The author defines the boundaries of “ secularism”, in the context of Indian politics. Indian politicians in their pursuit for vote banks, have conveniently forgotten the meaning of the word, or never really understood it, if at all.
To most Indian politicians the word simply means as much as a bunch of letters that have something to do with religion.
It’s now left for the thinking elite to enlighten the milieu on what the words mean, and what are the repercussions. Mr. Singh criticizes General (Retd.) S.K. Sinha, Jammu & Kashmir’s former governor for giving forestlands to the Amarnath Shrine Board. This giving away of property that did not belong to him, at his whim and will, in the light of the religious diversity that the country struggles to balance is reprehensible. Having held such a senior position in the Indian Army, it should have struck him that by doing this, he has provoked the local Muslim population, who will now be more inclined to distrust the Hindus, as well as the authorities. This is a walkover for Pakistan. And what is the sense in creating strife inside the country, when we are dreadfully short of armed personnel for the front, and additional force is indirectly required to quell the uprisings that will surface periodically. General Sinha may, at the best, go down in the history as a senile armed force personnel, while people fight amongst themselves and lose life over something that General Sinha had no rights to do, what so ever.
I, however, wish Mr. Singh had raised similar issues on grants to Haj pilgrims. That would have been really secular on part of the Mr. Singh.
More reviews about the Secular Blunders