An End to Pakistan--or a New Beginning?

For some time now, I have familiarized myself with several nationalities living in what is now Pakistan:  Baloch, Sindh, Pashtun, Kashmiris, Gilgit Baltistanis, Punjabi Hindus, and others.  Since Pakistan's creation in 1947--a statement by the Indian Subcontinent Muslim League that Muslims and Hindus cannot live together--these national groups have been chafing under various forms of oppression and the attempted eradication of their national characteristics.

Pakistan is an artificial, polyglot rump state that was once part of a large "Indian" entity; in 1971, its lost its remaining, non-contiguous Bengali portion (then called East Pakistan) when it broke away to form Bangladesh.  What makes Pakistan different from India, the other part of the British Raj's partition of the greater subcontinent?  Although Pakistan did not declare itself an Islamic Republic, with Islam as the official state religion, until 1956; it was in fact created as a Muslim-dominated country.  This is contrary to the history of India, which has maintained its status as a secular state, with no official state religion. Additionally, Indian authorities come from a range of its subgroups and nationalities.  Pakistan is and has been dominated by one:  Punjabis, and specifically Muslim Punjabis.  Further, although India has seen many incidents of serious inter-communal violence by Muslims and Hindus against one another; the minority Muslims enjoy a range of protections that the state has enforced with vigor.  Such has not been the lot for Hindus in Pakistan who complain--with a good deal of evidence--that Pakistan is guilty of an anti-Hindu jihad.  I have been to the camps in New Delhi of Hindu refugees from Pakistan and taken the refugees' testimony of their oppression--both in violent incidents and in regular day-to-day oppression of Hindus, including forced conversion which the government does not criminalize.  Thus, in Pakistan's 1951 census, Hindus were counted at 12.9 percent of the population.  In 2014, they were down to 1.85 percent with a net decrease in population of about 17 percent.  In contract, from 1951 to 2011, Indian Muslims grew from 9.8 percent to 14.2 percent with a net increase in population of almost 400 percent.

Internationally Pakistan has a well-founded reputation for oppressing its own people, supporting an intelligence service that has been defined by some countries as a terrorist group, proliferating nuclear weaponry, massive corruption, and sponsoring worldwide terrorism, especially against India.  These national groups--especially the Baloch (predominantly Muslim), the Pashtun (predominantly Muslim), and the Sindhi (predominantly Hindu)--offer a way out of this morass.  All of them have a history that eschews an official religions and welcomes others as equal members of the same polity; regardless of faith, they are strongly anti-Islamist; they believe in allowing different ethnic and national groups to develop as nations (whether within a confederation or independently); and they are fighting against the human rights atrocities that have become daily life for many inside the nation of Pakistan.  The next few years will be critical.  Pakistan and China have been developing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which the Pakistanis believe will make them immune to demands from democracies and those fighting radical Islamic terror.  That expansion of Chinese dominance all the way to the warm water port of Gwadar in Balochistan, threatens both US and Russian interests and could be the basis for the sort of common interest cooperation suggested by US President Donald Trump.  Many youth among the Baloch and Pashtun, have been looking for the West to support their insurgencies but are finding that the only real support they get is from Islamist groups.  If we do not support these efforts, it's likely that more will join with Islamists in the (probably mistaken) hope that it will bring relief to their peoples.  And there are regional implications:  Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi already has expressed support for the Baloch and has interests in what happens to its perennial rival; Afghanistan often identifies as a Pashtun state; and Balochistan is occupied by both Pakistan and Iran.  There are many restive national minorities in both countries.  Pakistan is only about half Punjabi; and Iran is only about 40 percent Persian.  There is a lot of opportunity to keep those terror-supporting nations busy trying to stay together as states, such that their pursuit of international goals would be suppressed.

We have the opportunity, and many of the leaders of these groups have told me they are hopeful of a change in US policy that will help their causes while they together end up advancing US interests. But the clock is ticking.

