Author:
Publication: The Economic Times
Date: March 14, 2006
URL: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1448493.cms
It would be unwise to ignore what the jihadi
forces, aided and abetted by our neighbour, are up to. True, India has been
able to successfully thwart all Pakistani attempts since Independence to rip
apart the secular fabric of our polity.
But the jihadi terrorist forces are far more
dangerous; their main aim is to radicalise the Indian Muslims for their own
war against the west and Israel. The recent blasts at Varanasi and the Sankatmochan
temple goes to show how desperate they are to create a communal divide. No
one should have any doubt about that.
Of course, the security apparatus has a huge
responsibility to prevent such assaults and bring the culprits to book, but
our political class has a bigger responsibility. They should do or say nothing
that would polarise the society on communal lines. Sadly, more than one mainstream
political party has recently been guilty of playing vote bank politics.
The jihadi forces see in the debasement of
the democratic institutions and all-pervasive corruption, which has weakened
our polity and its security apparatus, an opportunity to extend their tentacles.
Political mobilisation of Muslims, as has recently been shown again in the
riots in Lucknow, ends up in communal violence.
Playing identity politics has always been
a dangerous game, but it is more so today because of what is happening in
the rest of the world. The wounds of the Gujarat riots are too recent to be
easily healed, but some political parties instead of helping in the healing
process are doing everything possible to ensure that they remain fresh.
And all this is being done at a time when
the Muslim insecurities have further increased after the war in Afghanistan
and Iraq. Thugs and criminals masquerading as political leaders have no compunction
in joining the jihadi forces by exploiting their sense of grievances to further
their own selfish ends.
What is, however, more tragic is that leaders
of some main political parties have chosen to go along with them. The Shahi
Imam of Jama Masjid, Delhi, praising the 'Talibans' is one thing, but a minister
of the largest state of the country openly inciting murder is an entirely
different matter.
The shrill protests against the Bush visit
and the so-called tilt in the Indian pro-American and anti-Iran foreign policy
cannot hide the political agenda of those behind this mobilisation.
The leaders of these protests conveniently
forgot to explain to their supporters that the appearance of the blasphemous
cartoons in a Danish paper had nothing to do with the Bush visit. Communal
frenzy has been unleashed in the name of secularism and independent foreign
policy.
When the state is the main axis around which
all relations between the communities are structured, it is easier for the
hardliners in both the communities to mobilise political support on communal
lines in times of heightened tensions.
The other community is blamed for all their
woes. The divide between 'us and them' becomes more acute. Should we then
be surprised that the jihadi forces after their phenomenal success in Pakistan
and Bangladesh are now concentrating on India to expand their recruitment
base? The jihadi terrorism will grow and thrive as polarisation between the
communities takes place on communal lines.
The manner in which the POTA was allowed to
lapse shows how there is total lack of political consensus even about the
broad strategy to deal with the menace of terrorism. No sophistry can hide
the intention behind some of the measures in Assam before the assembly elections.
The corporate sector has a huge stake in the
stability and peace in the country. Unfortunately, politics in India today
is all about money and power. It is here that the leaders of our booming economy
can play an important role.
Big business should use its financial clout
by siding with the law and not by funding criminals and thugs. The jihadi
terrorism can be defeated only by a strong united response.
Ved Marwah, Former Commissioner of Police,
Delhi
THE proposition that terrorism can spiral into civil war seems to imply that
terrorism and civil war are located on a continuum such that, unless terrorism
is contained, civil war will follow. This is a mistaken assumption that blurs
the conceptual distinction between terrorism and civil war.
Terrorism is the deployment of violence for
political ends, generally targeted towards civilians, and often aimed at secession
of territory and sovereignty.
In India, terrorism has often been supported
and even engineered by external forces. Civil war is violent conflict between
different groups within a society, and generally involves a struggle to secure
control over state power.
For a spiral effect propelling us from terrorism
to civil war, two conditions would have to obtain: first, the existence of
a disaffected and alienated group within society (which may have shared affinities
with a foreign power that may be supplying it with resources such as personnel,
arms and training); and second, a motivated political exploitation of the
situation.
Neither of these is unfamiliar to Indian citizens,
the second most recently seen in Mr Advani's twinning of 'minorityism' and
'terrorism' as the targets of his new yatra, in the wake of the Varanasi bomb
blasts.
Strategies to prevent terrorism from contributing
to communal conflict have to take account of the causes of terror, which typically
include economic discontent, the denial of political voice, the absence of
recognition for minority cultures, and so forth.
Not all alienation, however, is expressed
in the form of terror. Hence, the usual strategies - such as reliable intelligence
gathering or diplomatic initiatives with meddlesome neighbours - must be supplemented
with social and political strategies.
These include enhancing the material well-being
of citizens; strengthening our democratic political culture and the foundational
pluralism of Indian society; opportunities for disaffected groups to articulate
their grievances, and strategies of political accommodation to respond to
them.
