Showing posts with label sikhs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sikhs. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Sikhs in Afghanistan elections? Awesome!

I suppose most Americans wouldn't know, and couldn't care either, that parliamentary elections in Afghanistan are only ten days away.  The Taliban there certainly is focused on it, unfortunately.

What I didn't know was that there are Sikh candidates in those Afghan elections. Yes, you read that correctly--Sikh candidates in Afghan elections.
Pritpal Singh Pal and Anarkali Kaur Honaryar are running for positions in Afghanistan’s Wolesi Jirga, the 250-seat lower house of parliament, elections for which are scheduled on September 18.
If they win, they will become the first democratically elected non-Muslim parliamentarians in the country — Afghan Hindus and Sikhs have held parliamentary positions before through nomination.
This, yet again, reveals the multiple threads of history that bind together the peoples of the Indian Subcontinent. The two candidates are descendants of people who have lived in the modern state of Afghanistan for centuries:
Pal says it is a common misconception that all Afghan Sikhs and Hindus are Punjabis who moved to Afghanistan from India years ago. In fact, many members of this community consider themselves to be the original Afghans who never converted to Islam. And this sense of rootedness only gives their pursuit of governmental representation in Afghanistan more zeal....
“I’ve travelled to many countries, including India,” she says at her campaign office in the Karte Parwan area of Kabul. “But I want to serve my own country and countrymen. I love Afghanistan.”
 I hope they win. Because, more than anything, their elections will be the another example of how we can democratically make the Taliban go away. Particularly if the Sikh woman, Pal, wins. A minority religion (infidel!) and a woman.  A Taliban nightmare :)

To honor the India-Afghan connection, here is a scene from Dharmatma, which was shot in Afghanistan in the days before the civil war, and featuring Feroz Khan, who was a Pashtun himself

Friday, May 14, 2010

Am not going to Arizona. For now.

I am not going to Arizona anytime soon, unless their immigration law is repealed or declared unconstitutional and void.

It is not any hyperbole, which unfortunately fills the airwaves and drowns out the genuine concerns.  In my case, my decision not to visit Arizona is simply because I remember all too well the awful feelings of sudden awareness of my brown-skinned ethnic appearance and accent after the horrific events of 9/11. 

I lived in Bakersfield, California, when the towers of the World Trade Center in New York tumbled down to dust.  Later that day, when it was early morning half way around the world in India, I talked to my parents and assured them that I was safe and that they needn’t worry about me.

After a momentary pause, my father slowly said something like “maybe you should consider shaving your beard off, at least for a few weeks.”  His concern was that a passionate mob might think that I am one of “them”, which could then have disastrous results.

I laughed it off.  I did not want to scare him by admitting that the thought had crossed my mind as well, and that I had already planned to restrict my movements outside the home only to the bare essentials.  There is, after all, millennia of human experiences distilled into the statement, “better safe, than sorry.”

My worry was justified to some extent by the news that a Sikh had been shot and killed because his beard and turban made him look suspiciously similar to the images of the bearded and turbaned Osama bin Laden and his followers.  Incidentally, this tragic incident happened in Arizona—in Mesa!

It was a strange time, for the country and for me.  After years of living in the US without having to think twice about my skin color and my beard, I now had to systematically think through the potential downsides of being brown-skinned, bearded, and with an accent. 

I did not become clean-shaven, and nor was there even one single incident where I was even remotely threatened.  Even at the security screening at airports, I went through without any special treatment—just like anybody else.  And, yes, the scientific training reminded me about the data that showed that there was no large-scale and systematic targeting of people like me.

But, it was a while before my perception of the reality would return to the pre-9/11 days when I did not have to be self-conscious about my ethnic appearance.  I suppose I am like most humans in that we need to be convinced within ourselves that our fears are unfounded. 

Which is why I am not in favor of visiting Arizona.  How much ever their elected officials and public safety officers claim that brown-skin will not become a blip in their enforcement radars, they have planted a worry in my head about a probability that I could be asked to prove my citizenship if I am in Arizona. 

Earlier this year, I met a Hungarian environmental attorney, who was in Eugene for ten weeks as a visiting fellow with Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW.)  I chuckled when she made sure that she had her passport before we stepped outside for coffee.  “Even in Hungary I always carry my passport” she said. 

I thought it was horribly bizarre that a Hungarian citizen had to walk around in Budapest with citizenship papers in case the police asked for it.  “But, this is America” was my response.  I explained that like most people, I never carry my passport with me when I am in the US.  To top it off, I joked that we would sue the police if we were asked to prove our legal right to be here. 

Well, it is not a joke anymore, I suppose. 

I worry that the possibility exists—even if a low probability—that I could end up in a jail in Arizona because I don’t carry my passport while within the borders of these United States of America. 

Well, I would rather bypass the Grand Canyon State.

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Religion matters not

a group of Muslims in eastern Uttar Pradesh told a colleague: “Sixteen major banks have failed in the United States; not a single Indian bank has folded up; all because we have had Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister.”
Profound implications in that quote in this report from The Hindu. India's prime minister is a Sikh--a small minority in India. A much larger minority, the Muslims, is happy with this Sikh as a prime minister, in a country dominated by Hindus.

Which is why I keep reminding my students and anybody who asks me that religious differences do not trigger violence in India. It does not mean that there are no prejudices--that is in plenty. But, quite a peaceful country though, given such immense differences.

Am glad that the BJP did not win. Yes, the Congress has a long history of playing communal politics. But, BJP is in a dangerous league of its own.
However, I don't think the prospect of Indira Gandhi's grandson being projected as Dr. Singh's successor is a healthy sign. Returning to an adoration of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty is not something to be proud about. On the other hand, Rahul Gandhi seems to be one hell of a hard working guy--at least, it will not be handed to him on a golden platter as it was the case with Indira and later with Rajiv Gandhi.