Forgotten India

A mob of Muslims burned to death at least 57 Hindu nationalists in a train in the Indian state of Gujarat Feb. 27. Since then, 700 more people—mostly Muslims—have been killed by Hindus. This tragedy has been virtually ignored by most American media sources, and in particular, the limited news coverage appears to be silent regarding the hundreds of Muslim victims.

Even Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, who has been tirelessly trying to understand the roots of ethnically-motivated violence in recent months, has mentioned the deaths in India only as a frame for the violence in the Middle East.

While the media and international community have been incredibly—and responsibly—focused on the escalating violence in Israel, the horrific rioting in India has not been addressed with anywhere near the same level of commitment or analysis.

As the minority in Gujarat state, Muslims make up only about 13 percent of the population, and the rioting has turned into a Hindu rout of the Muslim minority. While the rioting in Ayodhya, a city in Gujarat, was originally in reaction to the death of the 57 Hindus on the train, most of the violence has led exclusively to large numbers of Muslim deaths. Whole families have perished, homes have been destroyed and businesses vandalized and looted. Even as the violence has been suppressed by the government, as many as 30,000 Muslims are displaced and too frightened to return to whatever ruins are left to them. The Hindu-controlled national government responded to the rioting slowly and inadequately.

This most recent conflicts in India stems from one small piece of land in Ayodhya. Originally, a Hindu temple to the God Rama was built there, but in the sixteenth century, Muslims tore down the temple and replaced it with a mosque. This mosque was left standing until a decade ago, when Hindus tore down the mosque, leading to riots in which 2,000 people died. The issue comes down to who should have a house of worship on this land.

Last month, the supreme court of India decided that a Hindu temple should be built on an adjacent piece of land, and the Hindu party involved in the situation, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), agreed. No one wanted the rioting to continue, so such a compromise was welcomed. To prevent further violence, the supreme court ruled that there would be no religious activity of any kind, by any faith, directly on the site. Yet VHP immediately held a Hindu religious ceremony there.

For anyone outside of India, the situation is almost unknown. There can be outcry over elections in Zimbabwe, peacekeepers in East Timor and conversation about violence in the Middle East. Hundreds of deaths in India may get a story or two, but no commentary, no meaningful dialogue, not even a mention in State Department briefings.

With so much recent emphasis on understanding and alleviating ethnically-motivated conflicts, for the media and government to take no notice of the violence in India makes no sense.

It appears that a pattern has immerged in media coverage of certain conflicts. In 1994, ethnic violence rattled both Bosnia and Rwanda. However, only the conflict in Europe got the front pages of newspapers, the attention of politicians and a wide array of peacekeepers. Western nations now sheepishly admit that they should have intervened in Rwanda sooner and with more commitment.

Likewise, the lack of attention on the violence in India from the media, the U.S. state department and non-governmental organizations is inexcusable. There is a significant unbalance between the principles the media purports and its actual coverage of the world. The hypocritical behavior of the government and media has not dissipated even when unbalanced reporting has begun to be criticized in recent years.

If the media claims that its purpose is to give full and fair coverage of world events, then it cannot ignore violence in parts of the world that are more foreign to us than others. For people to believe that human rights are essential and that these rights must be protected regardless of where they live, then the media cannot portray a world in which only those closest to America deserve news time.

The conscious choice to exclude the deaths of hundreds of Muslims from news coverage is not simply an oversight or for lack of interest in international news. Considering that the 57 Hindus who were killed were deemed worthy of the front page, it is highly suspicious that there was no follow up for the Muslim victims. The media must give evenhanded treatment to all regions of the world and all ethnic groups. Otherwise, it will fall into the trap serving prejudicial news in a world that severely needs a better understanding of people different from themselves.

Katherine M. Dimengo ’04 is an English concentrator in Winthrop House.