(Study Material for IPS LCE) National Security: Incorrigible Corruption By Mr.K. Saleem Ali, Prof. Amarjeet Kaur & K.K. Aggarwal

By:  —Mr. K. Saleem Ali, Prof. Amarjeet Kaur & Prof. K.K. Aggarwal
Courtesy: Ministry of Home Affairs

As one of the oldest ‘cauldrons of civilization’ in the world, India stands apart on account of its geoeconomic and political location. It is, therefore, only natural that imbibing the ‘culture of tolerance’ in its polity, is comprehensible which is amply reflected by the fact that it has shared its home with people of various religious diversities and race like the Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Parsees, Sikhs, Baha’is and others. Thus, a culture of tolerance had gradually evolved and emerged over the ages, ushering in the predominance of public reasoning, magnanimity and resilience in the day to-day life of the Indians. Perusal of great Epics like the Mahabharata and Ramayana tell us of heroic deeds upholding these broad minded values, age old scriptures of the Upanishads and Vedas chant innumerable hymns with analogies reflecting the merits of patience and acceptance. With time, the charity and endurance preached by Ashoka, the sufferance and understanding by Jain Muni’s, subsequently, led to the open door policy of Akbar and the permissive Sufi and Bhakti Movements. All this only echoes the predominance of public reasoning and forbearance of its people, who had taken the test of time and matured, resulting in what we perceive today, an ‘accommodative polity of India’.
Role models in the garb of Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore and Jawahar Lal Nehru, during its freedom struggle, played a pivotal part to portray, practice and propagate the indomitable spirit of public reasoning and accommodation of “Unity in Diversity”. Thus “the secularism in contemporary India, which received its legislative formulation in the Post-Independence Constitution of India, contains a strong influence of intellectual history, including the championing of intellectual pluralism” 1. India prides itself as the only nation in the world, which adopted the secular democratic polity in its Constitution after achieving its independence. Contrary to this Utopian ideology, it has had to face its share of woes with the rise of fundamentalism irrespective of religion, over a period of time. The very same pillars supporting the basic value system envisaged in the Constitution has on several occasions gone to the extent of questioning this unique polity. The resilience of the people of India has kept it going, but at the same time, the cantankerous threat of communalism, looming large, remains intractable. To analyze the intractability of the communal violence and making it tractable, one need to delve into the entire issue of communalism from the historic point of view in a dispassionate manner and work out the structure of this conflict. Winston Churchill once had this standpoint, “if you want to plan for your future, you should know your past”. This paper is one such attempt.

Conflict Theories and Communal Violence in India

To analyze the glaring factors and the complex structure of Hindu-Muslim conflict in India, an attempt is made to correlate and put it in the right perspective, by examining the relevant Conflict Theories. On exploring a large number of themes and various Schools of Thought on Conflict Theories; the macro and micro theories were dropped, as they focus more on individual than group behavior. Hence, the search was extended to the Modern Theories relevant to our times which combines both individual and group behaviors.

Enemy System Theory

Among the Modern Theories the Enemy System Theory (EST) developed by a group of psycho analysts and International Relations Practitioners of the United States of America is most relevant. Donald L. Horowitz’s ten explanations on ‘conflict’ are also widely applicable in this context. Conceptually, both these theories have about six to ten factors, generally explaining the conflict between ethnic groups. The dividing line between ethnic groups and that of a religious group being very thin, both these aspects would be consolidated and utilized for our interpretation.
The EST hypothesis Paraphrases that, “humans have a very deep rooted psychological need to dichotomize and establish as enemies and allies”. It can be inferred from this hypothesis that the rapport between such groups would depend upon their past historic relationship. In the context of this paper, this theory is apt, since there has always been an attempt from the Eighteenth Century by the Fundamentalists of both the communities to mutually dichotomize each other as enemies and allies. If this perception and attitude was one sided, the conflict should be tractable, but since it is mutual, it becomes intractable.

