“India could be proud of having a writer who criticises all religions including Islam”: An Interview with Taslima Nasrin

In 1993, Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin published her first novel Lajja—Shame. According to Nasrin, Lajja was “a symbol of protest against violence, hatred and killings in the name of religion.” The novel became the centre of a controversy in Bangladesh, facing criticism from many who believed that her book unjustly vilified Islam. Later that year, Islamic fundamentalists issued a fatwa against Nasrin for blasphemy and insults to Islam. The Muslim clerics called for her executionand set a bounty on her head. The following year, in 1994, Nasrin escaped to Sweden where the government granted her a resident permit. She has been living in exile since, dividing her time between America, Europe and India. In 2003, her book, Dwikhandita—Two Parts—the third part of her memoirs, was banned in West Bengal on the grounds that it “could incite enmity between different groups.” The ban was later lifted in 2005. The first two parts of her memoirs, Amar Meyebela (My Girlhood) and Utal Hawa (Wild Wind) had earlier been banned in Bangladesh. In 2007, Nasrin was forced to leave Kolkata, her home in exile in India, following widespread protests after Muslim clerics in Kolkata issued a death warrant against her. Although she has been traveling since, Nasrin continues to live in India on a tourist visa, which was recently extended for a year in September 2014. She has often faced harsh criticism for her controversial statements against Islam and Muslims, the most of recent of which washer support for the arrest of American teenager Ahmed Mohamed. On 14 September this year, Mohamed was taken into custody for bringing to school a clock that he had made, which was suspected of being an explosive device. In an interview with Nikhil Pandhi, an intern at The Caravan, Nasrin speaks about her life in India, her position as an atheist writer against the rising tide of Islamic fundamentalism and the crisis of secularism in Bangladesh, a country that has seen a recurrent spate of anti-free-speech activities in recent times, including the violent deaths of secular bloggers.

Nikhil Pandhi: As an atheist Bangadeshi writer in exile, what was your reaction to the murder of Niloy Neel, the fourth secular blogger to be targeted in Bangladesh?

Taslima Nasrin: I was worried about all the atheist bloggers in Bangladesh who were killed, yet I knew that I was out of Bangladesh so there was not much to be afraid of. I knew I was living in a better place. After Niloy Neel was murdered, there was an intelligence report published in a Bangladeshi newspaper that the Ansarullah Bangla Team, the organisation which was killing the atheist bloggers, had decided to kill me also. They were allegedly going to send some killers to me. Of course, I was a little scared because of the report.

NP: In a recent column, you compared the murders of bloggers in Bangladesh to the attacks on the scholar MM Kalburgi and other Indian rationalists.

TN: It is almost the same thing here [in India], except the fact that the Islamists [in Bangladesh] are much more organised. Here, I don’t know how organised the Hindu fundamentalists are but they could be lone killers. But, in Bangladesh, they are more organised, almost like they are organised when they formed ISIS, Boko Haram or Al Shabab—they are much more organised than other religious terrorists in Bangladesh.

NP: Earlier this year, you said in an interview that you consider Islamic fundamentalism “a bigger threat” than Hindu right-wing extremism. 

TN: I still believe that. Look around, how many Hindu fundamentalists and how many Hindu terrorist organisations exist in the world? It’s only located in India and it is so much related with what is happening on the other side—[the fear] that the Muslim population is increasing and is somehow a big threat to the Hindus. So the fundamentalists take revenge and indulge in terrorism out of fear. They [the Hindu fundamentalists] are actually copying what Muslim terrorists are doing.

NP: In 2011, the word “secularism” was readopted in the Bangladesh Constitution, while the category of “Islamic State” was also retained. Would you call Bangladesh a secular country?

TN: No, I don’t think so, that is an oxymoron. If you have religious laws and if you start your constitution in the name of some god and have a state-religion, then obviously it is not a secular state.

NP: The year 2013 witnessed the Shahbag Square demonstrations against extremism and Islamic fundamentalism in Dhaka, Bangladesh. However, many believe this has only resulted in a stronger reaction from extremist groups.

TN: If some people would react, does it mean one would not protest against Islamism? Does it mean we stop encouragingprogressive ideas or the betterment of society? There will be enemies and one must not fear enemies. One has to change the society with human rights, a secular constitution, freedom of expression, women’s rights, altogether. There are enemies, there are misogynists, Islamists, religionists, fundamentalists, obscurantists—you must not fear them. If you shut your mouth, society will be stagnant. You have to make society evolve.

NP: Last year, the Modi government extended your visa by a year, after reportedly denying you a residence permit. What is your relationship with the government of India?

TN: I have the same relationship with all governments. It’s not that I have a special relationship with some government. All governments sometimes create problems for me to get my visa renewed, but ultimately they issue a visa. The Modi government told me that if I wanted they would issue me a residence permit for 50 years, but they haven’t done that yet. Instead they gave me [a] one year [extension]. They [the Modi government] seem to be following the Congress in this. Till 2004, I used to be on a tourist visa. There were some years in between when the government didn’t allow me to stay in India. I used to come from abroad and get the extension of my residence permit but they’d ask me to leave India immediately. This happened especially from 2008 to 2011. Every six months I used to come to India and the government would only issue me a residence permit if I gave a written undertaking saying that I will not stay in India and will leave the country within two days after getting a residence permit.

NP: Where were you staying at the time?

