What did Sharma say?

The hate speech: We’re not going to transcribe her hateful comments, but you can watch the clip here:

This took place on May 27 in the midst of a debate on Times Now on a show anchored by Navika Kumar. 

The FIRs: The video went viral after Alt News’ Mohammed Zubair tweeted out the clip—and Sharma accused him of creating a “false narrative.” Two FIRs are filed against Sharma and Zubair, respectively. The Mumbai complaint against Sharma is filed by an official of the Raza Academy. Zubair is booked in Uttar Pradesh on allegations by a member of the Hindu Sher Sena—who claims one of his tweets insults Hindu religious leaders. The offending tweet reads:

“Well done @vineetjaintimes! Why do we need Hate Mongers like Yati Narasinghanand Saraswati or Mahant Bajrang Muni or Anand Swaroop to arrange a Dharam Sansad to speak against a community and a Religion when we already have Anchors who can do much better job from News Studios.”

It is part of the same thread as the Nupur Sharma clip.

Enter, Naveen Jindal: He is the head of the Delhi media cell. His role is a bit hazy since media sources don’t specify exactly what he said. All we know is that he too tweeted something offensive about the Prophet on June 1. 

The protests: On June 3, after Friday prayers, angry Muslims in Kanpur gathered to protest Sharma’s remarks—which in turn led to a Hindu-Muslim clash. The police arrested 36 people and registered 1,500 cases—and UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath warned that all those involved “would not be spared.” FYI: This occurred on a day when President Ram Nath Kovind, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Adityanath were in town for an event.

Ok, when does this become an international incident?

The opening salvo was fired by the Grand Mufti of Oman, Sheikh Al Khalili, who tweeted on Saturday: 

“The insolent and obscene rudeness of the official spokesman for the ruling extremist party in India against the Messenger of Islam, peace be upon him, and his pure wife, Mother of the Believers Aisha, may God be pleased with her, is a war against every Muslim in the east and west of the earth, and it is a matter that calls for all Muslims to rise as one.”

The snowball effect: Neither the government nor the BJP responded to his tweet. But the Sheikh’s tweet was soon followed by a series of official responses from key nations in the Middle East. On Sunday, the governments of Kuwait, Qatar and Iran summoned their Indian ambassadors to express concern about the growing “extremism and hatred” signified by Sharma’s remarks. 

The strongest statement came from Qatar’s deputy foreign minister who tweeted: 

“The Islamophobic discourse has reached dangerous levels in a country long known for its diversity & coexistence. Unless officially & systemically confronted, the systemic hate speech targeting #Islam in #India will be considered a deliberate insult against the 2 billion Muslims.”

Also this: Supermarkets in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain removed Indian products—and there were a flurry of social media images of these being covered up in plastic on shelves:

What did the government say?

First, the BJP party issued a lengthy statement offering a stirring defence of India’s secular traditions: 

“During the thousands of years of the history of India every religion has blossomed and flourished. The Bharatiya Janata Party respects all religions. The BJP strongly denounces insult of any religious personalities of any religion… India’s Constitution gives right to every citizen to practise any religion of his/ her choice and to honour and respect every religion.”

Hours later, the leadership suspended Nupur Sharma and expelled Naveen Jindal. 

Amusing video to note: Just days before, Sharma assured an OpIndia editor that she had the full support of the party leadership—including the Prime Minister’s Office:

Meanwhile in the Middle East: The Indian embassies in Qatar and Kuwait issued near identical statements—which emphasises the nation’s secular traditions: “In line with our civilisational heritage and strong cultural traditions of unity in diversity, Government of India accords the highest respect to all religions.” 

And interestingly, it described Sharma and Jindal as “fringe elements”—claiming: “Vested interests that are against India-Qatar relations have been inciting the people using these derogatory comments.” A reference to Times Now, perhaps?

FYI: Qatar still insists it “is expecting a public apology and immediate condemnation of these remarks from the Government of India.”

Also notable: The diplomatic incident occurred while Vice President Venkaiah Naidu is on tour in Qatar—which no doubt added to the embarrassment. And an official dinner in his honour—to be held by the Deputy Emir of Qatar—was cancelled on Sunday evening. Though the official reason is that the Deputy Emir may have been exposed to Covid.

But why does any of this matter? 

It may or may not be significant in the grand scheme of things. But it does point to a key vulnerability of the government’s foreign policy. New Delhi has typically either ignored or dismissed any concern expressed for Indian Muslims—be it remarks made by Pakistan or committees in the US Congress. 

This unusual haste to offer a lengthy defence of Indian secularism points to the greater clout of Mideast nations. And here’s why they matter more:

• PM Modi has gone to great lengths to court Middle East countries—especially the UAE—which is our third largest trading partner. Thanks to his efforts, the UAE plans to increase trade with India to $100 billion.
• We depend on Qatar for 40% of our natural gas requirements. Saudi Arabia is our fourth largest trading partner and we are its largest oil importer.
• Also key: the Gulf Cooperation Council—which includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE. The total value of our trade with the GCC was $87 billion in 2020/21.
• There are 6.5 million Indians who live and work in the Gulf. For example, Indians account for a quarter of the population in Oman—and are among the richest communities in the nation. And in at least three countries, Indians outnumber locals.
• And the 5 million Indians in Saudi Arabia and the UAE respectively send $11.2 billion and $13.8 billion in remittances back home every year.
• Over the last five years, the two countries have also pledged a combined total of $170 billion to help India develop its infrastructure.

While Saudi Arabia and the UAE have not commented on the incident as yet—it was clearly in New Delhi’s best interest to try and end the controversy before it spread to its biggest trade partners. 

Not the first time: As Foreign Policy notes, the Indian government has always been more sensitive to concerns of its Mideast partners. When Muslim devotees of the Tablighi Jamaat were blamed for the spread of the coronavirus, it provoked a rare rebuke from Princess Hend al-Qassimi of the UAE. 

Soon after, PM Modi tweeted that the coronavirus “does not see race, religion, colour, caste, creed, language or borders before striking.” The government also cracked down on hate speech from Indians living in the Middle East—and offered extended assurances to Mideast nations:

“Recognizing the need to further placate rising concerns, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, India’s minister for external affairs, spoke to his counterparts in the UAE, Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia to reaffirm that India would continue to provide food supplies to Muslims during the holy month of Ramadan and would make available any medical treatment required to fight the pandemic.”

OTOH: Not everyone thinks the BJP’s move to “distance” itself from the likes of Sharma is noteworthy—or even new. In an older blog post, journalist Prem Panicker noted with dry amusement the many times the party has disowned extreme slogans, speech and personalities—often to little effect. As he puts it: “The BJP’s ‘fringe’ is getting to be like the late Bollywood actress Sadhana’s trademark hairdo—so much of ‘fringe’ that it is pretty much all anyone sees. And remembers.”

The bottomline: Gulf nations do not speak out each time Indian Muslims are humiliated—or harassed. The abrogation of Kashmir’s status wasn’t a problem—neither has there been any comment on riots, lynchings or bulldozer derbies. There is clearly a line between targeting Indian Muslims and insulting Islam—which cannot be crossed. In any case, it’s absurd to rely on the economic might of dictatorships to nudge the world’s largest democracy to respect its citizens’ rights. Surely that fight is ours.

Reading list

The Telegraph has the most on the Nupur Sharma sacking, while The Hindu has more on the diplomatic backlash. This older Foreign Policy piece has the best take on the hazards posed by Hindutva to India’s Mideast policy. Indian Express and The Diplomat have more on India’s growing role in the region under Modi.