Narendra Modi's Game Changing Action Part II

World leaders from the US to Europe and Asia all claim to be fighting the scourge of terrorism.  (US President Barack Obama refuses to call it what it is, radical Islamist terrorism, but that is what they all are fighting.)  One near constant of this fight against Islamists has been the reactive nature
of their actions.  A terrorist tries to blow up a plane with his shoe, and now we have to take off our shoes at the airport.  Terrorists try to use liquid explosives to blow up planes going from the UK to the US, and we have to restrict the size of liquids in our carry-on baggage.  And so on and so on.  They act; we react.  In this war so far, the bad guys usually set the agenda, and we allow them to do it.

On May 26, 2014, all that changed when Narendra Modi was elected India's Prime Minister in a landslide for his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).  Perhaps not immediately. In fact, Modi began his tenure as PM with an unprecedented gesture of friendship by inviting Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to his inauguration and for meetings that would hopefully usher in a new era of Indo-Pak cooperation.  Unfortunately, despite Modi's gesture of friendship, the Pakistanis continued their provocations against their neighbor, and the latest attacks in Uri, Kashmir were the final straw.  They had supported anti-Indian terrorism before during Modi's tenure, but the Uri attacks went to far.

The day after I predicted he would, Modi ordered pinpoint strikes against the Lashkar e-Taiba terror camps in Pakistan occupied Kashmir.  Lashkar has been operating freely with the Pakistani government's tacit and sometimes active support, and Modi's actions sent a strong message to the Pakistanis that--unlike his predecessors--he would not flinch from defending the lives of his people. After the Pakistani directed attacks in Mumbai on November 26, 2008, in which 164 people were murdered and over 300 wounded, the previous Indian government failed to take action; and continued its craven behavior as Pakistan steadfastly refused Indian demands for justice and prosecution of the terrorists.  They continued their obstinacy even after the so-called "American Taliban," David Headley exposed their involvement.  But the recent Indian strikes against the terrorists made it clear that the Pakistanis no longer could act with impunity.  It also sent a message to terrorists and would be defenders that the game has changed.

Moreover, this was not just a reaction against the Pakistani terror attack.  Earlier, Modi had expressed support for a free Balochistan and said that Pakistan would have to answer for its atrocities against the Baloch.  (I work with the Baloch and can confirm the tragic history of Pakistani--and Iranian--human rights violations and atrocities against them.)  There are other restive groups struggling against the Pakistani occupation of their homeland, and Narendra Modi has given them all a new sense of hope.  If they take action, especially cooperatively, it could spell the end of Pakistan.  Look for a Balochistan government-in-exile to form in the coming months.

The world just changed, and we need to thank Narendra Modi for it and for ushering in a new era in the fight against radical Islamists.

Narendra Modi's Game Changing Action Part II

World leaders from the US to Europe and Asia all claim to be fighting the scourge of terrorism.  (US President Barack Obama refuses to call it what it is, radical Islamist terrorism, but that is what they all are fighting.)  One near constant of this fight against Islamists has been the reactive nature
of their actions.  A terrorist tries to blow up a plane with his shoe, and now we have to take off our shoes at the airport.  Terrorists try to use liquid explosives to blow up planes going from the UK to the US, and we have to restrict the size of liquids in our carry-on baggage.  And so on and so on.  They act; we react.  In this war so far, the bad guys usually set the agenda, and we allow them to do it.

On May 26, 2014, all that changed when Narendra Modi was elected India's Prime Minister in a landslide for his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).  Perhaps not immediately. In fact, Modi began his tenure as PM with an unprecedented gesture of friendship by inviting Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to his inauguration and for meetings that would hopefully usher in a new era of Indo-Pak cooperation.  Unfortunately, despite Modi's gesture of friendship, the Pakistanis continued their provocations against their neighbor, and the latest attacks in Uri, Kashmir were the final straw.  They had supported anti-Indian terrorism before during Modi's tenure, but the Uri attacks went to far.

The day after I predicted he would, Modi ordered pinpoint strikes against the Lashkar e-Taiba terror camps in Pakistan occupied Kashmir.  Lashkar has been operating freely with the Pakistani government's tacit and sometimes active support, and Modi's actions sent a strong message to the Pakistanis that--unlike his predecessors--he would not flinch from defending the lives of his people. After the Pakistani directed attacks in Mumbai on November 26, 2008, in which 164 people were murdered and over 300 wounded, the previous Indian government failed to take action; and continued its craven behavior as Pakistan continually refused Indian demands for justice and prosecution of the terrorists; even after the so-called "American Taliban," David Headley exposed the Pakistani involvement.  But the recent Indian strikes against the terrorists made it clear that the Pakistanis no longer could act with impunity.  Beyond that, it sent a message to terrorists and would be defenders that the game has changed.

