The Lessons Of Gujarat And Kashmir

World focus is on India and Pakistan. .A million strong armies of two nuclear armed states are facing eachother. The memory of Hiroshima lies deep in the human psyche. In 1947 a geographical boundary was drawn alongreligious lines. Hatred based on religion was converted into a cold war, sometimes hot, between two countries:India and Pakistan

The horrifying passions lurking just below the South Asian surface were revealed by the attacks in earlyMarch, by extremists Hindus, against Muslims in the state of Gujarat, following the equally horrible attack byMuslim extremists at Godhra. The frightening aspect was the involvement of the Government machinery in thispogrom.

Religious passions have bedeviled all the countries of South Asia. The collateral damage due to thisfanaticism has also affected the United States, as seen tragically on 9/11.How do we control these primordialhatreds, and channel them towards growth and development, in a region widely considered among the poorest inthe world?

India is the predominant state in South Asia, in terms of population, economy and diversity. In every senseit is at the heart of South Asia. It also has the best potential for tackling this religious madness. It is afunctioning democracy, with a vibrant media and an alert but very slow, judicial system. Mahatma Gandhi is aniconic figure in India, and a central aim of his life was the harmony of all religious faiths Human rights arevery much incorporated into the Indian Constitution. The National Human Rights Commission is a powerful andprestigious body.

Then why is it that India has not been able to control religious fanaticism?

The answer lies in the democratic structure of India. Democracy involves elections. Politicians have toseek and cajole voters to give them power. That is exactly how it should be. Ironically that has a severenegative effect. As the average Indian is very traditional and oriented towards religion, it gives a window ofopportunity to any unscrupulous politician to exploit religious bigotry to draw political support. This hasbeen the curse of India since independence.

The tragedy of India lies in its past. Hindu-Muslim interactions started within a hundred years of theadvent of Islam in Arabia. This interaction produced a rich cultural heritage, in the arts (the Taj Mahal),music (Tansen), and in Sufism with its two remarkable exponents: Guru Nanak and Kabir.

The Islamic precept of equality was superimposed on the Hindu caste structure. This had far-reachingsociological implications for both faiths. But it also involved Muslim rulers and Hindu subjects. Sometimes itwas Hindu rulers and Muslim subjects. The result is a past that continuously haunts India. One can findcountless cases of horror, perpetrated by a Muslim forefather against a Hindu forefather. Or it may be viceversa.

Is it fair to expect the present generation to settle that account, and how?

The issue becomes ultra sensitive, when it concerns a mosque or a temple. In the Middle Ages, such placesof worship used to be very rich in terms of gold, and jewels. They attracted the plundering eye of many kingsand even far away invaders. Today, the memories of those plunders and destruction can drive atavistic passionsto a crescendo.

It is estimated that the Ayodhya mosque temple dispute may have caused the death of about ten thousandIndians in the past fifteen years.

The future of India, and by extension, that of South Asia, is closely tied to its capacity to control thesereligious passions. Basically that calls for the people of India to have a modern, scientific attitude. Theymust turn to the future .It is imperative that they move away from the past. No society can progress, if it issteeped too deeply in the past. This is more true for India, where the past is more divisive in nature,tending to generate hatred and bigotry against one's own fellow citizens.

The problem of Kashmir could have taken a different turn if we had held free and fair elections in thestate. Regrettably the only free elections ever held there were in 1977, when the then Prime Minister MorarjiDesai expressly forbade any tampering. The argument that we have to prevent anti Indian elements from beingelected, overlooks the tremendous price we have been paying, for rigging elections.

The last fifteen years of bloody conflict could have been avoided if we had not rigged the 1987 elections.I wish Muslim United Front MLAs, had sat in the Kashmir Assembly. I would much rather have them inside theAssembly, than have them outside, shooting at our security people .One hopes that the forthcoming Kashmirelections will be as free and fair as possible. It may go a long way in calming the state.

No words are too strong to emphasis the importance of human rights in India, including Kashmir and Gujarat.A great deal of death and destruction in Gujarat could have been avoided if the Modi Government had given dueimportance to the human rights of all citizens. The police machinery must be fair and just to all. Thatautomatically prevents people from taking the law into their own hands

Gujarat is one of the few states that have refused to appoint a State Human Rights Commission. Suchobstinacy reflects the indifference the Gujarat Government has for human rights. The Kashmir tragedy has beencompounded by the gross violations of human rights. There is no faster way to lose the support of abeleaguered population than to violate their human rights.

Possession of land may be redundant, if we have lost the trust of the people. India's strongest card onKashmir has always been the presence of an Indian Muslim population, comparable with that of Pakistan. Theirwell being and general integration into the Indian population, was proof that Kashmiris could also integratewith the country. Unfortunately the Gujarat pogroms make such a claim hollow.

There is a qualitative difference between Pakistan and India. It would be unfair to treat both on a par interms of women's rights, minority rights and even the general emphasis on human rights. Pakistan deliberatelychose a theocratic structure, making its state polity subservient to religion. Pakistan is widely viewed as afailed state.

The reason is its theocratic nature. Minorities have practically no say in Pakistan public life. There is asteady decrease in minority population percentage in Pakistan. What does it indicate? It is exactly thereverse in India. Secularism is a cornerstone of Indian polity. Gandhi gave his life, to enable Muslims tolive with dignity in the country. Which country can boast of a Father figure who sacrificed his life for theminority people?

Our founding fathers, including Sardar Patel, realized that the soul of India lies in its diversity. AsSwami Vivekananda so wisely mentioned, religions are like rivers, flowing ultimately into the same vast Ocean,we call God. In another comment, he dreamt of an India with a Muslim body and a Hindu mind.

Secularism is vital for the very survival and emergence of India as a great and prosperous country. The daywe abandon secularism, India will be reduced to the level of Pakistan, but on a larger scale. That is theinherent danger of Gujarat.

India's survival demands an honest separation between Government and religion. All Indians have to betreated as equal citizens of the same Mother India. That is the essence of secularism. But we as a people havefailed to make secularism operational. If we succeed, the benefits for Hindus, for Muslims and for the countryas a whole will be tremendous. Hindus must get over the holier than thou feeling towards Muslims.

Secularism is not an act of charity towards Muslims. Rather it is a national imperative.

Muslims too have to change, not only in their own interests, but also for the wider interests of Muslimsthroughout the world. Muslims and Hindus have to learn to live together. Special efforts must be made torespect each other's feelings. Confrontation must give way to adjustment, for the larger good of all of us,particularly our poor.

How long will our people suffer from Ayodhya? Can't we solve it mutually in a spirit of give and take? Hajsubsidy and polygamy will have to go. I fail to understand how a secular Government can grant subsidy for Haj,for that invalidates the Haj itself. Similarly why should Indian Muslims insist on polygamy, when even theHoly Koran mentions that such a practice is only to be followed under very strict conditions, which are notpossible today. Based on this, even Egypt and Pakistan have outlawed polygamy.

The highest priority must be given to business and industry, second to education, particularly for girls,and finally to smaller
families. Muslims have to realize that science and modernity are not incompatible with Islam. To assumeotherwise is a great injustice to Prophet Mohammed.

(The author is on the faculty of M.S. University, Baroda. He is the Gujarat vice-president of thePeople's Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL) and the general secretary of the Baroda Welfare Society, anorganisation that focuses on the economic and educational uplift of Muslims, particularly women. The above isthe text of a lecture he gave today
at MIT, Boston)