Us vs Them

To further delve into the above issue, with reference to these two theories, the first and foremost concept relevant is “the positive identity and negative identity”. It’s a commonly known fact that, Human beings organize themselves into two groups (us and them) and tend to attach good qualities with their group and bad attributes to the other, thus creating conflict. Similarly, if an individual is suffering from low esteem through narcissistic injuries, he develops within him a negative identity and in order to improve his self image, joins a maladaptive group of criminals/ terrorists organization and creates conflict. Thus, in India, the Right Wing Extremists propounded by RSS, VHP and Islamic Fundamental groups, like Lakshar-e-Toiba, Huji and SIMI are examples of groups having identity and negative identity embedded in them. The conflict is intractable due to the mutuality of such identity between both these groups. This concept is also in agreement with the concept of Horowitz that, ethnic affiliations being highly charged are non-rational. Ethno-nationalism & Ethnic Victimization The second concept of EST is ethno-nationalism3 which is similar to the concept of the other theory that “ancient group hatred between groups produces conflict”. In this concept, the identity of an individual to their ethnic (community) or national group leads to two distinctive and conflicting ethno-national groups which end in conflict if there has been any historical animosity between them. In our nation, this has been evident all through, among the Hindu - Muslim communities harboring and nurturing antagonistic, historical animosity since advent of Islam in India. The animosity sometimes is due to a deliberate mutual distortion of history which leads to violence and riots.

The third concept of EST is “ethnic victimization”

This is the state of ethnic / community mind, when the security of their group is shattered by an experience of cataclysmic event, of unjustifiable violence and continuous threat that generates a fear of annihilation of the victim group. When the survival of such a group is at stake, conflict emerges. This ethnic victimization can be identified in India during the invasion of the Mughals, the Partition of India and the subsequent and recent riots, especially in Godhra, Gujarat in 2002 and Khandamal, Orissa, wherein, both the communities were affected and ethnically victimized.
Egotism & Passivity of victims The four th concept of EST is “egotism of victimization”.5 It is the in- capacity of the ethnonational group (communal groups), as a direct result of its own historical traumas, to empathize with the suffering of another group. This victimized group does not see beyond their own suffering and don’t
bother about the root cause of the suffering being created. This concept is abundantly prevalent in India. The hard line policy proposed by the Right Wing fundamentalist against the Muslims of India, as a response to terrorist activities and series of explosion by the Pro-Islamic groups without bothering for the suffering targeted group is a typical example of the concept wherein both the communities have gone through a rigorous historic trauma, with their points of view, which they don’t want to forget nor correct.
Elaboration on the fourth concept, unfolds that, ‘passivity ensures the continuation of victimization and suitable targets of externalization. thus making the ethno-nation groups more susceptible to these influences. The group in order to prevent themselves from being victimized continues with this unjustified action in the name of group preservation and thus become passive. This is a common theme with Jihadi Militants as well as the Right Wing and Left Wing extremists in India.
To project themselves as powerful, targets of externalization, they adopt the process of displaying images of in animate objects such as national flags or colors, ethnic food, music, costumes or dances which are stored as ethnic identity and used to create a positive image for themselves and negative image for others, thereby allowing them to focus hate on external groups. In India, during the freedom struggle, Right Wing Hindu parties demanded saffron flags as the National Flag, Vande Mata ram as our National Anthem, Hindi as the National Language, a specific dress code for women, celebrating birthday’s of great leaders like Shivaji, and Rana Pratap as Hindu icons, which were some examples of chosen targets of externalization practiced to create a positive image of themselves and a negative image of other communities, thereby creating a wider rift. Demonization & Dehumanization The fifth important concept of EST is the inability to mourn. Volkan in his theory describes mourning as the reaction to real or threatened loss or change. He propounds the opinion that, if a group under threat, looses territory or prestige to an enemy or another group; it often tries to reclaim their insecurities by regaining what was lost. The “concept of Akhand Bharat of Right Wing groups and International Caliphate of the SIMI are living examples of this reaction of regaining lost territory. The sixth salient concept of EST deals with the psychological mechanism that makes it easier for humans to aggress and kill one another through processes of demonization and dehumanization. Demonization is the mechanism for projecting negative images onto enemies, especially leaders, to make them appear as villains.
Dehumanization is a step further than demonization. This takes over when we begin to devalue, disrespect and disregard the identity and dignity of our enemies as something less than human. It is a state of mind where we cannot empathize with their pain as we attack and kill them. Victimization further leads to sufferance and trauma.9 A badly victimized group suffering from complicated mourning becomes obsessive about the trauma and often feels a sense of entitlement of avenging and repayment of past wrongs. An apt example for this would be, the systematic projection by the Right Wing fundamentalist that Islam is a violent religion, making its inception in India by destroying temples and with the sole objective of converting people to Islam. It also propagates the view, that Indian Muslims are Pan Islamic and were solely responsible for the partition of India. The fact that Muslims have a higher population growth than the Hindus is perceived as masterminded tactics to overtake them in the long run, has manifested itself in violent riots against the minority.
This is also true of the Islamic fundamentalists of India who project that Islam is a danger and that the Right Wing politics is likely to destroy India, thereby carrying out massive explosions by killing innocent people. Modernization & Economic Competition The another concept of Horowitz emphasizes that; Ethnic conflict is brought on by modernization and economic competition10. This very practical theory believes that, Modernization makes people want stability. Man’s wants are insatiable and unlimited and this sets up a great scramble for the same limited resources. This is visible in the economic competition between the ethnically differentiated segments like Hindu - Muslim community in India, also another valid cause leading to resentment, mistrust and therefore conflict. These concepts are self- explanatory.
The last concept of Horowitz emphasizes that, elite competition and the actions of ethnic entrepreneurs” drive ethnic conflict. Elites manipulate ethnic/ community identities in their quest for power. It is they who “construct “ethnic conflict 11. This is also obvious from the activity of Shahi Imam of Delhi who issues fatwa during the elections and the issue of Ram Mandir and Akhand Bharat spearheaded by Right Wing fundamentalist, which has generally created conflict of serious nature.

