During his recent visit to India, as Donald Trump was praising his ‘good friend’ Narendra Modi for his ‘able leadership’, Delhi witnessed the unfolding of spectacular violence against its Muslim minority. Mob attacks, arson, looting, human rights abuses, death, torture, humiliation, expulsion, and every other form of exclusion and violence have been deployed to generate a climate of hatred against Muslims and perpetuate fear amongst them.

Hindu chauvinists are using the familiar tropes of ‘Muslim extremism’, ‘Islamic terrorism’ and ‘anti-nationalism’ to explain away this violence. Given the ideological underpinnings of this fascist form of nationalism that these chauvinists subscribe to, the weaponization of these tropes should not come as a surprise. What is saddening is the response of many non-BJP Indians and political leaders including recently re-elected Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who refuse to call a spade a spade. Instead, they speak of ‘peace’ and ‘calm’ on all sides and (un)wittingly portray what we are witnessing in Delhi as ‘two clashing sides’ – Hindu and Muslim – thus neglecting the stark reality of this violence.

Delhi 2020 is an anti-Muslim pogrom where the state — in the form of police, judiciary, as well as politicians — has actively taken sides. Yes, Hindus have also been killed but there is no evidence of cops siding with the Muslims, of temples being vandalised, or Hindus being systematically demonised and targeted as part of a wide plan. On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence of the state allowing, encouraging and even supporting attacks on Muslims. While we can be sure that the individual Muslims guilty of petty violence will be punished, we know that Hindus perpetrating large-scale violence will be protected by the state and even feted by the governing party.

Narendra Modi’s supporters see him as a strong leader and capable administrator. That under his very nose, parts of the capital witnessed gratuitous violence in which many Muslims and some Hindus were killed, properties were destroyed, and a reign of terror imposed, begs the question of capability or culpability. Either he is incapable as a leader or he is complicit with this pogrom which is being propagandised as ‘teaching a lesson’ to the Muslims. His past record in the anti-Muslim pogrom of 2002 Gujarat clearly indicates his culpability. He is being consistent with his record and true to his roots in one of the oldest and most resilient fascist organisations in the world, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

Given the existing socio-economic marginalisation of Indian Muslims coupled with their growing de-facto political disenfranchisement, we should ask: why would so many Hindus accept the fascist narrative of “teaching them a lesson” or at least not challenge it? Such a view is neither a product of ancient hatred nor an inevitable result of religious differences.

That under Modi’s very nose, parts of the capital witnessed gratuitous violence in which many Muslims and some Hindus were killed, properties were destroyed, and a reign of terror imposed, begs the question of capability or culpability.

It stems from an ascendant Hindu nationalism that sees Muslims, Christians, Communists and Secularists as enemies and threats to the establishment of a Hindu Rashtra. It is fuelled by politics of fear where Hindu fascists present violence as a necessary and legitimate tool to manage the threats to the majoritarian nation. A common Hindu fascist slogan is – “Pehle qasai, phir Isai” (First the Muslims and then the Christians). Given Modi’s desire to solidify his image in the West, the anti-Christian bigotry is being kept under control but is still very much present in various parts of India. Muslims are easier targets. Hindu nationalist sloganeering ‘Musalman ke do hi staan, Pakistan ya qabristan’ (Muslims, choose between Pakistan and the graveyard) reflects the desire to either discipline Indian Muslims and reduce them from being citizens to subjects where instead of equal right-bearing individuals, they become dependent on the majority community’s ‘generosity’ for ‘protection’; or to expel them from the country, or simply exterminate them. The relatively low number of killings in Delhi 2020 compared to Gujarat 2002 does not imply that the ideology and desires are not lethal. In fact, this may be an experiment to gauge the appetite of majority Hindus for an anti-Muslim pogrom on an even larger scale. Will Hindu nationalists get away with this?

Read more: 1947 to Delhi 2020

Whether it is in Western countries, in China against Uyghurs, in Myanmar against Rohingyas or in India against Kashmiris as well as Indian Muslims, Islamophobia has emerged as a global problem. And by jumping onto this global Islamophobia bandwagon, the Modi regime hopes to get away with its blatant anti-Muslim politics of which Delhi violence is a small part.

The abysmal record of Muslim majority countries, including Pakistan itself, when it comes to equality, rights and dignity of religious minorities makes it easier for India to reject any criticism coming from the OIC member states as hypocritical. The active support of Muslim majority countries to China’s concentration camps in Xinjiang also plays into the hands of Hindu nationalists.

However, the question here is not whether any other country is better, but that of the dangers of genocidal violence in the second-most populous country of the world. If majority of Indians accepts the Hindu nationalist narrative around the Delhi violence, it spells disaster; for we will come face-to-face with a humanitarian crisis that will make even the Rohingya genocide pale in comparison. The world’s largest democracy could turn out to be the biggest fascist power in the 21^st century.

From a prime minister who mocks religious minorities, a home minister who keeps harping on about exterminating ‘tukde tukde gang’ and various ministers and leaders speaking of shooting ‘anti-nationals’ to mostly pliant television media encouraging xenophobic public culture, India’s slide from a flawed-but-functioning democracy to a democracy merely in name but almost fascist in practice is very real. Whether this ‘almost fascist’ will become a full-blown ‘fascist’ or not is no longer a matter of academic debate but a possibility unless there is a strong anti-fascist pushback in India and beyond.