Union home minister Sushil Kumar Shinde’s letter to chief ministers to ensure that in the fight against terrorists, care is taken to prevent harassment of innocent Muslims and the “innocent” should be released at once is yet another instance of the ruling Congress’ divisive agenda even in an areas of national security. As expected none of the “secular” parties or academics have protested against the grossly communal missive. Had the home minister expressed concern over innocents being harassed irrespective of their religious or any other identity that would have been understood as a legitimate expression of the government’s concern at wrong being done to any citizen in the authorities’ enthusiasm to secure India against terror from any source. Why this concern is so exclusive instead of being inclusive can only be seen in the light of the Congress’ and some other self-styled “secular” parties’ competitive militancy in projecting themselves as the saviour of Muslims. The Samajwadi Party government in UP, for instance, is twisting and turning the rules in seeking release of several persons who happened to be Muslims, detained as suspects in terrorism related events. In one instance, the government’s request to drop the case against a set of suspects has been turned down by the court. The contrasting treatment the Akhilesh Yadav government meted out to Hindus as against Muslims accused in the Muzaffarnagar riots is striking. It also speaks of appeasement of one community against vindictiveness as opposed to the other. While BJP MLAs like Suresh Rana and Sangeet Som were hounded to their homes and arrested despite little proof about the charge of incitement, Muslim clerics like Maulana Nazir who, too, were similarly accused were given red carpet treatment, sending special aircraft to bring them as state guests to Lucknow and meet the chief minister. As for the security apparatus harassing Muslims, there are several instances of prospective Muslim suspects being released (or acquitted by courts), too, and Hindu suspects being held without bail for years on end. The security forces first held some alleged IM terrorists for the blasts in the Sadbhavana Express. Then the policemen changed their story and zeroed in on a Hindu sadhvi and a Hindu colonel working in the army intelligence apparatus. Three years later, the NIA that is dealing with this case is still opposing their bail applications. The sadhvi is extremely unwell and the government has not filed a full chargesheet against them. Compare that with the excessive concern of the Congress-led Kerala government, as it went out of the way to intervene in neighbouring Karnataka calling for “better” medical treatment of suspect extremist Abdul Naseer Mahdani, held for masterminding bomb attacks in Bangalore. Why is the concern not extended to an equally or even more unwell sadhvi held for the Sadbhavana Express and Ajmer bombings? Are basic human rights to be interpreted in communal terms? It is possible to agree with the home minister’s premise that security forces could often arrest and even take innocents to court. In police administration this happens almost every day. Fortunately, the courts maintain a vigil in such cases. It could even be conceded that despite such vigilance by the courts innocents often get caught in the police dragnet and are substituted for the real culprits because the police was eager to prove its efficacy. But that doesn’t seem to be main concern of Shinde’s epistle to chief ministers. He simply wanted to show himself and his party as the champions of Muslim interests. As the central home minister, Shinde should have been more concerned about discrimination by state governments, especially those headed by Congress chief ministers, in favour of Muslim detainees. The Congress government in Andhra Pradesh, for example, went out of its way to “compensate” 21 Muslim youths acquitted by the courts after being in jail for five years on terror charges. There is no provision in law for such compensation and the state has not given any compensation to detainees of other religious denominations in the past. Naturally the state high court struck down the compensation move for Muslims as discriminatory and against the provisions of law. Now, the Congress government is finding out whether it should appeal to the apex court in the matter. That the so-called concern for the “innocents” among the Muslims is partisan can be further seen from the ruling party’s top leaders seeking to cry on the shoulders of Azamgarh residents as the security establishment swooped in on some suspects, part of an IM module, holed up at Batla House in New Delhi two years ago. Some Congress leaders like general secretary Digvijaya Singh have even expressed serious doubt over the sacrifice of the Mumbai ace police officer who was shot at by Pakistani terrorists who invaded the city and killed over 265 people. The NIA has spent much time and energy in establishing that the bombings in several places like Ajmer and Pune were the outcome of the conspiracy hatched by Hindu outfits! While there can be no justification or condoning of innocents being pushed into jails for even a day on trumped up charges, the entire law enforcement agency could be merely being human in being influenced by the global terror situation. Consider a day’s headlines about terror attacks in different parts of the world. The September 30 edition of Hindustan Times has these headings up on a single page: “Car bombs kill 40 in Peshawar”, “50 college students gunned down by militants in Nigeria”, “Bloody Sunday across Globe”, “US drone kills four (Taliban leaders) in Pakistan’s tribal region.” In all these events the perpetrators are jihadi Islamists. In global events whether in Pakistan, India, Egypt, Somalia, Nigeria or Yemen, Europe or America it is all the story of involvement of Islamic militancy, with the underpinnings of religious beliefs. What is it that even a convert to Islam in America is inspired to place a car bomb in New York’s most crowded Times Square? While such concerns have been raised across the world by not only governments but academics, sociologists and other leaders of thought, in our “secular” circles, the entire reasoning is only to present the Islamists as victims rather than wrong doers and security agencies as the villains. What is Shinde’s take on it?