PROJECT WORK ON

ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS CONFLICTS IN

INDIA

TABLE OF CONTENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
2
INTRODUCTION
... 4
WHAT IS
CONFLICT
5-8
ETHNICITY AND ETHNIC
CONFLICT.. 8-10
RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS
CONFLICTS 10-11
ETHNIC CONFLICT VS RELIGIOUS
CONFLICT 11-12
FAMOUS ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS CONFLICTS IN
INDIA
. 12-18
CONCLUSION
.. 19
BIBLIOGRAPHY
20

INTRODUCTION
How inconceivably modest are human beings who bind themselves to only one religion! I
have very many religions and one over-riding them is only forming throughout my life
(Elias Canetti, who won the noble prize for literature in 1981). Is it not a pity that we
should confine ourselves to only one religion when loyalty to and faith in more than one
could have meant more by way of mutual peace and camaraderie?
Today we have many different cultures, societies, and religions spread around the world.
Most of these cultures and religion originated in the past, ancient world to us. The religions
and cultures were spread through different ways by each country or religion, some used
teachings and education, while others used violence and enforcement of religion. Religion in
cultures and society is made important, of its effects of teaching morals, values, spirituality,
and a guided path of life. At times these different believes can conflict each other, thus
creating and causing secularism, intolerance, anddiscrimination towards other religions and
cultures.
In India, there are more ethnic and religious groups than most other countries of the world.
Aside from the much noted 2000-odd castes, there are eight "major" religions, 15-odd
languages spoken in various dialects in 22 states and nine union territories, and a substantial
number of tribes and sects. India has largely been on the amplification of ethnic and religious
conflict. There has been no uniform pattern in the upsurge or the tension of the racial
conflicts. They have, nonetheless, shown heightening of the conflagration from time to time.

The statistics of these types of conflicts are so appalling that they raise a question everyone
ought to ask: are such levels of suffering, imposed by human beings on each other, really
necessary? Arent there better ways of managing and resolving the differences between
people, and groups of people, which bring about war and violent conflict?

What are conflicts?

Conflict refers to some form of friction, disagreement, or discord arising within a group
when the beliefs or actions of one or more members of the group are either resisted by or
unacceptable to one or more members of another group. Conflict can arise between members
of the same group, known as intra-group conflict, or it can occur between members of two
or more groups, and involve violence, interpersonal discord, and psychological tension,
known as intergroup conflict.
Conflict exists in any situation where facts, desires or fears pull or push participants against
each other or in divergent directions. Bickering, arguing or getting insistent about your point
of view indicate someone who is unskilled at handling conflicts in a collaborative way. So
does going silent about your perspective. Like dropping a ball indicates someone who lacks
catching skills or falling on ice skates indicates someone who needs more practice at staying
on his feet, talking in an irritated tone of voice, becoming insistent on your way or going
silent all indicate skill deficits.
Sure, everyone may drop a ball or fall on skates once in a great while, in a particularly tough
situation, If you are going to enjoy your work and other relationships, the less often you
become irritable, argumentative, or go silent, the better your partnerships will be for both of
you.

Definition

M. AfzalurRakhim notes there is no single universally accepted definition of conflict. He

notes that one issue of contention is whether the conflict is a situation or a type of behavior.
Citing a review of definitions of organizational conflicts in 1990 by Robert A.
Baron, Rakhim notes the following common elements in the definitions of conflict:

there are recognized opposing interests between parties in a zero-sum situation;

there must be a belief by each side that the other one is or will act against them;

this belief is likely to be justified by actions taken;

conflict is a process, having developed from their past interactions;

