‘And then there was no one left to speak for me …’

Atiq Rahman
Published : 22 Oct 2021, 09:40 PM
Updated : 22 Oct 2021, 09:40 PM

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out —

Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out —

Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out —

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me."

This confessional statement was written in 1946 by German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the cowardice of German intellectuals and clergy (including himself) following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental purging of their chosen targets, group after group.

Fast forward 75 years later to present-day Bangladesh – we are seeing a range of violent incidents against the Hindu community based on an apparently staged conspiracy. Rumours and false information shared over social media ignited a series of communal attacks across the country – Hindu places of worship were vandalised, their residences and businesses were arson attacked, their properties and belongings looted. Local-level administrations failed to maintain law and order situations while the wider community of majority Muslims was not proactive to prevent or stop these attacks on minority Hindus. It was an epic failure for Bangladesh as a nation that could not provide protection to its own citizens.

This latest incident cannot be ignored as sporadic or one-off. In fact, this is just the latest episode of a series of attacks fuelled by religious extremism and fundamentalism that we have witnessed over the last few years. There were similar incidents in places like Ramu (2012), Gobindganj (2016), Nasirnagar (2016), Shalla (2021). The locations or targets were different, but the model was similar – using a rumour or falsehood spread over social media to incite communal hatred and attack on minority communities.

In a modern democracy, it is the responsibility of the majority to protect the rights of minority groups. For a country like Bangladesh where Muslims make up 90% of the population, it should not be considered that the remaining 10% are any less than the rest in terms of their human, civil and constitutional rights. Even the teachings of Islam ask for guaranteeing the right of religious freedom for other believers. Despite having a stable government with a deep-rooted belief in secularism as its ideology, these incidents keep on happening. It is alarming to see the apparent indifference of the Muslim majority population and their failure to recognise the risks lying ahead if religious extremism and fundamentalism are not nipped in the bud. These Muslims, being the overwhelming majority in Bangladesh, are thinking persecution of religious or ethnic minorities is not a risk to them. They are living in a false sense of security. They do not have to look too far in the history books to understand what may happen next –  there are two rather recent examples from Afghanistan and Myanmar where the majority population failed to provide protection to minorities till they themselves became the victim.

Afghans, weary of the infighting after the Soviets were driven out, generally welcomed the Taliban when they first appeared at the scene around the 1990s. The early popularity of the Taliban stems from their promise to stamp out corruption, curb lawlessness and make the areas under their control safe for commerce to flourish. In September 1995 they were successful to gain control of the province of Herat and exactly one year later they captured the Afghan capital, Kabul. By 1998, the Taliban were in control of almost 90% of Afghanistan.

When the Taliban declared Jihad on the ethnic Hazaras – a historically discriminated minority group from central Afghanistan – the majority, Pashtuns, remained indifferent. Even though both Pashtuns and Hazaras believed in Islam, their differences in religious and ethnic origins (Pashtuns mostly followers of the Sunni sect and speak the Pashto language while Hazaras mostly belong to the Shia sect, speaking a Farse dialect 'Dari' and having distinct physical features like Mongolians) made Hazaras the most persecuted minority group in Afghanistan. In the years that followed, Hazaras faced severe repression and persecution by the Taliban, including a series of mass killings in northern Afghanistan, where thousands of Hazaras lost their lives or were forced to flee their homes.

The Pashtuns failed to recognise that the Taliban oppression would not stop with the Hazaras. The Taliban introduced one of the most repressive regimes in modern history. They implemented public executions, amputations and flogging as punishment. They banned television, music and cinema, and disapproved of girls aged 10 and over going to school. The Taliban rule brought severe poverty to Afghanistan, accompanied by food insecurity and large-scale emigration for most Afghans. The Pashtuns who chose to remain indifferent to the Taliban oppression against minority Hazaras became the subject of a different kind of oppression at the hands of the Taliban. Eventually, that Taliban rule ended following an invasion by US-led forces in 2001 that resulted in the occupation of Afghanistan and prolonged civil war for the following two decades.

Let's look at the more recent incidents in Myanmar. In late 2016, Myanmar's armed forces and police started a major crackdown on the Rohingya (minority Muslims) in Rakhine state in the country's north-western region bordering Bangladesh. It was reported by various United Nations agencies as a 'textbook' form of ethnic cleansing and genocide – there was evidence of wide-scale human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, summary executions, gang rapes, arson of Rohingya villages, businesses, and schools. The crisis forced over a million Rohingya to flee to other countries – most fled to Bangladesh, resulting in the creation of the world's largest refugee camp, while others escaped to other parts of South and Southeast Asia.

