Yasmin Morgan-Griffiths condemns the recent threats made to controversial author Salman Rushdie.

Another blow was struck to the fight for freedom of speech in India when Salman Rushdie was intimidated into stepping down from attending the 2012 Jaipur Literary Festival. Last week, the influential author was informed by the Rajasthan authorities that assassins would be lying in wait at Asia’s most prestigious literary event in order to “eliminate” him. After further investigation, it transpired that the threats were no more than malicious lies intended to prevent Rushdie from making a public appearance in a region strongly influenced by Islam. The controversy coincides with the run up to state election campaigns in Uttar Pradesh, which strongly suggests that the incident was an underhand political stunt in order to gain popularity amongst Muslim voters, who constitute around 18% of the electorate.

Rushdie’s case is an example of censorship in the extreme, a sad reminder of the fact that the expression of ideas which deviate from conservative Islamism is likely to be met with violence and intolerance. Rushdie has been a target for extremists since the release of The Satanic Verses in 1989; an allegorical text which takes inspiration from a set of supposedly removed verses in the Koran and the life of the prophet Muhammad. The Supreme leader of Iran famously issued a fatwa against Rushdie shortly after its release, forcing him into hiding for many years.

It seems that many people with fragile sensibilities choose to ignore the most foolproof method of avoiding ‘offensive’ literature, which is simply to stop reading. As long as the right to express individual and creative interpretations of texts like the Koran is restricted, the fight against militant, negative practices linked to Islamism, and the real enemies of the faith can never be won. While Rushdie does not hesitate to speak out vehemently against religious fundamentalism, his work also explores highly relevant and secular themes such as alienation from society, immigration and the birth of modern India. By endorsing the repression of ideas fundamental to India’s historical and cultural identity, its politicians are revealing themselves to be irresponsible, intolerant, and encouraging violence and hate amongst its people.

Following the exposure of the authorities’ misconduct, India’s reputation has been severely damaged as a country which, in recent years, has professed to uphold the values of secularism and a liberal approach to both politics and art. The ban on the book is incongruous with the progressive ideals of a secular nation, and furthermore, such an irrelevant issue should not be focused on as a central incident within an election campaign. If this is the best the authorities can come up with to secure their positions in power, then it seems that they should never be granted the responsibility of leading a democratic nation. If anything, their attempt to win more votes through this act of cowardice has revealed them to be incompetent, willing to cheat to get ahead, not to mention content to focus on petty differences of opinion as opposed to focusing on resolving the major socio-economic issues that India faces today.

It needs to be emphasised that this particular incident seems to be the work of a minority of fanatics, as opposed to the vast majority of the Indian population and those who practice Islam peacefully. Ironically, the issues that truly matter in a country that is becoming increasingly culturally diverse are addressed only by those who are courageous enough to speak out in the face of years of tyranny and intimidation by those who retaliate to mere differences in opinion with mindless violence.

Such overblown reactions to a book would be laughable was the threat of bloodshed not so real. It brings to mind the scene in The Life of Brian where the outraged populace of Judea sentence a man to stoning for uttering the sacred name of Jehovah in praise of his wife’s cooking. Monty Python’s satirical representation was not far from the truth, yet it doesn’t seem as though things have made much progress decades down the line.