It couldn't get more ironic. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s answer to the one question posed to him in his entire visit to the United States, was a long-winded assertion that democracy was so ingrained in India’s DNA that discrimination against anyone (the question was about Muslims but Modi refused to utter the word) just wasn’t possible.
Hardly had his words been reported than his followers had their knives out for the journalist who asked the question.
For Modi’s supporters, journalists asking tough questions isn’t a normal phenomenon. One can hardly blame them, for this activity, a routine in any democracy, has vanished since their leader took over as Prime Minister in 2014. No wonder then, the sight of a journalist, especially a foreign one, asking Modi an uncomfortable question, makes them suspicious. Who was this woman who dared to question the Prime Minister on Muslim rights and freedom of speech in India?
Journalists at crowded press conferences normally remain unknown outside media circles. But thanks to Modi bhakts, we know everything about Sabrina Siddiqui. We know that the 37-year-old who works for The Wall Street Journal, was born in the US to Pakistani parents: her father was born in India and her mother in Pakistan. Her great-great grandfather was the famous Sir Syed Ahmed Khan who founded the Aligarh Muslim University in 1875. Bhakts dug out all his quotes which spoke of Hindus and Muslims being unable to coexist, ignoring those that compared the two communities to two eyes of the beautiful bride that was India. Of course, there was no mention of his pioneering contribution in promoting modern education among Muslims in the face of opposition from his own community.
For any professional journalist, Siddiqui’s question was the most obvious one to ask, not only because of the way Muslims have been targeted since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) took over, but also because Modi is known never to take questions; so this was an opportunity not to be missed. But for Modi’s supporters, such a question could only have been asked to fulfil a ‘hidden agenda’. Why, they asked, should a journalist working for a business publication ask a political question? That a business publication could have a White House beat, and Siddiqui was on that beat, mattered little to them.
Siddiqui’s background confirmed their suspicions: what else could be expected of a Pakistani Muslim but a question about Muslim rights? But for some, this wasn’t enough. There had to be an international conspiracy at work, they asserted, one aimed at maligning India and by definition, Hindus. Siddiqui had to have been planted at that press conference; among the conspirators named were George Soros, the US billionaire who criticised Modi when the damning Hindenburg report on Gautam Adani came out earlier this year; and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, who was in the US just a fortnight before Modi’s visit. One follower even requested the foreign minister to ensure that Siddiqui never gets an Indian visa.
Siddiqui’s attempt to defend herself by posting pictures of herself and her father supporting Team India in cricket cut no ice. Why hadn’t she questioned the Pakistani Prime Minister about the treatment of Hindus in Pakistan, they wanted to know. Not having done so, she had no right to question the Indian Prime Minister.
After 2015, when Modi faced a couple of difficult questions in London from the BBC and The Guardian, Siddiqui’s is the first difficult question Modi has had to face. One question in eight years, and the entire army of Modi fans is rattled!
Given the obsession the BJP and its supporters have with Jawaharlal Nehru, it seems only appropriate to point out that India’s first Prime Minister faced any number of press conferences at home and abroad. Some of these were in the first flush of Independence, when many in the West did not give India a chance of emerging as a stable democracy. Yet, neither his supporters, nor he himself, thought twice about facing the press. Indira Gandhi appeared in press clubs across India even after her defeat in the crucial 1977 elections, knowing she would be asked about the Emergency. She need not have, but like other leaders of her stature, she considered it part of her job. She knew that in a democracy, holding power entailed the capacity to be held responsible, the confidence to be questioned about your deeds.
Not under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, it doesn’t — despite the overwhelming mandate that got him elected twice. All his speeches in the US about democracy in India could have been punctured with any number of facts — but finally, that wasn't necessary. His followers’ attacks on Sabrina Siddiqui said it all.
Jyoti Punwani is a senior journalist.
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.
Deccan Herald is on WhatsApp Channels| Join now for Breaking News & Editor's Picks