Building on that, the proposed definition of conflict by Rakhim is "an interactive process
manifested in incompatibility, disagreement or dissonance within or between social
entities." Rakhim also notes that a conflict may be limited to one individual, who is
conflicted within himself (the intrapersonal conflict).
To take another definition of conflict, Michael Nicholson defines it as an activity which
takes place when conscious beings (individuals or groups) wish to carry out mutually
inconsistent acts concerning their wants, needs or obligations.
Conflicts

can

occur

include quarrels between

between

individuals,

individuals, labor

groups

and

organizations;

strikes, competitive

sports,

examples
or armed

conflicts.Within this simple definition there are several important understandings that
emerge:
Disagreement - Generally, we are aware there is some level of difference in the positions of
the two (or more) parties involved in the conflict. But the true disagreement versus the
perceived disagreement may be quite different from one another. In fact, conflict tends to be
accompanied by significant levels of misunderstanding that exaggerate the perceived
disagreement considerably. If we can understand the true areas of disagreement, this will help
us solve the right problems and manage the true needs of the parties.
Parties involved - There are often disparities in our sense of who is involved in the conflict.
Sometimes, people are surprised to learn they are a party to the conflict, while other times we

are shocked to learn we are not included in the disagreement. On many occasions, people
who are seen as part of the social system (e.g., work team, family, company) are influenced to
participate in the dispute, whether they would personally define the situation in that way or
not.
Perceived threat - People respond to the perceived threat, rather than the true threat, facing
them. Thus, while perception doesn't become reality per se, people's behaviours, feelings and
ongoing responses become modified by that evolving sense of the threat they confront. If we
can work to understand the true threat (issues) and develop strategies (solutions) that manage
it (agreement), we are acting constructively to manage the conflict.
Needs, interests or concerns - There is a tendency to narrowly define "the problem" as one
of substance, task, and near-term viability. Simply stated, there are always procedural needs
and psychological needs to be addressed within the conflict, in addition to the substantive
needs that are generally presented parties. Any efforts to resolve conflicts effectively must
take these points into account.
So, is it still a simple definition of conflict? We think so, but we must respect that within its
elegant simplicity lies a complex set of issues to address. Conflicts occur when people (or
other parties) perceive that, as a consequence of a disagreement, there is a threat to their
needs, interests or concerns. Although conflict is a normal part of organization life,
providing numerous opportunities for growth through improved understanding and insight,
there is a tendency to view conflict as a negative experience caused by abnormally difficult
circumstances. Disputants tend to perceive limited options and finite resources available in
seeking solutions, rather than multiple possibilities that may exist 'outside the box' in which
we are problem-solving.

Role of perception in conflicts

One key element of above definition is the idea that each party may have a different
perception of any given situation. We can anticipate having such differences due to a number
of factors that create "perceptual filters" that influence our responses to the situation:

Culture, race, and ethnicity: Our varying cultural backgrounds influence us to hold

certain beliefs about the social structure of our world, as well as the role of conflict in
that experience. We may have learned to value substantive, procedural and
psychological needs differently as a result, thus influencing our willingness to engage
in various modes of negotiation and efforts to manage the conflict

Gender and sexuality:Men and women often perceive situations somewhat

differently, based on both their experiences in the world (which relates to power and
privilege, as do race and ethnicity) and socialization patterns that reinforce the
importance of relationships vs. task, substance vs. process, immediacy vs. long-term
outcomes. As a result, men and women will often approach conflictive situations with
differing mindsets about the desired outcomes from the situation, as well as the set of
possible solutions that may exist.

Knowledge (general and situational): Parties respond to given conflicts on the basis
of the knowledge they may have about the issue at hand. This includes situationspecific knowledge (i.e., "Do I understand what is going on here?") and general
knowledge (i.e., "Have I experienced this type of situation before?" or "Have I studied
about similar situations before?"). Such information can influence the person's
willingness to engage in efforts to manage the conflict, either reinforcing confidence
to deal with the dilemma or undermining one's willingness to flexibly consider
alternatives.

Impressions of the Messenger: If the person sharing the message - the messenger - is
perceived to be a threat (powerful, scary, unknown, etc.), this can influence our
responses to the overall situation being experienced. For example, if a big scarylooking guy is approaching me rapidly, yelling "Get out of the way!" I may respond
differently than if a diminutive, calm person would express the same message to me.
As well, if I knew either one of them previously, I might respond differently based
upon that prior sense of their credibility: I am more inclined to listen with respect to
someone I view as credible as if the message comes from someone who lacks
credibility and integrity in my mind.

