Syed Jalaluddin Umari is the President (amir) of the

Jamaat-e Islami Hind, one of the largest and most

influential Islamic organizations in India . In this
interview with Yoginder Sikand he talks about the
recent wave of terror attacks in India , attacks on
Muslims and on moves to set up a Muslim political
party in the country.
Q: What do you have to say about the recent wave of
bomb blasts across India , which the media and the
intelligence agencies have sought to blame Muslims
for?
A: Soon after the deadly state-sponsored anti-Muslim
pogroms in Gujarat in 2002 there was a sort of lull in
communal violence and disruptive acts, but now, over
the last year or so, suddenly blasts are happening in
various parts of the country, causing widespread
death and destruction and indiscriminate arrests,
mainly of Muslim youths. The state agencies, the
police and the media have sought to blame Muslims
for all these disruptive acts, but, as the recent
revelations about the role of Hindutva groups in the
Malegaon and Modassa incidents clearly shows, this
accusation appears to have little merit. In the wake
of blasts across India , scores of Muslims have been
targeted, picked up by the police and tortured, and
the law has not been allowed to take its proper
course. All that we have, in the vast majority of cases,
are confessions probably forcibly procured by the
police from those arrested, and this cannot be
adduced as proof in any court of law. Yet, the media
takes these confessional statements extracted under
duress as gospel truth and has been engaged in a
concerted campaign to brand Muslims as terrorists.
Q: So, do you mean to say that Muslims might not be
responsible for these various blasts, contrary to what
the media and the intelligence agencies allege?
A: I am not saying that there might not be even a
single Muslim who could engage in disruptive
activities. But I strongly feel, and this some sections of
the media are themselves now saying, that these blasts
might have been perpetrated by fiercely anti-Muslim
groups, by radical Hindutva outfits or their activists,
who seek, along with the media and the intelligence
agencies, to blame Muslims for them so that Islam
and Muslims get a bad name. They want to thereby
divide the people of India against each other, widen
communal polarisation, create anti-Muslim hysteria
and consolidate a Hindu vote-bank, particularly
keeping in mind the coming elections. Anyone with a
bit of commonsense must certainly wonder why
Muslims would engage in such activities when they
cause grave harm and damage to Muslims
themselves, because after these blasts it is inevitably
Muslims alone who are arrested or gunned down in
fake encounters and who have to suffer increasing
suspicion and hatred from other communities. And
then several of these blasts have taken place in
Muslim localities, even in mosques, dargahs and
Muslim graveyards, where those killed and injured
have been wholly Muslims. Why on earth would
Muslims target their own people? Why are the police
and the media not coming out in the open about the
evidence of militant Hindutva groups and activists
being involved in several terrorist attacks and bomb
blasts? Why is this not being branded or described as
terrorism?
I must also state here that all Indian Muslim
organizations and notable leaders have openly and
forcefully condemned all these disruptive acts, no
matter who their perpetrators might be. These
activities harm our country, kill innocent people,
Hindus, Muslims and others, and do the most damage
to Muslims, because it is Muslims who inevitably bear
the brunt of the wrath of the police, the intelligence
agencies and the media in the aftermath of these
incidents even when they are not behind them.
We demand a proper and fair investigation into all
such incidents. But is this being done? I regret to say
it is not. Take the case of the recent killing of two
Muslim youth in Batla House in New Delhi . Muslim
as well as secular human rights organizations are
raising serious questions about the police's version of
the story, and they are demanding a proper
investigation of the incident. This is a purely
democratic demand, but why is it that this is not
conceded? Are the authorities afraid that such an
investigation might reveal the police's version to be
false? To claim, as those who oppose this sort of
investigation say, that this would result in the
lowering of the morale of the police is completely
bizarre.
Q: What, then, do you think is the way out?
A: We want the law to take its proper course. We
want the legal process to be allowed to properly
function. Unfortunately, however, this is not
happening in scores of cases. Muslims are being
arbitrarily arrested and branded, by the police,
intelligence agencies and the media, as terrorists,
though the courts as yet have not delivered any
judgment. Our point is that if any persons, no matter
what their religion, or if any organization,
irrespective of whichever community it is associated
with, are proved, after proper investigation, to be
indeed involved in these blasts, they must be punished
according to the law.
