 57(4), 52-67.
- Bhat, T. (2020). The Impact of Article 370’s Abrogation on Jammu and Kashmir. South Asian Review, 41(3), 213-229.
- Chandra, A. (2019). The Rise of Hindu Nationalism in India. Political Science Quarterly, 134(2), 345-368.
- Global Rights Forum. (2022). India’s Human Rights Violations in Kashmir. Rights Watch.
- Hussain, R. (2021). Pakistan’s Diplomatic Strategy in Response to India’s Actions in Kashmir. Pakistan Journal of International Relations, 19(2), 175-189.
- Kumar, P., & Joseph, A. (2022). Anti-Conversion Laws and Religious Discrimination in India. Law and Society Review, 49(1), 109-132.
- Malik, F. (2024). India and the Middle East: Navigating Economic Diplomacy Amidst Religious Tensions. Middle East Journal, 58(2), 122-139.
- Raj, V. (2020). The Constitutional Debate on the Citizenship Amendment Act. Indian Journal of Constitutional Law, 12(1), 34-50.
- Rizvi, A. (2023). The Interplay of Religion and Politics in South Asia: Implications for Regional Stability. South Asia Journal, 45(2), 78-95.
- Siddiqui, T. (2023). The Politics of Love Jihad: Anti-Conversion Laws in India. Journal of Human Rights, 18(1), 45-62.
- UNHRC. (2023). Report on Human Rights Violations in India. United Nations Human Rights Council.
Pak NDU scholars are tutored to write such Anti-India articles.Pakistan needs to be told how their own country is to be governed than to preach its neighbour India.
Does any muslim nation accept Pakistani Muslim immigrants?Will Pakistan accept if Indian Muslims are keen to migrate?
Indian minorities all are happy living here with freedom to practice their own religion.
Muslims are really not a minority in India any more with their growing numbers.
India is and will remain a multicultural society where as any citizen can reach the highest positions if he or she has the capability and their are innumerable examples.
Do visit India and then compare with the kind of freedom Indian minorities have and then you the Pakistan scholars will rewrite but their you do not have that kind of freedom. You will go missing.