Previous experiences: Some of us have had profound, significant life experiences

that continue to influence our perceptions of current situations. These experiences
may have left us fearful, lacking trust,and reluctant to take risks. On the other hand,
previous experiences may have left us confident, willing to take chances and
experience the unknown. Either way, we must acknowledge the role of previous
experiences as elements of our perceptual filter in the current dilemma.

These factors (along with others) conspire to form the perceptual filters through which we
experience conflict.
ETHNICITY AND ETHNIC CONFLICTS:
An ethnicity, or ethnic group, is a socially-defined category of people who identify with
each other based on common ancestral, social, cultural, or national experience. Membership
of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural heritage, ancestry, myth of
origins, history, homeland, language (dialect),or even ideology and manifest itself through
symbolic systems such as religion, mythology& ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical
appearance, etc.
The word "ethnic" (adjective of ethnicity) has come into widespread usage in its modern
sense only in the post-World War II period. The word "ethnic" has been derived from the
Greek word "ethnos"1 and has been used differently by different scholars. Still, most of the
scholars defined ethnicity taking a hint from the definition "groups in an exotic primitive
culture".The largest ethnic groups in modern times comprise hundreds of millions of
individuals (Han Chinese being the largest), while the smallest are limited to a few dozen
individuals (numerous indigenous peoples worldwide). Whether through division or
amalgamation, the formation of a separate ethnic identity is referred to asethnogenesis. The
six main ethnic groups of India are Negritos, Austrics, Mongoloids, Dravidians, Western
Braycephals, Nordics or Indo-Aryans. Currently India has more than two thousand ethnic
groups.

ETHNIC CONFLICTS is an armed conflict between ethnic groups. it contrasts with

civil war on one hand (where a single nation or ethnic group is fighting among itself) and
regular warfare on the other, where two or more sovereign states (which may or may not be
nation states) are in conflict.

Ethnic dissonance has its roots in the policies that had been pursued since the colonial and
post-colonial days. During the colonial period, the empire-building was based on the
imperative that required trans-border placement of ethnic groups. Even the geo-political map
was drawn in a manner that left ethnic groups on both sides of the borders. This explained
why internal ethnic turmoil crossed the border and acquired an international dimension.
Ultimately what really happened was that the ill-perceived priorities and misdirected policies
that suited the ruling elites made ethnic communities marginalised and politicised, and they
reacted with demands ranging from share of resources, power and even territory, and hence
virtual separation. Once such movements took shape, it was the state that was vulnerable.
Until the advent of Western powers, the migrants as well as invaders seemed to enrich the
cultural diversities and get integrated into the age old civilisation of the Indian subcontinent.
The unifying thread was its hierarchically structured social system along with a moral code
and, at the same time, preserving plural identities therein. In the due course of time, these
pluralities did acquire their own specificities and ethnic identities but without subverting from
the core of the system. The Western colonial era (particularly the British) was more
penetrative and intrusive in nature not only in terms of institutional structures but also of
ideas and ideologies. The impact of such intrusion was more severe in British India and in
this area, the pattern of intervention varied. Such divergence in the colonial administration
and intrusion was due to the imperial imperatives of political governance, economic
exploitation and strategic dominance.

RELIGOUS GROUPS AND RELIGIOUS CONFLICTS:

A religious group or denomination is a subgroup within a religion that operates under a
common name, tradition, and identity.At the dawn of the twenty-first century, a casual glance
at world affairs would suggest that religion is at the core of much of the strife around the
globe.

Often,

religion

is

contentious

issue.

Where

eternal

salvation

is

at

stake, compromise can be difficult at or even sinful. Religion isalso important because, as a
central part of many individuals' identity, any threat to one's beliefs is a threat to one's very
being. This is a primary motivation for ethno-religious nationalists.However, the relationship
between religion and conflict is, in fact, a complex one. Religiously-motivated peace builders
have played important roles in addressing many conflicts around the world.