Myanmar's military dismissed the allegation which was not unexpected since they themselves were the perpetrators. The largely Buddhist population of Myanmar (90%) also opted to remain indifferent to the oppression against the minority Rohingya. While Buddhism is rarely associated with extremism or violence, some of the Buddhists leaders pursued a nationalistic brand, got involved in various anti-Muslim campaigns and openly supported the military crackdown on Rohingya.

But what surprised the world was the actions (or inactions) of Myanmar's civilian leader Noble Peace Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. Once hailed as the beacon of human rights, Suu Kyi refused to condemn the military or acknowledge accounts of atrocities. She went on to provide personal defence of the military's actions at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2019. Her inactions attracted widespread condemnation across the globe, but she remained popular with the majority of the Myanmar population. It was an evil sign of nexus amongst the Myanmar military, political elites and mass people – they all failed to prevent the persecution of the minority.

A little over a year later in February 2021, the same military leaders who were defended by Suu Kyi turned against her and the mass people. The military declared a year-long state of emergency. Despite being the elected leader, Suu Kyi and members of her political party were detained. The general population of Myanmar who were silent over the oppression of the Rohingya by the military decided to protest over the coup. The military responded with curfews, limits to gatherings and brutal forces – they used water cannons, rubber bullets and live ammunition in killing hundreds of protestors.

Will the majority, Muslims in Bangladesh, take lessons from the Pashtun majority in Afghanistan or the Buddhist majority in Myanmar? Looking back at history, Muslims in Bangladesh had already experienced a version of this during the birth of its nationhood. The situation of the Hindu minority under Pakistan, particularly concentrated in the then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was tense since independence in 1947. The first case of mass violence against Hindus occurred in East Pakistan at the beginning of 1950. It was started by the spread of false rumours, somewhat encouraged by the official media, and degenerated into retaliatory violence between West and East Bengal. Then, another episode of atrocities occurred in 1964 allegedly due to the loss of Prophet Mohammad's hair from the Hazratbal mosque in Kashmir, India. The salient feature of the 1964 riot was its urban nature and selective targeting of Bengali Hindu-owned industries and merchant establishments in Dhaka and Narayanganj. This resulted in unending waves of Bengali Hindu refugees in neighbouring West Bengal.

Fast forward to 1971 – the West Pakistan military rulers raged one of the most heinous genocides in recent history against the East Pakistani population. This time they targeted Bengalis – both Hindus and Muslims. Despite belonging to the same religious belief as their West Pakistani countrymen, the Bengali Muslims could not escape the ethnic cleansing the West Pakistani military initiated. They killed Hindus because they were not Muslims and they killed Muslims on the pretext that they were not 'good enough' Muslims.

This eventually resulted in the independence of Bangladesh with secularism as one of the founding pillars of its constitution. But with the killing of the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975 through a military coup, Bangladesh started walking backwards. Subsequent military-led governments allowed the repatriation of religion-based politics to counter secular philosophy. The secularism principle was removed in 1977 by the 5th Amendment to the Constitution during Ziaur Rahman's government and Islam was declared the state religion in 1988 by HM Ershad.

The majority, Muslims, in Bangladesh failed to acknowledge how this changed the national psyche of Bangladesh. When a particular religion is considered as the state religion, it makes the followers of that religion thinking themselves as superior to the believers of other religions. They are no longer citizens with equal rights and freedom. The style and approach towards religious education from early years in school also contributed towards creating an unequal society. When a child is methodically taught that his/her religious belief is "the best", it automatically infers other religious beliefs as inferior. The concept of respect for other faiths or the right of religious freedom for all is no longer there. The rise of religious intolerance amongst Muslims in Bangladesh stems from these two historical mistakes – it does not come from the actual teachings of Islam.

It's overdue for the majority, Muslims, in Bangladesh to acknowledge the risks lying ahead if they do not curb religious intolerance and extremism. The fundamentalist groups have already orchestrated attacks targeting religious minorities, indigenous and ethnic communities, and free speech proponents. After the oppressors are done with the minorities in Bangladesh, they will come after the Muslims too. They will use a different pretence perhaps but make no mistake, they will not spare the Muslims simply because they belong to the same religious beliefs. Unless we speak out for the freedom and protection of minorities now, as Martin Niemöller confessed 75 years ago, there will be no one left to speak for us when the time comes.