Q: What do you feel about the charges about the
banned Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI)
being behind these blasts? After all, at one time, the
SIMI was the youth wing of the Jamaat-e Islami.
A: It should be clear that SIMI was never a wing of
the Jamaat. Jamaat has its own wing, the SIO
(formed in 1982). In 1992, the Iqdam-e-Ummat
conference was organized by SIMI in Mumbai. There
the SIMI activists used intemperate language. Then
the Jamaat-e Islami Hind decided that henceforth no
Jamaat representative would attend any SIMI
meetings. This was done to emphasize the Jamaat's
stand that the language used by Muslims must be
proper and balanced. Prior to this, we had tried to
make the SIMI realize that their immature approach
was wrong, and under the circumstances it was
unrealistic and impractical as well and not in
accordance with the Islamic temperament.
However the ground reality is that even before the
ban on the SIMI, its influence was rather limited. It
was not the hugely influential movement that the
media makes it out to be. Moreover as journalists
such as Ajit Sahi of Tehelka have shown, no case of
SIMI activists being involved in any illegal or
disruptive acts has ever been proved in any court. If
SIMI was really wedded to terrorism, as is being
alleged, then why is it that when it was not banned it
did not engage in such activities, and that after the
ban, when its wings were clipped, its offices sealed,
many of its activists arrested and others who had
been associated with it closely watched by intelligence
agencies, it was allegedly able to mastermind all these
deadly blasts across the country? This question must
be asked, but, of course, the media is not asking it.
Q: But surely the SIMI's radical rhetoric was
inflammatory and pernicious. Its call for armed jihad,
its visceral hatred for and opposition to democracy,
secularism and the concept of the nation-state and its
appeal for establishing a Caliphate in India naturally
made it seen by many Indians, including Muslims, as
very dangerous. In this sense, it was akin to some
extreme radical Islamist groups in the Arab world.
What do you have to say about this sort of approach?
A: Any immature approach is of course wrong and
completely impractical and, moreover, it is counter-
productive. However, you must realize that much of
the SIMI's rhetoric was limited to raising slogans.
Islamic movements across the world have
increasingly begun to avoid empty rhetoric. They
know that any immature action leads to harsh
suppression. Islamic movements in various countries
are clearly realizing that the only practical avenue
before them is through peaceful mass movements
which could engage in democratic politics and in
elections to present their agenda and win public
support. Well-known Islamic parties such as the
Jamaat-e Islami of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the
Ikhwan ul-Muslimin in Egypt, the Refah Party in
Turkey and so on are routinely taking part in
elections and seeking peaceful means to come to
power. They de facto recognize the existing secular
and democratic Constitutions, even though they may
not be Islamic Constitutions. Seeking to gain public
acceptance and support by participating in elections
and using peaceful means is their method.
Q: So, are you suggesting that the radical approach of
extremist groups such as Hizb ut Tahrir in the Arab
world and Central Asia or the SIMI, which aimed to
capture political power through violence to establish
what they call an Islamic state, is wrong?
A: To shun peaceful mass movement and adopt
coercion is entirely impractical and counter-
productive, as I earlier mentioned. As I said, only
through peaceful means one may seek to bring about
the desired change. However your perception that
SIMI aimed to capture power through violence is
entirely wrong. Participating in democratic elections
is certainly one possibility before the Islamic parties.
It is a different matter that when in some countries an
Islamic party wins the elections the West (which
otherwise keeps harping about democracy) makes
sure that such a party does not actually come to
power. The instances of Turkey and Algeria can be
seen in this context. But even if this happens, there is
no practical alternative to the peaceful movement
method. After all, how long can the West succeed in
denying Muslim masses the regimes that they
democratically wish to elect?
Q: In the wake of the terror attacks and bomb blasts
across India and the growing hounding of Muslims,
what political course would you personally and as head
of the Jamaat-e Islami Hind suggest for the Indian
Muslims to follow, especially with regard to the
forthcoming Parliamentary elections?
A: I would advise Muslims to refrain from
emotionalism and seek to struggle for their rights
using all available peaceful and legal means. They
must desist from any illegal or disruptive activity. In
general, they should seek to create avenues of
dialogue and build bridges with non-Muslims,
including with the people in the media and in political
field with genuine commitment to democracy and
justice. The Jamaat, along with some other Muslim
groups, has been trying to push a constructive agenda
forward in the recent past. We have called a meeting
that is to be convened soon of leaders of various
political parties other than the Congress and BJP and
social and human rights activists in Delhi to discuss
such an agenda.
