Memoranda for Submission to the Chief Ministers of the Two Telugu States.

National Security

Chakmas are Different from Rohingyas

Dt:  14/9/17



Chakmas  are Different  from Rohingyas


Dr T.H.Chowdary*

Some Muslim gentlemen (eg: Munir Khasru )  left, liberals and the  compulsively anti-Hindu, Muslims -fraternising  communists of various  sects (I,M,ML,ND…) are  questioning as to why the Government of India while  not only giving asylum but even  content  to give citizenship to Chakmas , is wanting to   deport  the  Rohingya Muslims who had illegally entered India,  not even recently but since the last few years.    The case of Chakmas and Rohingyas is fundamentally different.  Chakmas  are  Buddhists.  They were the  majority in the  Chittagong Hills area ( district of East Pakistan,  now Bangladesh ).  Sylhet was Muslim majority district in Assam .  At the  time of  partition, there was referendum and  the Muslim majority there voted to join Pakistan  and  Sylhet  became part of East Pakistan , Bangladesh 

If the Congress party  insist  on holding a referendum in the   Chittagang  Hills  district which had the Buddhist majority, surely they would have voted to  be a  part of  India. These Buddhist Chakmas from,  just as the 35% Hindus, were persecuted in East Pakistan .   They had to   flee from  the  persecuting  Islamist East Pakistan. This is  how they landed in India.


2.  In the  Sindh  province,  there is a district Tharparkar which had a Hindu majority . It is adjacent to the Kutch  district of Gujarat.  While  we insisted upon the  division of  Punjab and  Bengal   so that    the Hindu-Sikh majority  areas  will not be  part of Pakistan  but  part of India, we should  have insisted   that Sindh also should be  divided . There could have been  a referendum in Tharparkar just as  there was  a referendum  in Sylhet. The  Hindu majority  of  Tharparkar  in Sindh would have  voted for   merger with India; there could have  been a Sindh state  in  India to justify the word  Sindhu  in our national  anthem.  It is unfortunate  that the Chittagong area of Budhist and Tharparkar area of Hindus were lost to intolerant  Islamism states.


3. Muslims anywhere and everywhere have the   option to go to  any of the   more than   50 Muslim majority countries   where   they are a part of the borderless Islamic Umma. The Umma is incarnated  in the  OIC, Organisation of  Islamic  Convention.  Hindus and Buddhists  in the  world   can  go nowhere  if they are  persecuted ,  except to Hindu India and  India is the  only Hindu majority country and  the Hindu tradition has been to give      shelter   to all persecuted people.  Nepal used to be a Hindu state but after  the  communists had taken over, it is  “secular” i.e anti-Hindu as India had been  till recently.  India had given shelter  to  Zoroastrians  of Iran who had to flee from Persia , when Persia was Islamised.   We had given asylum to Jews who  had been expelled by the Roman Empire in the first century AD.  We had given shelter to more than 10 mln Hindus and Sikhs expelled from   west Pakistan . The  Hindu majority Jammu and Delhi   are giving shelter to the Hindus and Sikhs expelled from the   Kashmir Valley of J&K state.  The  millions of Hindus squeezed out of Bangladesh are also given  shelter in the mother  country, Bharat. But  the case with Muslims is different.  The Muslims of India asserted and succeeded in their  demand   that they are  not part of  Indian  nation, that they are  a separate nation   and they carved out  a home -land  Pakistan from where the  19%   Hindu Sikh population  is reduced to 1%; even today Muslims  living in India refer to themselves  as a “minority”  and not  as Indians. They talk of Muslim  Indians and not Indian Muslims . They are  demanding the carving out of Muslim  majority areas into  separate districts.   98% of the   terrorists operating in India are    from that  community.  Muslim infiltrators   from Pakistan  and  Bangladesh are   sheltered  among them.  They refuse to sing  Vandemataram.  As before  Independence they are asking for separate  reservations   to be followed by separate  electorate and so on.


4. In such a background it would be committing    suicide if India goes on adding some more Muslims from other countries  to those who are already within India and are always  complaining  of insecurity and exhibiting separatism .   It is also known that  quite a number of Rohingyas have already    become    the  IS soldiers .    Those  Rohingya  Muslims who are already  in India  are  settling  in Jammu in Hindu  majority city for this and not  in the exclusively  Muslim   Kashmir Valley of J&K.  What is  the reason if not  muslimification of  non-Muslim  areas .  


5.  One more thing  we should  remember  is that while  all the non- Muslim  nation members of  the United Nations have subscribed to    the Universal  Declaration of  Human Rights,  the fifty and odd Muslim countries in the Organisation of Islamic Convention (OIC)  have come out with   an Islam Declaration of Human Rights there by asserting  that  Muslims  are different from non-Muslim humans.


6. One more thing  to be noted is that the Muslims who are fleeing   violence  and genocide  from other Muslims  in Syria and  Iraq are not going to other Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia  but    to    the Christian countries  in Europe . Is that also  a part of a grand design  for  muslimification    of non-Muslim counties ?   India cannot become a shelter for  people where  divisive,   intolerant  and   converting   others .


7. Bharat is the  only refuge for  the Buddhist Chakmas of  Chittagong Hills ( formerly  east Pakistan  now  Bangladesh ) and of Tibet. These peoples are our  spiritual cousins.   They would be  subjected to  humiliation, degradation,  deprivation,  ethnic cleansing and forced  conversions  if left   in the lands where the majority people  belong to the Abrahamic religions which enjoin upon their  followers to convert the rest of the humanity  to their own  respective faiths.  The Rohingyas  must not be  sheltered in India . Their  natural  choice must be the  fifty  and  odd countries of the Islamic  Umma represented by the  OIC.  The United Nations  especially   the UN Rights Chief Zeid Ra’ad  Al Hussain must be  told  in no uncertain terms that  the OIC should be  addressed and prevailed upon to take care of the Rohingya  Muslims . It would be perilous for India to have them.  That Muslim Rohingyas are concentrating in Hindu majority areas like Jammu and not in exclusively Muslim Kashmir Valley  is ominous and should be the red flag for India  to be intensely cautious about them


8.  India  should also investigate those persons and organisations which are welcoming them, sheltering them and  are pleading that they should be  taken care of by India.


(1,084 words)