President Obama should raise his concerns with Modiji on the potential for communal violence

Some argue that discussing the Gujarat riots with Modi is diplomatically untenable. But Obama could express anxieties about the potentials for communal violence, especially as many Hindu nationalist supporters of Modi's party continue to embrace visions of hate and discrimination that led to the 2002 riots and ensuing violence. Some of Modi's supporters still make provocative assertions about Indian Muslim involvement in terrorism, and have made outlandish claims about Muslim plots to target Hindu girls in India for religious conversion -- caustic speech that is creating a sense of insecurity among India's Muslims and other minorities.

Obama should raise these concerns with Modi, and urge him to ensure that his party's victory does not generate Hindu triumphalism that sparks communal tensions. It is possible to speak about these matters diplomatically. Obama can point out that US history has its share of extremists who have used hate speech at the expense of vulnerable populations. He can note that the responsibility of any good leader is to ensure that such extremists do not feel emboldened to challenge the rule of law and turn their speech into violence. That is a message Prime Minister Modi needs to hear.

Beatrix Kiddo wrote:your hating him is not enough. obama must hate him too!

confuzzled dude wrote:

Some argue that discussing the Gujarat riots with Modi is diplomatically untenable. But Obama could express anxieties about the potentials for communal violence, especially as many Hindu nationalist supporters of Modi's party continue to embrace visions of hate and discrimination that led to the 2002 riots and ensuing violence. Some of Modi's supporters still make provocative assertions about Indian Muslim involvement in terrorism, and have made outlandish claims about Muslim plots to target Hindu girls in India for religious conversion -- caustic speech that is creating a sense of insecurity among India's Muslims and other minorities.

Obama should raise these concerns with Modi, and urge him to ensure that his party's victory does not generate Hindu triumphalism that sparks communal tensions. It is possible to speak about these matters diplomatically. Obama can point out that US history has its share of extremists who have used hate speech at the expense of vulnerable populations. He can note that the responsibility of any good leader is to ensure that such extremists do not feel emboldened to challenge the rule of law and turn their speech into violence. That is a message Prime Minister Modi needs to hear.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-sifton/modis-baggage-obama-meets_b_5899996.html

-> He could use Rajdeep's incident to break the ice/as a precursor to the discussion since it occurred on US soil, and ask him if he can trust him to be a reliable partner in the fight against global terrorism.

A federal court in New York issued Modi a summons last week, compelling him to respond to a lawsuit accusing him of human rights abuses. Heads of state have immunity from lawsuits in American courts.

That record could present an awkward juxtaposition Tuesday as the Obama administration attempts to present a united front. Modi’s arrival in Washington came on the same day that White House press secretary Josh Earnest urged authorities in Beijing to “exercise restraint” in response to large pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

“I’m sure they will continue to emphasize India democracy, in explicit contrast with China,” he said. “But there are unpleasant questions about Modi’s own background and why he was barred from the U.S.”

On Sunday, violent clashes erupted between Hindus and Muslims in an area of Gujarat. More than 140 people were arrested. A group of members of Congress said in a letter to Obama that the clashes echoed the 2002 violence, and urged the president to open a dialogue “about the positive steps his government can take in preventing oppression and encouraging religious inclusion.”

“When push comes to shove, will the U.S. back India up or ignore it because its economic relations with China are so strong?” said Tanvi Madan, director of the Brookings Institution’s India Project. “These are the questions in the back of their minds. But it’s not like they want to commit to a [security] alliance either, so there will always be a certain amount of questions about the reliability of the relationship.”