HVK Archives: The anatomy of a communal riot
The anatomy of a communal riot - The Free Press Journal
Somnath Sapru
()
4 August 1997
Title: The anatomy of a communal riot
Author: Somnath Sapru
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: August 4, 1997
In the post-independent India, communal riots have taken not only a toll of
lives but also of our national honour and wounded the psyche of a very
important section of our population, namely the Muslim community in the
country. The question is repeatedly asked as to why this happens. Many
theories are advanced, the latest being the fundamental wind blowing from
the Middle East. But is it all that simple?
When the British ruled us they divided us. The British Raj was the common
enemy. But-today, after 50 years of independence, can we still lay the
blame of them? In all fairness something is wrong, not only with the
Muslim community's response to the secular theme, but also with the
majority community's response to the problems of the minority.
One has of sheer necessity to look into the past, to find out the reasons
for the present malaise that is gripping the country. When the 1857 mutiny
took place, the aim was to restore monarchy of Bahadur Shah Zafar. At that
point of time, the Mughal rule in the country was almost over 250 years
old. Democracy per se and secularism were not discussed in the terms that
we understand today.
It is an unfortunate fact of history that when the call of Pakistan was
first heard, the majority of the Muslims were told by their leadership that
they would get their Pakistan wherever they were. It is understandable
that the majority, most of whom were illiterate, did not understand the
implications of this. lie Muslim-League leadership of that period, was
primarily from UP and when the promised Pakistan did arrive, no one
explained to the Muslims who had supported it, that the country would be
partitioned. When the leaders left for Pakistan, the Muslim population
felt left in the lurch.
The concept of a democratic secular state to which the majority community
took to, was a strange phenomenon for the average Muslim. And then after
1947, a new leadership emerged, most of them secular, and dividing
themselves on political ideology rather than religion. The first 20 years
the Muslim of India was confused and withdrew within himself to identify
his own identity. This was important for him, but he was not successful.
Adding to his trouble were the broken families, a part of which went to
Pakistan, and a part which stayed in India. Initially, it was all milk and
honey there, and nothing much here. But a small section of the community
saw the opportunities in a secular state. And part of that is today's
silent leadership of the community. The tragedy is that this leadership
comprising, doctors. lawyers, judges, engineers, and even politicians are
not articulate.
It's true that the educated Muslim can understand the problems of the
community but do not as do educated Hindus get involved in politics. Within
the community the tie of religion is strong and therefore no one likes to
be singled out as something of an heretic. Thus they would rather keep
their jobs and their families and continue with their lives peacefully.
But what of the professional politician? In India, the Muslim politician,
having the memories of the Muslim League and that of the partition, has
identified himself with secular parties. Where the leadership has failed is
in its efforts to educate the community. Whether it is an economic
grievance on jobs or it is anything to do with the general economic
well-being of the community.
In a democratic set-up the identification is with apolitical party, that
has an ideology. Look at the extreme Left and the extreme Right. If
religion were the criteria then the CPI the CPM, the Congress and the BJP
would be one party. By the same token, if religion were the criteria for
politics then in Pakistan, there should have been only one political party.
The fact of the matter is that religion is no longer a factor in the policy
of a nation. Time was when state and religion were one. But today it is a
person's personal matter. Look at Japan. Any form that one fills up in
Japan for anything from a driving licence to a visa application does not
contain a column for religion. All are Japanese.
If religion were really that important in the governance of a nation then
there would have been no Bangla Desh. It was primarily the economic
issues. The Bengali Muslim of East Pakistan was feeling neglected because
his voice was not being heard and his share was being taken away by the
ruling clique from West Pakistan. The present problems of Sindh are also
economical in nature.
The ferment in the Muslim world today is also taking its own toll but that
is not to say that our system of administration is good. Why do communal
riots take place always at the time of festivals of either the Hindus or
the Muslims or between Shias and Sunnis? While on paper the district
administration is responsible for maintaining law and order it is the
politicians who call the tune.
Again, it is economics that is responsible for such a state of affairs.
Allotment of shop sites to the minority community in what was seen as large
numbers was reportedly one of the causes for the friction between the
majority and minority communities in the peaceful district of Budaun. Did
the leaders not understand that it would lead to heartburning and were they
impartial in the allotment. On the surface this is a small insignificant
matter but such things, once they snowball, become big issues.
The Muslim psyche is a wounded one today. The masses feel let down. They
still withdraw - it is like the Muslim quarter that people like Rudyard
Kipling used to write about in every town in India. They physically
withdraw. It's like the ghetto mentality. They feel safe there. Why should
they not feel safe elsewhere. After all they have lived for centuries with
the Hindus. It's the call of the leaders mostly that misleads the masses.
On the other hand the various concessions given to the minorities, the
practical reversing of a Supreme Court judgement, in the Shah Bano case,
the suspicion generated in Muslim community about family planning that are
being seen as something going against the interests of the majority
community. Hindu-chauvinists are ready with figures. In the period
1951-1961 the Hindu population grew at the rate of 20.6 per cent in a 1
0-year period while the Christians grew at the rate of 23.1 per cent, the
jams 23.6 per cent the Sikhs 26.6 per cent and the Muslims at 28.1 percent.
The fear of dominance, by the majority has been with the Muslim from the
day Pakistan came into being as a theocratic State. Minorities in Pakistan
are practically unheard of while that of India are certainly vocal thanks
to a free press and free expression. The other side of the coin is that the
Hindu. who after nearly a thousand years of foreign occupation feels that
the secular set-up given to the nation should be preserved at all costs.
He also feels that concessions should not be given either to religious
minorities or even to depressed classes.
Look at the reservation issue. This has divided the Hindu community. There
is a fierce debate going on this subject as many feel that it is being
misused. While Dr. Ambedkar, wanted it for only 15 years we have it almost
from the day India became independent till date. And former Prime Minister
Rajiv Gandhi had announced that reservation will be extended by another ten
years. This has added fuel to fire because, today, we are in the process
of witnessing the growing up of the third generation of reservation
beneficiaries, whose parents also benefitted from it. Naturally this
creates friction. Caste wars, killing, land disputes with caste overtones
are the result.
What has this got to do with Muslims? The answer is obvious that while the
Hindus tried to secularise politics they failed, because since the last
four general elections, candidates are selected both by the ruling party
and the opposition on basis of caste and religion Two years ago, we had the
strange and paradoxical situation where the Congress fielded a Shia Muslim
against a Sunni Muslim in a Sunni Muslim majority area. The result was a
foregone conclusion. When the Congress campaigned for Mizoram elections, it
is alleged that they appealed to the religious sentiments of the Christian
majority state.
This naturally divided the people and will continue to do so. One does not
need to be an astrologer to predict that candidates' selection in the
forthcoming general and. state elections will also be on this basis. Look
at Kerala, the most literate state in India. Politics there has become
totally communal. The Communists and the RSS, the Nairs and Thias, the
backwards and Ezhavas. Each one of them have their own schools,
newspapers, and even select candidates for election. If this is the state
of affairs in a state like Kerala what can one expect in the backward
states of the country?
On the one hand we hear of criminalisation of politics, the nexus between
the politician and the criminal and on the other that between the police
and the criminal. If this is so, then what is left for the average
citizen, be he a Muslim or a Hindu or a Christian.
What is needed today is the emergence of middle class among the Muslims
which is articulate and provides the much needed leadership to the
community. What is needed on the other side, is equally an enlightened view
of not viewing every Muslim as a fundamentalist. In other words, we must
leave the question of religion to the individual and foster the concept of
nationality. In that lies the salvation of the country.
(The author is a former Editor of The Pioneer)
Back
Top
|
