Why Should We Boycott Indian Goods?

In recent times, there have been increasing calls from Muslims in the Arab world and around the globe to boycott Indian goods. This movement gained momentum after Nupur Sharma, the now-sacked spokeswoman for India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), insulted the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) on prime-time television. Her remarks led to an unprecedented backlash from Muslim-majority nations, including Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Indonesia, and the Maldives. Consequently, Sharma was suspended from the party, and Naveen Jindal, a BJP spokesman in Delhi who also tweeted derogatory remarks about Islam, was expelled.

A Pattern of Insults and Anti-Muslim Rhetoric

Muslims worldwide must understand that this incident is not an isolated one involving a ‘lone wolf’ in India. There have been numerous instances where Hindu nationalists, backed by the BJP and other right-wing organizations, have insulted the Prophet and humiliated Islam and its sacred personalities. These actions are part of a broader pattern of anti-Muslim rhetoric and behavior.

Despite the international diplomatic fallout, this incident is unlikely to curb the Hindu right wing’s anti-Muslim stance in the long term. If anything, such positions may become even more entrenched. For now, BJP representatives might be more cautious in their public statements, but the underlying sentiments among far-right supporters of the Modi government remain unchanged. The flood of “I stand with Nupur Sharma” comments on social media and calls to boycott Qatar Airways highlight this coordinated support.

The Response to International Criticism

India has faced criticism from various quarters for its handling of the incident. Should India be lectured on pluralism and human rights by undemocratic nations, some of which have poor records on diversity? This question is contentious. Even the fiercest critics of the BJP’s Hindutva politics are often uncomfortable with external powers, including democracies like the United States, dictating terms. Many applauded India’s foreign minister for reminding the United States that any dialogue over human rights must be between equals and not framed as a patronizing admonition. Similarly, Indian Muslim politicians have repeatedly pushed back against Pakistan’s attempts to interfere.

The BJP’s Duality and Economic Interests

The BJP’s response to the outrage from at least 15 Muslim-majority nations, contrasted with its indifference to the sentiments of over 200 million Indian Muslims, underscores a duality in its approach. This discrepancy might be explained by the economic stakes involved, such as billions of dollars in trade, oil, food exports, and remittances from these countries. Additionally, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has made significant efforts to enhance diplomatic relations with the Muslim world, likely sees this controversy as damaging to his brand. India’s vice president, on a visit to Qatar, when the issue erupted, faced considerable embarrassment.

Domestic Political Dynamics

The BJP and the Indian government took several days to act against Sharma, doing so only when the issue became a significant international concern. According to retired diplomat Navdeep Suri, the BJP believed it could pursue the politics of polarization at home while its diplomats maintained favorable relations with the Muslim world. This dual strategy is now under scrutiny.

The furor over Sharma’s comments was initially ignored because the BJP has never faced significant political repercussions for marginalizing the Muslim community. The party’s electoral success has often come at the expense of religious diversity and inclusiveness. There is a real possibility that the party might soon have no Muslims in parliament, a scenario it would not regret.

Today, the Modi government is managing crises on two fronts: anger from Islamic nations, where millions of Indians live and work, and backlash from its far-right base, which views any concession as a betrayal. Online right-wing platforms are rife with provocative outbursts about “betrayal,” showing the depth of the ideological divide.

The Role of Indian Media

India’s private television news channels play a significant role in perpetuating this divisive rhetoric. Every evening, anchors pit extreme voices against each other, fostering a toxic culture of coarseness and hate. Noam Chomsky’s concept of “manufactured consent” is turned on its head in India, where media conglomerates thrive on manufacturing dissent. Despite publishing editorials on the dangers of polarization, these outlets profit from sensationalism and conflict.

The Broader Impact and Future Implications

Supporters of Sharma argue that the backlash from Gulf countries is part of an organized campaign by India’s adversaries. Reports of threats by al-Qaeda to carry out attacks over Sharma’s comments only bolster this narrative. All violence, including threats to Sharma, is indefensible. However, the irony is that while terrorists issue threats, politicians argue, and media hosts fuel division, the voices of ordinary Indian Muslims remain marginalized.

While Sharma was officially labeled as “fringe” in India’s clarifications, the reality is that today’s fringe can become tomorrow’s mainstream. This ongoing controversy reveals much about the current state of Indian politics and the challenges faced by the Muslim community.

The call to boycott Indian goods by Muslims worldwide is a response to deep-seated issues within India’s political and social fabric. It highlights the ongoing struggle against anti-Muslim rhetoric and actions by Hindu nationalists. The international diplomatic fallout, economic considerations, and the BJP’s duality in handling domestic and international criticism reveal a complex web of motivations and consequences. As the situation continues to evolve, the need for genuine dialogue and inclusiveness remains more critical than ever.