The differences are
stark.
Democratic state, as opposed
to a theocratic state.
One with unprecedented
economic ascendancy, other with the exact opposite.
In our country syncretism is
largely upheld and minority numbers are increasing if anything; on their side
radicalism has entrenched itself firmly and people of other religion have been
hounded, converted, persecuted or chased away.
Yet the said state and its
militia-terrorist nexus expect red carpets to be laid out as they approach a
disputed territory to incite divisions.
Like a recalcitrant brat, impervious to frequent clips around the ear,
this epicentre of global terrorism always expects to be treated equally and even
royally! It expects the world to treat it “on par” with
its neighbour. Ever since we have managed to exorcise ourselves from our horrid conjoined twin, it
has made numerous attempts to seek attention, cry foul, throw tantrums, and, if
all else fails, to covertly decimate its older brother.
Actually it is not
surprising if you consider the above differences; envy was always going to make
its presence felt, which then makes the brat do these things. Truly, the predominant colour of that nation
as been well chosen – green: the colour of envy. The brat has to get what the older brother
has just got, if not it is going to create a fuss. If it is beyond the reach of its capability,
such as sending space-crafts to moon and Mars, or economic prosperity driven by
an able leader, it would make sure that it would at least spoil the party for
the other – through ceasefire violations, as we have seen recently.
But we do share an ambivalent relationship with this country.
On the one hand, tennis players unite to win doubles tournaments, and
films stars and singers of that country are ‘palanquined’ into ours as though
they are god’s best creations. On the
other hand, each time there is a border skirmish, a hilltop war, or a terrorist
attack, we cry foul, pin blame on them immediately (often rightly), and deride
these attacks in our cinema.
When a tennis player married
a cricketer from the other side, news reports showed men from the other
side dancing ecstatically to drum beats, with some even suggesting that we
should bow down to them as we, being the ladkiwale, should be
subservient to the more superior ladkewale. It was like suggesting that your ladki
has chose our ladka over the millions of men in your country;
there must be something superior about us!
Some even suggested that she should play for her sasural country
henceforth! Actually they were exposing
their own entrenched patriarchal and anti-feminine cultural mindset by saying
all this. But what happened after all
that chest-thumping? The ladki,
now the bahu of that country, continues to play for our country – in
short skirts, and with male partners to boot – something which occasionally
causes a religious leader to throw a fit.
Coming back to our imported
celebrities, how many of them have actually criticized their country for
inciting violence through cross-border ceasefire, or through covert terrorist
attacks?
How many of them have openly
condemned 26/11?
Did any of them say that
the terrorists, their countryman, was wrong in carrying out those attacks?
How many acknowledge the
wide gulf that exists between the socioeconomic situations of the two
countries. How many are grateful to a
country, its society and its people, who have accepted them after overlooking
all of these? Like free-loaders, they
enjoy the fruits that come their way, and maintain aloofness whenever their
parent country unleashes another of its brazen plans.
In a misguided sense of
secularism and largesse, we tend to overlook all of these and go all out to
please them. We end up giving needless
importance to a rogue nation that just needs to be left alone. Even those people who raise a voice against
this are silenced, and even boycotted. A
singer, who has ‘ole ole’d a lot in the past, doesn't seem to be getting
any work these days; probably because he openly questioned the need for
importing celebrities from that country.
Forget the celebrities. What about the ordinary people from that country, who come here with their passports and then chuck them to get lost
among the multitudes? The number of
people who have overstayed their welcome, or who have totally disappeared once
on this side of the border, is staggering.
Is it not possible that at least some of these have contacts with, or
indeed, are themselves terrorists? It’s Sarfarosh
all over again.
Forget even the people of
that country for a while. These days our
cities are attracting students and workers from all across the globe. Most of them, if not all, seem to revel in
their audacity, which is unleashed as soon as they see the soft nature of our
people and the lax implementation of our law.
Recently there was a rampage by a group of students from a North African
country – the kind of thing that we would never dream of doing when in a
foreign country. Should we put it down
to cultural differences, religious differences, or something else?
This just goes to show that there needs to be
some kind of a screening process before foreign elements are allowed into the
country; thorough vigilance of their actions is necessary, which may involve
something more than just registering at the local police station; if they
resort to violence or crime of any sort, they need to be deported.
As things stand now, we seem
to be allowing far too many indiscriminately without any kind of background
check. Our leaders and law enforcers are
slumbering as infiltrators disappear into the local population. If this is not checked, we may soon end up
with a very real problem – in addition to communal clashes, strikes, rapes and
murders – that of the rogue foreign immigrant.
We need to learn from other countries’ examples. The UK, which had allowed a very
similar immigration to occur on a mass scale in the 1950s and ’60s, is now
faced with a problem that it is unable to solve. Most of the descendants of the immigrants of
that time are now UK
citizens, but their loyalties are split, and in some cases, are even
anti-British. It is worth noting that
the London Tube bombers were the so-called ‘home grown’ terrorists –
descendants of immigrants. There are
ghetto areas in many of UK’s cities, which are
considered to ‘no-go’ areas that you would do well to avoid.
The point is this. You are welcome to come to our country. You are welcome to stay and make use of the
facilities here – whether academic, economic, or other. We believe in the principle of Vasudhaiva
Kutumbakam – the whole world is one family; one humanity. But once you are here, do not show off, do
not act high and mighty, do not degrade our culture/religion/nationality, do
not expect special favours, do not overstay your welcome, and certainly do not
indulge in covert anti-state activities.
In the meantime authorities all over – law enforcers, policy makers,
ministers, educationists, employers, film producers, music directors – please be
more vigilant and keep an eye open for misdemeanour from your foreign
recruits.
If not it would have to be A Wednesday all over again!
Image source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/Indo_Bangladesh_Border%2C_Dakshin_Denajpur.jpg/220px-Indo_Bangladesh_Border%2C_Dakshin_Denajpur.jpg
