Religious intolerance: Why Obama's remarks may not target the ruling BJP

Read the counter view here: Obama quoting Gandhi is a wake-up call for all of us

Two lines in a speech of a thousand lines should not be read as the distillate of a speech or as conveyance of any single thought. But coming, as it was after a similar reference to sectarian violence on his visit to India last week, Obama's statements on India in his annual talk at the National Prayer Meeting has aroused interest, and pique, in many quarters. One would assume that being from the ruling dispensation, I would be hard pressed to defend these remarks. But I feel comfortable otherwise, because it is hardly likely that a group of people who violently colonised an entire continent and erased the memory of an indigenous people so completely, would claim to carry advice for others, particularly a black President who has only to turn a few pages of history and witness the struggle of his own people.

A cursory look at President Obama's speech indicates that what he said was by no means a slight to India, and certainly not to the seven-month-old NDA regime. The speech was actually quite good; it was all encompassing and quite in tune with the demands of the occasion - it was, after all, a faith-based meeting. President Obama was at pains to establish that crimes were committed in the name of Christ, but his focus and opening shot was reserved for ISIL; in an all too apparent reference to religious terrorism.

However, if there is still a need to decipher the intent in his utterances or the need at all to bring India into the equation where he argues for injustice in the name of religion globally, it could be safely assumed that Obama's reference to India was in perspective of a period which belonged to the UPA. He said of India "… but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith", the key words being "in past years".

One could easily accuse me of engaging with the letter and not the spirit of the matter, and point to incidents claimed by Christian groups that seem curiously interrelated with the advent of the BJP to power, but that would bring the President within the range of suspicion of playing to the right wing back home. Or was he under pressure from evangelist groups active in India? He is best placed to answer, but to that extent, President Obama's statements about a threat to India's unity from sectarian violence on his January visit to India can also be seen in the perspective of a more seminal thought - India was a country that was split on sectarian lines at birth and he was right in recalling the abnormal basis of that divorced result. Whatever be his motive then, it was lost on the moment at that time of euphoria. This time around too, while it might make a headline or two to read his statements out of context, his motivation was clearly innocuous in driving home a larger point. One can be assured, that no one can ignore that India has had from time immemorial, the best record of managing diversity and tolerance, and how non-violence is ingrained in its culture. Remember that this was a meeting where HH the Dalai Lama was presiding. He would know.