Although not necessarily so, there are some aspects of religion that make it susceptible to
being a latent source of conflict. All religions have their accepted dogma, or articles of belief,
that follower must accept without question. This can lead to inflexibility and intolerance in
the face of other beliefs. After all, if it is the word of God, how can one compromise it? At the
same time, scripture and dogma are often vague and open to interpretation. Therefore,
conflict can arise over whose interpretation is the correct one, a conflict that ultimately
cannot be solved because there is no arbiter. The winner generally is the interpretation that
attracts the most followers. However, those followers must also be motivated to action.
Although, almost invariably, the majority of any faith hold moderate views, they are often
more complacent, whereas extremists are motivated to bring their interpretation of God's will
to fruition.
In virtually every heterogeneous society, religious difference serves as a source of potential
conflict. Because individuals are often ignorant of other faiths, there is some potential tension
but it does not necessarily mean conflict will result. Religion is not necessarily conflictual
but, as with ethnicity or race, religion serves, as a way to distinguish one's self and one's
group from the other. Often, the group with less powerbe it political or economic, is more
aware of the tension than the privileged. When the privileged group is a minority, however,
such as the Jews historically were in much of Europe, they are often well aware of the latent
conflict. There are steps that can be taken at this stage to head off conflict. Interfaith dialogue,
discussed further below, can increase understanding. Intermediaries may help facilitate this.

ETHNIC CONFLICT Vis a visRELIGIUOS CONFLICTS:

Dr. Mai Nguyen, Creighton university Ethnic conflict is defined as any episode of

sustained violent conflict in which national,ethnic, and religious or other communal

minorities challenge governments to seek major changesin status. I explored ethnic conflicts
that have occurred in different nation-statesacross the globe; specifically I examined the
conditions that contribute to an increasedlikelihood of ethnic conflict within a region.I argue
that the religious composition of the population affects the likelihood of ethnicconflict within
anation-state. Religion has been shown to be an issue in many worldwideconflicts; however,
I contend that religious diversity is a significant factor in determining howlikely a state is to
experience ethnic conflict.
Religion is one of the factors involved in what we call culture. Religion is one of the ethnic
"descriptors" critical factors that may be observed to identify ethnicity.

Religion is one of the factors that help define culture, and thus ethnicity. It depends on
religious group. In some cases, different people in the same ethnic group have different
beliefs, and religious groups cross ethnic lines.
However, in many cultures, people are born into a particular group, and identified with that
group by others even if do not actively practice its religion. In these cases, the religious
identity is, in effect, a type of ethnicity, and though two groups may be labelled by their
religious affiliations, they usually have many other differences that distinguish them, such as
language, clothing, food, and other cultural practices. Youll sometimes see the term ethno
religious used to refer to these groups. Thus, when we hear about Sunnis and Shia in Iraq,
what we are really hearing about is two different ethnic group that happen to distinguish
themselves first and foremost by adherence to the two different branches Of Islam, but that
have other cultural differences as well. Moreover no one ever includes the Iraqi Kurds in the
Sunnis, even though almost all the Kurds practice Sunni Islam.
Likewise, even when two ethnic groups do not have religious labels, religion may still be
one of the things that divide them: this is true, for example, of the Sinhalese (Buddhist) and
Sri Lankan Tamils (Hindu) in Sri Lanka.