Structure of Communal Violence

The structure has been worked out by analyzing the historic facts and figures of communal violence in India in three parts namely, Pre-British period (advent of Islam), British period and Post-British period.

Pre-British Period

During the Post-British Period, the entire Islamic era was projected of as an Era of Conversion, Cut and Slash, while completely ignoring all other contemporary points of view. That Islam came to the Indian sub-continent at a time which was the beginning of a complex relationship that expressed itself in its war, culture, civilization, dialogue, dress, ethnic liberation, law, mysticism, philosophy, suspicion, myth, segregation, integration, fantasy and nightmare. It was a relationship launched by war but not sustained by it. The Moguls’, who initially came as invaders stayed back, to become home grown Indians and remained in this country, for four hundred years12. The matrix prepared on communal riots, with reference socio-cultural and political scenario is ample proof and throws light on the historically recorded transformation and organized communal violence.

British Period

During the British era, the structure of the conflict was raised to a much higher level than that of the foundation laid by the historians. Religion got mixed up with the politics of the time; as a result the permanent structure for intractable communal violence was stabilized even more. The third battle of Panipath in the year 1757, paved the way for the British Empire to make inroads in India. Between 1757 to 1857, Muslims in India were always dealt with, as suspects, by the British, ultimately resulting in the Sepoy Mutiny (First War of Independence, according to nationalist) in 185713. The freedom struggle which started after this Mutiny was the period when the British played with the sentiments of both the Muslims and Hindus in scheming divisive ways to rule India and create an unbridgeable rift between them.
Hence, the freedom struggle during the British period needs to be analyzed in detail, in two phases namely, the Pre-Swadeshi period and the Swadeshi period, where the structure of the conflict was more complex. With the advent of British rule in the Pre-Swadeshi period, European culture was in vogue and enthusiastically embraced by the non-Muslims, as a result of which; they got easily employed, while the conservative Muslims lagged behind due to their Persian medium of education. The complexities and politics of losing their empire to the British further distanced them14, resulting in the resurgence and launching of socio-religious reform movements among the Muslims. At the same time, enlightened English educated Hindus also started their reform movements to counter more than eight centuries of suppression and injustice of being ruled by outsiders.

