The Muslims and Co-existence

The Muslims are the single most numerous minority in the contemporary federal all-India polity. They also constitute the majority in J&K, albeit in the Valley which forms about a tenth of that state. The Muslim minority in India, in numerical strength, constitutes one of the biggest Muslim populations in the world. Although it is more numerous, even several times, than at least two-thirds of the other states, it is still a minority in the Indian national context, and moreover, a minority in all the federative states an account of the wide dispersal all over India.
One crucial question is how can the Muslims of India, the Kashmiri Muslims included, harmonize their sense of belonging with the over-all change in the larger Indian community. When some Muslim leaders propagated the two-nations theory and took the field for an exclusive Muslim state, most of those who remained in India, who had stayed there more on account of the dictates of geography and the compelling economic links, could not modernize sufficiently to compete with the Hindus. The question, however, is also a part of the wider political confrontation with the whole of India in respect to its policies of democracy and secularism.
Remembering that centuries of Muslim rule in India has come to an end, or worse, the Muslims of Spain, were either exterminated, forcibly Christianized or expelled after more than seven hundred years of governance, the adherents of the Islamic faith, like many other groups, are caught in the whirlpool of inevitable breaks and alterations in the Indian society. A general Muslim response to these winds of change was even greater awareness of its minority status, mistrust of “Hindu domination” and more adherence to traditional Islamic views. As a tool of defence against the British and the Hindus, the religious leaders had not developed the Muslim laws even during the decay of the Moghul Empire. The Muslims also agreed, then, however, that British rule, through not Dar-al Salam (Land of Peace), was neither Dar-al Harb (Land of War), but was Dar-al Aman (Land of Basic Liberties). Why cannot contemporary India, neither ruled by Muslims nor hostile to Islam, but a new republic based on the diffusion of democracy and secularism, be another Dar-al Aman?
Instead pf feeling like co-rulers, they continue to harbour the minority psychology and hence communal consciousness. The population ratio most unlikely to change is the foreseeable future, the “in-group” feeling based on religion is bound to persist. One can understand the sub-nationalism of a minority in a democracy. If some Hindu circles suggest a Ekta Yatra or a journey for national unity, starting at Kanya Kumari and ending in embattled Srinagar, thus covering the entire length of the country, such a move awakens new fears among the Muslims of a “Hindu” India. The communalism of the minority may be a reaction to the fear, real or imaginary, of the communalism of the majority. Conversely, the communalism of the latter may also be a response to the creation of Pakistan. Neither Hinduism, ideologically and historically free of the “inquisition” mania, aims to annihilate Islam in India, nor may all the Muslims, who have traditionally sown abilities to conform to new environments, be described as fundamentalists. But a minority as numerous as the Muslims of India and with a long and an impressive history, especially living basically in a secular democracy, may be expected to make a much more creative contribution to society at large.
The Hindus and the Muslims stood on unequal levels of growth during the British rule. The well-to-do Muslims could afford to leave for Pakistan after partition. Those landlords who stayed were hit hard by the land reforms of independent India. There still exist differences between the two communities on account of the disparities among the educated middle class members and the consequent benefits of losses that accompany such unevenness. But new elites are coming up from the rural areas inhabited both by the Hindus and Muslims. This evolution gives the Muslims a chance to integrate better with the mainstream, contribute to modernization, and play a new role in the building of secularism. Whether in the wider framework of the Indian Union or in J&K, it is possible to be a Muslim and an Indian at the same time and help create a closer unity in an obviously plural society. More democracy, the promotion of secularism and faster industrialization will diminish or destroy the obsolete relationships based on caste and religious differences. The Muslims of India have a chance to play such a constructive role in a country in whose history their contribution has been outstanding.