Moreover, this was not just a reaction against the Pakistani terror attack.  Earlier, Modi had expressed support for a free Balochistan and said that Pakistan would have to answer for its atrocities.  (I work with the Baloch and can confirm the tragic history of Pakistani--and Iranian--human rights violations and atrocities against the Baloch.)  There are other restive groups struggling against the Pakistani occupation of their homeland, and Narendra Modi has given them all a new sense of hope.  If they take action, especially cooperatively, it could spell the end of Pakistan.  Look for a Balochistan government-in-exile to form in the coming months.

The world just changed, and we need to thank Narendra Modi for it and for ushering in a new era in the fight against radical Islamista.

Narendra Modi's Game Changing Action

Indian Prime Minister has been talking about Balochistan--a lot, including this on August 13, 2016, Pakistan "bombs its own citizens using fighter planes [and will] have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Balochistan and POK."  To be sure, it was another clear message that the craven days of Modi's predecessors are gone, and that India will no longer roll over for Pakistan.  It also was something that few democratically elected leaders have done in this existential war against radical Islam and its enablers:  Prime Minister Modi took the fight to the enemy.

How reactive and predictable are we in the face of this enemy!  Some sad sack tries to set his shoe on fire on a plane, and we have to take off our shoes before we can board.  A few amateurs try to blow up planes with liquid explosives, and we can't take our bottle of water with us.   For years, New Delhi danced to Islamabad's tune, allowing Pakistan to commit regular violations in Kashmir then accusing India of "atrocities"; driving out Hindus then saying "popular sentiment" demands an Indian withdrawal--and India does nothing.  I saw the previous government give on point after point even after Pakistan trained and funded terrorists to attack India.

No more; not with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.  Adding to the man's accomplishment, his enemies, foreign and domestic, were ready to paint him as a racist, warmonger, and anything else they could use; but he has been able to bring India to this self-respecting position without acting in ways that make those screeds at all credible.  Even here in the United States, there is a strong current to replace our decades long Pakistan-ties with Indian ones.  And Modi's politically-motivated detractors on Capitol Hill have gone silent.

Returning to Balochistan, much of the world has been obsessed with a non-existent occupation in the Middle East while ignoring a very real and brutal one in Pakistan.  Baloch, Pashtun, Gilgit Baltstanis, Sindhi, and Kashmiris all will tell you that.  Perhaps other world leaders need to take a lesson from Modi ji and stop letting our enemies define the agenda or tell us what is just

BETRAYAL: USCIRF PROMOTES RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION

In its just released report, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) ignored overwhelming evidence of Bangladeshi government complicity in the ethnic cleansing of Hindus, while rejecting the path of cooperation with India, choosing instead a sterile form of confrontation.

·        USCIRF was established by Title II of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998.  Its mandate is to “facts and circumstances of violations of religious freedom [and make] policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State, and Congress.”

·        Along with a misguided minority in Washington, it has for years sullied the reputation of current Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and observant Hindus with discredited claims of his complicity in anti-minority violence.

·        Its recently-released 2015 annual report continues that effort, using questionable material to claim religious freedom abuses in India, and attributes it to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent election and "Hindu nationalist groups," while calling forced conversion of Hindus "media propaganda." When USCIRF staff brought the allegations to me for my advice, I provided evidence refuting it.

·        Fewer and fewer people and organizations continue this sterile line given Modi’s election as India’s Prime Minister, his actions since that election, the growing importance of India’s relations with other democracies, and India’s Supreme Court having cleared Modi multiple times.

·        USCIRF’s action is consistent with a pattern of anti-Hindu bias.

·        Its report on Pakistan, where Hindus face intense violence and have been reduced to one percent of the population, USCIRF calls violence against Hindus “allegations,” while not similarly qualifying the claims of any other minority group.

