Four decades after the end of the colonial period, South Asia is in the midst of a crisis that threatens not only some of the existing state structures but the very fabric of society. There are three interrelated dimensions of the present crisis.

  1. The growing polarization of society along ethnic, linguistic or religious lines. Associated with this, the undermining of social values through which diverse communicates had lived together in a pluralistic society.
  2. The perceived failure of highly centralized structure of political power to give effective political representation of all strata of society, and the growing militarisation associated with the use of coercive state power to quell resurgent sub nationalism.
  3. The collapse of the approach to development adopted in the postcolonial period in South Asia. The growth process associated with this approach has generated endemic poverty, growing interpersonal and interregional disparities, erosion of the ecological environment, and finally growing dependence on foreign aid in the case ‘of a number of countries in South Asia

The potential to reconstruct both the consciousness and political/economic institutions through which stable state structures and viable Regional Cooperation could be achieved for the benefit of all the peoples of South Asia is still there.

UNITY IN DIVERSITY

The region of South Asia has been a crucible in which diverse civilizations and ideologies have cross fertilized. Over the centuries, the continuous interaction between diverse people and cultures has inculcated two apparently contradictory sets of personality traits: First there is a deep rooted posture of tolerance, a highly evolved humanism, and an ethos in which any particular ling is tic, religious or ethnic groups can tolerate and appreciate, the creative elements of another. These  are manifested in the folk literature and art through which South Asia communities apprehend their fundamental traditions and experience the well springs of their creative identity. Consider for example the 19th century Sufi poet Mian Muhammad

“Demolish the Temple, demolish the Mosque, and demolish all that can be demolished, but do not injure the heart of people, for that is where God reside.” Mian Muhammad

At a time when the emergence of the market and material possessions were beginning to influence social values there was a reaffirmation that one’s fulfill ment and knowledge lay in the transcendence of the ego through a human relationship with the other.

“The distinction between the body, the heart and property was apprehended only when I set to light my hut”.

Bulleh Shah

Here the 18th Sufi Poet Bulleh: Shah and the tradition he represented proposes overcoming the tyranny of property as a means to true knowledge. In the same vein we have Shah Hussain in the 17th century, suggesting that fulfillment and joy lies in transcending the ego, and experiencing the other human being within one’s self

You are the woof and you the warp You are in every pore Says Shah Hussain Fakir I am nothing, Allis you Shah Hussain

The ability to absorb diverse religious, linguistic and ethnic forms within the social fabric, and the experience of unity in diversity is expressed in the following lines:

In every form I see my beloved, my heart is lost in my beloved. Baba Farid (13th century)

A remarkably similar mood is expressed in Guru Nanak the great 17th Century saint of the Sikh Community.

A remarkably similar mood is expressed in Guru Nanak the great 17th Century saint and founder of the Sikh religion,

In whichever garb you find your beloved, That garb you should don. Guru Nanak

The awareness that there are shared aspirations and common denominators inspite of having very different religious or ethnic norms was reinforced in more recent times during the Nationalist movement against the British Raj The struggle for independence in different parts of South Asia shared two common convictions.

  1. That the British colonial rule in some sense constrained the full cultural and religious development Of the peoples of the region and 2. The national independence within separate states would allow the people of all communities to achieve greater material welfare than ‘was possible under colonial rule.

‘A careful consideration of the natural resources base in the South Asian region suggests that if these resources are, collectively exploited at a South Asian Regional level each of the independent states within the region would benefit from such an enterprise.

Yet in spite of the powerful material basis for cooperation, deep rooted cultural propensity for tolerance and an overarching humanism within which pluralist society could flower, South Asian history has been marked occasionally by violent explosions of communal conflict. During these moments, the violence has gripped large sections of society, and an enlightened human perspective has narrowed to an obscurantist religious/ethnic identity, where mere difference of religion or ethnicity has induced individuals to kill or get killed, Such outbursts of ‘communal violence are associated with a suspension of the link with the civilizational identity of individuals and their coming under the sway often more proximate impulses Of fear, insecurity and aggression. Such impulses are unleashed when a linguistic, religious or ethnic ‘group perceives a real or imagined threat to its existence as a community. There is, however, a civization consciousness amongst diverse communities that can be the basis of a humane and tolerant society. This is the potential to achieve unity indiverstiy. A framework within which diverse communities can develop in creative interaction within stable states, and different states can come together in Regional Cooperation.

