I am an Indian student in Germany, and reading about attacks on Indian students in Australia has been quite disturbing. I am not aware of the circumstances under which these attacks took place, but first of all, I would like to say that it is important to keep in mind that such isolated incidents do not make all white Australians — or any other ethnic group for that matter — racist to be wary of. I am sure there would be many others like Steve Waugh who are “shocked and saddened” about what is happening. In fact, some of the most eloquent critiques of the West have been written in the West itself. Racism, like other forms of discrimination, thrives on stereotyping of the ‘other’, and those who oppose it should try not to fall into the same trap. Reality is always complex, and we need to acknowledge this in thought as well as in practice.
Having said this, we should try to analyse the root causes of such acts of violence, which, I am sure, are multi-faceted. We may not know for sure, but could offer probable explanations. One such explanation could be: there is enough scientific evidence now that race has nothing to do with genes or biology, but is socially constructed to maintain the notion of innate superiority. For a long time, it was believed that racial differences were ‘natural’ (Whites superior, the rest inferior), which made it easy to explain why ‘White’ Western countries were developed, and others not. However, the rise of countries in the Far East and elsewhere not only challenged the Western models of growth, but also the traditional understanding of race. According to IMF’s World Economic Outlook for April 2009, today’s global economic reality is even much more mixed, with eight non-Western countries (including Turkey, excluding Russia) on the list of top 20 countries in terms of GDP (refer to figure 1). Add to this the list of billionaire ‘foreigners’ in Western countries and the recent trend of mergers and acquisitions by Indian and other companies overseas.
Some find it difficult to absorb or adjust to this changed reality. While old notions of race still linger on in varying degrees across sections of Western societies, there is a tendency to blame global economic integration (outsourcing of jobs, reduction in subsidies, etc.) and the influx of migrants – taking advantage of welfare money and the system – for the shifting economic matrix. Those who no longer have access to better economic or cultural (education, etc.) capital in comparative terms – or, in extreme cases, have not found, or lost, a job – perhaps tend to have recourse to the notion of ‘racial’ superiority more than the well-off (this is what they feel they are left with), and are perhaps the ones prone to taking the extreme step of ‘racial’ violence. The system is too complex to be understood and revenged upon, and foreigners, therefore, become scapegoats.
Look, for example, at South Africa. Relations between Indian and Black Africans in Durban – inhabiting the largest Indian population outside India in percentage terms – have been marred by varying degrees of tension. Historically, and partially, this is attributable to the preferential treatment meted out to Indians by the apartheid regime in comparison to Black Africans, and not in the least due to the discriminatory attitude of a section of the local Indian community. Nevertheless, much of it has economic roots. Unemployment rate among Black Africans is 24 per cent, compared to 9.5 per cent among Indians/Asians and 4 per cent among Whites (South Africa Labour Force Survey, March 23, 2009). The stark differences in living standards are there to see if one visits the somewhat mixed, though Indian-dominated, locality such as Phoenix (home to the Mahatma): clusters of big Indian houses on hillsides next to shacks and squatter settlements, mostly populated by Black Africans. Violent conflicts between the two communities in 1949 at Cato Manor, and then in 1985 at Bhambhayi, served the business interests of certain Black merchants: “African small businessmen who saw Indian merchants and small traders as an obstacle to their own ambitions of ‘serving’ Africans tended to take the lead in raising charges against Indians.”
In 2002, old wounds were re-opened with the release of a controversial song, AmaNdiya (Indians), by a popular Zulu playwright, Mbongeni Ngema: “Whites were better than Indians … Indians have conquered Durban – we are poor as all things have been taken by Indians … I have never seen Dlamini emigrating to Bombay, India. Yet Indians arrive everyday in Durban – they are packing the airport full,” coupled with exhorting Zulu “strong, brave men to face/confront Indians”. Despite a court ban on its sales and Mandela’s criticism, Ngema remained unrepentant, further claiming: “It is a fact that all the shops in the major towns and cities of KwaZulu-Natal are owned by Indians.” On the one hand, it is felt that Indians are foreigners who have dominated local business at the expense of Black African interests, and on the other, Indian merchants and bosses are seen as exploiting Black African customers and employees at various levels. The result: according to Ron Reddy, a community figure in Chatsworth, attacks against Indians have become commonplace.
If this explanation is true, then the urgent task before policy-makers – whether in South Africa, Australia or elsewhere – would be to address economic disparities, while taking stern security measures in the short-term to protect migrants, who are soft targets for the economic woes of ‘locals’. Even conservative economists and policy-makers may now agree that it is easier to let a corporation go down due to its market failure, but it is highly dangerous to let individuals and social groups go down that path. India, too, needs to ensure equitable growth, even if it is not fast enough, to address its own set of social manifestations of partially-economic hardships: be it Naxalism, communal violence, or rising levels of stress/aggression in the society.
Ali Mehdi is a PhD student at the University of Freiburg, Germany
mehdi@global-studies.de
