Violence towards some monuments such as the destruction of certain statues in Russia after the fall of the Communist order (1991) or the attack on the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya (1992) is an example of a way to vent anger resulting from pain. While the grievance is passed from the older to the younger generation the original trauma is mythologized, and the description of the event may become entirely one-sided. The “egoism of victimization” no longer allows the acknowledgement of injuries sustained by the other group. A trauma may bring to mind former traumas and thus the more distant ones. The recent (1984) assault on the Golden Temple may remind the Sikhs of the defilement of the same back in 1746, and their massacre by Ahmad Shah Abdali of Afghanistan in 1762. The Sikh leadership refers to these repressions as the “Lesser and the Greater Holocausts”.[3] The past plays a very important role in dealing with and accommodating the present. It matters little whether the memory is factual or mythical, ancient or recent.

France’s Front National is the largest far-right party in Europe, electoral supported on an anti-immigration platform. Racism and violence pose serious questions in Germany as well. The Berlin Wall fell, but “the psychological wall” (Die psychologische Mauer) persists. Presently, it is rather perilous to be a foreigner (Auslander) in Germany.[9] Just as Hitler’s National Socialists detested the Weimar Republic, contemporary neo-Naziz view German democracy with open contempt.[10] Considering democracy as a degenerate political system inconsistent with Germany’s historical tradition, the neo-Nazis aim to establish a totalitarian order. As part of this strategy, foreigners, guest-workers and Jews have been selected as specific targets of violence. With ole prejudices being in the foreground, Europe is presently experiencing a resurgence of violence with strong racist overtones.

With the demise of the bipolar structure of international relations, one witnesses the outbreak of old conflicts and animosities among nations and peoples of the Balkans and East Central Europe.[11] The way in which the international community dealt with the aggression, occupation, genocide and ethnic cleansing in the former Federal Yugoslavia will have a profound impact on the attitudes towards Western Europe’s own difficulties. It may also have repercussions on Russia, if the latter attempts to unify all or some Russians living in the fourteen former Soviet republics.[12] In Eastern Europe, armed extremist movements such as the Pamyat in Russia, the Chetniks in Serbia, the Ustashis in Croatia and the Vatra Romaneasca in Romania grew in size and influence.

India, which is the dominant power in South Asia, has a background of parliamentary democracy.[13] Violence may be defensible in some just causes, but democracy and terrorism are surely incompatible. Democracy tries to settle disputes by peaceful means. Violence, on the other hand, uses the weapons of terror. But paradoxically, some aspects of democracy feed violence. Real or perceived challenges to personal or cultural identity are capable of arousing fanatical activism.[14] The challenge need not be as dramatic as Iraq’s policy of denying the separate identity of the Kuwaitis. Even the identity may be a mere fantasy, but, as Freud discovered, fantasies are also “facts”.[15]

As sufficiently brought out in the previous sections, India and Kashmir have been melting pots of peoples and cultures. Frequently described as “the largest democracy”, India has long been considered a model among developing countries for its success in the implementation of democratic institutions. Moreover, the ideal of non-violence has often been identified with the cultural tradition of India. Apart from Hindusim, other related beliefs such as Buddhism and Jainism, are also identified with the precepts of non-violence. Mahatma Gandhi had turned this unique tradition into a workable passive resistance against British colonialism.

But to survive is the ultimate aim of any organization, above all, the terrorist groups. The total accomplishment of an advocated cause may threaten the goal of survival. A terrorist group should be successful enough to maintain and perpetuate itself, but such ascendancy should not reach the point of putting the terrorist group out of business.[16] The Indian experience in parts of the country indicates that terrorism may increase when an official peace process begins.

Home Page