Instead of hastily jumping to ideals of Hindu-Muslim brotherhood, perhaps we should first strive to humanize the Shia or Sunni next door—recognizing that they are as human as the Hindu in the neighboring town.

Blaming the West and the Cold War for the problem of Islamist terrorism and extremism is a convenient way of washing our hands of the issue. This narrative often ignores the fact that many Muslims themselves have normalised certain extremist ideas in everyday conversations. When a child is taught from an early age to view others as the other, some form of distance, hostility, and ultimately ghettoisation if not spatial , mental is bound to follow.

Let’s be clear: this ghettoisation is, to a large extent, self-imposed by Muslims who prefer to live “amongst their own.” But who is “their own”? This very idea contradicts the oft-repeated narrative that “we rejected Pakistan.” But what is Pakistan? It is not just a territory—it is an idea. An idea that Muslims of the subcontinent cannot coexist with non-Muslims, primarily Hindus, and therefore need a separate space to live and in essence explore our religiosity as a state and a community .

If that is so, how is ghettoisation any different? Isn’t it the same idea in practice—that Muslims cannot live among Hindus and must live solely among themselves? Various reasons are given for this self-imposed segregation—such as the reluctance of Hindus to rent or sell property to Muslims. But let us admit: in many so-called Hindu-dominated areas, Muslims do live—let’s not delve into their religiosity, though they often tend to be those who do not wear their religion on their sleeves, who have retracted religion to their homes, hearts, and mosques.

The claim that a Muslim cannot live among non-Muslims is a myth, and it ignores the broader sociological fact that segregation is not unique to Muslims. Other religious, ethnic, and linguistic groups in India also tend to cluster together, yet no one calls that oppression. People often prefer to live among those who share cultural and linguistic affinities. Why should that inherently be seen as exclusionary and wrong?

A large section of Muslims have migrated from Hindu-dominated areas to Muslim-dominated ones—such as Mumbra, Kurla, Mira Road in Maharashtra. These areas were initially chosen because they were on the periphery of Mumbai, relatively underpopulated, and affordable. Over the years, they transformed into Muslim-majority areas, derogatorily called “Mini Pakistan”—Mumbra in Maharashtra, Jamia Nagar in Delhi, Juhapura in Gujarat.

Initially, Muslims shifted to these spaces due to real threats of communal violence, but later, the migration became driven by perceived threats. However, a troubling development occurred: as Muslims moved into these spaces, they started cultivating a hyper-nationalistic and hyper-religious consciousness, and they didn’t see contradiction between the two, all the rage against the state and other communities got very conveniently channelised into fuelling sectarianism.

In these ghettoes, communalism of a specific intra-Muslim kind flourished—sectarianism became even more intense than Hindu-Muslim communalism. The Wahhabis, Barelvis, Deobandis, and Shias engaged in pitched ideological battles, throwing each other out of Islam every day and taking them in everyday to be kicked out the next and suddenly uniting with them in the face of the larger Hindu threat, This all happened in these very ghettoes. 

I feel that in the study of Indian Muslim ghettoes, how sub-divisions among Muslims also find expression in ghettoisation is often missed. For example, there are Shia ghettoes or, to be apolitical, Shia settlements within the larger Sunni ghettoes in India. Shias usually don’t reside among Sunnis, as every year Sunnis take offence at their mourning of Hussain, the grandson of Prophet Mohammed. Similarly, Ahl-e-Hadith to a large extent live near Ahle Hadees masjids, and the same is partially true for every major sect.

I remember a friend narrating an incident from Mumbra—the largest Muslim ghetto in India. He lived in one of its best buildings. During Muharram, some Sunnis in the building objected to the mourning rituals of Shias. Instead of asserting their right to peacefully observe their faith, some residents demanded that the Tablighi Jamaat’s halqas (religious circles) also be stopped.

In the same friend’s building, there was a man who never greeted others with salaam. When asked why, he replied, “I don’t greet kafirs,” referring to other Muslims who did not align with his sect. Let me reiterate this is one of the best buildings in the ghetto.

Recently, I met a man who recounted his experience at an Eid-ul-Adha prayer. The imam there declared that if the animal sacrifice was not performed by a Sunni Imam, it would be invalid. He also insisted that the skin of the sacrificed animal should be donated only to “Our Masjid.”

Let us not deceive ourselves: sectarianism is real and deep-seated within Muslim communities. Instead of hastily jumping to ideals of Hindu-Muslim brotherhood, perhaps we should first strive to humanize the Shia or Sunni next door—recognizing that they are as human as the Hindu in the neighboring town.

A humanist lens demands that we first dismantle our internal sectarianism before talking of communal harmony at large. Only when we see each other as human—across sects, faiths, and communities—can we hope to create a society not based on hatred but on larger and real Harmony.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

The February 13 incident has sparked outrage within Australia’s Islamic community, with Test cricketer Usman Khawaja among those highlighting what they see as an inadequate government response to threats against Muslims.

When asked whether the government would have reacted more swiftly if the attack had been anti-Semitic, Albanese told journalists that any attack based on religion was unacceptable.

“I take all attacks on people on the basis of their faith seriously, and they should all face the full force of the law,” he said.