·        Its report on Bangladesh calls violence against Hindus “occasional,” despite sending staff on a fact-finding trip in which my associates provided ample and vetted evidence of ongoing ethnic cleansing of Hindus and the Bangladeshi government’s complicity that have reduced Hindus from one in five Bangladeshis to as few as one in 15.

·        In August 2014, I arranged a meeting between an Indian government representative and USCIRF’s Chairperson at which both parties agreed on a path of cooperation to undo decades of mutual animosity and work together toward common understandings.  In the end, USCIRF rejected cooperation and chose the course of confrontation instead with an increasingly important US ally.

·        Hindus are being persecuted out of existence in Bangladesh and Pakistan.  Yet, USCIRF minimizes or ignores that—despite being given ample evidence to the contrary choosing instead to pursue discredited accusations against one of our most sincere allies.  I have direct evidence of all of this and stand by my accusations against USCIRF and the government of Bangladesh.

·        USCIRF’S decision was a disservice to both India and the United States, to religious minorities in South Asia, and to the cause of religious freedom worldwide.  It also called its impartiality into question and with it that of the United States government.

India can expect the media's "Israel treatment"

What is the media's "Israel treatment"?  It is the imposition of a general narrative over the situation, which then mandates that all events be interpreted within its framework; all editorial decisions about what gets covered (and what does not) and how it is covered must come out of that narrative.  Matti Friedman, who was an Associated Press reporter and editor in its Jerusalem bureau from 2006-2011, has done an excellent job of describing how that narrative works to mislead populations whose misinformed actions then seem to validate this "narrative construct that is largely fiction."  How would such a narrative work to distort any actions India might take to save Hindus in Bangladesh?

The media and its slavish followers have decided that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a "bad guy" and that Bangladesh is a "moderate Muslim country,"  both of which are as far from the truth as one can get.  If PM Modi is a bad guy, so must be the overwhelming number of Indians who gave him a landslide mandate in the world's largest democratic election ever.  Moreover, I have the pleasure of knowing him and know that he is sincere in his aspirations for his nation and all of its people.  On the other hand, Bangladesh has fallen under the grip of Islamists, who now control most of its major institutions.  (Al Qaeda and ISIS have recently opened offices there.)  Another of the media's cherished myths is that the current party in power, the Awami League, is the "good party," as opposed to its major opponent, the BNP,  Like the rest of the narrative, that too does not stand up to the reality of ongoing ethnic cleansing of Hindus and others in Bangladesh with the government's tacit support.

Here is one example of how the narrative distorts reality to make good guys into bad and bad guys into good.  Earlier this year, I was in Assam's tribal areas and observed the cultural and ecological damage massive infiltration from Bangladesh has brought to the region.  Forests are being destroyed, poaching is bringing both the elephant and one-horned rhino to the brink of extinction; the natives' children are being sent out of the area for their safety with the parents having little hope that they will return to their tribal culture; an ancient way of life and the ecology that supports it are dying, and the people in the area are restive.  On several occasions, that restiveness has erupted into violence (I've interviewed several elderly tribal victims of the violence); and the only thing preventing another, major eruption is the people's expectation that new Indian PM will protect them.  Yet, I told tribal leaders earlier this year that if they try to expel illegal infiltrators, the media will feature "bedraggled refugees," alleged victims of "nationalists."  Moreover, no major media outlet has covered the devastation to their land and way of life--even after Bangladeshi PM Sheikh Hasina promised a continued flow of illegal aliens to Assam.

The media has left India with three difficult options.  It can cave into the narrative in an attempt to avoid criticism at the price of its people's safety.  It can ignore the narrative and hope that one day people will recognize the reality of the situation.  It can attempt some hybrid that probably leans toward the second option but attempts to mollify its critics. If the Israel experience is any guide, the first option is a disaster and will only invite more anti-Hindu rhetoric; and the third will prevent India from achieving the goals it wants to in order to protect its people. The second road is a tough one that brings potentially high political costs to the leader who follows it.  My own sense is that after centuries of other nations--first the mughals then the British then the West in general--treating India in a patronizing way and lecturing it on right and wrong; India is about to flex its muscles under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and take its rightful place as a world economic, cultural, and military leader.  How it handles the flood of infiltrators from Bangladesh, the Prime Minister's pre-election promise to protect neighboring Hindus from ongoing and state-supported persecution, and similar matters will test its mettle in the face of the narrative makers.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi already thinning India's bloated government

In office only five days, India’s new Prime Minister Narendra Modi is already showing people how a small government, conservative head of state acts.  Without even touching his people’s services or their quality, he began on his very first day in office fulfilling his promise to cut the size of his country’s bloated government.

