Connect with us

Featured

India: School Principal Booked After Students Recite Iqbal’s Poem- What Makes Muhammad Iqbal a Contentious Figure in India?

School Principal booked after students recite Iqbal’s Poem- What makes Muhammad Iqbal a Contentious figure in India?

Published

on

After the great poet Muhammad Iqbal’s poem “Lab Pe Aati Hai Dua” was recited by students during the morning assembly, a video of the event went viral, leading to the arrest of the principal of a government school and a Shiksha Mitra in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. The Education Department has also placed Shiksha Mitra Wazeeruddi under investigation and suspended the school’s principal, Nahid Siddiqui. “Lab Pe Aati Hai Dua”, also known as “Bachche Ki Dua” (A child’s prayer), is an Urdu language dua, or prayer, in verse form authored by Muhammad Iqbal in 1902. The poem has been set to music and sung in morning school assemblies in Pakistan as well as India.

While far-right groups have been using this and similar incidents in order to demonize Iqbal for quite some time, Muhammad Iqbal has become a contentious figure in India for many more reasons. Muhammad Iqbal is also known for writing the most popular patriotic song of India “Saare Jahan se acha Hindustan humara” (Better than the entire world, is our Hindustan), which he also called “Tarana-e-Hind” (Song of India).

Also, read The Crises of Multiculturalism In Europe And The Question Of The Muslim Immigration

School Principal booked in UP

A First Information Report was filed against Siddiqui and Wazeeruddin at the Fareedpur police station in response to a complaint made by Sompal Singh Rathore, a local Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) official, who claimed that a “religious prayer” was recited at the public school in an effort to convert the children. He also alleged that the principal “made” the students recite the Islamic prayer with the purpose of offending Hindu sensibilities. Police have filed the FIR against the two instructors under sections 298 (deliberate intention to wound religious sentiments) and 153(provocation with intent to cause riot) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) after taking notice of the complaint.

The complaint was lodged by Sompal Singh Rathore, a local leader of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), an Indian right-wing Hindu organization based on Hindu nationalism. According to Rathore, students should be made to recite the Indian national anthem and “Saraswati Vandana” (a Hindu mantra for goddess Saraswati that is recited for music, knowledge, and wisdom). Instead, they were forced to chant “Mere Allah Burai Se Bachana Mujhko” (O Allah, protect me from evil) by the headmaster.

Read here, The Scope of inter-religious pluralism within Islam

Controversy over Iqbal- The Second Incident in Four Years

This is not the first time that a school head has been terminated because of a prayer. This is the second time in four years that a local VHP worker filed this type of complaint. Three years ago, in October 2019 a VHP worker alleged that the headmaster of a government primary school in the Bisalpur neighborhood of Pilibhit had forced students to recite a religious prayer that is typically recited in madrasas. As a result, the headmaster was subsequently suspended. The students also recited “Lab Pe Aati Hai Dua” by Allama Iqbal in that instance. Later, the headmaster was reinstated but moved to a different institution.

Soon after the complaint was lodged and the incident made it to the news, BJP spokespersons took to social media to support the FIR. Anyone who called out the absurdity of the complaint started to get trolled by BJP spokespersons and supporters who called these people anti-nationalists and supporters of a communal leader like Iqbal. Right-wing groups started demonizing Iqbal by calling him a bigot and father of the two-nation theory and a staunch advocate for the creation of Pakistan.

When a popular Indian journalist Rajdeep Sardesai took to his Twitter handle to express his disappointment with the incident, he was severely trolled. One BJP supporter and journalist even wrote an article dedicated to “demystifying” the myth of Iqbal’s pedestalization by the Indian left and Indian Muslims.

“While the nation and especially those advocating secularism know Iqbal only for writing ‘Sare Jaha Se Accha, Hindustan Hamara’, there’s much more to him that they conveniently sweep under the rug, which includes Tarana-e-Milli and the formation of Pakistan . . . The Islamic fundamentalist nature of Muhammad Iqbal became entirely evident as he wrote, ‘Cīn o-ʿArab hamārā, Hindūstāṉ hamārā, Muslim haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai sārā jahāṉ hamārā’ ”, the article mentioned.