Terminus to Terrorism

Those Muslims, Hindus or Sikhs who welcome brute force and destructiveness fall outside this route to harmony. No matter what their motives are, the terrorists everywhere, including India and Pakistan, undermine the democratic process. Seeing a “Rambo inside Hamlet’ in the mind’s eye, violence based on some kind of vengeance may be understood, even when deplored. But their activities should be described as assaults on the democratic traditions. Openness, pluralism, peaceful evolution and compromise are the tenets of democracy. One assumes that groups learn during the democratic process to value forbearance, moderation and consensus. Although much truth may be found in this assumption, the democratic system may also cause conflict, since each compromise may be used by groups for new demands through violence.
Assuming that the world was becoming more rationally modern, some analysts hoped that the problems caused by nationalism, ethnicity and secessionism would be left behind, and that the world would commit itself to common interest and shared values. The relative absence of ethnic strife during the Cold War was treated as an evidence of the stability of the existing states. In the so-called New World Order, however, these suppositions taken for granted proved to be incorrect, and ethno-nationalism served as a motivation for a number of groups. Armed conflicts immediately occurred with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Federal Yugoslavia. The fracturing of Iraq and Somalia indicated dangers for some other states.
Great Powers, which for centuries interfered in the events of Afghanistan, treated that country as a minor player in the game of international politics, but never in human terms.
On account of the upward trend visible in the instance mentioned above, even the democratic societies remain under a threat that is growing. They need to establish how best to conduct their counter-terrorism while maintaining democratic values. These societies, in which there is a strong trend to respect the democratic rights of the citizens, believe that failure to follow these principles causes a slide towards authoritarian rule. The brutality of terrorist attacks, however, caused some reservations about this rule of law approach. Some circles assert that terrorism is a form of covert warfare, and that it should be treated as such. Consequently, at least in some cases, the rules of the game may be changed, and democratic rights may be temporarily curtailed. Some governments declared virtual ‘war’ on terrorism and engaged in repression at a human and political cost. But, on the other hand, this approach may well be counterproductive since it will generate additional support for terrorist groups, which will reappear as soon as repression comes to an end. Moreover, “declaring war” on terrorists may give them some “legitimacy”, taking them out of the classification of common criminals. Further, a number of liberal societies do not wish to throw out the baby with the bath water: they stress the need to deal with terrorism only within the confines set by respect for democratic values.
As another alternative, some circles argue that the laws may be legitimately altered to meet the new terrorist threats. Some advocate regional police forces, others suggest an international court to try terrorists. Almost all concerned underline that possible terrorist access to weapons of mass destruction must be prevented. There is, indeed, a long tradition of states combining their efforts in the battle against types of crime which affect many countries. There is also sufficient basis in international law for cooperation among states to combat terrorism. For instance, the U.N. General Assembly Resolutions of 1994 (49/185) and of 1995 (50/186) and the Security Council Resolution of 1999 (1269) reiterate great concern over gross violations of human rights perpetrated by terrorist groups. They call upon states to take all necessary and effective measures to prevent acts of terrorism wherever committed. In order to raise the effectiveness of the agreements already made, all states must strictly fulfill their obligations and must not apply different yardsticks to the various acts of international terrorism. All states must take appropriate measures at the national level, harmonize their domestic legislation with international conventions, perform their international obligations, and prevent the preparation in their territory of acts directed against other states.
Believing in the values that lie at the very base of modern India, one has no other alternative but to uphold secular democracy. One’s determination should be all the more forceful when terrorism challenges it. In spite of violence, India succeeded so far in protecting its democratic system. The country’s federal structure continues to offer a framework within which national and state parties share power. Politicians should not instigate the feelings of hatred of their followers by reminding them, for electoral or other purposes, of certain previous conflicts. Instead of retreating to the golden age of Rama, no matter how glorious it may be, and demanding from others to purge the country from the so-called “foreign impurities”, a constructive way of rediscovery is to emphasize India’s rich cultural, philosophical, religious and artistic traditions that include Islamic contributions as well.
Although there are many different situations in various corners of the world where ethnic groups are concerned, each case has to be assessed in the light of its particular circumstances. Some general observations, applicable also to India, may be made. First, the protection of persons belonging to such groups has to be seen essentially in the interest of the state and of the majority. If the state exhibits care and loyalty to its citizens, it can expect loyalty in return by those who will have an interest in the stability of the country. Secondly, solutions should be sought within the framework of the state. The self-realization as an ethnic group within the frontiers of the existing state being quite possible, secession is not necessarily an answer to the problems and aspirations of the minorities. In most cases, secession is neither feasible, nor desirable. Moreover, it is almost impossible to find a government willing to cede even a small section of its territory. Even the mere mentioning of such an option motivates a greater rigidity on the part of the central authorities.
While human rights organizations are recurrently occupies by “state-sponsored terrorism”, it is too simple to reason that all state actions against terrorist groups necessarily fall under this category. Sometimes, they are taken when all democratic avenues fail. What is more, they are often taken against unbridled terrorist outfits who by the sheer violence they practice cow the silent majority with the aim of disrupting law and order and destabilizing established institutions and national structures and who hardly represent the people in whose name they purport to fight. The golden rule still seems to be a recognition of the fact that the questions relating to minorities may be resolved in democratic framework, and also that self-determination and secession are not the one and the same thing.
Although Pakistan has repeatedly denied any involvement in aiding and abetting cross-border terrorism, it is appropriate to remind here that its record of sponsoring terrorist infiltration commenced as early as 1947. Kashmir was then invaded under the guise of tribal raiders, ostensibly to liberate their Muslim brethren. There was another armed incursion in Ran of Kutch in 1965, allowing hundreds of infiltrators to move deep into Kashmir territory. The people in the Valley reported the presence of the infiltrators to the security personnel right at the beginning of the operation. Pakistan denied links in the insurgency that wreaked havoc in Punjab. Pakistan even denied connections with cross-border terrorism in originated from Islamabad. Militancy in Kashmir may not be out, but it has lost a great deal of popular support.

