Bodh Gaya Blasts

Can we prevent terror events

by working on trust deficit?

TKP Nair

            The Bodhgaya blasts in close proximity to the unsolved Hyderabad blasts of February, both suspected to be the handiwork of Indian Mujahideen, are a grim reminder of  the ability of terror groups operating in India to strike at any place and time of their choosing, without the fear of being pre-empted or effectively investigated by the Indian anti-terrorism machinery ( if it really exists). Such episodes are to be treated also as repeated wake-up calls for us to come out of our deep slumber and to take a fresh look at our extreme vulnerability and  search for its underlying reasons. This is at least as important  as the steps to be taken on war-footing to beef up our deplorably loose intelligence network, abysmally tardy state administration  incapable of responding to intelligence inputs if any, and the utterly unprofessional police forces. The IM who are the local arm of LET based in Pakistan can not organize such acts without the committed support of local hosts. The mindset that makes this possible is undoubtedly the deep mistrust existing among communities in our country. The solution lies in identifying the sources of such mistrust and correcting it before it goes out of hand. We need to examine as to where we erred in our evolution as a pluralistic secular society.

            I believe that the majority of us Indians subscribe to secular beliefs and take pride  over the choice made by free India to embrace secularism as the core principle of its nationhood, even as its estranged twin embraced narrow religious affiliation  for its nationhood. The Muslim brothers & sisters who remained with India obviously subscribed to the secular view and trusted that the majority community would not exploit their minority status and erode their secular beliefs. It is unfortunate that in the past 65 years after Independence the relationship between the two communities has  not been one that would entirely promote trust between them , if not due to real issues, at least in perception. This is in spite of the numerous constitutional provisions written into India’s comprehensive constitutional framework which has been continuously evolving, thanks to India’s democratic traditions, to effect more and more inclusiveness of the minority communities as well as the previously marginalized sections of the majority community. The constitution envisages a society in which various religious groups and communities have equal opportunities to flourish and live harmoniously together enjoying equal rights, without any bias whatsoever. We should hopefully be able to attain that goal in not too distant a future.

            Unfortunately over the years there have been several occasions where there have been conflicts of interest between the majority community and the minority communities. Many of them have of course been resolved amicably even with appropriate legislative measures wherever necessary,  but it is sad that some of them are left to fester, causing considerable strain between communities.This is more significant between the majority community of Hindus and the principal minority community of Muslims. Some of the issues that keep cropping up time and again are: Babri Masjid demolition, Godhra Riots, Kashmir Conflict and Terrorism.The main aggrieved party in all these are our Muslim brethren.

            I wonder why we can’t adopt a radically different approach towards these issues and settle them once and for all. It of course requires courageous initiatives from both sides.To begin to resolve these issues we need to take a close look at them and dispassionately analyze the perspectives of both sides and examine whether there is any scope for bridging the gap.   

                                                                                                                                

            I have often wondered why our Muslim brethren can’t set aside for a moment the emotions behind the demolition of Babri Masjid and try and understand objectively the perspective of their Hindu brethren. Of course there is no doubt that the act of demolition is an act of arrogance and it smacks of complete disregard for the sentiments of devout Muslims. The leaders of BJP & RSS should have had a dialogue with Muslim religious leaders about the issue prior to the wanton act they perpetrated. Dialogue must be the means of achieving any goal where the interests of multiple sections of society are at loggerheads. Having said that let us also consider with understanding what  the cause of the conflict was. The claim of the Hindus is that the masjid stood at the place where one of their principal avatars, namely, Lord Ram was born  and ruled the kingdom of Ayodhya in prehistoric times. They hold the view that there was a temple of Ram on the same site before the masjid was erected by the moghal king Babar in the 16^th centuary. Notwithstanding any corroborative scientific archeological findings, such a belief of the Hindus by itself deserves to be seriously considered. It is possible that Babar who, like most Moghal rulers, wanted the dominance of Islam, desecrated a major Hindu temple at the site. Let us now pause for a moment and ponder over whether the Muslims will ever permit any Christian or Jewish worshipping place to come up in close proximity to their principal holy sites near Mecca or Madina? India to Hindus is like Saudi Arabia to Muslims by virtue of being the land of origin of their respective religions. Also consider in this context the special favour the Indian State has been bestowing on its Muslim subjects by way of funding their annual pilgrimage to Mecca for Haj without bestowing a similar favour to the majority community. Can’t our Muslim brethren therefore try to appreciate the genuine sentiments of their Hindu brethren in that spirit and show a magnanimity of understanding and refrain from raising the issue of demolition ever in future. They could of course demand a sincere apology from the Hindus for their high-handed act which was perpetrated apparently without exploring the option of peaceful settlement through dialogue. Let the Hindus compensate by building a grand mosque at a mutually acceptable location in the neighbourhood. I think what prevents this kind of

rapprochement is merely false pride and, perhaps even more significantly,  the fear of mistaking it as weakness on the part of the aggrieved community. Such a gesture, I sincerely believe, will result in a sea of positive change in the relation between the two communities and will promote genuine love and trust between them which will replace the present animosity and suspicion.  The sentiment of brotherhood will further  grow a hundred-fold if only the Muslims boldly come forward and offer to take similar stance about other principal sacred sites of Hindus, like Varanasi, Mathura, Dwaraka  etc. if situations like in Ayodhya prevail there. To avoid such conflicts in future let the Indian State formulate a legislation, in consultation with all religious groups, to fix a minimum geographic separation between their worshipping places proposed to be erected in future.

