WISCOMP Workshop: Communalism in Uttar Pradesh

Women in Security, Conflict Management & Peace (WISCOMP), an initiative of the Foundation for Universal Responsibility of H.H. the Dalai Lama, New Delhi, in association with the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict, organized a peacebuilding workshop titled Enriching Democratic Practice in South Asia: Possibilities from the Field of Peacebuilding in New Delhi, where I expressed my views on Communalism in Uttar Pradesh. My views, as mentioned in the Report of the Workshop, are reproduced below. To access the full Report, please visit

[DOC]

Download (1960.0k) - Peace Portal

Mr. S. M. Faizan Ahmed, a Research Coordinator at the Center for Conflict Resolution and Human Security, New Delhi, shared the highlights of a study on communal violence in Uttar Pradesh. At the outset, it was noted that while communalism is harmless if it focuses on building organizations for the welfare and service of the community, more often than not, it takes on a negative character, which is competitive, retaliatory, and ultimately violent in nature. Following interviews with more than 200 individuals across diverse sectors – politics, media, non-profit, civil rights and public policy – the study on communal violence revealed the following facts: The political elite are primarily responsible for instances of communal violence. Most incidents of communal violence take place in the backdrop of elections and political gain, where politicians misuse the religious sentiments of the people, and at times even succeed in trapping religious leaders. The administration is also implicated because it is well-equipped to maintain law and order during a situation of communal tension. However, its officers choose not to take the necessary action. The reasons for this vary. While most bureaucrats are under pressure from politicians, there are also many officers who are lethargic and even a party to the violence. Ahmed shared that pressures on administrators to spur or quell violence come in the form of threats of demotions, promotions, transfers and suspensions. The media was identified as the third important sector, which could play a decisive role in a situation of communal violence. In the case of Uttar Pradesh, it has a poor track record because it has depicted the problem and members of different communities in a way that has often inflamed an already tense situation. Acknowledging this, some sections of the media have also attributed the problem to poor training and a lack of sensitivity, responsibility and professionalism among reporters. In fact, Ahmed noted that neither the media nor the market have missed an opportunity to encourage religiosity in the public sphere, thereby profiting from peoples’ religious sentiments. It was also observed that while civil rights groups and NGOs have played an important role in raising awareness about communalism, they have an abysmally low presence in the rural and remote areas. Their absence plays a significant part in the exacerbation of communal tension. In addition, Ahmed noted that growing intolerance and an unwillingness to accept other ways of life is at the source of the communal problem that Indian society faces today. While approaches such as peace education and prejudice reduction are important in the long-run, he underscored the critical role that law enforcement agencies could play by acting promptly and responsibly. Further, if the administration is able to actively communicate with people from the two communities, there is little possibility of communal anger exploding into violence. This is possible only when the officers in authority are able to convince the people of their own neutrality and impartiality. Ahmed concluded with a plea that communal violence requires far greater research and should be seen from the perspective of the security of the individual and of people.