Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasrin (54) has lived in exile since 1994. From a poet in the late 1980s, she rose to global attention by the end of the 20th century owing to her essays and novels with feminist views and severe criticism of Islam. Her 1993 novel Lajja garnered severe criticism in Bangladesh.

After multiple threats and attacks against her in the backdrop of her novel Lajja, Taslima escaped to Sweden in 1994 and spent the next 10 years in exile in Europe and America. Coming to India in 2004, she settled in Kolkata, where she lived till November 2007, followed by a move to New Delhi. Taslima again moved to Sweden in 2008 and later worked as a research scholar at New York University.

Taslima is now a citizen of Sweden. She has been continuously getting Indian visas since 2004 and lives in the country. Her latest memoir, Exile, has just been released. The book chronicles her struggles in India over a period of seven months when she was hurriedly shifted, first to Jaipur and then to Delhi, confined to an obscure safe house and faced “incessant pressure from senior officials and politicians” to leave India. In this interview with SAKET SUMAN, Taslima shares her perspective on issues of contemporary importance as well as her struggles. Excerpts:

Q: In your latest memoir, Exile, you call upon neighbouring countries to “learn from India's example and be inspired”. But then you go on to mention “not that I have stress-free life in India either”. What is the “stress” here that you refer to?

A: My stress is that I am not sure whether I would be able to live here, or how long I am going to be living here because every time I ask for the renewal of my residence permit, I face problems. Also there are regular death threats. I fight for human rights and freedom of expression but threats are regular Rs whether it is safe for me to live here, whether I would be killed some day, only time will tell.

 Q: You had tweeted with reference to your visa that Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh, soon after resuming power, had said 'Aapka andhere din khatam ho jayega' (Your dark days will end). What is the status now?

A: Yes. But in reality it is not happening. I have to renew my residence permit every year. During the previous regime also I had to go on asking for residence permit from time to time. Of course, I have no problem asking for it but the problem is whether they renew it or not because sometimes it looks like maybe they do not want to renew it.

Q: You mention that everything that you were made to go through was, in your own words, “a result of the government's vote bank polities and blatant appeasement of the fundamentalist elements”. Can you elaborate on it?

A: Yes, I wrote that because when it was happening, I didn't know why the government was doing it, why they wanted me to leave the country. Then I realised it was for their vote bank. They used me for their political interest, to get Muslim votes. But why me? I am a non-political person, an independent writer. I was really shocked that I was placed under house arrest and asked to leave the country. I didn't create any problem. I didn't commit any crime. Why was that punishment?

Q: What are your views on the ongoing debate on triple talaq?

A: This is a part of Sharia law and Sharia law is a seventh century law. It is not suitable in 21st century and triple talaq is against women’s rights because women do not have the right to say 'talaq, talaq, talaq' to their husbands. I am not against divorce. If two people do not love each other, they should be divorced. But why only one person? If men have their right to divorce, why not women? So I oppose it for this reason, men and women should have equal right to divorce.

Q: As a champion of freedom of expression in India and elsewhere, one may have expected you to come out more openly and support the writers' protest in India last year. Yet you said many writers are guilty of double standards when it comes to dissent. What made you say so?

A:  Because I have seen that. I protested against the killing of writers. Award Wapsi was a protest they chose and I said, it is fine, it is wonderful. But I would have been very happy if they could protest against all the violations of freedom of expression that they do not talk about. I have seen that those people appear very much angry when a writer is victimised by Hindu fundamentalists. But they do not say anything when a writer is attacked by Muslim fundamentalists. It is a double standard that I found.   

 Q: How do you look at the recent unofficial ban on Pakistani artists?

A: The government didn't ban them. Even people didn't ban them. If people want to boycott, it is their right to do so. But even after the home ministry gave assurance, I don't know why Karan Johar felt the need to go to some person and accept all kinds of conditions. I think that was because he thought that there may be problems. And those conditions, that he will never hire any Pakistani actors, if it is his own choice it is okay, but if he is forced to do that then I think it is against freedom of expression. If artists or actors are involved in terrorism, of course India should take a very strong stand and they should have no right to work here. But what if they are innocent people? There are people in Pakistan who are secularist, humanist, who are fighting against terrorism or fighting against ISI or fighting against the role of military and fighting for equal rights. Should we reject them only because they are Pakistani? But they are fighting against terrorism too. So I think the fight, the conflict is not between Hindus and Muslims or India and Pakistan, the fight is between secularists and fundamentalists, between the rational, logical mind and irrational, illogical faith, between people who value freedom and people who do not. I like to see India as a generous and civilized society and if somebody is bad…you don't really have to be bad, you can spread kindness, generosity and accept those who are not terrorists but are doing good work.

–Saket Suman