PERENNIAL CONFLICTS

The attempts at forming administrative political units beyond the village, have frequently been informed by an impulse to impose an artificial uniformity and unrealistic centralisation of political power. Political centralization and & spurious cultural homogeneity has been an imperative of capital accumulation by ruling elite.

The process of centralization and concentration of economic and, political power has accentuated the economic disparities between regions and social groups. Thus poverty has become endemic: to the system. A map of poverty when superimposed on a map of ethnic groups and regions in South Asia, would show that certain regions and religious/ethnic groups have a greater proportion of their population below the poverty than other regions and eth

religious groups. Thus it is not only the fact of continued poverty its disposition across various political dstrata that has fuelled ethnic religious and regional conflict.

At the same time, to contain the incipient resistance against these conflicts, the ruling elites have politically manipulated one community against another, and used coercive force, Such Administrated/political initiatives have over a period of time induced an insecurity amongst the people with cultures or religious/ethnic identities different from those of the ruling elite. Invariably the protective response of the oppressed community has been to assume an attitude of the oppressor aggressive intolerance.

THE CONTEMPORARY CRISIS

In the post-colonial period parliamentary models of the Westminster variety were inherited by fragile elites with access over coercive colonial state apparatuses, The process of economic growth instituted by these elites occurred essentially within the framework Of private enterprise having a profound impact on the relationship between the State and Civil Society.

The Westminster model of parliamentary democracy inherited by the newly independent states of South Asia from the colonial period essentially centralized political power in the hands of the elite. This was problematic in a society marked by diverse linguistic, ethnic and religious  groups and endemic poverty.

A centralized political system under these circumstances effectively denied large sections of society participation in the decisions that affected their economic cultural and social existence.

After three decades of unequal development and in the absence of a politically viable national alternative, the deprived sections of these societies responded by seeking the proximate sources of mobilizing militancy and political: pressure; i.e. the assertion of linguistic ethnic or regional identities. The growing polarisation of society along subnational lines so charged the political atmosphere that in a number of cases the relatively affluent sections of society also began to assert their religious or ethnic identity against the onrush of the deprived sections. Faced with this crisis, the elites of these countries, failed to act within the perspective of strengthening fragile democratic structures by decent realising political and economic power, and failed to create an environment of freedom to practice religion and culture amongst diverse communities, Instead these elites responded by strengthening and using the coercive power of the state to preserve regime interests, against resurgent subnational. Ata political level, the ideologics of the ruling elites became increasingly narrowed (Sinhalese nationalism in the Sri Lankan elite, Hindu nationalism in the Indian elite and an obscurantist version of Islam in Pakistan’s ruling elite).

As state structures in a number ‘of South Asian countries re threatened by internal upheavals, in a number of cases their elites are forming alliances with superpowers outside the region, as a means Of acquiring political and economic support for regime survival. ‘As a consequence they are supplied with economic said, the technology and tactics of crowd control and counterinsurgency from powerful countries outside the region. As superpowers get drawn into the crisis, it accentuates the momentum of violence and fragmentation.

The ruling regimes, unable to find a fundamental solution to the problem of poverty and inequality, tunable to provide a political framework and an intellectual vision within which the diversity of culture language and religion can enrich, rather than undermine society,  tend to show a kneejerk reaction to the crisis. The kneejerk reaction consists of seeking an external bogey and on the basis of this fear, seek to mobilize and unite their ‘own people. This is a major inhibiting factor to the search for Regional Cooperation in South Asia. Rajiv’s military manoeuvres around Pakistani frontiers fit the norm.

Sustainable Regional Cooperation must be based on a restructuring of the ideological political and economic system in each of the countries of South Asia. At the level of ideology. the deep rooted Civilizational consciousness of tolerance, humanism and freedom of belief must be tapped. At the level of politics, what is needed is decentralisation of power, and the ‘emergence of local institutions through which the individual whatever his social status can participate in the decisions that affect his immediate economic, cultural and ecological environment. At the level of economics, a development strategy which combines self-reliance, equity, and a balance between man, nature and growth is required, It is when a more rational and humane social system emerges in South Asian States, can the promise and potential of Regional Cooperation be fulfilled, So Jong as the internal crisis of the State persists in these countries, Regional Cooperation for the governments can only be a pious declaration and for the people of South Asia a distant dream.

 Courtesy: The Muslim

Article extracted from this publication >> December 12, 1986