Read here, Israeli Filmmaker Nadav Lapid Sparks Outrage in India after calling <em>The Kashmir Files</em> “Vulgar Propaganda”

Who is Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938) ?

Iqbal, one of the most prominent figures in Urdu literature during the first three decades of the 20th century, transitioned from writing about subjects that were specifically Indian and reflective of pluralism and multiculturalism to using worldwide realities to arouse, stimulate, and encouraging the imagination of Indian Muslims. Through his stirring poetry, he was one of the first to teach socialism and the socialist movement to young people in India. In addition, he added contemporary philosophical ideas that he had learned about while studying in Europe and greatly expanded the range of the educated Muslim intellectual discourse while keeping it bound to their essentially Islamic roots. He advocated “socialism” cloaked in Islam in his fiery rallies against the powers of capitalism and imperialism.

Poems like “Masjide-e-Qartaba” (The Mosque at Cordoba) and “O Ghafil Afghan” (O Heedless Afghan), written by a celebrated and lauded poet like Muhammad Iqbal, fueled a rising fear that a “grave disaster” was waiting to strike the Muslims of the sub-continent. Iqbal was one of the first to notice the struggles that the Indian Muslims were experiencing on account of their religion, and to include it in his poetry. The fate of his fellow Muslims in various colonized lands seemed to foretell even worse things for Muslims in India, who were a minority in a colonized Hindu majority population.  

Upon the formation of Pakistan, he was honored as its national poet, as well as earning the titlesMufakkir-e-Pakistan’ (thinker of Pakistan), Hakeem-ul-Ummat (sage of the Ummah), and Shayar-e-Mashriq (poet of the east).

Also, read How Practical is the Secular Democracy of India? Curbing of Religious Freedom in Kashmir

The Vilification of Muhammad Iqbal

The most well-known of Iqbal’s many works is the timeless “Saare jahan se achcha Hindustan hamara,” which he wrote in 1904 and which became one of the songs that propelled Indian independence fighters against British authority. The right-wing groups vilifying Iqbal keep reinforcing that after writing “Tarana-e-Hind” (song of India) in 19004 he went on to write “Tarana-e-Milli” (song of the community) in 1910. They use this example to display the contradiction between the India-loving patriot that he is thought of instead of the Muslim bigot and the father of the two-nation theory that he turned out to be.

The Tarana-e-Hind and the Tarana-e-Milli show the progression from “Hindi hain hum watan hai Hindustan hamara” (We are the people of Hind and Hindustan is our homeland) to “Muslim hain hum watan hai sara jahan hamara” (We are Muslim the whole world is our homeland). However, it might be worthwhile to consider his body of work as a whole to try and understand the movement in his poetic thought. Iqbal’s history and poetic career can be split into three phases. The first one is his patriotic poetry dedicated to the Indian nation and patriotism from 1901 to 1905, after which he did philosophical poetry from 1905 to 1908, and eventually, his work and poetry focused on the Muslim community from 1908 to 1938.

Iqbal is considered to have given the vision for the creation of Pakistan, whereas Jinnah is considered to be the one who shaped this vision. 

While Iqbal’s “Tarana-e-Milli” is a poem that talks about the notions of Islamic universalism, it has no offensive hints at the Hindu community. Therefore, using this poem to call Iqbal a Muslim bigot seems absolutely absurd.

Read here, The BJP Enforcing Patriotism By Instilling Fear- “Har Ghar Tiranga” Campaign in Kashmir and Other Schemes

Hindu Right Wing Group’s blind hatred for Muhammad Iqbal

Soon after his death, Iqbal (1877–1938) was denounced as the creator of the “two-nation theory,”, a follower of pan-Islamism, and a fervent supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. After being hailed as Pakistan’s “national poet,” this criticism gained momentum in the years following the 1947 partition. However, people of India should pause and think about BJP’s hatred for the same poet who gave India “Saare Jahan Se Achha Hindustan hamara,” a song that, incidentally, is used as the marching theme by not just one but multiple military bands of different regiments of the Indian armed forces.