SOME FAMOUS ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS CONFLICTS IN INDIA:

Four ethnic or religious conflicts have occurred in the states of " Nagaland, Assam and
Punjab; another, the more widely known Hindu-Muslim conflict, continues to persist.
Nagaland and Assam problem are primarily ethnic; the Punjab problem is based on both
religious and regional conflicts, while the Hindu-Muslim problem is predominantly religious.
ETHNIC CONFLICT IN NAGALAND:
The ethnic conflict in Nagaland, in north-eastern India, is an ongoing conflict fought between
the ethnic Nagas and Tangkhuls in the area, complicated by the support of some for rebel
groups seeking independence for the state. It is located near Myanmar, where rebels regularly
take over.
The Tangkhuls wanted to defeat or drive away the Kukis, a Kuki people living in the Ukhrul
district of Manipur, and having close links with other Nagas tribes in Nagaland. The various
groups involved in the conflict include several rebel groups, the National socialist council of
Nagaland (Isak-Muivah), which purportedly wants a Christian religious state; the National

socialist council of Nagaland (Khaplang), which wants an independent greater Nagaland

to include territory now in Myanmar, based on ethnicity; and the Naga national council
(Adino). The first insurgencies occurred in the early 1950s. They subsided gradually or were
repressed in the early 1980s. In 19993, violence erupted gain between the Nagas and the
Kukis. At least 34000 died in the conflict between 1954 and 1975.

ETHNIC CONFLICT IN ASSAM:

Not since the 1947 partition of India have so many people been killed and uprooted as a
result of ethnic or communal violence. By most available reports now, mob violence has
claimed four thousand lives, rendered about 200,000 homeless, and forced a large number to
leave the state for protection elsewhere. The immediate occasion of this bloodshed was the
election held in February, though conflict and tension have been present for the last three
years. In Assam, three culturally disparate groups have been in collision: the Assamese, the
Bengalis (both of which have segments of Hindus and Muslims) and the tribals, which are
localized communities.
Assam has had the highest rate of population growth in India since the beginning of this
century. Migration into the state accounts for a substantial part of this growth. Most migrants
came from Bengal, including what is now Bangladesh (known as East Bengal before the
1947 partition and East Pakistan from 1947-71). Bengali migrants were both Hindus and
Muslims.
Bengali Muslims on the other hand, were mainly peasants. They originated predominantly in
East Bengal, a highly populated area with low agricultural productivity and a fragmented
landholding pattern incapable of supporting large families. In contrast, Assam was less
populated, many areas were unsettled, and there was less pressure on the land.
Overall Bengali dominance began to manifest itself in various ways. They held urban
professions, their language was more developed and widely used in Assam, and their
educational and even numerical superiority became more than evident. With the halting
spread of education in the twentieth century, the Assamese middle class slowly emerged, and
with the growth of the Assamese middle class, the seeds of what has been called "little
nationalism" were sown in Assam.

After the partition of 1947 and the transfer of a very large Bengali Muslim district of Sylhet
to East Pakistan, the Assamese middle class came to power for the first time in about a
century expanded educational programs and the use of Assamese as a language in the
university which electorally buttressed, was used to consolidate the position of the Assamese
middle class against Bengali dominance in administrative services and professions.
On the other hand, the various tribes on the lower ranges were less developed than both of
these contending communities. Depending on the preponderance of one or the other in their
local context, they felt pressured, even exploited, culturally, economically and politically by
both groups.
Despite the existence of an international border, the migration from East Pakistan continued
alongside migration from West Bengal. There is considerable dispute over the actual
magnitude, but the most comprehensive estimate shows that between 1961 and 1971 the
proportion of Assamese declined for the first time and that of Bengali speakers increased.
On the other hand, the "post-1947 place of origin" of migrants from Bangladesh, largely
Muslim, makes them "aliens" and their migration, for political purposes, can be called
"illegal." The students thus found a ground for demanding their expulsion. Additionally, these
Muslim migrants provided unstinted support to the Congress Party, now represented by Mrs.
Gandhi, and the party in turn patronized them, so much so that local politicians of the
Congress Party seem to have put aliens on the electoral rolls irrespective of whether or not
they had Indian citizenship.
It is in this atmosphere that the elections were called. Mrs. Gandhi has been heavily criticized
in India for her decision to call the elections. Two considerations seem to have gone into her
decision: her need for an electoral victory due to the reverses her party had suffered in recent
state elections, and her intention to negotiate with a new set of elected leaders who would
possibly be more pliable than students on the issue of "aliens."
Large-scale violence and destruction of lives, property, bridges, and various other resources
resulted. In addition to the predictable attacks on Bengalis in the towns, there were massacres
in which first pro-election Borotribals attacked Assamese villages at Gohpur and later, in the
worst massacre witnessed in independent India, another tribe, the anti-poll Lalung, reportedly
with Assamese support, killed scores of Bengali Muslims in Nellie.

