In The Line Of Fire: Why BJP Did What It Did

Before we talk about the recent diplomatic row between India and the Gulf, it might be enlightening for a few to know that Indian imprints reached Gulf through the Indus Valley routes, more than 1,500 years before Islam was born. The trade ties and knowledge exchange between the Indian subcontinent and the Persian Gulf date back centuries. Marred by the latest controversy, there are questions being raised about whether the Modi government sent out the right message or not.

On May 27, Nupur Sharma, now suspended national spokesperson of the BJP, appeared on a TV debate where certain remarks made by her were deemed to be ‘insulting’ to Prophet Mohammed. For several days, after that, she received death and rape threats from Jihadist elements. She was hounded for her remarks on Prophet Mohammed by, among others, self-proclaimed fact-checkers and ‘liberals’. There was a concerted campaign to punish her for alleged ‘blasphemy’ she committed.

The controversy having snowballed became a diplomatic quagmire between India and Gulf nations, endangering India’s economic interests and the safety of Indians residing there. At that point, it became necessary for the Indian government to respond to the unwarranted backlash.

BJP suspended Nupur Sharma and Naveen Kumar Jindal, Delhi BJP’s Media Unit Head for their remarks on the Prophet. The sudden suspension of the two leaders did not go down well with the supporters of PM Modi and BJP, who saw India’s position as a surrender to the Gulf world, whose own track record of religious freedom, freedom of speech and human rights is severely wanting.

Calling their party’s spokespersons “fringe elements” obviously sounded terribly apologetic; especially for a government that does not hesitate in putting India’s position across, even at the expense of inviting the displeasure of the West. Then, why did it cow down in front of the Gulf? The answer could be found in “What is at stake?”

India’s political, economic, and strategic ties with the Gulf world spans millennia. In the last few years, the Gulf, which is separated from India by the Arabian sea has found a common cause with it on energy security, strategic and economic cooperation, fight against extremism and digital expansion.

89 lakh Indian citizens reside in the Gulf nations; well-being, and security of whom depend on the nature of the relationship between the region and India.

Both Saudi Arabia and UAE, have supported India under PM Modi, despite his detractors raising the bogey of “genocide” of Muslims under his reign. India’s unequivocal stance against terrorism, including surgical strikes and air strikes, has also found resonance among the Gulf nation. They have displayed their stand by not meddling in India’s internal affairs despite Pakistan’s many attempts to make them the Gulf’s concern. e.g., in the aftermath of the Centre’s move on Article 370.

There is an enhanced focus on deepening ties at all levels and across sectors. India and UAE are making huge strides in converting their mutual interests into actionable trade agreements such as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) signed in February 2022 and military exercises that have economic and security implications. UAE is, already, India’s third-largest trading partner. The trade is expected to almost double by 2026 under the CEPA regime.

With Saudi Arabia, India looks to partner on energy cooperation to meet its oil needs and assist the Saudis in fulfilling their food security needs. Oman is India’s closest defence partner in the Gulf region and critical for India’s defence and strategic interests. India may consider negotiating a preferential trade agreement (PTA) with Oman to boost bilateral trade and investments between the countries. India is engaging with all Gulf nations, in different capacities, that would help India emerge as the epicentre of the global value chain.

When we put the progress Modi government has made in furthering ties with Gulf nations, it would not be sagacious to let it all go downhill because of one or two ill-thought remarks that were blown out of proportion by the liberal “fringe” who do not want the government to succeed in the first place.

For Sharma, being a national spokesperson of a party does warrant being judicious in one’s public posturing. However, threats to her are highly condemnable and should be dealt with in the strictest possible action, so as to set an example. Even though she has been suspended by the BJP, she has found support from a vast majority of people who are standing up for her right to free speech.

This controversy has brought out an uncomfortable truth: that all civilisational battles cannot be fought by the government, which has a larger basket of interests to look after. Some of these battles must be fought by the people of India, especially Hindus.

Lastly, people who are rejoicing at the Gulf nations ‘intervening’, must know that none of the Gulf states has claimed to speak on behalf of Indian Muslims. They have only acted at the behest of their interests. Modi’s detractors may use the Gulf card to blackmail the government in future too. However, they are only positioning themselves for embarrassment, considering the Gulf’s relations with India are not contingent on religious identity but on cooperation that finds its existence spanning centuries, even before the advent of Islam.