Attempts to Make India a Hindu Nation Would Fragment the Country, Says Aiyer

Portraying Muslims as villains would backfire, asserts senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar; continuous dialogue with Pakistan stressed 

JAIPUR – In building national identity, attempts to convert secular India into a Hindu Rashtra (nation), portraying Muslims as villains would fragment the country into at least 43 separate states, senior Congress leader and a former Union Minister, Mani Shankar Aiyar, has said. He also called for sustained dialogue with Pakistan.

Aiyar was in the town to attend an event organised at Kanodia College on the theme ‘Future of India: Pseudo Hindutva or Secular Bharat?’ here on Saturday. 

Highlighting India’s religious diversity, Aiyar said the country cannot survive if built on a foundation of exclusion. According to an ANI report, he noted that while Hindus form an overwhelming majority, Muslims make up the largest minority at around 20 crore, with another five crore belonging to other faiths, and that this diversity is what defines India.

“In this vast subcontinent, specifically the portion known today as India, there exists an overwhelming Hindu majority. But Muslims constitute the largest minority, about 20 crore. Five crore people belong to other faiths. This is India. To label this India as a ‘Hindu country,’ to attempt to establish a ‘Hindu Nation’ here, and in the very process of constructing that Hindu Nation, to assert that Muslims are our enemies because we have supposedly remained enslaved by them for a thousand years – if we were to build our national identity upon such a foundation, then India cannot survive. We would fragment into at least 43 separate states,” Aiyar said.

The Congress leader underlined that India’s strength lay in its diversity that manifested across religion, culture, and tradition. He noted that even Hindu customs differed significantly across regions. He further pushed back against the idea that religious minorities owed their loyalty to foreign lands, citing Muslim film personalities as an example.

“Our heroes are Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan, and Salman Khan. They are told to go to Pakistan. Why not Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, or any other country? This is said only to spread hatred. Why should they go? They had the opportunity to leave this country, but their families chose to stay back as a minority in India and live alongside their Hindu brothers. Instead of congratulating them, telling them to go to Pakistan is wrong,” he said.

Delving at length into the frosty India-Pakistan relations, Aiyar argued that cultural and linguistic commonalities between the two nations made dialogue not only possible but also essential.

“According to my experience, I can say that it is the easiest thing for a Hindu or for an Indian to talk to a Pakistani because the language is the same, the mindset is the same, and the culture is, by and large, the same. We understand each other perfectly. Their kebabs might perhaps be better than ours. But we can certainly engage in a friendly rivalry,” he said.

“Had the tragedy of the Partition not occurred, the citizens of that country would be citizens of this country, and we would all be citizens of the same nation. And yet, you talk about launching surgical strikes against them. If you truly have the courage, then sit down and talk to them face-to-face. Why do you lack that particular courage, the courage to engage in direct dialogue?” he said.

The senior Congress leader stressed that India-Pakistan dialogue, even if prolonged and contentious, was the only path forward, but the government lacks the courage to engage with them continuously.

“It is essential that this dialogue be sustained. Because initially, they will air their grievances, and you will present your complaints. That process might take months. They will keep reiterating the mistakes you made, while we keep pointing out the misdeeds they committed, tracing it all back from Pahalgam right up to 1947. Therefore, we must engage with them continuously,” he said.

Aiyar questioned India’s foreign policy alignments with the US, Israel, and Russia. 

“Why are we embracing the Americans? Why have we suddenly become such close allies of Israel? Why are we so heavily dependent on Russia?