I thank Shri Kureel for his reply to my letter in the latest issue (October 1-15, 1998). Let me first take up some elements of his hypothesis:

(i) The racial or ethnic origin of the Muslim Indians is irrelevant and immaterial, once they consolidate themselves as a Muslim community rooted in India,  rising, if possible, above the caste cleavages, as they should, since they are targetted and victimised as a religious group

(ii) The Muslim masses, apart from a false sense of identification with the power structure during the Muslim rule were as badly off as the non-Muslim masses. The Muslim elite which thrived was largely of recent foreign origin and ruled the country hand on glove with the high castes of the BSO. Muslims were neither the ruling class yesterday, nor are they slaves today. They do not aspire to restore Muslim rule; they only demand justice and equality as co-citizens of a democratic, secular state. So should the Dalits. It is wrong to say that an average Muslim feels any disdain or contempt for the Dalit. Indeed, all politically conscious Muslims look upon the Dalits as partner in a common struggle.

(iii) It is also wrong to say that Muslim Indians, a religious community, are only concerned about religious parameters. They are equally concerned about economic, social, educational and developmental parameters, just as the Dalits then. So there is common ground between them.

(iv) Muslim Indians know their limitation; they form only 12%; they are not evenly distributed. They are concentrated only in 10 States of out 25 in about 175 districts out of over 500 and in 100 parliamentary constituencies out of 542

(v) It is also a myth that they vote en bloc as they are themselves divided not only politically but also by caste, and what is more important, by caste or sub-caste links propped by the BSO. In any case, assuming they do vote as a bloc, they can influence about 100 odd constituencies.

(vi) I agree that in Hindu-Muslim face-off, the BC's who aspire for vertical mobility and Sanskritisation line up with the BSO. But so do the Dalits. In fact the Dalits provide foot soldiers for the BSO much more cheaply.

(vii) If BC's have poor representation in the administration. So do Muslims. Perhaps, in this regard, by virtue of reservation, the Dalits are marching ahead of both BCs and Muslims. This is a plus point if there is sincere desire for joint struggle.

Mr. Kureel advises Muslim Indians to "evolve a political leadership of their own". This means they should not accept Mulayam Singh Yadav or Laloo Prasad Yadav as their leaders. Then why should they accept Kanshi Ram?

If Kanshi Ram's greatest quality is to know when to kiss, when to kick and when to kill, he may also, some day - after capturing power - kick and kill the Muslims! He has already blotted his copy book by his anti-revolutionary power hungry opportunism.

As for the distribution of tickets, the question is not the number but the choice of constituencies and candidates. Let Mr. Kureel say how many non-Muslim candidates are put up by the BSP in Muslim constituencies and how many were won by the BJP because of BSP's undercutting the SP?

Let me add that the Muslim masses are getting disillusioned with their electoral exploitation by all 'secular' parties, without any quid pro quo.

If Mulayam Singh Yadav or Laloo Prasad Yadav is not prepared to deal with a Muslim leadership on terms of equality, is Kanshi Ram so prepared? That leadership may be a Muslim political party? Or it may be a national institution or organisation which may be in a position to make a deal and deliver?

On the other hand, Muslim Indians who were once exploited by the High Castes and then by the Backward Classes, will not like to be exploited, a third time, by the Dalits, assuming for arguments' sake that Kanshi Ram represents the Dalits.