American Hindus in 2012

Earlier this spring, anti-Hindu riots raged in Bangladesh’s Satkhira District after a local newspaper published an article alleging that “indecent remarks” were made about the Prophet Mohammad during a play at the local high school. A few days later, area Muslims exited their Friday prayers whipped into a violent frenzy over the allegations and attacked the Hindu community for two successive days. Dozens of homes were razed or looted; belongings of entire families destroyed; and there was at least one sexual assault reported. Hundreds of university students took to the streets in the nation’s capital to protest the riots, tying up traffic and bringing large sections of Dhaka to a standstill. And although the article that incited the riots was proven to be false (in fact, the paper’s charter to publish was summarily revoked as a result), the school’s headmaster and assistant headmaster were arrested on charges of “blasphemy.”

How many of you read about these events your morning newspaper; events of major import in the world’s third largest Muslim-majority country? Was it in the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, USA Today; or for that matter, Times of India? What about the cable news giants like the BBC, CNN, or Fox News? Did they report it? The news blackout by the media should surprise no one. Deliberate, government-tolerated attacks on Hindus like these—and worse—have been a regular feature of Bangladeshi life since long before the nation’s official birth. They have brought the once-robust Hindu community from almost a third of the population to less than eight percent. Yet, it was only last year that a lone US Congressman, Robert Dold of Illinois, raised the issue from the floor of the US House; and there still is no mention of Bangladesh’s Hindus in any of the world’s major media, or from those who claim the mantle of human rights, such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, or the UN Human Rights Council.

People have explained this and related phenomena to anti-Hindu bias, pro-Muslim bias, petro-dollars, fear, and more. I would also add the fact that the deliberate elimination of non-Muslims in places like Saudi Arabia and Iran fit politically correct philosophies that insist ad nauseum that the problems of Islamic extremism are limited to, well, Islamic extremists. Identifying that sort of thing in retrograde states like Saudi Arabia does not upset their comfortable theories. But when it occurs in an institutionalized way in a “moderate Muslim nation”like Bangladesh, it does.

Dr. Subramanian Swamy puts a lot of the blame, however, on the “Hindu mindset,” that he says is not oriented towards conflict in the same way as other religio-ethnic groups are. His insight is shared by the vast majority of Hindus with whom I work. Thus, it is no surprise that when I travel both home and abroad to speak about the ethnic cleansing of Bangladesh’s Hindus, many Hindus claim to not to know anything about their brethren’s persecution; even though the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) has been publishing information about Bangladesh’s persecution of Hindus for years, usually right in the front of its annual human rights survey. Others admit to knowing about anti-Hindu persecution in Bangladesh, but have done little or nothing to stop it. For Hindus in the United States, the hotly contested election year of 2012 offers an opportunity to change that.

Shalabh Kumar, founder of the National Indian American Coalition (NIAC), has noted that the American Hindu community is around half the size of the American Jewish community, but you would never know it given the extent to which Jewish community concerns are considered by the media and public officials compared to those of the Hindu community. Nor would one know that there are only about a million more Muslims in the United States than Hindus by the way media and elected officials react to Muslim organizations like the Congress on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) compared to the HAF. In neither case are Jews or Muslims the problem; they are only doing what every American community and interest group has a right to do: organize and advocate for the interests of their constituents.

We got a small taste of that potential in 2010. A group of us in the Chicago area contacted several Congressional and one Senatorial candidate who had a history of support for the Hindu community. None of us claimed the ability to deliver any particular number of votes, but we did make known to them some of the issues that were on the minds of several community members. While no one would allege that we were the difference between victory and defeat, our efforts did help launch more extensive relationships that enable us to make sure officials are aware of some of these matters.

The atrocities being perpetrated against Hindus in Bangladesh are the perfect issue around which such efforts can be organized. Ours is a country that sent troops into Bosnia when 10,000 people were victims of ethnic cleansing; there are more than 100 times that many Hindus facing ethnic cleansing in Bangladesh. The issue is not political but moral. It is not something that appeals to either Democrats or Republicans, but to both. It is a matter of right and wrong, and if Mandirs take a leading role in organizing to save lives, the pristine nature of our cause will be even clearer. Does it work?

Anyone who was around in the 1970s and 1980s will recall that it was impossible to pass a synagogue without seeing a large banner reading “Free Soviet Jewry.” Our people were being oppressed in the Soviet Union, and the American Jewish community recognized its obligation to do something about it; and our religious institutions were the focus. Religious school children were taught about it and given pen pals—Jewish children in the USSR whom they came to see as brothers and sisters, kids just like them. When children had their Bar and Bat Mitzvah, the synagogue would “twin” them with similar aged kids in the USSR—who did not have the freedom to celebrate their own. Average people whom you might see at the water cooler or in the supermarket, went on trips to Russia and smuggled in religious books and artifacts. The American Jewish Committee and other Jewish groups took a lead role in making sure our elected officials did not ignore us; and before it was all over, we got 1.2 million Jews out of that Gulag.

Let the Bangladeshi Hindus be your Soviet Jews!

Now the work begins!

Not all of our candidates were victorious in the November 2 elections. The relentlessly independent Congressman John Adler of New Jersey lost to Tea Party backed Jon Runyan. While we lost one friend in Congress, we are confident that we have gained another. The amazing Joel Pollak gave Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky a scare during the campaign but failed to unseat Congress's biggest spender and most leftist Member. Our congratulations to both men for raising important issues, and we expect that we have seen the last of neither.