            Another conflict site is Godhra. No doubt the riots in Godhra subsequent to the train-burning episode have been horrendous and could have been effectively checked if only the Govt. of Gujarat had acted promptly and with determination. The courts will have to investigate impartially the allegations of inaction and possible complicity of the Gujarat Govt. and punish the guilty. Action in this direction has been going on for some time now at the behest of the Supreme Court and let us hope that the efforts will ultimately yield tangible results. Now let us pause for a moment and check as to what caused the riots. What triggered the riots was the train-burning episode in which 59 Hindu karsevaks who were returning from Ayodhya lost their lives. It was presumed (without proof at that time) that Muslims did it in vengeance of the demolition of Babri Masjid. The right thing would have been to investigate the train-burning incident and to book the culprits and concurrently take all steps to check the riots that got triggered which could  be anticipated. It could well be presumed that the train-burning was just due to an accident of electrical short-circuit, in the context of no concrete evidence at that time to the contrary. (Of course subsequent investigations clearly brought out that the episode was a deliberate act of a section of the local Muslim population avenging the Babri demolition and law has already caught up with them) Deep mistrust between the two communities and their thirst for revenge were obviously the fundamental cause of the two tragic episodes. The mistrust accompanied by the misplaced belief that retribution is the answer to a wrong action of the adversary led to the terrible catastrophe. It requires courage and statesmanship to initiate a dialogue when an injustice is perpetrated or is perceived to be perpetrated. Both communities failed to choose that option.

            Now let us look at the Kashmir conflict which has been the central issue on which our neighbouring State has been nurturing a perpetual anti-India stance. It is to be admitted that over this issue our Muslim brethren have so far not taken a consistent stand favouring their motherland, which has also contributed significantly to the mistrust existing between the two communities. Let us look at the issue closely. Our neighbour holds the view that since J&K is a Muslim majority region it should rightfully be part of their country. They ignore the fact that religion is not the core principle of formation of the Indian State. They further ignore the fact that the ruler of J&K in 1947 exercised his option as per the rules of partition and joined the Indian State. The Indian Army could have easily evicted the marauders from their side who captured the so-called ‘Azad’Kashmir part of J&K in 1947 and thus could have solved the issue once and for all. This didn’t happen because our first PM who was already a widely-respected world leader and a renowned messiah of peace referred the conflict to the UN for mediation as he didn’t believe in applying force to settle any issue between countries.  However, the fledgling world body was not strong enough to settle the issue on ethical and legal grounds and instead offered the so-called ‘plebiscite’ to ascertain the preference of the people through a  neutral  referendum. Pakistan however flouted the requirement of withdrawal of its forces to facilitate the required neutrality making the UN resolution of 1948 unimplementable. Subsequently our neighbour systematically worked on the religious sentiments of the people in the Indian region  to achieve its goal. When that didn’t yield  results it resorted to jihadi tactics of  killings and intimidation against people and the democratic institutions in the Indian region. The persistent instigation by our neighbour, who is yet to give even a semblance of democratic right to the people inhabiting the region under its occupation, has however succeeded over the years in promoting voices of liberation among a section of the people on the Indian side. This section of people seems to be naïve about the impossibility of retaining independence of J&K (even if India granted it)  in the kind of volatile neighbourhood it has to cope with on the other side. The irony is that this festering problem of J&K can be solved instantly if only the Indian Muslims, who substantially outnumber their co-religionists on the other side, in one voice endorse the merger of J&K with India as final and proclaim to the world that they don’t accept the religious majority theory of our neighbour to claim any part of our country. Such an act will no doubt go a long long way in reinforcing  their relationship with the majority community.

            Now lastly the Terrorism issue. About the general tendency of branding of the various acts of terrorism happening in our country as Islamic there is very serious objection from our Muslim brethren. They are at great pains to declare that Islamic tenets do not promote terrorist acts. On the contrary Islamic religious texts categorically prohibit violence as a means of settling any dispute, be it among their followers or between those from their faith and those outside it. The Indian Mujahideen and similar outfits are groupings of misguided members of the religion. If this fact is declared by an authoritative Muslim religious body, there will be lesser tendency of attributing such activities to the religion. There should also be serious efforts to wean away erring youngsters from such unpatriotic outfits. It is true that there have been a few terrorist activities in the country from outfits populated by youth of the Hindu religion directed against Muslims or institutions belonging to Muslims. However a close study of such episodes will reveal that they have been executed as a response to the episodes involving jihadi groups. If the secular section of our Muslim brethren take a strong initiative (which is required because the predominant number of such acts are being executed by the jihadis, either foreign or Indian), then the episodes of terrorism can be substantially

reduced and thereby the fraternity between the majority community and the dominant minority community can be significantly boosted.

            In the above narrative I have only tried to take an impassioned look at some of the major episodes and issues that have unfortunately been at the core of mistrust between the majority community and the principal minority community. I have suggested some proactive measures from both sides to enhance mutual fraternal relationships. Admittedly it is difficult to implement these suggestions since it necessitates a drastic change in existing mindset of both groups. A courageous initiative is needed to do that. Liberalists in both communities need to win over the diehards and take control and guide the communities to adopt an unbiased perception of past, present and future events. Neither community should harbour thoughts that the other is bent upon harming its interests. All interactions should be transparent and mutual dialogue should be the means of resolving any differences. Such an initiative will certainly trigger a positive avalanche effect which will be immensely beneficial to our complex society. The ‘hate speeches’ from both sides will automatically lose their audience and belligerent postures from both sides will become a thing of the past. Terror groups will lose local support and that will ensure their ultimate defeat.

-------------------------