Tale of two Bengals, and worrying spillover of radical politics

medium nocaption120434759Those untutored in the labyrinthine byways of West Bengal would no doubt have found chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s belligerent attack on union home minister Amit Shah and the Border Security Force somewhat over the top. Speaking to a largely Muslim gathering in Kolkata last Wednesday, she charged Shah and the BSF with instigating the riots that broke out along the Chicken’s Neck of the Indo-Bangladesh border on April 8. The violence continued unchecked for four days until the Calcutta High Court ordered the simultaneous deployment of central forces. The accusation that the Centre craftily provoked riots in the Muslim-majority Murshidabad district is unsubstantiated. On the contrary, the perception that what was intended as a show of Muslim opposition to the recently enacted Waqf Amendment Act went out of control is backed up by media and intelligence reports. The mobs were mobilised on the strength of rumours that with the new laws, there would be no mosques for Muslims to pray in or places to bury their dead.This was on par with the claim during the 2019 anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) riots, which also rocked Murshidabad, that the citizenship of Muslims was about to be rescinded. In choosing to paint the Centre as the villain of the piece, the CM quite consciously conveyed the message that she expected the 30% plus Muslim community of the state to remain unflinchingly committed to her fight. Mamata was aware that her promise to not allow the modified Waqf legislation to be implemented in Bengal had no basis. Her grandstanding was symbolic and akin to her party’s stand during the anti-CAA troubles that “we will not show any documents”. The Trinamool Congress’ (TMC) identification with sectarian Muslim politics is quite explicit. A few months ago, one of its garrulous MLAs from Murshidabad district had threatened local Hindus that they would all be drowned in the Bhagirathi river if they misbehaved. Earlier this month, one of its ministers threatened to bring life in Kolkata to a halt if the Muslim objections to the Waqf legislation went unheeded. Throughout the state, the administration appears to have received unwritten directives to maintain a hands-off policy towards the Muslim community as the price of total electoral support. The calculation is that if Muslims vote en bloc for the TMC (as they have in recent elections), additional support from a mere 20% of Hindu voters is sufficient to ensure a conclusive victory. To offset this de facto Muslim veto, the BJP needs to secure around 62% of the Hindu vote. As of now, it has managed around 55%. In the past, Muslim politics in West Bengal was disengaged from developments in Bangladesh. The nationalism of the Awami League had never resonated among Muslims across the border, not during Pakistani rule and certainly not during the liberation war of 1971. When Sheikh Hasina mounted her anti-Jamaat-e-Islami offensive on Bangladeshis, many Islamist activists crossed the border and integrated themselves in West Bengal. Their role in quietly radicalising Bengali Muslims, taking advantage of a politically indulgent environment, has been significant. Since the fall of the Hasina government last August, the undercover Islamists of the past have become the main props of the interim administration of Muhammad Yunus. For the first time in recent memory, the shifts in Bangladesh have resulted in a loose political convergence between the Muslim radicals in both Bengals. Plagued by internal incoherence, the ability of the dispensation in Dhaka to exploit this convergence for its own ends is limited. However, two factors need to be flagged. First, the radical Islamists in Bangladesh have an agenda independent of the Bangladeshi state. Their Caliphate ideal being transnational, the possibility of a fallout in West Bengal shouldn’t be discounted. Secondly, with the Yunus arrangement keen to distance itself from the legacy of the liberation movement, Pakistan has moved rapidly to rehabilitate itself in Bangladesh. With the defeated side of 1971 now in control, the stage has been set for Bangladesh becoming a staging post for Pakistan-inspired acts of subversion. There are fears that the organised Rohingya influx into India from camps in Bangladesh could be a part of a larger design. At present, it may seem fanciful to pay heed to those voices in Bangladesh who want India to be pinned down all along the east. There is a call for Bangladesh to quickly establish a military airbase in Lalmonirhat with the aid of China and Pakistan. This base is seen as the heart of a larger military preparedness for the capture of the Siliguri corridor (Chicken’s Neck) and the snapping of the land link between the Indian mainland and the north-eastern states. However, if the Chicken’s Neck becomes a permanently disturbed area in the control of Muslim radicals and there is political encouragement from the state government to treat the BSF as a hostile force, India’s national security will be further jeopardised. There is a section of exasperated people in West Bengal who feel that Banerjee is steering the state in the direction of another Bangladesh that will result in yet another bout of Hindu dispossession. It is for the CM to prove that these fears are unwarranted. Recent events prompt grave alarm.Also read: Is Mamata Banerjee’s rule in West Bengal unravelling?