Sambhal Violence: The Rise of Radicalism and the Role of the Ecosystem in Shaping the Narrative

Paromita Das

GG News Bureau

New Delhi, 26^thNovember. The recent violence in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, where Islamist mobs ambushed a court-ordered survey team, has ignited widespread debate over law enforcement, communal harmony, and media bias. The incident resulted in the deaths of four rioters and left over 20 policemen injured, yet the narrative surrounding the attack has been polarizing. As the facts unfold, the role of media personalities, political leaders, and international outlets in shaping public perception comes under scrutiny, raising concerns about how truth and accountability are overshadowed by communal and ideological rhetoric.

The Incident: Unpacking the Events

The violence erupted during a court-mandated survey of a disputed site in Sambhal, allegedly a Shahi Masjid. Islamist mobs ambushed the survey team, pelting stones and reportedly opening fire on the police. In response, law enforcement used plastic pellets and fired warning shots to disperse the mob.

While the police maintained they acted in self-defense, a section of media and political figures immediately framed the incident as an attack on Muslims. The focus shifted from the mob’s violent actions to allegations of excessive police force and systemic bias against minorities.

A Pattern of Radicalism

The Sambhal violence fits into a broader pattern of orchestrated radicalism, often unfolding in predictable stages:

1. Organized Mobilization for Violence:
   Mobs gather under the pretext of protecting religious sentiments. The scale and coordination in incidents like Sambhal suggest prior planning, with stockpiled projectiles and deliberate targeting of state officials.
2. Activation of Ecosystem Defenders:
   Influential figures and organizations swiftly jump to defend perpetrators, whitewashing the violence while portraying the attackers as victims of systemic oppression.
3. Vilification of State Institutions:
   Law enforcement and judiciary become targets of smear campaigns, accused of communal bias and oppressive behavior.

The Ecosystem’s Role in Shaping Narratives

The aftermath of the Sambhal violence revealed a troubling pattern in how some media and political figures approached the incident:

• Selective Reporting:
  Prominent journalists such as Arfa Khanum Sherwani and Rana Ayyub focused on police actions while downplaying or ignoring the injuries suffered by policemen and the ambush by mobs. This selective narrative undermines public confidence in media integrity.

“चलाओ बे गोली चलाओ”
संघी जज एक घंटे के भीतर सैंकड़ों साल पुरानी मस्जिदों का ‘सर्वे’ करा ले रहे हैं।
क़ानून की किताब नहीं जय श्रीराम के नारों के साथ ‘सर्वे टीम’ मस्जिद की ओर कूच कर रही है।
संघी पुलिस गोली चला रही है।
क्या यही है हिंसा और नाइंसाफ़ी की ज़मीन पर खड़ा विश्वगुरु ? pic.twitter.com/G92E0Udaod

— Arfa Khanum Sherwani (@khanumarfa) November 24, 2024

भारत के मुसलमानों से भारत की सुप्रीम कोर्ट का वादा था अयोध्या सिर्फ़ एक अपवाद होगा
मुसलमानों ने दिल पर पत्थर रखकर अपने देश के अमन-चैन के लिये एक मस्जिद को क़ुर्बान किया।
अब संघी अदालतें ‘हर मस्जिद के नीचे शिवलिंग’ ढूँढने को हरी झंडी दे रही हैं
सुप्रीम कोर्ट का वादा भी झूठा निकला? pic.twitter.com/eT7mqOMbRn

— Arfa Khanum Sherwani (@khanumarfa) November 24, 2024

Justice Chandrachud, this is on you ! pic.twitter.com/c3bza0pvZd

— Arfa Khanum Sherwani (@khanumarfa) November 24, 2024

Four killed in Sambal. Former CJI, Justice Chandrachud had allowed for the survey of the Gyanvapi mosque and other Islamic structures citing that it would not violate the Places of Worship Act, 1991

Who is responsible for the loss of 4 lives ?

— Rana Ayyub (@RanaAyyub) November 25, 2024

Four killed in Sambal. Former CJI, Justice Chandrachud had allowed for the survey of the Gyanvapi mosque and other Islamic structures citing that it would not violate the Places of Worship Act, 1991

Who is responsible for the loss of 4 lives ?

— Rana Ayyub (@RanaAyyub) November 25, 2024

• Political Opportunism:
  Leaders like Asaduddin Owaisi and Chandrashekhar Ravan criticized law enforcement without acknowledging the severity of the mob’s actions. Such rhetoric, aimed at consolidating specific voter bases, risks exacerbating communal tensions.

सरकारी गोलियाँ बहुजनों पर सीधे चलती हैं। यह कोई मिथक नहीं, बल्कि एक कटु सत्य है, जिसे हमसे बेहतर कोई नहीं समझ सकता। चाहे वह एससी/एसटी आंदोलन हो, किसान आंदोलन हो या सीएए विरोधी आंदोलन—हर बार सरकार के इशारे पर पुलिस ने निहत्थे आंदोलनकारियों पर सीधी गोली चलाकर हमारे लोगों की जान ली… pic.twitter.com/qVKaRXSJjf

— Chandra Shekhar Aazad (@BhimArmyChief) November 24, 2024

• International Amplification:
  Outlets like the BBC highlighted visuals of police actions without context, portraying India’s law enforcement as oppressive while ignoring the mob’s initial aggression.

The Cost of Misplaced Narratives

The bias in reporting and political commentary has significant consequences:

Erosion of Trust in Institutions:
Constant vilification of law enforcement and the judiciary undermines public trust, making it harder for these institutions to act decisively in future crises.

Encouragement of Radical Elements:
The absence of unequivocal condemnation of violence emboldens radicals, who see these narratives as validation of their actions.

Polarization of Communities:
The framing of incidents like Sambhal deepens societal divisions, making reconciliation and coexistence increasingly challenging.

Law Enforcement and Judicial Response

The police and judiciary are facing increased scrutiny, often unjustly:

Police Restraint:
Law enforcement in Sambhal has stated that they used minimal force, including plastic pellets and warning shots, to disperse the crowd. Despite this, they have been accused of bias.

Judicial Orders:
The court-ordered survey that sparked the violence was a legal procedure. Accusations of “Sanghi courts” and judicial bias are baseless and detract from the rule of law.

Upholding Truth and Accountability

The Sambhal incident highlights the need for balanced narratives and a commitment to truth. Media and political figures must exercise responsibility in their commentary, ensuring that facts take precedence over ideology. Selective outrage and communal rhetoric serve only to inflame tensions, undermining India’s democratic and secular principles.

State institutions must be empowered to enforce the law without fear of backlash from biased narratives. This requires public support and a rejection of divisive rhetoric that prioritizes victimhood over accountability.

Conclusion: A Call for Unity and Clarity

The Sambhal violence is not just an isolated incident but a symptom of a larger issue: the erosion of societal trust in institutions due to biased narratives. While the mob’s actions are clear-cut violations of law and order, the selective framing of the incident distracts from addressing the root causes of radicalism and communal disharmony.

For India to progress as a pluralistic democracy, the focus must remain on truth, accountability, and fostering trust between communities and institutions. The Sambhal violence serves as a wake-up call to reject polarizing rhetoric and uphold the principles of justice and fairness that form the bedrock of the nation.