Latest news with #IndianMuslims
Scroll.in
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Scroll.in
Why Asaduddin Owaisi is losing the trust of young Indian Muslims
Fiercely articulate, legally astute and unapologetically Muslim, Asaduddin Owaisi has carved out a space where Indian Muslims can feel represented, not merely as a vote bank but as citizens with constitutional dignity But he has unleashed a torrent of disappointment with his recent participation in an all-party delegation to the Gulf to explain the government's position after Operation Sindoor. In news clips, Owaisi can be seen fiercely denouncing Pakistan while insisting that Muslims in India are in a way better shape, has unleashed a torrent of disappointment. What happens when a voice of dissent begins to echo the narratives of the establishment it once challenged? Critic echoes the state It was not Owaisi's criticism of Pakistan that sparked outrage. Indian Muslims have no illusions about the Pakistani state. Far from offering it support, they do not even have any expectations of it. Rather, it was Owaisi's tone and timing, his eagerness to present a sanitised picture of India abroad, at a moment when Muslims at home are being subjected to bulldozer justice, arbitrary arrests and public lynchings by the same establishment he was representing overseas. This made many of those who looked up to him feel abandoned. Amid this deeply violent landscape, what does it mean for Owaisi to offer the narrative of internal harmony to the world? Participation in such delegations could have been used as an opportunity to highlight the paradox of Indian democracy, its capacity to showcase token diversity while eroding real dissent. Asaduddin Owaisi drops a truth bomb "A terrorist wanted by America is being sheltered by the Pakistan Army in Muridke and Bahawalpur" @asadowaisi says it like it is! Pakistan is shielding terrorists, and the world needs to see it #IndiaPakistanWar — Nabila Jamal (@nabilajamal_) May 10, 2025 Instead, Owaisi chose to align with the state's script, insisting that India's internal tensions are merely political differences. That erasure of Muslim suffering is a wound far deeper than any ideological disagreement. Thus far, Owaisi's strength has been his refusal to bend to the Hindutva machinery. He was that rare voice who dared to challenge the ruling Bharatiya Janata party and its mother organisation, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, while also holding secular parties accountable for their token gestures towards ensuring minority rights. His insistence on constitutionalism, on asserting rights not through communal appeals but legal frameworks, was refreshing. Today, that insistence is becoming performance. By chanting 'Pakistan Murdabad' or death to Pakistan, not as a critique of that nation's policies but as a means of proving loyalty, Owaisi has crossed a symbolic threshold. It is not just that he's critical of Pakistan – it's that he appears eager to use anti-Pakistan sentiment as a way to buy legitimacy in the eyes of an establishment and a section of India's people who already view Muslims with suspicion.. For many Indian Muslims, this feels disorienting. This is not because they sympathise with Pakistan – far from it – but because their everyday lives are shaped by being equated with it. At a time when India's Muslim neighbourhoods are branded as 'mini-Pakistans' and community youth are jailed merely on the allegation of supporting Pakistan in cricket, what does Owaisi's vilification of Pakistan globally really accomplish? His actions of presenting a united front on an international level play into the BJP's narratives that project India through a Hindutva lens and marginalise Muslims. AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi- 'Bharat Zindabad Pakistan Murdabad' — Haryana Mail (@HaryanaMail) May 8, 2025 The irony is bitter. Indian Muslims are denounced as being 'anti-national' for everything from their dietary habits to their choice of clothing, yet the man they looked to for defense now seems to be parroting the very lines that reinforce their marginalisation. Owaisi's nationalist credentials may earn him mainstream support, media space and diplomatic access, but at what cost? When the bodies of Muslims lie broken in the streets and their homes reduced to rubble, silence is complicity. Owaisi's silence, dressed in this hyper-nationalist rhetoric, speaks volumes. Internal discontent For the BJP, Owaisi is becoming a prized possession. His striking presence in the Parliament, his traditional attire and his eloquence in Urdu, make him the perfect 'other'. With his recent international posturing, he becomes even more valuable. Owaisi has become both figurehead and foil. The more he speaks about foreign enemies, the less he cares about the enmity manifesting itself back home. Young Muslims, once inspired by Owaisi's defiance, now feel betrayed. They watch their brothers lynched and their sisters harassed while the man they saw as their advocate poses for photos with those complicit in their suffering. They see bulldozers where schools once stood. They see headlines criminalising their grief. It is not enough to say that Owaisi is 'doing what he must' to survive politically. Representation without resistance is vacuous. If he cannot call out the violence and the state machinery that facilitates it, his voice is no longer that of the community. This growing sense of alienation could have tangible electoral consequences too, particularly