He began by swearing in only 23 cabinet ministers, combining several portfolios and eliminating others.  It was the smallest number of cabinet posts in 16 years.  Only five days later, the Prime Minister did away with an entire layer of government by summarily abolishing the country’s 30 “ministerial groups.”  These groups were designed to protect entrenched and immediate interests, whether legitimate or not; and stood between India’s citizenry and the cabinet.  They had to give their blessing to any measure requiring cabinet approval before it could even get there for deliberation.  Under the previous, left leaning Congress Party government, ministerial committees numbered as many as 60.

Modi, whose theme has been “minimum government, maximum governance,” got rid of these groups even though in doing so he took on more personal responsibility and the greater accountability that comes with it.  According to The Hindustan Times, their abolition means that Modi himself “will now have to adjudicate matters where there are differences among cabinet colleagues,” rather than having an additional bureaucratic layer to cut deals and run interference for him.  And he will be responsible for those decisions, something his immediate predecessors assiduously avoided.

Reducing the size of government and speeding up the pace of decision-making are two critical elements in the free market conservative Modi’s plans to revitalize the Indian economy and polity and make government responsive to the Indian people.  Modi's method will remove the barriers that until now has kept a lot of people worldwide from participating in India's economic potential.

Accept it America, a Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a good thing

Few Americans are aware of the potentially earth-shaking events currently unfolding in India. The left-center Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, which has ruled India for all but eight of its 67 years of national existence, is about to be voted out of power in favor of the conservative opposition under the leadership of Narendra Modi. Fewer still realize what a fantastic thing it is for the United States.

Modi is an unapologetic free market capitalist who turned his state of Gujarat into a pro-business economic miracle that accounts for 72 percent of India’s new jobs and has its lowest unemployment rate.  His foreign policy is based on a strong and assertive India that acts as the bulwark against the expansion of both radical Islam and communism, both of which have taken the lives of many Indians.  I spend a lot of time in India and never once was there when attacks from either or both did not cost innocent lives.  Yet, a small but vocal Congressional coalition of leftists, conservatives, and people who fashion themselves defenders of human rights but do so with blinders; have banded together to keep beating an anti-Modi drum that has been discredited multiple times.  Taken in reverse:

• The uniformed:  Congressmen like Chris Smith of New Jersey have been fed the stale and discredited line that Modi was involved in Gujarat's 2002 riots.  Several commissions and even India's Supreme Court have absolved him noting that much of the "evidence" they encountered was based on fabrications.  Yet, Smith and others believe that they (perhaps as Westerners?) sitting half way around the world know better than the entire Indian judiciary.
• The ill informed:  Several conservatives have been convinced that Modi will be bad for Christians on the basis of hyperbole spread by missionaries some of dubious political leanings.  Most recently, several Christian prelates have noted that more and more Indian Christians have flocked to Modi as the man who can make their lives better.  Moreover, Modi has never been credibly accused of aiding or abetting any anti-Christian actions.
• The misinformers:  Leftists have reason to worry.  Modi once told me that he was anxious to work closely with the US and Israel.  He also will begin dismantling some of the big government programs that have made India one of the most corrupt country in the world and have actually made the lot of most Indians worse.  He recently addressed a crowd in the Indian state of Assam, worried about Islamist infiltration of their homeland, the increased anti-Hindu violence they bring and their environmental destruction.  "Assam lies next to Bangladesh, and Gujarat lies next to Pakistan,” he said. “People of Assam are troubled because of Bangladesh, and Pakistan is worried because of me."

The Indian American Muslim Council has hired a lobbyist to use their influence to get Members of Congress to sign on to this biased resolution.  We do not have their money, but we have the truth. House Resolution 417 is a pack of lies and must be defeated.  On top of that, the World Bank reported last week that India has passed Japan as the world's third largest economy.  With China as Number 2, this is a time to embrace India and its new Prime Minister, not alienate them.