The most popular party of the left, the Communist Party Marxist (CPM), is in power in West
Bengal and therefore is associated with Bengalis. Moreover, tribals seem to be involved in
the struggle over land, attacking whichever community, Assamese or Bengali, in possession
of most of the land in their respective local situations.
Hold over government; struggle for jobs, land scarcity, and population influx have thus
intensified the historical differences between Assamese and Bengali into violent ethnic
antagonisms in Assam. All of this took place in a context of acute underdevelopment of
Assam and slow economic growth. The anti-aliens agitation is an expression, among other
things, of the Assamese fear of becoming politically swamped by an ever larger Bengali
presence in the state.
SIKH-HINDU CONFLICT IN PUNJAB:
Starting in August 1980, mounting communal tension between Hindus and Sikhs in the state
of Punjab led to violent clashes, in the last year in particular. Unlike Assam, Punjab is a state
with the highest per capita income. It is the seat of the Green Revolution in India, whose
biggest beneficiaries have been the rich Sikh peasants. In Punjab, Sikhs are a majority,
Hindus, a minority.
Although religious symbols have been used for the mobilization of Sikhs and the secessionist
slogan of Khalistan (a sovereign state of Sikhs) has been raised, the Sikh's charter of
demands, drawn from the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, has strong economic and political
components, unlike in Assam where the issue of aliens has sidelined economic demands.
The "major" religious demands by the Sikhs, including greater radio time for religious
broadcasts over federally controlled radio, and a separate legislative act for Sikh religious
shrines, were granted by New Delhi this past February. The major political demands are
greater powers, including financial, for the states vis-a-vis New Delhi. A commission has
been appointed to review these demands.
The economic demands include a greater share of river waters for irrigation and larger central
investment in the industrial sector of Punjab. The territorial and the waters issues are the only
unsettled points left. Other demands, minor at present, may later assume importance. The
agitation continues unabated.
Classes, Religion and Green Revolution in Punjab

According to the 1971 census, Sikhs constituted 60.2% of Punjab's population and Hindus
37.5%. In the villages, the Sikh majority was even greater, constituting 69.4 % of the total
rural population as opposed to 28.6% Hindus. In the urban areas, however, Hindus formed
the majority, 66.4 % against 30.8 % Sikhs. Trade and services, rather than manufacturing, are
the main sectors of urban economy in Punjab, and Hindu traders are dominant in both. The
agricultural sector is dominated by the Sikh cultivating castes, known as jats.
Green revolution, based as it was on biochemical and mechanical inputs in agriculture and
surplus production for market, has deeply linked trade with agriculture and made the latter
dependent on the market. Both for buying modern inputs and selling surplus produce, the rich
Sikh farmer has to go through the urban market, dominated by the Hindu trader. So long as
the economic pie kept increasing, this incongruity did not much matter, but when prices of
food grain and other crops stopped increasing, a clash of interests between the Sikh farmer
and the Hindu trader was created.
Irrigation problems have worsened the situation. Due to its power and diesel needs, tube well
irrigation, is "three to nine times more costly" (India Today). The prosperity of the rich
peasant has thus slackened.
Other developments have occurred. Landlessness has increased from 17.3 percent in 1961 to
32.1 percent in 1971 and later. The landless, mostly Untouchables and low caste Hindus and
Sikhs, have also become politicized by the leftist Agricultural Labor Union. Sikhs in urban
trades are neither economically nor numerically as dominant as the Hindus. And finally, the
proportion of Sikhs in the Army has fallen from 35 percent to 20 percent.
Amid these mounting uncertainties, religion both divides and unites.
For the rich Sikh peasantry, faced with Hindu traders on the one hand and politicized labor on
the other, religion performs a useful role. It unites the Sikh trader, who is also opposed to the
Hindu trader and the low caste Sikh labourer by dividing the agricultural labour into low
caste Sikhs and low caste Hindus or Untouchables. Religious slogans appeal to the religiosity
of the insecure small Sikh peasant and the unpoliticized Sikh labourer.
It is unlikely that these links would have automatically led to political action without the
mediation of political parties. This mediation did not simply reflect the emerging socioeconomic divisions; it deepened them. The two main rural parties, the ruling Congress and
the AkaliDal, a party dominated by the rich Sikh peasanty, have contributed much towards