Reform Movement: First Phase

The Socio-religious Reform Movements of the Muslims were through various organs, in the form of the Faraiz i, Wahabi, Deobandi, Aligarh School of Learning and the Muslim Association of Bengal. The Hindu Reform Movement also had its institutions in the Brahma Samaj, Arya Samaj, the Hindu Mahasabha and Rastraya Sevak Sangha. Both groups of the Reform Movement ushered in a modern view on one side and retrograde fundamental view on the other. Even though inclusive policies were evolved by both the Movements, the retrograde views brought in exclusive policies vitiating the atmosphere and constantly leading to frequent communal riots in India.
Some such fundamental activities recorded during this period were the Suddhi Movement of the Arya Samaj, which converted Muslims back to Hinduism on a large scale in 1877 and 1910, The Cow-Protection Movement of the Arya Samaj in 1882, the organizing of religious procession during the Ganesh festival by Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1893, B.C. Chatterjee’s Bande Mataram, propagating Sanskrit followed by attempts to replace Urdu with Hindi in 1867 as a part of cultural renaissance are a few examples to throw light on cause of the tension. This led to a counter offensive by the Muslims to retaliate in form of cow sacrifice during Bakrid and aggressive Maharrum processions which was the best cocktail for communal violence in the country. This was further fanned and complicated by the literary offensive fired both by Hindus and Muslims concentrated especially in Bengal15. Books and articles published in various Muslim journals like, Musalmani Bengali and Bengali books like, Zohadatal-Mondal, Islam Taitua, Hindu Musalman, Upadesh Sangraha, Massayeb Islam, Paritana Kabya, books of Md. Maharullah were targeted against Hindus and Christians. Bengali Weeklies like the Sudhakar Group and Islam Pracharak promoted a Pan Islamic feeling and alienated Hindus in a big way. On the other hand, intellectual Bengalis led by, B.C. Chattacherjee wanted to resurrect Hindus who were weak, with odes like, Bande Mataram, wrote novels like Anandamath, which had anti-Muslim sentiment , followed by S.C. Chattopadhyaya’s essay on Hindu-Muslim problem, Jadunath Sarkar’s “History of Bengal” and Jaya Chatterjee’s “Bengal Divided” highlighted Muslims with such vehemence, that the dislike was evident whereby, the literary poison of communal violence was widespread and apparent in Bengal. The Chronology Matrix of communal riots in India proves the increase in such riots due to increased socio-religious Reform Movements of the first phase.