TN: I was in the USA and in Europe, or elsewhere. I had no home, I was moving around like a homeless person. You should read my forthcoming book being published by Penguin called Nirvashan [Exile], the story of how I was thrown out of West Bengal, how I was forced to live under house arrest in Delhi and how they refused to let me stay here [in India] but didn’t refuse issuing a residence permit for me. How peculiar is that!

NP: Several bans have been enacted in India over the past year, on books and films. Recently a fatwa was issued against the music director AR Rahman by the Raza Academy, a Mumbai-based Sunni Muslim organisation.

TN: There are five fatwas against me! As far as AR Rahman goes, I tweeted in his support. My book was banned, my mega-serial was banned [by the Mamata Banerjee government]; I am banned, I can’t go back to Calcutta, where I was earlier living. So I know what it means; I am the victim of banning and censorship myself. What I do not do is self-censorship because it is the worst form of censorship. The people who issue fatwas against writers and artists should be punished. Here I find, instead of punishing the fundamentalists who issued fatwas against me, the government takes action against me and throws me out of the country.

In Calcutta, people in broad daylight made a big procession, issuing a fatwa against me. Their police said that whoever will kill Taslima will be rewarded an unlimited amount of money. An Imam [Barkati, who set a price on Nasrin’s head in 2007], who is a good friend of Mamata Banerjee and the CPM [Communist Party of India (Marxist)]; Mamata invites him on stage and lets him speak. They pray together. He is a criminal but he was not punished. I was punished. Who am I? I write for women’s rights, human rights, I write for freedom of expression, democracy. Those who are against all these ideals are the good friends of politicians.

NP: Mamata Banerjee was in Dhaka recently to support the historic Indo-Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement.

TN: The [Indo-Bangladesh Land Boundary] Agreement is a very good idea. I appreciate it. Yet, I am an individual. [The prime minister of Bangladesh Sheikh] Hasina is also against me. The whole government [of Bangladesh] is against me because I write against established thoughts and against religious fundamentalism. Both Hasina and Mamata encourage religious fundamentalism for votes. Even though they are women, I don’t think they have any ideological commitment to improve the conditions of women. Mamata herself is critical of rape victims and blames them. They are women, [but that] doesn’t mean they support women’s rights.

NP: On 16 September, you tweetedabout the arrest of the young American boy, Ahmed Mohamed, who brought a clock he had made to school.

TN: I think that everybody would be afraid of that Muslim man, Muslim boy bringing something which is very strange looking, which doesn’t look like a clock. Why do we think that Muslims can bring bombs? Because they bring bombs. Not many days ago, the Tsarnaev brothers planted pressure-cooker bombs in the Boston Marathon; they looked very innocent, they were students; so this is happening. 

Mosques all over the world are breeding grounds for Islamic fanatics and also Islamic terrorists. There are many American Muslim boys who have decided to join the ISIS in Syria. Many Muslim boys from Europe are likewise leaving for Syria and Iraq to join the ISIS. They want to behead people; they want to kill people; they want to rape girls. So if a Muslim boy is bringing some strange thing with wires, it is but natural that we will suspect that he may be bringing a bomb.

NP: Should children not be allowed to bring any objects to schools?

TN: Yes, they should be allowed, but it’s not the kid’s fault. It is the fault of those Muslims who are engaging in fundamentalist activity in the name of Islam. It is not wrong for me to be suspicious. If, even after he [Ahmed] was proved innocent, he was put in a prison and tortured, then we could have protested. Otherwise, if his activities were suspicious, he can be taken, as you [NP] can be taken for your beard. If Muslims didn’t engage in terrorism, beards would not be a problem. We are rational people; we can be suspicious for our security.

If you suspect [Muslims] you are called “Islamophobe”. The word was coined by some Islamic fundamentalists to stop the criticism of Islam—it is against our freedom of expression. We should not be afraid of being called “Islamophobe[s].”

There are some white Christian boys who come with revolvers and kill people. I would equally be suspicious of a white, Christian boy coming with a gun to school. I would say first call the police to check if it is a toy gun or a real gun. Maybe he is innocent, but he could do it because other times, they [white Christian boys] have done so.

NP:  You have lived in exile in India, the US and Europe. How different has life in exile been here in India? Is it safer?

TN: No, it is not safe. Europe and America are much safer. But I still live here because I like to—maybe because I know the names of the flowers (smiles). I don’t feel like an outsider here. Also, I am a Bengali writer. There was a time I decided to move to West Bengal but the government threw me out. It is a kind of challenge for the subcontinent that I am in India and I would criticize religion. Actually, I am favouring India as a secular country; you could be proud of having a writer who criticizes all religions including Islam [and] can stay here. It would ultimately be to your credit than my credit. You will really prove that you are a secular state by keeping me here. So maybe, by my presence, I am helping the Indian government.

NP:  Do you think you will be able to go back to Bangladesh someday?

TN: No, I don’t think so, not in my lifetime. Because the situation has worsened. In my time, they [Islamists] used to do processions and demonstrations and set a price on my head, but they didn’t come with weapons to kill me. They could kill me but there was never this systematic killing. They are much more powerful today. In my time, the Islamists had an outfit, a distinct look and belonged to specific backgrounds—madrasa education. You could see them and make out they were fundamentalists. Now it is very hard to distinguish them. Terrorists, Jihadists, Islamists study in universities; they speak English and use Facebook: it is a totally different generation that is much more intolerant, and very dangerous.