The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) mouthpiece, Panchjanya, has sharply criticized actor Prithviraj Sukumaran for his apparent silence regarding the ongoing persecution of Hindus in neighboring Bangladesh. The criticism has sparked a larger debate about the role of public figures and celebrities in speaking out on human rights issues, particularly those affecting religious minorities in countries like Bangladesh.
The article, published in Panchjanya, a weekly publication closely aligned with the RSS’s ideological stance, pointed out that despite being a high-profile figure with a massive fan following, Prithviraj has refrained from making any statements or taking a firm stand on the rising tide of Hindu persecution in Bangladesh. The publication accused the actor of neglecting his responsibility to speak out against the atrocities being committed against the Hindu community in the neighboring country, where they have been subjected to violence, discrimination, and forced conversions over the past several years.
The Context of Persecution
In recent years, there has been increasing concern over the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh, a country with a Muslim-majority population. Reports from human rights organizations have documented instances of mob violence, forced conversions, vandalism of temples, and attacks on Hindu families. The most alarming incidents have occurred during religious festivals like Durga Puja, where Hindu communities have been subjected to coordinated attacks, often with little or no intervention from law enforcement agencies.
Bangladesh, despite being a secular nation by constitution, has seen a rise in extremist sentiments, particularly in rural areas where Hindu minorities are often vulnerable to persecution. The Hindu community, which once constituted about 30% of the population in Bangladesh, has seen a significant decline in numbers, with estimates now placing them at around 8-10% of the total population. Many blame the state’s inadequate response to these crimes for the erosion of Hindu rights and freedoms.
Prithviraj’s Silence Sparks Controversy
Prithviraj Sukumaran, a well-known Malayalam actor with a considerable following, has been admired for his work in the Indian film industry and for his outspoken views on various social and political issues. However, his silence regarding the persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh has drawn sharp criticism from certain sections of the media and political commentators. According to Panchjanya, the actor’s failure to comment on such an important issue raises questions about his priorities and his commitment to the protection of Hindu interests.
The RSS mouthpiece argued that celebrities like Prithviraj, who enjoy a wide reach and influence, have a responsibility to use their platform to highlight global human rights violations, especially when those violations affect religious minorities. The publication emphasized that by remaining silent, Prithviraj was not only neglecting his duty as a prominent public figure but also contributing to the global silence around the atrocities against Hindus in Bangladesh.
The Debate Over Celebrity Activism
The criticism leveled at Prithviraj has sparked a wider debate about the role of celebrities in political and social issues. While many believe that public figures should take a stand on issues of human rights, others argue that celebrities should remain neutral and not involve themselves in sensitive political matters. There is a fine line between using one’s platform for good and risking the alienation of a large section of one’s fanbase, especially in a politically charged environment like India.
Some have defended Prithviraj’s silence, arguing that it may not be his place to comment on a foreign nation’s internal affairs. They suggest that an actor’s role is to entertain, not to become embroiled in international politics or human rights issues. Others point out that the issue of Hindu persecution in Bangladesh is not just a foreign issue—it is one that impacts the broader Hindu diaspora, including those in India, who view the treatment of Hindus in Bangladesh as an issue of concern.
Moreover, there is the question of diplomatic sensitivity. Public statements criticizing another nation’s handling of religious minorities can strain diplomatic relations, and some argue that such comments could harm India-Bangladesh relations, which are crucial for regional stability. Therefore, it is suggested that while public figures should indeed speak out against human rights violations, they must also consider the complexities of international diplomacy.
The RSS Perspective
The RSS and its affiliates have long advocated for a more robust defense of Hindu interests, both within India and internationally. The organization has been vocal about its concerns regarding the treatment of Hindus in countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, where religious minorities often face persecution. In the eyes of the RSS, Prithviraj’s silence is part of a broader pattern of indifference to the struggles of Hindus outside India.
In the Panchjanya article, the RSS argued that India, as the world’s largest Hindu-majority country, has a moral responsibility to speak out against the persecution of Hindus abroad. The organization has often called on the Indian government to take a more proactive role in protecting the rights of Hindus in these countries, and it believes that public figures, including celebrities like Prithviraj, should lend their voices to this cause.
Prithviraj Sukumaran’s silence on the issue of Hindu persecution in Bangladesh has ignited a passionate debate on the role of celebrities in social and political activism. While some defend the actor’s right to remain neutral, others believe that his influence could have been used to shed light on an important human rights issue affecting millions of Hindus. As the discussion continues, it remains to be seen whether Prithviraj will address the concerns raised by the RSS and others, or if this issue will remain a point of contention in the wider conversation about the role of celebrities in global politics.