The Second Phase

This second phase at the end of Nineteenth Century saw the bonding of contours and conflicts between Hindus and Muslims, while, the Twentieth Century saw the hardening of this conflict with the formation of Indian National Congress. The INC was reinforced by many progressive Hindu Sabha hardliners who joined them. Parallel to this development, the Muslim League in 1906, the Arya Samaj, the Hindu Mahasabha in 1915 and the RSS in 1925 also heightened their activity. All were either direct or indirect players in the freedom movement and also responsible for fanning of communal passion in the run up to the freedom struggle. Analysis of the activities of these parties during this period clearly brings out the salient ingredients which went in, to reinforce the structure of communal conflict. In essence, an analysis of the history and activities of the Hindu Mahasabha17 founded in 1915 reveals its dogmatic philosophy and ideology to protect the Hindu identity and regenerate the old pride of the indigenous Indian.
Records reveal the fact that they also adopted a similar approach in their activities like the Arya Samaj on issues of reconversion, popularizing the Hindi language, protection of the cow, the celebration of Hindu festivals and of representing the political interest of the Hindu majority before the British Government. The last aspect brought religion into politics, which was also practiced by the Muslim League thereby, bringing in a silent and disturbing, yet, fervent and rabid rivalry between the two in the race to the freedom struggle.
Perusal of the Annual Sessions of both these parties18 blatantly unveils the fact that the resolutions adopted by them were counter point to each other, thus building up the momentum of the tension between the communities during the freedom struggle. Some of those issues unmasked were: their opposition to the Communal Award of 1925, the Nehru Report, the Fourteen Point Demand of Muslim League, creation of North-West Frontier Province, the rejection of Pune Pact of 1935 and the insistence on dominion status. Party egos also dabbled on exclusive social policies by encouraging birth anniversaries of their icons like Shivaji, Maharana Pratap, GuruGovind Singh, Bir Banda Bairagi, Swami Sradhyannanda and others, proposing a Pan-Hindu flag as the National Flag and Bande Mataram as National Anthem. The systematic resolution on the priorities lay bare with their demands for the Right for religion processions with music in public places, Military training for the youth of India and organizing militant parties against partition of India, further hardened the conflict between Hindu and Muslims. It is obvious, from the evidence cited above, the extent and impact of the divide which was irreparable. This schism was fur ther aggravated by the emergence of the RSS19, which was formed in Nagpur as a breakaway group from Hindu Mahasabha. Their ideology was focused from the very beginning, and the means to achieve the ends, well pronounced. They adopted a militant stand and went to the extent of sending B.S. Moonge to Italy in March, 1931 to meet Mussolini in Rome, to find out ways and means to tackle the Muslims in India.
Moonge visited the Central Military Schools for physical education and the Military College too. Hindu fascism came to the fore in 1933, when the RSS asserted that Muslim should be treated on the same lines as the Nazi’s treated the Jews20. This was fur ther complicated by Gowalker’s fiery speeches and declarations that, foreign races in Hindustan must accept and adopt the Hindu culture and language. He also showered praise on Hitler on the concept of nationhood.
A detailed analysis of the Muslim League21 since its inception in 1906 also exposes some major issues, relevant to the upsurge of communal violence. The Muslim League predominantly started as Pro-British political party to derive benefits for the Muslim community in India. The fervor for this benefit sometimes banked towards parochial chauvinism when they did not get what they wanted from either the Congress Party or the British Government. While they were happy with Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909 and the Partition of Bengal in 1905, they were extremely disillusioned when the Partition of Bengal was cancelled in 1911. The Lucknow Pact of 1916 went in their favour, not to be rattled when dominion status was demanded in 1929.
Their political equation and rapport with the Congress during the Khilafat Movement was both cordial and mutually convenient, but their resentment and disapproval of Gandhi’s impulsive policies were apparent, especially so, when he withdrew the agitation due to Chauri Chaura outrage. The Communal Award of 1932 elated their cause, but they lost faith in the Congress, when they opposed it in Bengal. In 1937, the defeat of Muslim League in the general election was converted by Jinnah against Congress, who cheered its dissolution of elected government after the Second World War broke. Steeped with distrust, opportunism and repeated failures to attain what each Party strived for, the Muslim League ultimately demanded a separate Sovereign State in 1940, proposing the name ‘Pakistan’ through one of the Press.
The main difference of opinion between the Muslim League and the Congress was on the issue of a federal structure of the Government, wherein the Muslim League wanted an individual State having their own Government under the federal structure. At this juncture, one needs to dispassionately perceive the repeated attempts made by the British to drive a wedge deeper through their various enactments and actions, starting from the Local Self- Government Bill in 1883, followed by the Partition of Bengal in 1905 and its subsequent cancellation in 1911. The Minto-Morley Reforms in 1905, the Rowlett Act of 1919, the Mopllah Rebellion in 1921, the Simon Commission in 1930, the Round Table Conference of 1931-32 and the Communal Award in1932, also unravel intricate accounts of divisive ‘Divide & Rule’ politics and partisan favoritism in practice.
It was during this insecure phase that the Muslim League also forayed into the pan-Islamic arena and this is reflected in their activities and policies made in 1913, 1918, 1921, 1923, 1925, 1933, 1935 and 1938 respectively, wherein they passed a resolution against the war on Turkey, the occupation of Jerusalem, their faith on the Khalifa system and other issues. It vehemently condemned the action of the British Government on Egypt and the action of the League of Nations in Turkey; it condemned the assassination of Nadir Shah in Afghanistan, while condoling the demise of Mustafa Pasha of Turkey. Apart from this issue, the Fourteen Point Demand of 1928, and the 128 pages Committee Report of 1938, gave a handle to Hindu Mahasabha to brand the Muslim League as Pan-Islamic and divisionary, which led to a lot of blood shed. All through this phase ,which was steeped in mistrust and vested interests, the Indian National Congress mastered the art and skill of doing the balancing act of sometimes satisfying the Muslim League, without antagonizing the majority ultimately leading to the Partition of India, wherein more than 2,00,000 lives were lost. Thus, if we analyze the entire activity of the Muslim League, the Hindu Mahasabha, the British Government and the Congress party, the cataclysm was evident.

