Prevent mobs from defaming India
According to media sources, the five international students who suffered injuries in a mob assault on their dormitory on March 16 were recipients of Indian Council of Cultural Relations (ICCR) scholarships. They were Muslims who were performing namaz, some of them from nearby nations. The attackers urged them to travel to a mosque because they didn’t want them to do it on the hostel’s property. After heated exchanges, the crowd destroyed several of the students’ cars and looted their apartments in addition to attacking the students. There were two wounded pupils that required hospitalization.
A Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesman turned to social networking site X (previously Twitter) on March 17. “There was a violent incident at Gujarat University in Ahmedabad yesterday,” he said. Strict measures are being taken by the state government against the offenders. There were two wounded international students. One of them received medical care and was later released from the hospital. The Gujarati government and the MEA are in communication.
Even though photos of the event and remarks from international students staying in the hostel in question were making the rounds on social media, it was evident that the MEA was unable to name the “perpetrators.” The ICCR’s stated goals of having the scholarships serve as “an important vehicle of outreach and create goodwill about India” and that “each ICCR scholar is India’s goodwill ambassador abroad” can hardly be achieved with this needless caution. After this occurrence, it is unlikely that many of the 300 recipients of ICCR scholarships at Gujarat University would support these objectives. The fact that India is home to almost 7,000 ICCR scholars is notable. Of them, 1,100 are reportedly in Gujarat, including those who work at Gujarat University, according to the media.
Neerja Gupta, the university’s vice chancellor, paid a visit to the dormitory over twelve hours after the assault. Maybe after the nighttime event, the administration of the institution and the police told her not to go there right away. It is unknown whether any senior academic staff or administrators showed there to reassure the international students about their safety. A committee advisory to foreign students has been established by Gupta. According to her, namaz was not the primary problem and that international students needed to start paying attention to other cultures. She must explain whether the foreign students’ decision to give namaz in their dorm was improper. She would surely know that during the month of Ramadan, which started in India last week, Muslims worldwide become more cognizant of their religious duties. It’s also important to find out whether the international Muslim students who gave namaz in their hostels had done so before or if this was their first time.
The Gujarat Police have rounded up five of the offenders and set up squads to find the others. In order to prevent hostile countries and organizations from disseminating the false information that India is no longer a secure place for international Muslim students, it is imperative that a full investigation of the issue be conducted and that those found guilty face consequences. Forces hostile to India are actively disseminating the claim that Islamophobia has seized hold of India. These incidences, together with the ambiguous remarks made by the MEA and V-C, might be utilized by these parties to ratchet up their anti-India campaign.
at light of this episode, it is pertinent to note that India once again refrained from endorsing a resolution against Islamophobia proposed by Pakistan and other Islamic nations at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). On the UNGA’s dedicated day against Islamophobia last year, this resolution was approved. India decided not to vote because it believed that all religions should be treated equally and that the UNGA should pass a resolution against prejudice against any faith. The present resolution requested the UN Secretary General to designate a special envoy to fight Islamophobia, building on the resolution passed the previous year. Similar to previous year, India provided an explanation for its abstention.
There is nothing wrong with the Indian claim that there should be no religious divisions in the world, but it is a fact that India’s abstention may have been linked to the events at Gujarat University. As a result, everyone involved in this issue needs to put in more effort, including the MEA, ICCR, the authorities at Gujarat University, and the state’s law enforcement agencies. India has a stake in the Islamic world, therefore it shouldn’t let the idea go out there that it’s hard for Muslims in India or outside to follow their religious duties there.
Academic institutions that host a significant number of international students must exercise extra caution to ensure that any conflicts that may arise between them and local students are managed. When it comes to this matter, the ICCR must also act more concernedly. The organization’s mission is to represent Indian culture globally and highlight the diversity of its customs. The current government is keen to present India as the birthplace of democracy. Demonstrating that there is no prejudice against anybody in India based on their ethnicity or creed is crucial. Only then will international students be able to accept the message of India’s democratic traditions and often mentioned slogan, Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam.
The soft power of India is highly valued by the government. India emphasizes in particular that the world would improve if it adopted the harmony and peace ideals that the country developed in antiquity. Undoubtedly, the mob assault on international students performing namaz at a university did not align with India’s efforts to showcase soft power.
Notably, political figures have refrained from discussing the issue despite Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan’s assertion that these kinds of instances show the public’s ongoing ignorance of the nation’s customs and cultural legacy. How does it reflect on our culture and politics?