BJP’s and other Hindu right-wing groups’ tendencies to perceive India through a starkly black or white lens, has led the Indian people towards majoritarianism and vilifying any belief system that differs from their own. The mindless loathing for Iqbal and everything he stands for seems unsurprising and even inevitable given the intensely volatile and polarizing times we live in. 

Also, read Shraddha Murder Case Revealing Indian Media’s Rooted Islamophobia

WELCOME

MZEMO

GET EXCITING NEWS

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

Gaza on the Brink Again: How the Rafah Border Closure Is Pushing 2 Million People Toward Extreme Hunger

Published

on

Source: Reuters

Although the world is more focused on the ongoing Israel-Iran War, a lot of severe genocidal acts are underway as a backdrop in Gaza. The 2.2 million people who are living in the Gaza Strip in abysmal conditions are just surviving, day after day.

Amidst the war, Israel again closed the Rafah border crossing after it was reopened just a month ago. It is undoubtedly a heinous attack on the innocent civilians of Gaza. Gaza’s only direct gateway to Egypt has once again pushed the enclave toward a severe humanitarian catastrophe.

Israel was allowing just a limited number of aid supplies into Gaza before the Rafah closure, but this genocidal act has completely stopped every humanitarian effort. As a result, the crisis of food shortages, medical collapse, and worsening hunger is getting extreme.

Rafah Crossing: Gaza’s Last Remaining Humanitarian Lifeline

The Rafah crossing has long been Gaza’s most critical humanitarian corridor. Unlike other crossings that are controlled by Israel, Rafah connects Gaza directly to Egypt and the wider Muslim world.

The Rafah crossing serves through:

  • Entry of humanitarian aid, including food, medicine, and fuel
  • Evacuation of wounded and critically ill patients
  • Entry of doctors, journalists, and international humanitarian workers

Gaza’s population is heavily dependent on imported supplies. The enclave produces less than 20% of the food it consumes, making border access essential for survival.

Before the latest closure, aid agencies estimated that 500 to 600 humanitarian aid trucks per day were needed to meet Gaza’s basic needs. In reality, only a fraction of that number has been able to enter.

Ultimately, when Rafah shuts down, Gaza’s already fragile humanitarian system quickly begins to collapse.

Gaza’s Growing Hunger Crisis

Food insecurity in Gaza has reached alarming levels.

The United Nations has warned that hundreds of thousands of people are now facing severe hunger, and food insecurity is reaching its highest levels. Humanitarian agencies report that many families have already reduced their daily meals to one per day or less.

Key indicators illustrating the scale of the crisis are as follows:

  • Over 80% of Gaza’s population relies on humanitarian food aid
  • Nearly a million Palestinians face catastrophic food insecurity
  • Food prices in local markets have surged dramatically due to shortages

Basic staples such as flour, rice, cooking oil, and sugar are becoming increasingly difficult to find. When supplies do appear in markets, prices are often far beyond what ordinary families can afford.

But now, as the aid is completely blocked, the survival of these families is uncertain.

Hospitals on the Edge of Collapse

Before the Rafah closure, critical patients were admitted to Egypt’s hospitals for better medical care. However, since its abrupt closure, medical officials warn that hospitals – a few remaining ones – across the territory are facing critical shortages of medicine, surgical equipment, and fuel needed to power generators.

Key health statistics revealing the severity of the situation are as follows:

  • More than half of Gaza’s hospitals are no longer operational.
  • Thousands of patients require urgent evacuation for treatment abroad.
  • Fuel shortages threaten intensive care units and dialysis centers.