Independent India

It has to be acknowledged that despite the strong opposition from various factions, a secular Constitution was ultimately adopted due to the foresight and obstinacy of visionaries like Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore and Jawahar Lal Nehru, who led from the front, to succeed in their quest of India’s freedom struggle. However, the aftermath of Independence only resulted in an organized but steady resurgence of Hindu Right Wing activity, leading to further recurrence of communal violence making the Hindu-Muslim backlash totally intractable. This is clearly evident on analyzing the role of the Hindu Mahasabha22 in this period, after independence, as well as that of the RSS23 and their offshoots commonly known as the Sangh Parivar. After Independence, the Government banned the RSS on 8th February, 1948 on the grounds of spreading violence, after assassination of Gandhi. But the subsequent lifting of the ban on 25th August, 1949, gave a shot in the arm as it received a legal status by adopting a Constitution of its own. The Hindu Mahasabha was also registered under Act, 21 of 1960 with an aim to establish a Hindu state ‘Akhanda Bharat. However, the strong measures taken by the Government of India and the fervor of new Independence spirit kept the Hindu Right Wing activities under control and masked their objective. Subsequently, the RSS allowed Dr. Shyamaprasad Mukherjee to start a mass social movement on 21st October, 1951, to lead the Hindu Right Wing political activity, in the name of Jana Sangha. This party in its very first session25 criticized the Nehru Government for appeasing Muslims in 1951.They opposed autonomy given to Jammu &Kashmir in 1953 and took up the issue of merger of Goa by clashing with Goans in 1954. Demonstrations against cow slaughter were once again revived in 1966. During the Indo-China war, the Jana Sangha and RSS branded the Congress Government as a ‘weak’ and years later, also utilized the Indo-Pakistan war in 1965 to whip up the fear of suspicion against Indian Muslims.
Over the years, the RSS further perfected the art of re-engineering itself into large number of subsidiary parties under different contexts without diluting its staunch Pro-Hindu ideology. The subsidiary parties were formed primarily to indirectly orchestrate the cause and interests of the RSS. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad, a cultural organization was started in 1964 and was subsequently followed by its youth wing; the Bajrang Dal, giving sufficient evidence in this regard. This brilliant tactics of the RSS to have multi organizations speaking the same tongue on their core values, ideals and objectives and having an organised and professional network all over the country, was a deliberate attempt, well masterminded and executed.
However, the Nationalist Government with strong leaders constantly kept them under check and the final shot in the arm to silence them was the declaration of Emergency by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Ultimately, this led to gaining of political ground by Right Wing Hindu parties. The records of the last 60 years exhibit glaringly, that the RSS had violated every condition on which the ban was lifted in July, 1949. It used violence as its basic weapon, fermented the riots, spread hate by utilizing its organizational structure with its fascist outlook 26. The proof for this, as well as the umbilical cord ties with the other parties is evident from the underlining understanding that it has with the BJP.
This is evident from the number of incidents recorded in recent times. The underlining understanding was that, if the BJP does anything to the minorities, the RSS has no objection to it - be it 2002 Gujarat carnage or the recent Khandamal or Karnataka riots in 2008. The RSS speaks only when there is a crisis inside the BJP organization. The BJP was formed under the condition that the RSS would give its cadre only if the ideology it stood for, was promoted, topmost being what Golwalker believed strongly that minority should have no right, except as second class citizens.
Over the recent past, Govt. of the day committed a series of follies, which encouraged the Right Wing Fundamentalist to further its anti-minority ideologies. The first was the decision of the Government to reconstruct the Somnath Temple in 1951, which rekindled the old flames of hatred. Recently, the lack of firm decisions to deal with the incidents of placing of Lord Ram, Sita and Laxman’s idols inside the disputed Babri Masjid on 22nd - 23rd December, 1949, and in the order of DM to allow Pooja and its subsequent closure .The second instance was the complicity of the State Government in U.P. in opening the lock of Babri Masjid on 1st February, 1986 and allowing the formation of All India Babri Masjid Action Committee. The third sensitive cord touched was the Muslim Women Bill in1986, to offset the impact on Muslims due to Shah Bano Judgment and the dealing of the issue relating to the run up to demolition of Babri Masjid on 6th December, 1990 by national government. The fourth was the mishandling of the mass conversions of Harijans to Muslims at Minakshipuram in South India in 1981, which gave a fillip to the Sangha Parivar. Finally, the famous TV serial Ramayana gave a boost to the revival of the Hindu consciousness in 1987-88 and two years later, BJP encashed on it and organized a Ratha Yatra in 199028, leading to riots in several states, including Gujarat. This ultimately made the BJP emerge as a major Opposition Party.

This study throws light to a dark past, which has done little or nothing to get to the root of the matter. In today’s modern, secular India we have in no way manifested streaks of being progressive, civil or accommodative. As we stand at the threshold of our future, which still appears bleak, we continue to have two communities perceiving themselves as mutual enemies, constantly manipulating and creating a negative identity among each other, attempting not xo forget their historic enmity, creating a cycle of ethnic victimization, nur turing egoism of victimization and ensuring passivity to victimization. Thus, by creating suitable targets of externalization, it has been making no effort absolutely to convert its inability to mourn into ability to mourn. No sincere effort has been made by either side, to stop the process of demonization and dehumanization of each other and to provide equitable opportunity to both the communities so as to be initiated into a modern, global world, where they can be mutually civil, dignified and reinvent themselves, that would be beneficial and in tune with the call of the times. Until then, the Hindu-Muslim conflict will remain intractable and a curse to the society we live in.

Courtesy: Ministry of Home Affairs