in states like Bihar and West Bengal, where his All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen party has sought to expand its influence. The question now is no longer just about his strategic brilliance, but about trust. Can Indian Muslims still see Owaisi as a bulwark against systemic injustice or is he becoming just another player in a rigged game? Owaisi once inspired a new variety of Indian Muslim politics, one rooted in legal consciousness, political engagement and unapologetic identity. Today, however, that feels hollow. It speaks at global press conferences, not about the streets. It performs nationalism, not justice, and in doing so, it loses the very people it was meant to protect. Yes, politics demands compromise. Yes, Muslim leaders walk a tightrope in today's India. However, there is a difference between walking carefully and walking away. Owaisi's recent actions suggest he may be doing the latter. In a nation where Muslim existence is increasingly criminalised, where bulldozers replace courts and where silence is state policy, what Indian Muslims need is not a strategist but a witness: someone who will name the violence – even if it costs him the mic. Until that happens, Owaisi may not be seen as a political alternative but merely a bearded accessory to an increasingly Hindutva state. Ismail Salahuddin is a writer and researcher based in Delhi, focusing on Muslim identity, communal politics, caste, and the politics of knowledge, social exclusion and inclusive policy at Jamia Millia Islamia in New Delhi. Mohammad Aaquib is a Kolkata-based writer and researcher. He works on communalism, political violence and Muslim identity in contemporary South Asia.
The Print
a day ago
- The Print
Indian Muslims are hiding their dowry practice in a Sharia loophole
And it doesn't stop at money changing hands. In 2022 alone, over 6,000 dowry-related deaths were officially registered, according to NCRB data. These aren't just statistics—they're women who have been burned, beaten, and silenced. Policymakers have tried to curb dowry through legislation, but most of those attempts have failed to bring real change. For example, researchers studied 40,000 marriages in rural India between 1960 and 2008, and found that dowry was paid in 95 per cent of them despite it being illegal since 1961. That's not a loophole, that's a system. A video where a woman is seen falling off the roof of a building is making the rounds on social media. The young woman, Aamina, from Jalaun, Uttar Pradesh, was reportedly thrown off a rooftop by her husband, Arif, and his family after being beaten like an animal. Her 'crime'? Her family couldn't meet the dowry demand of Rs 10 lakh. The news has been covered by local newspapers as well. But while we often talk about dowry in India and acknowledge that it cuts across all religious communities, the conversation rarely stops to look at Indian Muslims. As a Pasmanda Muslim, I've noticed this gap again and again—hardly any data, barely a whisper of discussion, and certainly no honest reckoning with how deeply dowry continues to harm women within our own community. Just like this case of Aamina—beaten, locked up, and allegedly thrown off a roof by her in-laws—there are countless others. We just don't want to talk about them. Remember Ayesha Banu? A 23-year-old woman from Ahmedabad, who took her own life four years ago, left behind a video that pointed to the dowry harassment she faced. Her face haunted many of us, but still, no serious change followed. Also read: The reel story of Indian weddings—how they are lavish, viral & broke Practice vs theory Whenever someone tries to talk about these issues within the community, the reaction is predictable. People get defensive and say, 'But dowry is a sin in Islam', 'It's impermissible, we don't support it.' As if just saying that somehow erases the reality of what's happening around us. It doesn't. Quoting scripture is not a solution when women are still being tortured, driven to suicide, or killed for dowry in our own homes. If anything, this response just helps build a culture of collective silence and negligence, where no one feels responsible. It's also important to understand where the practice of dowry among Indian Muslims really comes from. Islam talks about meher (dower), which is a mandatory, promised gift or money given by the groom to the bride. This is her right and not to be confused with dowry. But there is no such mandatory dowry concept mentioned. Islam gives women the right to inherit property. But in practice, that inheritance is often handed over at the time of marriage in the name of jahez or dowry. And once it enters the husband's household, it no longer remains hers. It becomes something everyone feels entitled to—in-laws, siblings, even distant relatives. Many try to justify it using the term jahez-e-Fatimi, referring to the modest items the Prophet is believed to have given his daughter Fatima. But let's be honest, what we see today is far from that. Lavish goods, expensive clothes, cash negotiated between families, and grand hospitality for the baraat—none of this is religious. It's social pressure, dressed in misplaced religious justification. The standard practice among Indian Muslims is to give daughters dowry in lieu of inheritance, and then expect them to never ask for anything else. I've seen cases where if a Muslim woman dares to ask for her rightful share in inheritance, she's immediately reminded of how much the family 'spent' on her marriage and