To see if your Member of Congress is a co-sponsor of the anti-India bill, House Resolution 417, and want to urge him or her to withdraw from this ethnocentric, factually flawed, and geopolitical stupid piece of legislation, click this link.  You can also contact me through this blog.

H.R. 417 Anti-India; Harmful to US-India Relations

The year 2014 begins with a particularly pernicious and irresponsible piece of legislation circulating the United States Congress.  It is H.R. 417 which begins by praising India but follows with nothing but propaganda and mischaracterizations that could set back US-India relations by decades.  The resolution singles out India as a nation that regularly tolerates attacks on minorities, while its backers would never think of calling out the worst violators of minority rights including Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.  Moreover, I have been in India for about a month every year, and every time I've been there, there has been at least one terrorist attack and anti-religious action.  Not one of them has been perpetrated against a minority, but every single one has been perpetrated against the majority Hindu community.


H.R. 417 is also presumptuous and ethnocentric.  India has enacted and enforced a plethora of laws that protect minorities; some might even say advantage them.  417 additionally singles out one of India's two major candidates for Prime Minister and accuses him of racism and atrocities. What's wrong with that?  First, it's not true.  Second, Gujarat Chief Minister and BJP Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi has been cleared again and again of any wrongdoing, including being cleared by India's Supreme Court, which has stellar reputation internationally.  How insulting for a group of people half way around the world, who have not seen a tenth of the evidence reviewed by India's Supreme Court, to presume that they know better due to some sort of entitlement!  And consider this:  Right now, it looks more likely than not that Narendra Modi will be India's next Prime Minister.  How do we--a nation that welcomes Russian President Vladimir Putin and whose President bows to the Saudi King--apologize for that insult and make relations whole again?

The Hindu American Foundation has uncovered the biased motives of the group behind H.R. 417, the misnomered Committee Against Genocide, as well as its discredited information, and anti-Hindu hatred.  See The Coalition Against Genocide:  A Nexus of Hinduphobia Unveiled.

You can help stop this dangerous and prejudiced bill by contacting your Representative in Congress and urging or demanding that he or she oppose the resolution.  If your Representative is already a co-sponsor, urge him or her to do as Congressman Steve Chabot did who withdrew his co-sponsorship when he was apprised of the facts.  You can find your Congressman or Congresswoman through this site.

Hindu Genocide Museum Proposed

A group of concerned citizens from several areas across the United States are looking to build a museum dedicated to educating people about the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Hindus in places like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and elsewhere.  The effort is in the early stages, but we know that the intention is to pattern the museum after the holocaust museums commemorating the Nazi attempt to wipe out the Jewish people.  More to come on this.

To help with any of these or other efforts, please email me.

US Should Grant Modi a Visa before it is too late

Imagine the following scenario.  It is mid-year 2014, and India has just sworn in its new Prime Minister--an individual committed to achieving for India its rightful place as an international economic and political giant.  A pro-growth PM, he will likely preside over the time when India's eclipses China as the world's most populous nation; and he has made it clear that this new India will stand for the values we Americans espouse against the forces of international authoritarianism.

The US Ambassador congratulates the Indian people on their new leader, talks about the strong relationship between India and the United States, and extends a hand to the new Prime Minister.  The PM politely accepts it but with a knowing smile of contempt and wondering about my country's duplicity and whether or not we will be a true friend to this resurgent India.

Although the Indian elections are almost a year away, polls and pundits are confident that Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi will become the nation's next PM.  As of today, the US government maintains its position that Narendra Modi is disqualified from receiving a visa to visit the United States; that he was somehow involved in the 2002 Gujarat riots in which over 1000 Hindus and Muslims died.  It is an odd position for us to take sitting atop our perch halfway around the world when people close to the ground have exonerated Modi of any such charges multiple times.

Although the Indian Supreme Court has declared Modi innocent of any wrongdoing, the US State Department, politicians, and self-interested ideologues believe that they know better and dismiss the court's actions.  I'm not sure what happened to our hallowed principle that people are innocent until proven guilty, but it seems we do not apply it in Naredra Modi's case.  Last week, the Indian legal system began the process of hearing the final gasp of Modi's detractors who are demanding that the court reject its own body's final report on their say-so.  It is not certain when it will dispose of this final stab at Modi, but as soon as it happens, the United States government would be wise to announce that if Narendra Modi wants to apply for a visa he will get one; that the charges against him have not been proven despite multiple attempt; that we have listened to those who slandered Narendra Modi's good name.

