Why are Hindus/Sikhs in India lamenting the fall of Afghan government? What are we mourning? Did Ghani give any rights to Hindus and Sikhs that Taliban will take away?  Did the previous Afghan constitution of 2004 give equal rights to Hindus or Sikhs? The answer is a resounding “No”. 

Let’s read the first few paragraphs from Afghan constitution of 2004:

“In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful

Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of Worlds; and Praise and Peace be upon Mohammad, His Last Messenger and his disciples and followers

We the people of Afghanistan:

Believing firmly in Almighty God, relying on His divine will and adhering to the Holy religion of Islam;”

Religious Freedom: According to Afghan constitution of 2004 based on Islamic law, Hindu or Sikh temples were not allowed as religious entity. Few temples Hindu and Sikhs had were on privately owned property. Christian Evangelists were able to convert few Muslims in secret, and it is rumored that Taliban skinned a Christian convert alive. Since Hindus and Sikhs do not proselytize, there were no new danger with Taliban conquest. 

Population: Hindu and Sikh population was 700,000 (6%) just 50 years back  (total Afghan population 12 million in 1970); prior to Taliban recapture in August 2021, Sikh and Hindu population was just around 500 (total Afghan population is 38 million in 2021). 

In 2004 Afghan constitution, Islamic dawa was allowed, but sharing non-Islamic faith was strictly prohibited. Afghan Muslims (under Karzai and Ghani constitution) tolerated the minority, but did not really treated them as equal. 

Indians on the other hand went overboard with praise and adulation of Afghan government of Karzai & Ghani. India build dams, roads, libraries, parliament building, stadium etc. India spent $3,000,000,000 on Afghanistan but never asked for equal rights for religious minorities. This is true for other western countries and their liberal media too. 

It seems like secularism is only expected from non-Muslim nations, but the standard is different for Islamic countries. Mosques are demanded in non-Muslim countries but if churches or temples are not allowed in Muslim nations, it becomes religious & cultural issues that non-Muslim should not talk about. If non-Muslims are not killed outright in a Muslim majority country (as the fear is in Afghanistan after Taliban takeover), it is considered a good Islamic country. 

If Islamic dawa is criticized in non-Muslim country, it is a sign fascism. However, when non-Muslim are not allowed to proselytize in Muslim majority country, it is normal and no one complains about it. Blasphemy law, death penalty for apostasy, compulsory hijab are considered normal. While women in Muslim countries are thrown in jail for defying forced hijab, feminists in non-Muslim countries stand shoulder to shoulder with Islamic conservatives propagating the idea of hijab as a choice of the woman. 

Right to eat beef in India is almost treated like universal human right by liberal media & Islamists but consuming pork is instigating Muslims! 

Why do non-Muslims not hold Muslims with same yardstick? If Muslims are not equal, are they either considered superior or inferior? Or is it colonial hangover guilt for Caucasian Europe? Or Stockholm Syndrome in case of India? 

Few years back, I had a conversation with a left liberal Christian guy. He blamed Israelis unequivocally and said something I found very racist. He said that he held Jewish Israelis to higher standards than the Muslim Palestinians,  as they are like him. Hence Jews should behave better than Palestinians Muslims. I do not know if he considered Israeli Jews better than Muslim Palestinians because of race or because of religion or some other criteria! We see the same attitude in woke white feminists declaring hijab as choice ignoring the fact brown & black women in Middle East, Asia and Africa are sometimes forced to certain dress code. 

Few months back, a Muslim girl wrote an scathing article when her Hindu boyfriend’s mother did not approve of son’s conversion to Islam to marry her. She lamented the loss of her true soulmate because he did not convert to her Islamic religion! Western feminists did not ask why a Hindu had to convert to marry a Muslim? Is one-way conversion the new norm? Because we treat Muslims with kid glove, they have stopped introspection or reform of their own practices. In any issue facing the community, they expect the non-Muslims to capitulate, yet continue to consider themselves as victim. 

Let’s reverse the trend. Let’s treat fellow Muslims equally – not someone as inferior or superior, not someone whose faith cannot be criticized, not someone whose social norms cannot be modernized. A Muslim has equal right & responsibilities as a non-Muslim. Let’s not be afraid of being called islamophobe if misogyny or death penalty for apostasy in Islam is criticized. We do not cower down to criticize other faiths, why have a different standard for Islam?

Living honestly is only we can advance humanity to the next level. 

DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.