Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
That should help what?

Mr Modi himself could make that process easier by making clear, unequivocal statements to the effect that his government is committed to providing equal protection to all citizens, and that violence against minorities or majorities would absolutely not be tolerated. Of course such statements would have to be backed up with action to mean anything, but statements would be a start.

Expecting other countries to "focus away from Mr. Modi's purported acts or in acts in 2002 Gujarat riots" in the absence of any such effort from Mr Modi would be to effectively ask them to condone mass murder. The world should not pretend that Gujarat didn't happen, any more than they should pretend that Mumbai didn't happen.

Bit of confusion in the tenses there. "Have shown" is past, "forthcoming" is future. It's one or the other, not both.

Impossible to comment without seeing the work. Would you care to summarize the evidence, arguments, and recommendations?

Just to be clear: I do not think Indians should care what the US thinks, or submit policies for US review. I also do not think the Indians should expect automatic support for their policies or leaders from the US or any Western power.
I couldn't agree more with just about everything you said.

If I were Mr. Modi, I would put it along these lines: Any form of ideological indoctrination that discourages citizens from embracing modern education and incites them into taking law into their won hands and trying to unlawfully enforce/impose rules on an ideological basis will not be tolerated, as are violence acts against all citizens.

I will just list the abstract of my upcoming scholarship:

Many militant groups around the world are purportedly fighting to institute sharia as the governing law of Muslims. However, very few scholars have studied the relationship between sharia and violence, presumably because the former is largely viewed as dealing with internal governance issues. This perspective has likely led to the West’s policy of accommodating political and community groups that seek to promote sharia. In this paper, I argue that public surveys in Muslim communities are ill-prepared to identify the potential links between sharia and violence, especially when the majority of poll respondents identify themselves as peace-loving Muslims who perceive sharia as divine law. Moreover, I identify a radicalized subpopulation of jihadist clerics that benefit from sharia’s popularity. Empirical data is presented regarding the growth of clerical power in Pakistan and elsewhere, aided in part by this popularity, which the clerics themselves have helped to nurture. In particular, the analysis suggests that jihadist clerics and militant groups leverage sharia’s esteem in order to advance a violent agenda.