how they gave her dowry, as if that cancels out her actual rights. She's warned, sometimes subtly, sometimes directly, that claiming what's hers means she'll lose all her relationships. It's one of the saddest things to witness. The same community, which cries hoarse about following Sharia law whenever there's any talk of reform for women's rights, won't blink twice when it comes to snatching away rights already given to women under Sharia. That's why I argue that the laws for Indian Muslim women should be based on social realities, not just an idealised version of Sharia. Because the lived experience is far removed from the textbook version. You can't build justice on theory when practice is so deeply broken. Enforcement is one challenge, but even getting to a point where society accepts the need for reform is a battle in itself. Amana Begam Ansari is a columnist, writer, and TV news panellist. She runs a weekly YouTube show called 'India This Week by Amana and Khalid'. She tweets @Amana_Ansari. Views are personal. (Edited by Theres Sudeep)
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
International Sufi Caravan chief Mufti Manzur Ziyaee strongly condemns OIC's anti-India stance; slams pro-Pakistan bias, says Indian Muslims enjoy full freedom and rights
MUMBAI: Reacting sharply to the statements made against India during the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) meeting held in Türkiye on 22 June, Mufti Manzur Ziyaee, President of the International Sufi Caravan and Patron of the All India Ilm-o-Hunar Foundation, has strongly condemned the remarks and questioned the OIC's biased approach. 'Once again, OIC has proven its pro-Pakistan bias by taking an unfounded and one-sided stance against India. We condemn this in the strongest terms,' Mufti Ziyaee stated. He said that the OIC continues to echo Pakistan's narrative while completely ignoring the reality of over 250 million Indian Muslims who enjoy complete religious freedom and constitutional protection in a democratic, secular country like India. 'India is a peaceful, secular and democratic nation where Muslims live with full freedom and dignity, and play an active role in political, educational, and social sectors,' he added. Turning his criticism towards Pakistan, Mufti Ziyaee remarked: 'Pakistan has long been a hub of terrorism, sectarian violence and systemic oppression of minorities. If the OIC is truly concerned about the welfare of the Muslim Ummah, it should focus on the internal oppression in Pakistan, the crisis in Afghanistan, and the ongoing wars in the Middle East — not target a peace-loving nation like India.' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Bansing: Scholarships You Can Apply For (Start Now) College Scholarship | Google Search Search Now Undo He further added: 'We strongly condemn the OIC's persistent partiality against India and reiterate that Indian Muslims consider themselves safe, respected, and entitled to full constitutional rights.' Mufti Ziyaee appealed to the global Muslim leadership: "OIC must restore its neutrality and refrain from targeting India under the influence of any specific geopolitical agenda."
Hans India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
India Strongly Refutes Islamic Organization's Comments On Domestic Affairs
India delivered a sharp diplomatic rebuke on Monday in response to criticism from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, dismissing the Islamic bloc's comments as baseless and politically motivated. The strong reaction followed a two-day foreign ministerial gathering in Turkey where the OIC raised concerns about various Indian policies. The Ministry of External Affairs issued a comprehensive statement rejecting what it characterized as "unwarranted and factually incorrect" references made during the OIC council meeting. New Delhi particularly took exception to the organization's commentary on the treatment of Muslims within India and other domestic matters. According to Indian officials, the OIC's criticism stemmed from what they described as Pakistan's influence over the organization's agenda. The ministry accused Pakistan of systematically weaponizing terrorism as a tool of statecraft while simultaneously manipulating international forums to advance its political objectives against India. During the Istanbul conclave, the Islamic organization had expressed concerns about what it termed the social marginalization of Indian Muslims and called for adherence to existing bilateral agreements between India and Pakistan, including the Indus Waters Treaty. The bloc also advocated for comprehensive dialogue to resolve outstanding disputes between the neighboring nations. India's foreign ministry responded by asserting that the OIC lacked the authority to comment on India's internal affairs, particularly regarding Jammu and Kashmir. Officials emphasized that Kashmir constitutes an integral and sovereign part of India, a status they described as constitutionally enshrined and permanently settled. The Indian government specifically addressed Pakistan's allegations regarding recent military operations, defending Operation Sindoor as a legitimate act of self-defense. The ministry characterized the operation as a precise response to terrorist attacks launched from Pakistani territory, particularly referencing the Pahalgam incident that resulted in significant casualties. New Delhi highlighted what it described as the irony of Pakistan raising concerns about counter-terrorism measures, given