A lot of great candidates won election and re-election--candidates that will stand strong for the United States, for the fight against radical Islam, and for the oppressed Hindus of Bangladesh, Kashmir, and elsewhere. The two most spectacular victories was the election of Mark Kirk to the US Senate from Illinois, and of Robert Dold to the Congressional seat Kirk is vacating. Senator-elect Kirk has been our strongest and most constant ally in our human rights struggles, and is pledged to help us "save more lives" and stop the spread of radical Islam. Congressman-elect Dold is already working with us, even before taking office, and will be an equally strong voice. Both men are acutely aware of the importance of this issue to the victims, to our nation, and to their Hindu-American constituents, who helped them to victory.

Now our work begins. We have an ambitious agenda for 2011--both in Washington and in South Asia. The 2010 elections have sent a clear message to our adversaries and to our actual and potential allies that we will not tolerate the destruction of Hindu communities in Bangladesh and elsewhere; nor the growth of Islamic radicalism.

Anyone who wishes to help--and receive the [US] tax deduction for 2010--can contribute to our fully deductible 501c3 at http://wwwforcefieldnow.org.

And now to work. As the great Jewish sage Hillel said, "If not now, when?"

Congressional Candidate Joel Pollak Focuses on Indian Americans

Joel Pollak is running for Congress from Illinois’ Ninth District and has made the Indian-American community an integral part of his campaign; a role he pledges to carry with him to Washington if elected. I sat with Pollak for over an hour one hot August afternoon near Chicago’s Devon Avenue as Shri Baba Brajraj Sharan gave a presentation on the ecological and spiritual degradation of India’s Braj Region, legendary home to Lord Krishna. Though it overran another commitment of his, Pollak remained transfixed on Baba’s presentation, later speaking emotionally about what he saw and his own experiences. Pollak’s biography suggests that his love for the Indian community is neither new nor political. Rather, as one community member told me, “it is a good partnership.”

He is running to represent the large NRI populations on Chicago’s North Side and in many of its suburbs. Despite the community’s size and vibrancy it has been under served, he believes, by incumbent Congresswoman, Jan Schakowsky, who "has been in Washington for 12 years and never once took up any issue of importance to us," according to a community member. Pollak vows to change that and has empanelled an Indian-American Advisory Committee with significant influence in his campaign. In the first of several interviews, Pollak spoke about foreign policy issues involving India and China.

RB: In 2005, your opponent voted against legislation to deter arms sales to China. Recent news suggests China’s arms industry is now outpacing our own. First, do you believe that China constitutes a threat to the United States and India; and second, if so, what would you as a member of Congress do to reduce or counter that threat?

JP: China’s military buildup and increased assertiveness around the world have raised the prospect of intensifying security competition both between China and the U.S., and between China and other countries in the Asia-Pacific. I believe that China’s foreign policy could be very destabilizing—unless, that is, the U.S. remains firm in defense of our allies overseas. In Congress, my policy towards China will involve commitments to defend loyal, democratic allies like India and strengthen diplomatic and security relations. India is a partner in the war against terrorism, and also in the global struggle for human rights.

RB: China has claimed the Indian State of Arunachal Pradesh and its hydro-electric resources, critical to both China’s and India’s burgeoning economies. Having seen China’s expansionist bent from Tibet to Hong Kong and other claims once thought ridiculous gain credence in the international arena; how would you prevent China from seizing Arunachal Pradesh and its critical resources?

JP: Yes, China has increasingly disputed Indian sovereignty over Arunachal Pradesh and even increased operations along the border. The Obama Administration has ignored India’s concerns, and gone so far as to make joint statements with Beijing promising to “work together” to promote security in South Asia. I think that is the wrong approach. The Administration should stop taking the friendliness of Beijing’s intentions for granted, and instead develop a realistic, strategic plan to prevent the outbreak of conflict along the border. We should deter China from further inflaming border tensions with India, or from launching an invasion, by projecting strength, defending our alliance with India, and passing a clear, unambiguous resolution promising that we will not stand by idly if China invades or destabilizes Arunachal Pradesh. As your representative in Congress, I will propose such a resolution, and I will encourage the House India Caucus and other members to sign on.

RB: Former Indian Cabinet Minister Dr. Subramanian Swami has noted that the Chinese economy is dependent on importing semi-raw goods from other Asian nations and exporting them to the West. He further suggested that convincing those nations to send their products through India instead would be an economic game changer. What is your reaction to that?

JP: America has become India’s largest trading and investment partner. However, India still has many tariffs and non-tariff barriers that discourage countries from exporting to India. One goal of our economic partnership with India should be to encourage further domestic liberalization to boost Indian economic growth and market access for companies wishing to send their partially produced products to India. In exchange, we could offer Indian greater access to American labor markets by lifting the cap on H1B visas.

Schakowsky has coasted to victory in previous elections thanks to Chicago’s legendary machine; but this is no ordinary election year, and Pollak is running neck and neck with his powerful opponent in what is shaping up to be a real “David and Goliath” race. Political newcomer Pollak (David) looks to be in position to upset Schakowsky (Goliath) in a race that mirrors events elsewhere around the country. As Pollak himself noted, "We have taken a ‘safe’ seat and turned it into a competitive race that is giving real power to the people of the 9th District." And a big piece of that power pie is going to Indian-Americans with whom Pollack and his wife Julia have longstanding personal and cultural ties.

Imagine, a US Congressman who knows about Arunachal Pradesh!