Albanese had faced criticism earlier in the week for not addressing the attack sooner. Australian leaders have been vocal in condemning a string of anti-Semitic incidents in recent months, including the torching of a Sydney childcare centre, the firebombing of a Melbourne synagogue, and anti-Semitic graffiti in Jewish neighbourhoods.

However, on Monday, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils expressed concern over what it described as a rising trend of attacks on Muslims.

“The response remains grossly insufficient,” federation president Rateb Jneid said in a statement. “When compared to the swift and significant attention given to less severe incidents affecting other communities, the disparity in response is not only apparent but also unacceptable.”

Aftab Malik, Australia’s anti-Islamophobia envoy, urged national leaders on Tuesday to condemn the attack and invest in measures to ensure Muslims feel safe.

“All forms of hate need to stop,” he later told Australian broadcaster ABC.

Khawaja also weighed in, posting on social media that attacks against the Islamic community were being “swept under the rug.” However, on Wednesday, he welcomed statements from both Albanese and the country’s opposition leader addressing the issue.

Victoria Police confirmed Wednesday that a female suspect has been charged and will appear in Melbourne Magistrates Court over the alleged assault. The two victims, Muslim women aged 30 and 26, reportedly suffered non-life-threatening injuries.

Ministers from Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran all echoed him in labeling it an act of “Islamophobia.” Retno Marsudi, the foreign minister, remarked, “Stop abusing freedom of expression. Silence equates to collaboration.

As the UN rights group debated a contentious motion in the wake of a Quran burning in Sweden, Muslim nations including Iran and Pakistan called for justice and stated that desecration of the Quran amounted to promoting religious intolerance.

In the motion, which Pakistan filed in response to the incident from last month, states are urged to review their legal frameworks and close any legal loopholes that could “impede the prevention and prosecution of acts and advocacy of religious hatred.”

The argument exposed divisions in the UN Human Rights Council between members from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and Western nations who were worried about the motion’s effects on free expression and the threats it posed to established norms for the defense of human rights.

The burning of the Koran outside a Stockholm mosque by an Iraqi immigrant last month sparked riots in numerous Pakistani cities as well as fury throughout the Muslim world.

In a video address to the Geneva council, Pakistan’s foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari said, “We must see this clearly for what it is: incitement to religious hatred, discrimination, and attempts to provoke violence.” He said that such actions were carried out with “government sanction and with the sense of impunity.”

Ministers from Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran all echoed him in labeling it an act of “Islamophobia.” Retno Marsudi, the foreign minister, remarked, “Stop abusing freedom of expression. Silence equates to collaboration.

The burning was deemed a “dreadful provocation” by Katharina Stasch, ambassador for Germany, who also denounced it. However, she continued, “Freedom of speech also sometimes means tolerating opinions that may seem almost unbearable.” Defending individuals, not religions and their symbols, was the goal of human rights, according to France’s envoy.

Diplomats predict a vote after saying that Tuesday’s heated discussions had failed to produce a breakthrough. Since 19 of the 47 members of the organization are OIC nations, and China and other members support them, such a vote would almost probably pass.

Volker Turk, the UN human rights chief, told the council that inciting violence against Muslims or other ethnicities or religions is “offensive, irresponsible, and wrong.”

After a 17-year-old of Algerian youth was fatally shot by a police officer on Tuesday, France was rocked by a widespread wave of protests and rioting.

In remarks reported by the official HaberTurk outlet, Erdogan said, “Cultural racism has evolved into institutional racism, particularly in nations known for their colonial past.”

The social architecture created by this mentality, he asserted, is what gave rise to the events that began in France. Muslims make up the majority of immigrants who are routinely oppressed and forced to live in ghettos.

“Unfortunately, violence gave birth to violence and precipitated today’s events,” the Turkish president continued.

“The streets cannot be the means of seeking justice,” he cautioned the French authorities. The government should undoubtedly take note of the social boom, though.

A number of cities have banned rallies, there are travel warnings, and there are new discussions about racial bias in law enforcement as a result of the civil upheaval in France, which has been exacerbated by claims of overpolicing in marginalised groups.

During the disorderly riots, protestors attacked the riot police in a violent manner while also torching cars and damaging buildings. In order to address this situation and bring the country together during his second term, President Emmanuel Macron called an urgent ministerial meeting.

Many government buildings were vandalised, protesters waved signs that read “the police kill,” and racial prejudice was a major source of animosity at the time. The French government imposed a crackdown and sent over 40,000 police officers around the country as a result of the widespread violence in mainland France and its overseas territories. Thousands of people have been detained, and hundreds of police officers have been hurt.

Rashed is followed by over 16,169 followers on his Facebook account and over 5,678 followers on his Insta account.

He earned praises recently on internet for his prompt action in grabbing and kicking the Norwegian anti-Islamic leader Lars Thorsen for burning the Muslim Holy Book Quran during a demonstration held in Norway’s city of Kristiansand on last Saturday.

Thorsen held a demonstration named “Stop Islamization of Norway” (SIAN) which was approved by the local Police authorities, however Police had warned SIAN against burning the Holy Quran, after SIAN informed them about their provoking plans.

No sooner Thorsen burnt the Quran, a Rashed managed to jump over the fence and grabbed Thorsen’s jacket, however he fell on the ground after attempting to kick. Police arrived on the scene and arrested both of them to contain the situation and disperse the angry protestors from both the sides.