what India characterized as Pakistan's history of harboring and supporting terrorist organizations. The ministry pointed to Pakistan's track record on human rights and minority protection as undermining its credibility to criticize other nations. The statement also addressed Pakistan's claims about targeting military installations, noting that Pakistan's retaliatory attempts had failed while endangering civilian populations and resulting in civilian casualties. This response aimed to counter narratives about proportionality and precision in military operations. Indian officials expressed frustration with what they perceived as the OIC's consistent failure to acknowledge documented threats posed by terrorism originating from Pakistani territory. They argued that this selective approach reflected a willful disregard for factual evidence, particularly in light of recent terrorist incidents. The ministry warned that allowing Pakistan's influence to shape the OIC's agenda could undermine the organization's credibility and international relevance. This cautionary message appeared designed to encourage other OIC members to consider the implications of Pakistan's role in shaping the bloc's positions. India's response emphasized its rejection of what it termed Pakistan's "baseless allegations" regarding unprovoked military aggression. The government maintained that its operations were defensive in nature and targeted specific terrorist infrastructure rather than constituting broader military campaigns. The diplomatic exchange reflects ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan, with both nations continuing to use international forums to present their respective narratives. The OIC's position demonstrates the continued relevance of Islamic solidarity in shaping organizational stances on conflicts involving Muslim populations. New Delhi's firm response indicates its unwillingness to accept international criticism of domestic policies, particularly when such criticism is perceived as being influenced by adversarial nations. The statement reinforces India's position that external organizations should not interfere in what it considers internal constitutional matters. The incident highlights the complex dynamics of multilateral diplomacy, where regional conflicts often play out in international forums through competing narratives and influence campaigns. Both India and Pakistan continue to seek validation for their positions through engagement with various international organizations and their member states.
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
India slams OIC's ‘unwarranted' remarks, says it should ‘reflect on perils of letting Pak propaganda hijack its agenda'
India on Monday criticised the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) for making 'unwarranted' and 'factually incorrect' references to it, saying that they were 'driven by Pakistan, which has turned terrorism into statecraft'. India's sharply worded statement came after a two-day foreign ministerial conclave of the OIC in Turkiye criticised New Delhi on a range of issues, including what it said is 'social marginalisation' of Indian Muslims. The OIC also called for strict adherence to bilateral pacts between India and Pakistan, including the Indus Waters Treaty and stressed the need for a broad-based dialogue for the peaceful settlement of all outstanding disputes. 'India categorically rejects the unwarranted and factually incorrect references to India at the OIC council of foreign ministers' meeting,' the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said in a statement. 'These statements, driven by Pakistan, which has turned terrorism into statecraft, reflect the continued misuse of the OIC platform for narrow political ends,' it said. The MEA said the OIC's repeated 'failure' to acknowledge the real and documented threat of terrorism emanating from Pakistan, most recently evidenced in the Pahalgam attack, reflects a 'wilful disregard' for facts. It said 'the OIC has no locus standi to comment on India's internal affairs, including Jammu and Kashmir, which is an integral and sovereign part of India – a fact enshrined in the Indian Constitution and irreversibly settled'. 'The OIC should reflect deeply on the perils of allowing Pakistan's propaganda to hijack and politicise its agenda. Any other course can only undermine the OIC's credibility and relevance,' the MEA said. It said India also 'outrightly rejects' Pakistan's baseless allegation of 'unprovoked and unjustified military aggression'. 'India's Operation Sindoor in response to the Pahalgam terror attack was a precise and legitimate act of self-defence against terrorist camps operating from Pakistani territory,' the MEA said. 'It is absurd for Pakistan to speak of targeting only Indian military installations when its retaliatory attempts not only failed but recklessly endangered civilian lives and property and ended up causing several deaths and injuries among the civilian population,' the statement said. 'It is also ironic that Pakistan, a country with an abysmal human rights record and a history of sheltering, breeding and empowering terrorists, should lecture others on counter-terrorism and human rights,' it added. The MEA said the comments made by Pakistan at the OIC meeting are nothing more than a 'desperate attempt' to deflect international attention from its own appalling record of 'state-sponsored terrorism, minority persecution and sectarian violence, apart from failure of governance'.