Above all, political parties must resist the
temptation to make political capital out of human tragedy. Of the three major
terrorist attacks of the last six months - the Delhi blasts days before Diwali,
the attack at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore and the attack on
the Sankatmochan temple in Varanasi - two have clear religious overtones.
In both these, the response of civil society
is notable. The aftermath of the Diwali blasts saw a public observance of
mourning at the site of the attacks, but equally a firm resolve to celebrate
Diwali, sending a clear signal to the terrorists that they had not succeeded
in their effort to intimidate.
In Varanasi, despite provocative statements
by the Sangh Parivar, devotees were back at the temple the next day, and there
was an impressive show of solidarity among communities in the peace marches.
Ustad Bismillah Khan invoked the unique, deeply pluralist, culture of Banaras
and its "Ganga-Jamuna tehzeeb".
In neither city did the fearsome spectre of
'retaliation' rear its ugly head. In the long run, it is this sort of response
by ordinary citizens and civil society that is the best antidote against civil
conflict.
Arguably, it cannot check terrorism, but it
can at least partially foil the designs of terrorists, who seek not only to
create fear, but also to provoke counter-attacks in situations of sensitive
religious divisions.
On the role of the economy, it should first
be noted that inter-community economic ties, such as those between the Muslim
weavers and Hindu traders in Banaras, are often traditional.
Secondly, while economic growth may help to
keep civil conflict at bay, this requires that economic prosperity be more
widely distributed, ensuring a reasonable level of material well-being for
all citizens, including and especially disadvantaged minorities.
Niraja Gopal Jayal, Prof, Centre for the Study
of Law & Governance, JNU
INDIA has many and enormous social, political and economic problems. Among
these, certainly, is the relative poverty and backwardness of the Muslim community,
the causes of which are many and complex, but that include at least a measure
of discrimination.
These are compounded by political mischief,
including efforts to electorally exploit communal polarisation and cultivate
communal vote banks - both of the majority and minority community.
From time to time, this pernicious politics
has exploded in communal riots and other patterns of violence, but India has
strong and inherent defences against any possibility of civil war.
These are, nevertheless, serious challenges
for the nation on other grounds, and need to be urgently addressed; but it
is not here that we will discover the 'root causes' of jihadi terrorism.
The roots of the jihad lie in Pakistan, and
in its relentless strategy, sustained over decades, to penetrate every concentration
of Muslims in the country with the subversive - and, for the overwhelming
majority of Indian Muslims, culturally offensive - ideology of extremist Islamism.
Kashmir has been the most dramatic success
of this strategy, where more than 40 years of systematic subversion transformed
a heritage of Sufi and Rishi Islam into an extremist jihadi perversion, which
exploited the spaces generated by political incompetence and opportunism.
Despite the history of its direct intervention
in J&K, Pakistan today finds it impossible to sustain the movement on
indigenous support; it is Pakistanis who now constitute the belligerent mainstay
of the 'Kashmiri' terror.
The geographically dispersed Islamist terrorist
attacks across India are only the more visible evidence of a war of attrition
by Pakistani state agencies and their jihadi surrogates. Dozens of terrorist
and subversive 'modules' are detected and disrupted each year before they
can translate their violent intent into action.
It is crucial, however, that despite occasional
and inevitable 'successes', this relentless strategy - which has targeted
virtually every concentration of Muslim populations in India - has overwhelmingly
failed to secure a base within the Indian community, beyond a minuscule radical
fringe; most such modules are now increasingly manned or led by Pakistanis
and Bangladeshis.
The Pakistani strategy, nevertheless, exploits
faultlines and vulnerabilities within India. The greatest bulwark the Indian
nation could seek against such mischief already exists: it is our Constitution.
It is, in fact, only to the extent that we
dilute or stray from a transparent and non-discriminatory constitutional order
in our practices - and this has been an increasing trend over the decades
- that we grow more vulnerable.
Even after the most extreme deviations, such
as the Delhi or Gujarat riots and the enormity of state collusion in those
cases, the anger of India's minorities was eventually assuaged and moderated
by the inherent justice of the Indian constitutional order - though not of
Indian society and politics. This order must be continuously strengthened.
Egyptian reformer, Tarek Heggy, notes: "The
most important point is that the Muslim community in India is the only Muslim
community (in the world) which lives in a genuine national democracy... India
has proven that when Muslims (like any other human beings) exist in a public
climate that allows them full participation in political life, they do not
turn to underground activities... and they do not leave (their country) to
blow up a plane, a train or a bus full of innocent civilians..."
In the economic sphere, again, it is non-discriminatory
development and equal opportunities for all communities that offer the best
course of action.
Special concessions and reservations have
done more harm than good to their target populations, becoming alibis for
neglect and discrimination in other spheres. India's minorities must be made
equal - and not privileged or under-privileged - partners in our many economic
enterprises.
Ajai Sahni, ED, Institute for Conflict Management