Doctors report that shortages of antibiotics, anesthesia, and surgical materials are forcing hospitals to delay or cancel life-saving procedures.

Moreover, Electricity is another point of contention. Gaza’s power grid has been heavily damaged, meaning hospitals rely almost entirely on diesel generators. Without regular fuel deliveries, critical medical services could stop altogether.

The Role of the Regional Escalation

The latest humanitarian crisis in Gaza is unfolding against the backdrop of a wider regional confrontation involving Israel, the United States, and Iran.

Military tensions between these countries have intensified dramatically, raising fears of a broader Middle Eastern war. As security concerns rise, Israel has tightened its illegal control over Gaza’s borders, including restrictions affecting humanitarian aid routes.

In practice, these security measures primarily impact civilians living in Gaza, who are already struggling with displacement, economic collapse, and widespread destruction of infrastructure.

The result is that Palestinians in Gaza are once again paying the highest price for geopolitical conflicts that extend far beyond their territory.

The Genocide and Growing Global Criticism

The entire world is appalled by the scale of genocide and devastation in Gaza by Israel, with the unravelling support of the US.

The International Court of Justice, the United Nations, and other international organizations have declared it a genocide.

Critics argue that the widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure, mass displacement, and restrictions on food and aid amount to a form of collective punishment prohibited under international humanitarian law.

At the same time, many Western governments continue to provide Israel with political and military support, framing its actions as legitimate self-defense.

For many observers across the Muslim world and the Global South, this response highlights what they see as a profound double standard in the enforcement of international law.

A Population Pushed to the Edge

For Palestinians in Gaza, the closure of Rafah is not simply a political development, but an existential crisis.

Every closed crossing means no aid trucks, medical evacuations, and absolutely no opportunities for relief. Each restriction deepens the humanitarian emergency facing a population already enduring one of the most severe crises in modern history.

With Gaza’s borders sealed and humanitarian access restricted, the enclave’s two million residents remain trapped in a territory where survival increasingly depends on decisions made by distant political and military figures.

This is not so bothersome for the people living outside Palestine, but one must feel the pain that they are living through. How can we survive without food, water, and medical supplies for days and even years? How can we see our children, elders, and women die of hunger, thirst, and bombs? The world must take action before it’s too late!

Continue Reading

Featured

From Gaza to Tehran: The Politics of Power Behind Western Double Standards

Published

on

Iran-Israel War

Across the globe, there are two dominating crisis headlines today: Israel’s blatant genocide in Gaza and the ongoing war between Israel-US and Iran. This war is undoubtedly imposed by Israel and the United States, labeling it necessary for peace.

Western governments and media houses frame their policies around the language of “security” and “stability”. There is a pattern of double standards that undermines international law, credibility, and humanity.

On one side stands Gaza, where more than 2.2 million Palestinians are being killed by Israel. It has produced one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes of the 21st Century. On the other hand, stands Iran, a country that is signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) yet faces sanctions, threats, and even attacks on its civilians.

Why are some countries given carte blanche and strategic exceptions while others face relentless punishment?

Gaza: A Genocide in Plain Sight

Since the beginning of Israel’s large-scale assault on Gaza, the humanitarian impact has been staggering. According to Palestinian health authorities and international humanitarian organizations, more than 80,000 Palestinians have been killed, with a large proportion of the victims being women and children.

Entire neighborhoods across Gaza have been reduced to rubble. The United Nations reports that the vast majority of Gaza’s population has been displaced, many of them forced to move multiple times as Israeli military operations expanded across the territory.

This is the purest form of genocide in modern human history. The scale of destruction, starvation, and forced displacement goes far beyond conventional warfare. However, not all media groups are showing the real picture. Western media is showing its unquestioned support for Israel even during the most heinous crimes against humanity.

Western Silence and Political Protection

The United States remains Israel’s closest international ally. According to data from the U.S. Congressional Research Service, Washington provides Israel with approximately $3.8 billion in annual military assistance under long term defense agreements.

