The Unholy War

By Michael S. Serrill

In a plume of dust, the central dome of an ancient Muslim mosque in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh collapsed under the blows of 4,000 Hindu fanatics last week -- and shook the subcontinent to its foundations. Like the three domes that crowned the 464-year-old Babri mosque, the three pillars of the modern Indian state -- democracy, secularism and the rule of law -- are now at risk from the fury of religious nationalism.

After a week of violence, the thousands of kar sevaks, or Hindu holy workers, who destroyed the Muslim shrine in the belief that it covered the birthplace of the Hindu god Rama, have been driven off. Army and police units have restored a semblance of order after Muslim-Hindu rioting left more than 1,100 dead and 4,000 injured. The government has banned three Hindu and two Muslim organizations and arrested the leaders of the major opposition party.

Yet Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao will have to do much more to heal the deep tear left in India's political fabric. What was challenged at the mosque was not merely a Muslim presence on a piece of ground held sacred by two religions, but the notion that India, a Third World superpower, can remain what its 20th century founders intended it to be: a tolerant, secular state of many ethnic identities, religions and languages.

The great majority of India's 700 million Hindus were repelled by the violence of the fanatics. But the Ayodhya riot ignited forces that lie just under the surface of the vast multicultural state. Indian democracy has survived by balancing the interests of many groups, particularly those of the Hindus and the Muslims, now 110 million strong, who stayed behind when India was partitioned in 1947. But militancy on one side breeds it on the other. In the wake of the Babri mosque's destruction, Syed Ahmed Bukhari, a Muslim religious leader, vowed to lead a mass march of his own to the site to rebuild the shrine. Said he: "The country is heading toward civil war."

Hindu nationalists have been fighting over the 16th century mosque since 1855. In recent years, the cause was taken up by the Bharatiya Janata Party, which has used anti-Muslim feelings to advance its political fortunes. By attacking the supposed privileges of the Muslim community and taking up the struggle over the mosque, the party won 88 seats in the lower house of Parliament in 1989.

In October 1990, party leader L.K. Advani escalated his campaign: he led a 6,200-mile procession across India in support of the movement to build the Rama temple. Lethal riots followed, but the extremist spasm had its desired effect. In 1991 the Bharatiya Janata Party won four state governments and 119 seats in the lower house, which made it the official opposition to Rao's ruling Congress Party.

The Bharatiya Janata Party bears most of the blame for last week's calamity. But Rao also shares some responsibility. He believed repeated assurances from Advani that the mosque would not be damaged. The Prime Minister, a wily parliamentary veteran whose preferred tactics are delay, discussion and compromise, underestimated the ruthlessness of the militants. By the time a screaming mob attacked the mosque with pickaxes, rods and bare hands, no party or government authority seemed able or willing to stop it.

Once the damage was done, Rao tried to respond. He vowed that he would rebuild the mosque, dismissed the state government and imposed direct rule on Uttar Pradesh. Advani was arrested and charged with fomenting communal violence. He protested that he had tried to prevent the kar sevaks from tearing apart the mosque, and issued a statement accepting "moral responsibility." But others argued that the assault on the shrine might never have happened had Rao's central government taken earlier and more decisive action.

India has absorbed great shocks before, and some analysts insist that it will rebound from this spasm. Others see a nation-threatening danger that has to be addressed by firm government action. Rao took a first step by calling for creation of a mass movement to defend secularism. His critics argue that he must go further by barring all parties from using religious issues to gain votes -- a stricture that is probably unenforceable.

The most immediate problem is to defuse the Ayodhya issue. Any attempt to dismantle the makeshift shrine at the site would be a dangerous provocation. One proposal is that the newly erected monument to Rama should remain while the government pays to build a Hindu temple and a Muslim mosque on either side of it.

The Bharatiya Janata Party, however, has not changed its ways. The party is planning to whip up Hindu fervor by holding nationwide rallies and protests against the arrest of its leaders. The party has also warned that Rao's vow to reconstruct the mosque would provoke "a confrontation of unimaginable proportions." Muslim leaders are sure to call counterdemonstrations that could unleash more bloodshed.

/ The nation will probably be convulsed for some time to come. If that span is to be shortened, Rao must provide forceful leadership -- and express it in a way that keeps the Hindu majority away from the banners of hatred and sectarianism. What India needs is a quick revival of the ideals of its founding Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, and its spiritual leader, Mahatma Gandhi. After last week's carnage, that seems a difficult task indeed.

With reporting by Jefferson Penberthy and Anita Pratap/Ayodhya