Link of The Guardian article:
The Guardian’s article “The Guardian’s view on Modi’s India…..”, as the name suggests starts with a wrong note. To start with India is a democratic country, has a democratically elected majority Government and the leader of an elected party as Prime Minister. As it fortunately happened, this leader is showing direction to the world with most able administration, hard work and outstanding leadership whether it is during Covid pandemic or diffusing tensions on wars created by selfish needs of other countries or group of countries. So, it will be only apt to say it is India or BJP governed India. The Guardian has never said Xi’s China or Biden’s USA (although must admit there is nothing to show off Biden’s leadership qualities)
Second point of writing names of some rogue’s leaders and putting Mr Modi’s name along with it also shows the deep-rooted racism that exists in this media house along with underlying Hindu phobia. The names mentioned are either Asian or African. On other words no whites. Talking of mass murder, why doesn’t The Guardian name Tony Blair of UK and George Bush of USA killing hundreds of thousands and decimating nations on some rumour of a country having WMD’s. This has been proved beyond doubt that this act was done without any credible proof. Why doesn’t The Guardian name Biden and Johnson as culprits for fooling Ukraine of defence in case Russia attacks?
“…..it might find the international environment less accommodating if Mr Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) continue to stir up hatred to win elections.” This statement stinks of Hindu phobia and baseless lies. First of all, India is a country where 79.8% of population are Hindus. The party is just nationalist party that has given new direction to India and trying to uproot corruption and bring more economic growth. If the people vote for it, how does it becomes Hindu nationalist? Can The Guardian prove this with one election manifesto of BJP that talks of only Hindus or avoiding growth and benefit of other religion? Can The Guardian prove where BJP stirred up hatred? How about asking Germany to have its main party as Christian Democratic Union? Or countless parties in India run purely for Islam? Or is it that The Guardian has issue only with Hindus?
Coming to the Gujarat riots, the newspaper starts from the middle completely ignoring more than 50 Hindu priests and monks were burnt alive in a train by Muslim mobs due to hatred spread amongst them. The riots were a very unfortunate event that followed. However, the Supreme Court of India has absolved Mr Modi of any lack of administration and action taken from his side as a CM. Does the newspaper do not believe in the Indian judiciary system? Has the newspaper still holds proof that Mr. Modi deliberately supported the riots? If riots and underlying tensions could be sorted in a matter of time, then why The Guardian has not accused UK and USA leaders of not stopping ghastly racist mindset in these respective countries?
The challenge for The Guardian is to show any report worth its value that indicates Muslims in India are treated as second class citizens, that can prove that economic growths are not benefited by the Muslims. Can The Guardian prove that whether in education (that includes government funding to recognised madrasas), sports, employment, entertainment, social life anywhere where the Muslims doesn’t have equal benefits? Or is this a malicious Hindu phobic article to spread more hatred against Hindus? Has The Guardian commented on genocide and mass exodus of Hindus from the Muslim majority state of Jammu and Kashmir. Has The Guardian analysed that under the current government, J&K is seeing return of tourism, investment on various industries that has never happened before? Has The Guardian analysed the number of communal riots in India pre and post 2014, when BJP got mandate from the people to Govern?
With regards to Leicester violence, there are video proof of vandalism of Hindu temples, of threatening of Hindus by Muslim mobs and community. Can The Guardian publish one proof of Hindus vandalising or threatening Muslims? Henry Jackson reports states otherwise as seen in their report.
There is no point in dwelling on petty things of who said what in 2002s etc. The social media is full of posts from Muslims living and enjoying their life in India but provoking to kill Hindus etc, let’s not glorify someone’s extremism for the sake of own business growth.
To summarise the article starts with abject racism, dives to Hindu phobia, then gives wrong representation without providing any concrete proof (which is an essence of journalism) and ends with try to ignite more communal hatred in UK with misleading statements.