Beyond military aid, Western governments have repeatedly shielded Israel from international accountability. In diplomatic arenas such as the United Nations Security Council, attempts to impose sanctions or demand ceasefires have often been blocked or diluted.

This pattern represents a profound contradiction: while Western leaders frequently emphasize human rights and international law, their response to the devastation in Gaza appears far more restrained than in other global conflicts.

Source: TRT World

Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal: The Middle East’s Open Secret

Another major source of controversy lies in the nuclear dimension of Middle Eastern politics.

Israel is widely believed by international experts to possess between 80 and 200 nuclear warheads, developed through its long-standing nuclear program centered around the Dimona facility in the Negev desert.

Yet Israel maintains a policy known as “nuclear ambiguity” — neither confirming nor denying the existence of its nuclear arsenal.

More importantly, Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the global framework designed to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

Just because it operates outside the NPT system, Israel’s nuclear facilities are not subject to full international inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Despite this reality, Western governments rarely criticize Israel’s nuclear capabilities or call for sanctions related to its weapons program.

Iran and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

On the other hand, Iran’s nuclear program exists in a very different legal context.

Unlike Israel, Iran signed and ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1970, which means it is legally permitted to pursue nuclear technology for peaceful purposes such as energy production and scientific research.

Under the NPT framework, Iran’s nuclear facilities are supposed to operate under international monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Nevertheless, Iran has faced decades of economic sanctions and intense political pressure from Western governments, which argue that its uranium enrichment activities could eventually lead to nuclear weapons development. However, Iranian officials insist that their nuclear program is intended solely for civilian purposes.

Attacks on Iran and the Broader Muslim World

Recent tensions have further escalated the crisis. Israel and the United States have carried out strikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, including sites associated with uranium enrichment. The assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, along with other high-ranking officials show how brutal these strikes are.

Just like in Gaza, Iran’s civilians are also being attacked. One such example is the recent bombing of a girls’ school in Iran in which more than a hundred innocent children and teachers were killed.  Such attacks raise serious concerns among international security experts.

Moreover, striking nuclear infrastructure carries enormous risks, including the possibility of radioactive contamination and the potential collapse of global nuclear non-proliferation efforts. Some analysts argue that military attacks on nuclear facilities could actually push targeted states to accelerate weapons development rather than abandon it.

Ultimately, these strikes represent another example of selective enforcement of international norms.

From Gaza to Tehran: A Crisis of Global Credibility

The combined effect of these policies has produced a growing crisis of credibility for the international system.

International law is being applied selectively, enforced strictly against adversaries, while ignored when allies are involved.

From the ruins of Gaza to the nuclear facilities of Iran, the politics of power continue to shape the Middle East in profound ways.

For millions of people across the region, the question is not merely about military strategy or diplomatic rivalry. It is about whether international law truly applies equally to all nations — or whether global justice remains dependent on political alliances.

Until those questions are addressed, the perception of double standards will continue to fuel anger, instability, and distrust across the Middle East and beyond.

Continue Reading

Crimes Against Humanity

Shockwaves Across the Gulf: How the US–Israel Strike on Iran Could Redraw the Region

Published

on

Shockwaves-Across-the-Gulf-How-the-US–Israel-Strike-on-Iran-Could-Redraw-the-Region

The clouds of a full-scale war are hovering over the Middle East amidst the Gaza genocide. The US-Israel unprovoked strike on Iran has sent political, military, and economic shockwaves across the region. Ultimately, it pushed the region into one of its most dangerous moments in decades. What Washington and Tel Aviv describe as a “preemptive defensive operation” is a direct assault on national sovereignty. It has become a dramatic escalation that risks engulfing the Guld in prolonged instability.

During the early hours of 28 February 2026, coordinated American and Israeli air operations struck multiple targets inside Iran, including military infrastructure as well as a couple of girls’ schools. Within hours, Iranian state media confirmed the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, along with senior security officials. Hundreds of coordinated strikes were carried out in the opening phase by Israel and the United States against Iran.

