Detrimental legacy of Indian Muslim leadership

Indian Muslim leadership has historically played a complex role in shaping the socio-political landscape of India. From the early 20th century to the present day, leaders claiming to represent the interests of Indian Muslims have frequently failed to address the real issues affecting the community. Instead, many have used divisive rhetoric, fostering a sense of victimhood or Muslim supremacy, while pursuing their political ambitions. This approach has not only alienated the community from broader national integration but also made it vulnerable to majoritarian counter-reactions. From the creation of the Muslim League to the contemporary politics of figures like the Owaisis and an assortment of elected and non-elected representatives to the Parliament, this legacy continues to harm the community by prioritizing narrow, short-term gains over meaningful socio-economic progress.

 

The seeds of this detrimental leadership were sown during the late colonial period with the establishment of the All-India Muslim League in 1906. The League initially sought to protect Muslim interests within British India but soon adopted a divisive, separatist agenda under the leadership of Muhammad Ali Jinnah. The party’s emphasis on religious identity, in the demand for Pakistan, polarized the Indian political landscape. Instead of fostering coexistence, the League’s rhetoric of Muslim victimhood and fear of Hindu dominance created a wedge between communities.

 

While the League’s leaders argued that Partition was the only way to safeguard Muslim rights, the outcome left Indian Muslims in a precarious position. Millions were uprooted during the Partition, and those who remained in India became minorities in a secular state and mistrusted forever in a permanent faultline between Hindus and Muslims. The Muslim League’s divisive politics alienated Indian Muslims from the inclusive vision of the freedom struggle, leaving them leaderless and vulnerable in the new nation.

 

ALSO READ: Dismantling ivory towers of academia – THE NEW INDIAN

 

In post-independence India, Muslim leadership largely failed to chart a path of integration and development for the community. Leaders aligned with secular parties like the Congress often framed Muslims as a vote bank, appealing to their religious identity without addressing their socio-economic concerns. Policies like the reversal of the Shah Bano judgment in 1986, under pressure from orthodox Muslim leaders, advocating for the ban of Rushdie’s controversial book, and mobilising Muslims on the streets from Kashmir to other Indian cities exemplify this trend. Instead of empowering Muslim women and reforming personal laws, the Congress government capitulated to conservative clerics, reinforcing regressive practices and blasphemy laws.

 

This appeasement-based politics kept the community isolated and dependent on symbolic gestures rather than substantive reforms. Leaders prioritized maintaining their influence over delivering educational, economic, or political advancements for the broader Muslim population. Consequently, Muslims lagged behind other communities in key indicators like literacy, employment, and access to healthcare, as highlighted by the Sachar Committee Report (2006).

 

The contemporary era has seen the emergence of leaders like Asaduddin Owaisi and his brother Akbaruddin Owaisi, whose politics often rely on polarizing rhetoric. The All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM), originally formed during the Nizam’s rule in Hyderabad to protect Muslim interests, has evolved into a party that leverages identity politics to consolidate Muslim votes. While Asaduddin Owaisi projects himself as a secular leader advocating for constitutional rights, the party’s campaigns frequently emphasize Muslim grievances and a sense of persecution, alienating non-Muslim voters.

 

ALSO READ: Global backlash against Muslims: Call for reflection, modernization – THE NEW INDIAN 

 

The rhetoric of Akbaruddin Owaisi, in particular, has been criticized for promoting Muslim supremacy and divisiveness. His speeches, which often evoke historical narratives of Islamic dominance, exacerbate communal tensions and provide fodder for majoritarian responses. This polarizing approach distracts from pressing issues like education, healthcare, and employment within the Muslim community, perpetuating their marginalization.

 

In the 90s Kashmir during the Islamic Jihad sponsored by Pakistan, the Muslim political and religious leaders too further alienated the Kashmiri Muslim population from the rest of the country by their secessionist rhetoric, their backing of armed terrorists and their support for Azadi (secession) from India, while gaslighting the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits at the hands of jihadis and their overground workers.

 

The long history of detrimental leadership has left Indian Muslims vulnerable on multiple fronts. By focusing on communal issues and resisting reform, leaders have hindered Muslim participation in broader national narratives. This isolation has reinforced stereotypes and fueled majoritarian reactions. The resistance of political leaders, religious ulema and the influential Muslim elite during the triple talaq abolition movement, and the misinformation of the CAA has left the Muslims in a delusional state of victimhood, with any hint of reform as an attack on their identity and faith. Even today in the 21st century, divisive rhetoric overshadows critical socio-economic issues. For instance, the lack of focus on modern education and economic upliftment has left large sections of the Muslim population in poverty.

 

ALSO READ: Rushdie unbanned in India after 35 years – THE NEW INDIAN 

 

Since the Shah Bano case and the opening of locks at the Ram Janambhoomi site as an appeasement to the awakening Hindus, polarizing strategies have fueled counter-movements among the majority community, leading to heightened communal tensions. The rise of political Hinduism can partly be attributed to the vacuum created by Muslim leaders’ failure to adopt inclusive, progressive approaches, or letting go of the rule of the Mughal period. Today, though it is late, the challenges faced by Indian Muslims demand a new generation of leadership that prioritizes socio-economic development and integration over identity politics. Such leaders must address the community’s backwardness in education and employment should be the top priority. Initiatives to promote vocational training, modern education, and entrepreneurship can uplift marginalized sections.

 

The new generation of leaders must advocate for progressive reforms in personal laws and social practices, ensuring gender justice and equality. This would demonstrate a commitment to the principles of democracy and secularism. Instead of emphasizing victimhood or supremacy, Muslim leaders should work towards building alliances across communities, promoting a vision of unity and shared progress. Also, their first and foremost duty is to reject extremist rhetoric and advocate for peace and coexistence, countering the narratives that fuel communal polarization. Only then can bridges be built across the permanent faultline created by the Partition of India into East and West Pakistan in 1947.

The columnist focuses on Indian Muslim issues and heretic traditions in Islam.