It is not only an insult to Modi himself and to the millions of Indians--Hindus and Muslims--who have made him Gujarat's longest serving Chief Minister, and one of its most successful.  In maintaining our baseless visa denial, we are declaring in one fell swoop that the entire Indian legal system is without merit; that the highly respected judges on its Supreme Court do not know what they are doing.  Is this how we treat a friend and ally?

My country has made peace with some of the worst world leaders imaginable:  Joseph Stalin who the Roosevelt Administration wanted us to call "Uncle Joe," Mao Zedong who was openly proud of the tens of millions he sent to their death, Palestinian terrorists and their Holocaust-denying "President," "moderate" Taliban, and Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood.  Yet, we hold firm against a man declared innocent time and again; a man who actually stopped Gujarat's annual that have not recurred under his administration?

My country's leaders need to acknowledge truth over politics and ideology and begin the same discussions with Modi that the UK, EU, and others already have.  Yes, it will be embarrassing if we suddenly extend a hand of friendship while holding the position that the man to whom we are extending it is worse than the rogues' gallery above whom we have taken into our bosom.  Worse for everyone, however refusing to budge in the face of facts threatens the quality of that friendship and the fate of the world going forward.

High Praise for book about Hindus in Bangladesh

I recently returned to the United States from an incredibly successful trip to India where I picked up endorsements for his work from the likes of Dr. Subramanian Swamy, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, among others. Since 2007, I have been trying to stop the deliberate program of ethnic cleansing that has reduced the Hindu population in Bangladesh from almost a third in 1951 to about seven percent today. Professor Sachi Dastidar of the State University of New York calculates that about 49 million Hindus are missing from the Bangladeshi census. Now, I ask you, how do 49 million people go missing and nobody notices? Worse, how do 49 million people go missing and nobody cares?

Despite the fact that reports of anti-Hindu atrocities continue to pour out of Bangladesh almost every day, people still ask for ”evidence” when you bring it up to them. They often ask why if things are so bad, we never hear anything about it from Hindus or the government of India. We can pose any number of reasons for that, but I believe that one is the fact that Bangladesh is referred to as a “moderate” Muslim nation; and while the talking heads in various capitals and NGOs love to distinguish between “radical” Muslim nations, like Iran, and moderate Muslim nations like Bangladesh, the ethnic cleansing of Hindus by the latter spoils their naïve theorizing.


My new book, A Quiet Case of Ethnic Cleansing: the Murder of Bangladesh’s Hindus provides the evidence that prevents people like that from continuing that fantasy. The incidents are based it on first-hand observation and testimony, extensive research, and a network of informants and associates who have been able to verify so many of the anti-Hindu atrocities that have been reported over the past three years; the book is a stinging indictment of successive Bangladeshi governments and those entities that pose as human rights defenders and should be protecting these Hindu victims.

While the book provides the historical, legal, and religious underpinning of these atrocities, it also focuses on current events and in particular the complicity of Sheikh Hasina and Bangladesh’s current Awami League government. All the pundits and so-called experts who hailed her election as as something of a watershed that would “change everything” in Bangladesh have been proven wrong—and for too many Hindu victims, dead wrong.

In India, A Quiet Case of Ethnic Cleansing received rave reviews from several prominent individuals as well as academics, religious figures, and others. Dr. Subramanian Swamy cut short a trip to Sri Lanka in order to fly to New Delhi and be the principle speaker at its book launch. He praised my work and tied the events in Bangladesh to “larger issues” facing Hindus and others. Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi was visibly moved by the events in the book and told me unequivocally that “I will work with you.” And K P S Gill, hailed by most as a hero for fighting such things his entire life and known as the man who saved Punjab, said that my book is an important one that should be “read carefully.”

A Quiet Case of Ethnic Cleansing: the Murder of Bangladesh’s Hindus is available for US shipping by clicking here and for addresses in India by emailing the publisher; people elsewhere, please email the author.