All this while, Muslims have been treated as a captive
vote-bank of the Congress Party, but, as the ongoing
repression of Muslims even in many Congress-ruled
states shows, this party has done little for Muslims. In
the wake of the disruptive acts and the consequent
large-scale persecution of hapless Muslims, the
Congress has taken no positive measures at all. It
maintains a studious silence, for fear of losing Hindu
votes to the BJP. It could have, if it had wanted to,
prevented the targeting of Muslims, but it did not do
so. Now it is making some feeble attempts to regain
Muslim votes before the coming elections by talking
of the Hindutva terrorists who are said to be behind
the Malegaon and Modassa blasts, but all this while it
has remained silent on the ongoing repression of
Muslims. Because of this, many Muslims think that as
far as Muslim issues are concerned there is little
difference between the Congress and the BJP.
My advice to Muslims, and this is also what I think
most Muslims would themselves do on their own, is
that in states where there is a realistic alternative
available to both the Congress and the BJP, Muslims
should prefer this alternative, and where there is no
such credible alternative they might consider the
Congress. This would not be because of any great
enthusiasm for that party's record but simply a
matter of compulsion.
Q: In this regard, what do you have to say about
ongoing talk about setting up of a Muslim political
party in India ? According to some sources, the
Jamaat-e Islami Hind is also thinking of entering
politics.
A: We feel that in today's national and international
context, particularly in the face of mounting anti-
Islamic and anti-Muslim prejudice, when even
legitimate grievances of Muslims are ignored, there is
a pressing need for Muslims to make their presence
felt in the political realm as well. This can take the
shape of a lobby, an opinion-building group or a
political party, and through this sort of effort
Muslims might be able to talk more effectively with
various political parties and present their views and
concerns. As to the exact shape this effort will take,
we do not really know for sure at the moment. It may
well be in the form of a political party with its own
agenda. It will work out how best to relate to other
parties and to marginalized communities. I don't
think such a party may emerge before the coming
Parliamentary elections early next year because the
time left now is too short. I think that till then the
Jamaat will continue with its present policy of seeking
to present its views and concerns to various political
parties. It will work for the cause of genuine
democracy, for equal treatment by the state of all
citizens, for social justice for all marginalized
communities, such as Dalits, Christians, Sikhs as well
as Muslims, and for countering communal fascism.
Q: All these years the Jamaat has stayed aloof from
politics. How and why is it that now it wants to become
actively politically involved?
A: It is not true to say that we have remained aloof
from politics. We understand Islam to be a code of
life, which talks about not only prayer and fasting but
also about all social and collective affairs, including
economics and politics. It is a question of how far
existing conditions allow us to organize activities
representing the collective aspects of Islam. In any
case we have been always been open to change in the
face of changing political and social conditions. We
have always encouraged our members to seek to
particularly interact with secular and democratic
parties and convey the Jamaat's views. In view of the
mounting anti-Muslim prejudice and attacks on the
community and of concerted efforts by powerful
fascist groups to practically turn Muslims into
second-class citizens by destroying their religious
identity, Muslims need to be politically more active.
This could take the form of a separate political party
which the Jamaat might wish to help form.
Q: What sort of issues would this party take up?
A: As I said, we have not discussed this in detail so
far, and it would take a while for things to finally
crystallize. The main agenda for the party, if it comes
into being, would be working for social justice and
genuine democracy, not for Muslims alone but of all
communities and sections who might be facing
various forms of persecution. This party would not be
associated with the Jamaat alone. In any case, the
Jamaat would continue to engage in its primary
work, of education, propagation and social change.
We would like other Muslim groups and
organizations to join the party if it comes into being,
based on a common minimum agenda, although the
Jamaat might have to play a leading role in
establishing and guiding it.
Iqbal Soofi

P.O Box: 24179 | Safat 13102 | State of KuwaitTel: 804050 Ext. 329 | Fax: + 965 243 5856 |
Cell: +965 652 0620 | Voice Mail: +1 51 6620 9920