this deepening. Scholars have noted the schizophrenic character of Punjab politics. It has a
"dual political system and a dual political area," one secular and the other religious and
confined to Sikhs.
Since the exhaustion of the green revolution in Punjab, this is the first time that Akalis have
not been in power. Although they had their first relatively stable rule from 1977 to 1980,
Congress returned to power in 1980. The Akali elite, when in power, did not take up any of
its present demands with New Delhi where its partner in electoral alliance, the Janata Party,
ruled, but soon after the rival Congress returned, agitations were launched in support of the
demands. The power implications seem reasonably clear: unless the enhanced economic
power of the rich Sikh peasantry is matched with political power, peace will be difficult to
maintain in Punjab. Either political power should compensate for the halt in its economic
prosperity, or greater economic incentives must return as expressed in the river waters issue.
Interests of the Akali political elites have thus coincided with those of the discontented
peasantry. Religion is a particularly effective vehicle of political mobilization in such a
situation, for that alone can prevent the increasing differentiation in the Sikh community from
fragmented and weak political expression.
The ruling Congress has also played an electoral game. In an effort to weaken AkaliDal, it
has, in the recent past, supported rabidly communal factions, including the present messiah
SantBhindranwale, in the SGPC elections. The Congress is clearly not interested in settling
the problem unless some political or electoral gains are likely, or unless the violence reaches
explosive proportions.
THE HINDU-MUSLIM PROBLEM:
Of all the religious and ethnic issues in contemporary India, history has cast its deepest
shadow on Hindu-Muslim relations. The most critical contemporary phase of this history was
the partition of 1947. A Muslim sovereign state of Pakistan was born amidst ghastly
communal violence but almost as many Muslims as there were in the new constituted
Pakistan, for various reasons, stayed in India. The partition did not solve the Hindu-Muslim
problems; it caused the situation of the Muslims in India to deteriorate. They were blamed for
the division of the country, their leadership had left and their power was further weakened by
the removal of all Muslim-majority areas except Kashmir. Most of all, the conflict between
India and Pakistan kept the roots of the communal tension perpetually alive and pushed
Muslims into the unfortunate situation of defending their loyalty to India. Even 36 years after

