A very fair and balanced article.
---
India is a budding economic powerhouse which, as a multicultural democracy, shares Americas most important fundamental values. Our relationship with India will be hugely important to us for years to come. This is especially true given recent revelations that our other supposed friend in South Asia, Pakistan, has been secretly (or not so secretly, to those of us who have been paying attention) acting as our enemy. India is in the midst of an important election to choose its next prime minister.
With exquisite timing, Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) is pushing a dishonest resolution that gratuitously insults the man who is the odds-on favorite to win that election. Ellison is teaming up with some Christian conservatives like Frank Wolf (R-Virginia) and Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) who are, good intentions notwithstanding, picking the wrong battle against the wrong target.
The focus of the congressmens ire is Narendra Modi, a free-market, anti-corruption reformer whom I have suggested might be Indias Ronald Reagan. Ellison might agree with that comparison but, as a man of the far left, he would mean it as a slur rather than a compliment. House Resolution 417, co-sponsored and pushed by Ellison, is certainly a slur rather than a complimenta slur against Modi and against India. It is a ham-fisted attempt to influence Indias election. While it will not succeed in doing that, it could certainly succeed in souring our relationship with what should be an important natural ally if passed.
The resolution creates the impression that Christians are persecuted in India, but the primary example used to support that notion is fairly dated: a single outbreak of Christian-Hindu violence that occurred seven years ago (and had nothing to do with Modi). I respect that the Republican co-sponsors of the resolution have a sincere desire to protect Christians. However, a little perspective is in order: Of all the countries in the world where Christians are a minority, few are more hospitable to Christians than Hindu-majority India. That is why over 25 million Christians choose to live in India, almost 10 times the number in neighboring Pakistan. Given the large number of countries where besieged Christian minorities are in constant mortal danger, it shows a distinct lack of moral judgment to single out India for its supposed persecution of Christians.
The real target of Resolution 417, however, is Modi, who is currently chief minister (governor) of the Indian state of Gujarat. The resolution essentially blames him for anti-Muslim violence that occurred in Gujarat in 2002. That violence occurred after Muslim arsonists burned almost 60 Hindu pilgrims alive on a train. Modis critics accused him of facilitating the anti-Muslim retaliation, or at least not doing enough to stop it. The Supreme Court of India appointed a special investigation team that cleared Modi of any wrongdoing, but the authors of Resolution 417 somehow forgot to mention that.
Those who dont like Modi, for political or other reasons, will always cling to the belief that he was somehow responsible for the 2002 violence. But beliefs, even sincere ones, are no substitute for evidence derived from a thorough investigation.
By ignoring the Supreme Courts findings, Ellison and his comrades are essentially impugning the integrity of Indias highest court. What evidence do they have that Modi was indeed at fault? The best they can come up with is a magazine report quoting some of the rioters. According to these rioters, the riots wouldnt have been possible without Modis connivance. In yet another glaring and dishonest omission, the resolution fails to inform us that the magazine quoted, Tehelka, supports the very political dynasty that Modi is trying to unseat. And it strains credulity that street rioters would have first-hand knowledge that the chief minister was conniving behind the scenes. In the face of the Supreme Courts exhaustive and authoritative investigation, Resolution 417 presents a pretty pathetic case for our continued ostracization of Indias likely next prime minister.
The resolution praises the U.S. State Departments 2005 decision to deny Modi a visa because of his alleged egregious religious freedom violations. According to the resolution, this was the first and only time such a denial has been issued on those grounds. That says more about the moral confusion of the State Department than it does about Modi.
Read more: Congress's misguided crusade against India | The Daily Caller
---
India is a budding economic powerhouse which, as a multicultural democracy, shares Americas most important fundamental values. Our relationship with India will be hugely important to us for years to come. This is especially true given recent revelations that our other supposed friend in South Asia, Pakistan, has been secretly (or not so secretly, to those of us who have been paying attention) acting as our enemy. India is in the midst of an important election to choose its next prime minister.
With exquisite timing, Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) is pushing a dishonest resolution that gratuitously insults the man who is the odds-on favorite to win that election. Ellison is teaming up with some Christian conservatives like Frank Wolf (R-Virginia) and Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) who are, good intentions notwithstanding, picking the wrong battle against the wrong target.
The focus of the congressmens ire is Narendra Modi, a free-market, anti-corruption reformer whom I have suggested might be Indias Ronald Reagan. Ellison might agree with that comparison but, as a man of the far left, he would mean it as a slur rather than a compliment. House Resolution 417, co-sponsored and pushed by Ellison, is certainly a slur rather than a complimenta slur against Modi and against India. It is a ham-fisted attempt to influence Indias election. While it will not succeed in doing that, it could certainly succeed in souring our relationship with what should be an important natural ally if passed.
The resolution creates the impression that Christians are persecuted in India, but the primary example used to support that notion is fairly dated: a single outbreak of Christian-Hindu violence that occurred seven years ago (and had nothing to do with Modi). I respect that the Republican co-sponsors of the resolution have a sincere desire to protect Christians. However, a little perspective is in order: Of all the countries in the world where Christians are a minority, few are more hospitable to Christians than Hindu-majority India. That is why over 25 million Christians choose to live in India, almost 10 times the number in neighboring Pakistan. Given the large number of countries where besieged Christian minorities are in constant mortal danger, it shows a distinct lack of moral judgment to single out India for its supposed persecution of Christians.
The real target of Resolution 417, however, is Modi, who is currently chief minister (governor) of the Indian state of Gujarat. The resolution essentially blames him for anti-Muslim violence that occurred in Gujarat in 2002. That violence occurred after Muslim arsonists burned almost 60 Hindu pilgrims alive on a train. Modis critics accused him of facilitating the anti-Muslim retaliation, or at least not doing enough to stop it. The Supreme Court of India appointed a special investigation team that cleared Modi of any wrongdoing, but the authors of Resolution 417 somehow forgot to mention that.
Those who dont like Modi, for political or other reasons, will always cling to the belief that he was somehow responsible for the 2002 violence. But beliefs, even sincere ones, are no substitute for evidence derived from a thorough investigation.
By ignoring the Supreme Courts findings, Ellison and his comrades are essentially impugning the integrity of Indias highest court. What evidence do they have that Modi was indeed at fault? The best they can come up with is a magazine report quoting some of the rioters. According to these rioters, the riots wouldnt have been possible without Modis connivance. In yet another glaring and dishonest omission, the resolution fails to inform us that the magazine quoted, Tehelka, supports the very political dynasty that Modi is trying to unseat. And it strains credulity that street rioters would have first-hand knowledge that the chief minister was conniving behind the scenes. In the face of the Supreme Courts exhaustive and authoritative investigation, Resolution 417 presents a pretty pathetic case for our continued ostracization of Indias likely next prime minister.
The resolution praises the U.S. State Departments 2005 decision to deny Modi a visa because of his alleged egregious religious freedom violations. According to the resolution, this was the first and only time such a denial has been issued on those grounds. That says more about the moral confusion of the State Department than it does about Modi.
Read more: Congress's misguided crusade against India | The Daily Caller
