Allahabad High Court verdict — a path to reconciliation?

In some ways the verdict of the Allahabad High Court in the Ram Jamnabhoomi–Babri Masjid case came as a bit of an anticlimax. Most people expected the verdict to go decisively in favour of either the plaintiff or the defendant. The central government had geared up to meet any challenge to the law and order situation with its security apparatus fully activated and on high alert. Even bulk SMSes were banned. Prominent leaders cutting across the entire political spectrum appealed for calm. It was almost as if the nation expected a backlash from one community or the other. The world watched with bated breath, given the sensitivity of the highly contentious issue.

But, India stood still. Much blood had already been shed. The nation had grown weary of the issue that had defied a solution for six decades. Political parties had failed to rise above sectarian ideologies or vote-bank considerations. The parties to the dispute had failed to arrive at an amicable, out-of-court settlement. The onus was now on the legal process of the land. The high court was deemed the final arbiter of justice in our secular, democratic republic. And, what was truly gratifying was that when the verdict was finally pronounced, it did not lead to communal tension, leave alone violence. Indian democracy seemed to have come a long way.

The verdict of the Allahabad High Court itself, has met with mixed reactions from all quarters. Constitutional expert, Rakesh Dhawan dismissed it as “panchayati-style justice”. Former attorney general of India, Soli Sorabjee, however, welcomed the verdict and applauded the judges for their courage in going beyond what was expected of them. Ravi Shankar Prasad, a spokesperson of the BJP, who was also the counsel for one of the Hindu groups in the trial, saw the verdict as a tacit endorsement of their position.

 

The chief of the RSS sounded a sober note and opined it was not a victory or loss for anybody and grandiosely called for national integration. L K Advani, the man behind the movement, went public to say that the way had been cleared for the construction of a grand Ram temple at Ayodhya. The Sunni Waqf Board, meanwhile, announced its decision to appeal to the Supreme Court as it found the verdict and the recommendations of the honourable justices of the bench of the Allahabad High Court unacceptable. It is opposed to “bartering” of the disputed land in a three-way split. They have claimed the entire disputed structure as a mosque.

So, the saga continues. The matter will now be taken up by the Supreme Court. Status quo will be maintained for three months. The apex court can either uphold the judgement of the Allahabad High Court or come up with an entirely new judgement. The litigants have time to study the high court verdict and explore the prospect of a possible out-of-court settlement. This then, is not the final chapter of this painful story. But, what is heartening is that the country seems to have moved on. As of now, the average age of India is 26. The youth, naturally, consider everyday bread-and-butter issues more important than where a temple or mosque should be built. That is what makes the possibility of reconciliation a lingering hope. I, for one, hope so any way... 

Will Indo-Pak relations ever be good? (Part 9)

People-to-people contact is all very well. Cultural exchanges and sporting encounters are fine. But, expecting them to improve ties in a major way would be downright naive. All these measures have been tried a number of times. They have at best created fleeting bonhomie between the peoples of both countries given our shared history and culture. However, they have invariably been held hostage to political developments on the ground.

The former national security adviser, J.N. Dixit, had an interesting story to tell once on a TV channel. He narrated an incident that occurred when he was India's ambassador to Pakistan. Dixit said he was once invited to dinner by a Pakistani diplomat who picked him up and drove him to his house. Upon arrival, they were greeted by the aging diplomat's granddaughter who was just about three or fours old at the time. When Dixit's Pakistani host told his grandchild he had brought along with him an Indian guest, the child ran into the house shouting, “Hindustani kutta, Hindustani kutta”.

Children imitate their elders. They are privy to many a conversation by adults at home. Their impressionable minds are moulded by the prejudices of family members whom they live and interact with. Hence, what the little girl said cannot be taken at its face value and dismissed as the innocent banter of a child. It reflected just how Pakistanis thought and spoke of Indians. When this was the case in a diplomat's home that supposedly had educated people living in it, what can we expect from large multitudes of ill-informed masses who are easily swayed by anti-India religious and political propaganda?

The idea is not to demonise the people of Pakistan. To be fair, Pakistani diplomats may have a similar tale or two to tell after a stint in India. The point I am trying to make is that mutual prejudice and suspicion run deep in the psyche of the two ill-fated peoples. Consider the recent spot fixing controversy three Pakistani cricketers find themselves in. The Pakistani High Commissioner to the UK, no less, openly claimed it was a frame-up and hinted at an Indian hand, when all the available evidence seemed to indicate otherwise. It is another matter that the man mellowed soon afterwards and began to sound more like a diplomat that is he supposed to be, as evidence mounted, and more skeletons tumbled out of the closets of Pakistani cricketers.

The problem is quite simply this: the core of the ideology that gave birth to Pakistan represents everything that is the complete antithesis of what India is and stands for. A theocratic nation state carved out for the Muslim community in the subcontinent is the very opposite of a secular and democratic India that has more Muslims in it than the entire population of Pakistan put together. Add to that the evil agenda of anti-India terror groups that operate from Pakistani soil whose avowed purpose is to fight the idol-worshipping kafirs of India to defeat and subjugate them.

What we have is an extremely complex situation from which there is no easy way out. In view of everything I have stated in this nine-part article, I am sorry to say, at least I for one am not very optimistic about the future of Indo-Pak relations. But then, this is one thing about which I would be glad to be proved wrong. Whether that happens or not, only time will tell.

* Concluded...