independence, the problem has not been overcome; Hindi-Muslim riots have in fact increased
in the last few years.
It would be wrong, however, to conclude that the entire Muslim community in India has been
under pressure. First, even though a minority (according to the 1971 census, 11.2 percent of
the Indian population was Muslim as opposed to 61.2 percent caste Hindus), Muslims are in a
majority in one state and constitute 13.5 to 24 percent population in five states. There are 39
districts in India in which they comprise from between 20 percent to 94 percent of the
population. Many cultural differences exist among them. Only 45 percent speak Urdu and
there are caste and sect divisions. As many as 73 percent live in villages; only 27 percent are
urban. This is particularly important, after 1947 the Hindu-Muslim riots occurred for the most
part, in urban centre. Most of these towns are modernizing, middle-size towns such as
Aligarh, Moradabad, Meerut, Ranchi, Baroda, Hyderabad, Trivandrum. In the big and/or
industrialized cities such as Bombay, Delhi, Ahmadabad, the communal fury, whenever it has
erupted, has remained confined to the older parts of the city. Villages have remained largely
undisturbed. Acute communal consciousness occurs largely in the middle class; its most
fertile bases lie in the lower middle classes of growing middle size towns of sizeable Muslim
populations.
Discrimination exists at other levels in other parts of the country. Decline in the status of
Urdu in north India, widespread use of Hindu mythologies and symbols in school textbooks
and continuing controversy over the foremost educational institution of Muslims, the Aligarh
University, have indeed done much to provoke Muslim fears. Evidence that the police and
administrative machinery in recent riots have sided with violent Hindus has further deepened
widespread feelings of discrimination.
The emerging character of electoral politics has made matters worse. Communal Hindu
parties apart, even the ruling Congress Party, professedly secular, has, since independence,
had a dualistic character. The secular strain in the Congress was represented by Nehru but the
communal strain was also present in the form of Patel, India's first Deputy Prime Minister,
and was more pronounced at the provincial level. Nehru's stature kept the communal strain in
check, but in the seventies, the party machinery has been taken over by the new generation of
leaders, whose power and mobilization is based less on secularism or socio-economic
programs and more on exploiting caste and religious divisions at the local levels.

If Nehru showed the integrative potential of democratic politics, the new leaders have shown
its divisive potential. Muslims are the largest minority. Their votes can swing political
fortunes. Parties have not hesitated to fan communal flames for electoral gains. The most
recent example of this was the openly communal campaigning by the Congress in the
violence-torn Assam elections. This new mode of real politics has been adopted by the new
provincial and local leaders of most parties. The higher recent incidence of Hindu-Muslim
riots has a good deal to do with this new phenomenon.

Conclusion
It is easier to outline these problems than suggest what should be done about them. In a
situation of mutual distrust, almost any solution will generate controversy. Still, three
solutions of conflict resolution seem plausible. First, further decentralization of power to
states would be of considerable help. This would partly address the problems in Punjab and
Assam, both of which have complained of the gap between the resources they are entitled to
and the resources they actually process. Second, a conscious attempt needs to be made to
improve the educational attainment and economic level is easily demonstrated of Muslims
whose socio-economic backwardness is easily demonstrated. The Muslim elite could do
much in this respect. Special educational privileges are constitutionally sanctioned but they
ought to be worked on. Modern liberal, as opposed to religious, education would be of great
help. The government, for its part, could allay the apprehensions of the Muslim community
by better representing Muslims in the police and paramilitary forces. Third, the secular
leaders, to the extent that they exist, must make a sustained effort to reintroduce and deepen
secular, socioeconomic concern in democratic politics. Partisan communal leaders and
communal electoral mobilization, both within and outside the communal parties, but

particularly within the ruling party, should be exposed. Aware leadership - political, social
and intellectual - has to work for this political reconstruction. Definitive resolution of
problems may be inordinately difficult but substantial alleviation is not. Especially for
religious conflicts, we have to promote a heightened awareness of the positive peace
building and reconciliatory role religion has played in many conflict situations. More
generally, fighting ignorance can go a long way. Interfaith dialogue would be beneficial at all
levels of religious hierarchies and across all segments of religious communities. Where
silence and misunderstanding are all too common, learning about other religions would be a
powerful step forward. Being educated about other religions does not mean conversion but
may facilitate understanding and respect for other faiths. Communicating in a spirit of
humility and engaging in self-criticism would also be helpful.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS:
Kanbur, R., Rajaram, P.K., Varshney A. (2011) Ethnic Diversity and Ethnic Strife: An
Interdisciplinary Perspective, World Development, 39 (2): 147-58.
Varshney, A. (2002) Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in
India, London: Yale University Press

WEBSITES:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_(process)
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/resolution-not-conflict/201211/what-makes

conflict-how-are-conflicts-resolved
http://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/aboutwhatisit.htm
http://www.ppu.org.uk/learn/conflict/st_conflict5.html
http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/religion-and-conflict
https://www.culturalsurvival.org/ourpublications/csq/article/ethnic-and-religiousconflicts-india