On March 15, New Zealand, one of the most peaceful countries having less than 5 million population, has witnessed the worst tragedy in her history. Brenton Tarrant — a, white supremacist migrant from neighbouring Australia-carrying a semi-automatic shotgun and a rifle, opened fire on worshipers in two mosques — Al Noor and Linwood, Christchurch — killing 50 innocent defenseless people. He talked about “invasion” from India, China and Turkey, defining the three countries as “potential nation enemies in the East.”
The gunman hated the immigrants. He was inspired by neo-Nazi ideology and hatred for Muslims. He gave death calls to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Turkish President Erdogan and London mayor Sadiq Khan. He wanted to show that no place in the world is safe and that even a country like New Zealand is subject to mass immigration. It is evident from his manifesto published online that he was inspired by the right-wing extreme movements, which thrive on nationalism, racism, xenophobia, anti-democracy and strong state advocacy.
His manifesto reads: “The invaders must be removed from soil regardless from where they came. Roma, African, Indian, Turkish, Semitic or other. If we wait until the majority of the boomers begin to pass…then it will be too little, too late.” New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, turned out to be a rare statesman. She called the terrorist attacks as one of New Zealand’s darkest days and declared no place for such attackers in her country. She has announced banning all semi-automatic weapons and a buy-back scheme costing NZ$200million would be established for banned weapons.
All military style semi-automaties (MSSA) and assault rifles, along with parts used to convert weapons into MSSA and high capacity magazines are banned. She said the immigrants and refugees have chosen to take New Zealand their home and “they are us.” She embraced the migrant and refugee community as New Zealand’s own while rejecting those perpetrating violence. And refused to name the terrorist, making him faceless and denying him any leverage.
This had a repelling effect in the US. The American lawmakers are demanding similar curbs in the US. Democratic Congress woman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said: “Christchurch happened and within days New Zealand acted to get weapons of war out of the consumer market. This is what leadership looks like.” They have praised Jacinda Ardern’s action and denounced the US pro-gun lobby.
They reacted: “We must follow New Zealand’s lead, take on National Rifle Association (NRA) and ban the sale and distribution of assault weapons.” However, the gun lobby and the NRA are not moved and they continue to defend their constitutional right to bear the arms. The US must resolve this dilemma sooner than later if it is to save itself from mass murders and violent gun culture.
The massacre in New Zealand is a reminder of how similar the white supremacist and the jihadist killers are — in morals and mindsets and taking to extreme violence. They inspire each other to greater heights of paranoia and self-righteousness — the enemies want to destroy their people and their faith. The white supremacists violence is catching up with the jihadists violence, accounting for more than three-quarters of 313 murders committed by the rightwing extremists in the US between 2009 and 2018. It is an explosive problem.
We must learn from how New Zealand responded to the terrorist attacks. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has now ordered an independent judicial probe by a royal commission to inquire whether police and intelligence agencies could have prevented the Christchurch attacks and to find out how a single gunman was able to kill so many people. She said, “It is important that no stone is left unturned to get to know how this act of terrorism occurred and how we could have stopped it.” This is very heartening — a sign of true liberal democracy, governed by the rule of law.
In contrast, in India, we dare not question the army and intelligence failures whenever the terrorist attacks take place. About those terrorist attacks in Gurdaspur, Uri, Pathankot, Baramullah and Pulwama, we are not expected to know how the intelligence failure and incompetent surveillance that cost the lives of hundreds of security personnel and innocent people.
Any questioning is labeled by the ruling party not only as anti-patriotic and anti-national — an alibi to cover up incompetence and mis-governance but almost condemnable as blasphemous. Surprisingly, this narrative of ultra-nationalism and misguided patriotism are not questioned even by the fourth estate — one of the pillars of democracy.
New Zealand has just 1% Muslim population, as against 14 % in India. And it stands by its microscopic minority. In India, no matter how many attacks are carried against the minorities, on one pretext or the other the right-wing elements, the government observes muted silence. Take for instance, the recent mob attack on a Muslim family in Gurgaon. The family was brutally assaulted for the crime being Muslim, and yet we saw demeaning silence by the Union government.
The mob lynching and violent acts by the extreme right wing elements are taking place regularly as a pattern but no impartial independent inquiry is done to ensure the perpetrators of crime are punished and justice secured. This breeds communal disharmony and social discontent.
The New Zealand Prime Minister did not permit hate propaganda through the media and no live videos on the attacks were allowed to be broadcast. By contrast, the videos that perpetrators of lynching and hate speeches are feely circulated in our country. Similarly, the hate speeches of ministers and members of the ruling party, which have potential to ignite communal passions- are uploaded and given wide coverage in the electronic media.
And “What is even more worrying than the failures of political and religious leaders in India to resist hate violence is the profound lack of compassion and solidarity in local communities wherever these attacks have occurred,” says Harsh Mander. Unless we stop acquiescing to the partisan version of the ruling dispensation and challenge its narrative, the idea of democracy will meet the same fate as the idea of India.
is a professor of Political Science, retired principal and an independent author.