Association with Drugs

In spite of improved international coordination, drug trafficking in South Asia as well as worldwide continues to grow. A global, integrated and multi-disciplinary approach to fighting drugs seems indispensable. Such a pursuit should include improving information exchange, a global coordination, treaty implementation, crop substitution, adequate funding of development programmes, controlling precursor chemicals, restraining arms transactions, widening educational programmes and discouraging money laundering.
The International Criminal Police Organization (ICPO, Interpol) and other agencies, in an effort to catch up with the latest array of smuggling methods routes, should complete their information about know and suspected traffickers, contacts, routes and all kinds of vehicles. A pragmatic as well as an integrated approach requires an understanding of interaction of factors and the avoidance of isolated strategies. Instead of various national policies moving in different directions, all anti-drug activities should be part of the agreed strategy to be coordinated by the United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP). The treaties which already exist, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (1988), are enough to put into shape a comprehensive body of international legislation. What is needed is their implementation rather than new treaties. Gradual crop substitution, instead of crop eradication, accompanies by persuasion and aid, may return peasants to their original occupation. The UNDCP’s experience in Latin America, which has shown that much can be achieved, may be repeated in parts of Asia as well. However, the farmers should be persuaded to plant other crops, encouraged to form producers’ associations to organize the purchasing of implements and the marketing of produce, and there should be a strict surveillance to eliminate new plantation of narcotic drugs.
There should be an international pressure for the control of precursor chemicals and weapons exports. Although the Chemical Action Task Force (CATF), established by the Houtson G-7 Summit (1990) with a mandate based on a technical text in the 1988 U.N. Convention, formed three working groups and identified five basic measures to implement control diversion, most national are preoccupied with the export of high technology weapons to developing countries. A balanced approach must reduce both demand and supply. To reduce a demand, not only socio-economic living conditions have to be ameliorated, there must also be renewed emphasis in education. An all-embracing warfare against drug trafficking should also include a concerted policy of identification, trace, seizure and confiscation of the financial assets of the traffickers or the eradication of money laundering. The Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF), convened by the Paris Summit (1989), published forty recommendations designed to permit rapid and tough actions. While FATF-2 was created at the Houston G-7 Summit (1990) to assess the implementation of the recommendations, it should be asserted that control of money laundering alone will not end drug trafficking. The solution lies more with the consumer nations who should reduce their demand for drugs and provide substantial aid to development programmes in producing countries. The old adage, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”, is also true here. Prevention reaching every community, school, and business, a drug-free society, although far off, is possible.