Washington termed the operation as necessary to neutralize an imminent threat. Israel also justified it as eliminating what it calls an “existential danger.” However, these attacks are unprovoked acts of aggression and severe violations of international law.

A Leadership Assassination with Structural Consequences

The attack on Iran’s Supreme Leader was not a usual casualty. Ayatollah Khamenei had led the Islamic Republic for over 35 years, shaping its strategic doctrine, regional alliances, and military posture. Removing such a figure represents a direct strike at the political and religious core of the Muslim states.

Decapitation strategies like targeting top leadership in the name of deterrence carry profound consequences. They do not end conflicts but often intensify them. Resultantly, Iran announced a 40-day national mourning period and vowed retaliation. Senior officials signaled that the response would extend beyond symbolic gestures.

Iran’s Retaliation and Gulf Vulnerability

Retaliatorily, Iran launched missile and drone strikes toward Israeli territory and toward strategic locations in states hosting US military infrastructure. Gulf capitals responded with emergency security consultations, temporary airspace closures, and heightened defense readiness.

The Gulf’s dilemma is acute as numerous Gulf countries host the US bases. While these facilities are described as stabilizing forces, they simultaneously transform host nations into potential targets during escalation cycles.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20 percent of global oil supply transits, became an immediate focal point of concern. Even limited disruptions threaten global energy markets. This sustained instability could push oil prices sharply upward, intensifying economic strain worldwide.

Gaza: The Overlooked Consequence

The escalation comes while Gaza remains devastated by months of genocide. Humanitarian agencies have repeatedly warned of extreme infrastructure collapse, medical shortages, and displacement levels affecting the entire population. Large portions of Gaza’s housing stock and essential services have been destroyed or severely damaged.

Heightened regional conflict often leads to tightened border controls and reduced humanitarian access, justified by security concerns. Aid corridors become entangled in broader military calculations.

This shift in focus carries real consequences. When diplomatic bandwidth is redirected toward containing a wider war, reconstruction plans, ceasefire monitoring, and accountability processes in Gaza may stall.

Thus, the connection is evident – escalation elsewhere reduces urgency for justice in Palestine.

Economic and Strategic Fallout

The economic reverberations are already visible. Energy markets are getting volatile, and regional investors are recalibrating exposure to Middle Eastern assets.

Conflict in the Gulf does not remain confined to the battlefield. It translates into global price pressures, supply chain disruptions, and political uncertainty.

Strategically, the precedent of targeting a sitting supreme leader introduces a new threshold. It signals that regime leadership itself is no longer beyond direct military targeting. Such normalization raises questions about future conflicts and global stability norms.

The Muslim World at a Crossroads

Public anger across Muslim-majority countries has intensified. Protests, political debates, and social mobilization reflect deep concern about sovereignty and double standards in global governance.

This moment tests whether regional powers will push collectively for de-escalation and accountability or remain constrained by strategic alliances.

What Comes Next?

Several scenarios are emerging:

  1. Controlled retaliation followed by backchannel diplomacy.
  2. Escalation cycles involving proxy actors across multiple fronts.
  3. Strategic realignment in which new regional blocs consolidate in response to perceived aggression.

The direction will depend not only on Tehran and Washington, but on Gulf capitals, Beijing, Moscow, and European governments navigating between confrontation and containment.

A Dangerous Threshold

The US–Israel strike on Iran marks a decisive turning point. By targeting Iran’s Supreme Leader, the conflict crossed a political and psychological threshold that reshapes regional calculations, as it was a “Red Line” that had been crossed.

Whether framed as defensive or aggressive, the outcome is the same: the Gulf is more exposed, Gaza’s crisis risks being overshadowed, and the Muslim world faces renewed instability. History shows that wars justified as preventive often expand beyond their stated objectives. The coming weeks will determine whether diplomacy reenters the equation, or whether the Middle East moves into a prolonged era of open confrontation.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending