Operation Sindoor - Our Army and Our Political Leadership

Like all my fellow countrymen I salute and express my gratitude to the Armed Forces for the well conceived, planned and executed Operation Sindoor.  This time Pakistan went one cut too far in its pursuit of its foolish thousand cuts policy, and this measured, mature and responsible response from our forces had become unavoidable.  This has avenged the great tragedy suffered by innocent Indians at the hands of mad terrorists.  Jai Hind, Jai Hind ki Sena.

However this valorous action by the forces must not bring a false sense of closure.  This is only half the battle won.  There are enemies within too.  Without such traitors such daring terror acts would be well nigh impossible in an area as highly militarized as J&K and elsewhere too.  It will be recalled that even after the dastardly 26/11 terror attack on Mumbai, there was a talk about a mole, popularly termed Pakistani Honey Bee, in New Delhi.  The mole was never found. (https://rajeev.in/?questionasked=indian-mole-who-helped-terrorists-in-2611-mumbai-terror-attacks)

After Pulwama attack too no culprits have been brought to book thus far.  A police man, Davinder Singh, was caught but we don't know whether he was found guilty or not.  He has simply vanished from the news space.

Catching these moles and traitors amongst us is squarely the job of the political leadership in the government.  The continuing failure to apprehend and punish them imposes a heavy cost on the country and our brave forces.  The forces have done their job in an excellent manner, and now it is for us, the public, to prevail upon our government to show similar deftness in catching and punishing the guilty within.  Remember that those who do not actively oppose the evil around them, effectively become part of them and just as culpable.

Let the drums of euphoria not drown the desperate cry for apprehending and punishing the guilty within.

Secularism In A Self-Help Organization

As elsewhere we too have a HOA (House Owners Association) that we call Jan Kalyan Samiti. People pay annual subscriptions that go to maintenance of common services, mostly security. Office bearers are all honorary position holders that do liaison with municipal authorities, police etc. The Association also organises an annual get together over cultural programmes and dinner.  This get together is synchronised with the popular Holi festival.

Last year saw addition of several religious celebrations to Samiti's activities, like Ganesh Puja, Durga Puja, Bhagwat Katha.  It may not be totally irrelevant to mention that a spate of such activities was observed all around us, in the city and also the state.  I was amongst very few members of our society who made bold to suggest that these activities be undertaken on individual basis or group basis but NOT under the aegis of the association which must confine itself to secular activities.  Though, it was not accepted.

Accounts presented in the general body meeting show that the amount collected and spent in religious activities matched the total expenditure towards the secular activities.  This shows a strong possibility of change in the very nature of the association and hence, when given an opportunity to speak, I reiterated my suggestion that the association should confine itself to secular activities and resist the wave of majoritarianism pervading the country.  I believe that these also go against the stated objectives of the Samiti in its bylaws.

In response one person mentioned that secularism merely means Sarvdharm Sambhaav, and another suggested that our Vice President of the association, who happens to be a Muslim, host an Eid party to be attended by the committee members.  Eid party hosted by an individual is perfectly okay, and in tune with my argument that religious observances should be individual affair and I do hope that this is not merely a feeble balancing act and will be applied to all other religious celebrations, annual get together being the only exception.

I would like to add that secularism doesn't and shouldn't mean equal respect for all religions.  That definition has already caused a lot of ambiguity.  Also, even with that definition, secularism is taking a beating today.  What secularism should actually mean is equal disregard for all religion in matters related to governance and services.