ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

The Rediff Interview/ Dr Surendra Jain

'Christians cannot face Islamic anger. They consider Hindus a soft target'

Dr Surendra Jain is the all-India convener of the Bajrang Dal, the militant Hindu outfit that is closely linked to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and which stands accused of being behind the murder of Graham Stuart Stains.

The Australia-born missionary, who worked with leprosy patients in Orissa, was burnt alive in his jeep, along with his two children aged 10 and six.

The Bajrang Dal chief stoutly denies the involvement of his organisation or any of its members in the murder of Stains, or in any of the recent incidents of violence against Christians.

Excerpts from an interview with Amberish K Diwanji.

Your organisation is linked to the Stains murder. How do you react?

George Fernandes and other Cabinet members visited Keonjhar (the district in Orissa, where the missionary was murdered) to investigate the matter.

Their report, released yesterday, categorically stated that no Hindu organisation was involved.

The prime accused, Dara Singh, is closely associated with Jaidev Jena, Orissa minister for mass education from the Congress party. Dara Singh too has been associated with the Congress for the past 10 years.

The Bajrang Dal has no organisational set-up in Keonjhar. From the day of the murder, we have been demanding that some high authorities should investigate the unfortunate incident and that the maximum punishment must be meted out to the culprits.

We consider the unfortunate incident a blot on humanity. The Bajrang Dal does not believe in violence. If we did, many would have been killed, but we have never asked our people to kill anyone.

Are you saying you are totally peaceful?

The Bajrang Dal is a mass organisation and a mass organisation cannot depend on the policy of killing. Even when Mulayam Singh Yadav killed so many kar sevaks on November 2, 1990, during the shilanyas puja, we never sought revenge.

The Bajrang Dal is assertive, not militant. We raise movement to create public opinion.

If your are as innocent as you claim, why is your outfit's name involved?

Unfortunately, the media and certain pseudo-secular parties have put the Bajrang Dal in the dock. There is no evidence that the Bajrang Dal or any of its allies are involved in the incident and we demand that those who accused us should apologise to us.

In all these accusations, right from the Jhabua nuns rape case, there has been false propaganda against us. And yet, in all these incidents, it was later established that neither the Bajrang Dal nor its allies were involved. We have had no hand in any such crimes. For instance, in the Jhabua case, those arrested for the rape are Christians who are close to a Congress leader. No one was linked to the Bajrang Dal.

Similarly, in Gujarat, the first reaction of the media and the pseudo-secular parties was to blame the Bajrang Dal. No one tried to verify the facts. It is the rule of justice that before one makes an accusation, one should have at least a prima facie case. Yet, this rule was never applied to us. And, in Orissa, the first reaction of the missionaries and others was that Hindu fundamentalist organisations were behind the unfortunate incident.

Yet there must be a good reason for your outfit to always be the primary suspect?

I feel there are two reasons for this. The first is to defame the Bharatiya Janata Party and to destabilise the BJP-led coalition government. This has gone to a ridiculous extent. For instance, when the Ranvir Sena killed some villagers, the first reaction of everyone was that those behind the incidents of Gujarat and Orissa must be behind the killings. Laloo Yadav even demanded the BJP's resignation! I think there are attempts to separate the BJP and its allies.

Even the US too is against the BJP ever since the Pokhran nuclear tests. The US wants to destabilise the central government so that a more pliable government comes to power.

The second reason is that there is an international conspiracy behind defaming the Hindu parties.

What international conspiracy? Any proof of this so-called conspiracy?

I have no proof at present but I have seen the documents that I am about to mention. In November 1995, there was a meeting in Colorado Sprints, USA, where Christian leaders from 77 countries met to chalk out a programme to evangelise the whole world. The project was named 'Joshua 2000'. At the meeting, the leaders drew up a list of countries where they felt that their activities needed more effort. And unluckily, India was on the top of the list. The links are thus very clear as far as India is concerned.

Then a circular was issued to the missionaries, called the 'Mission Mandate' (I could not get a copy of the circular but I have seen it) where it was written that 900,000 churches must be built in India by 2001. India has only 500,000 villages.

Also, where will the Christians get the money to build these 900,000 churches? Most of the Christians in India are poor, usually scheduled caste and tribe people. Obviously they will get the money from their foreign masters.

You say that none of your people are involved in any of the recent incidents. Then what explains the violence, the persistent reports of the Bajrang Dal's involvement.

The violence is a spontaneous reaction against the conversion activities being enlarged. For instance, in Arunachal Pradesh, over a hundred churches have been destroyed by the Vanvasi people (tribals). This is because the people love their religion and land, and if someone snatches these away, then the reaction is bound to be hostile.

Why is the Bajrang Dal so agitated?

In Indonesia, 50 missionaries were killed by local Muslim people, yet the international media ignored the event. Why? Because the West fears a conflict between Christianity and Islam throughout the world.

Even, in India, no Christian missionary goes to a Muslim area for conversion activities. Even though Muslims are among India's most depressed classes, or at least Muslims claim to be. The reason is that Christians cannot face Islamic anger. However, missionaries consider Hindus a soft target. Even the words 'soft target' were used in the missionary literature.

However, now the Hindus have woken up. We are no more a soft target for their unholy activities.

Do you or do you not welcome missionaries to India?

We appreciate missionary services, but only when the object is service and not conversion. We cannot allow the missionaries to defame the noble cause of service. If their mission is to stay on to convert and have links to secessionist and terrorist organisations (I have seen this interaction), then we oppose them. The missionaries must sever links with the terrorist organisations and with the foreign missions, then they are welcome.

I would like to add that even Stains was into conversion activities. The district commissioner of Mayurbhanj, Phani Bhushan Das, had given a written complaint that because of the conversion activities of Stain, there was tension in the area as the Santhals were agitated.

The Rediff Interviews

Tell us what you think of this interview