|You are in: Talking Point: South Asian Debates|
Thursday, 21 March, 2002, 23:05 GMT
The Ayodhya dispute: What should the government do?
Once again a disputed holy site in the town of Ayodhya has become the central issue in Indian politics.
The destruction of a mosque there in 1992 by Hindu hardliners wanting to build a temple prompted nationwide communal rioting that left 2,000 people dead.
The hardliners still want to be allowed to go ahead with their temple plan - although they have so far avoided a direct confrontation with the authorities over the issue.
The latest build-up in tensions comes as the state of Gujarat is still recovering from Hindu-Muslim violence in which more than 700 people died.
Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee says he will uphold the court order barring Hindu hardliners from holding prayers at the site.
Is this the right course of action? What should the government do to end the Ayodhya dispute?
This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
Build the temple and be done with it - bring closure to this case. It is sad that a country with 82% Hindus has to fight to build a Hindu temple.
Rob Elwell, Wisconsin, USA
Even though I couldn't care less if they decide
to build a temple or a mosque, I feel that this might
be a great opportunity for Indian Muslims who are no
less patriotic than Indian Hindus and who have long complained
that they had always been viewed with suspicion and their loyalties challenged, to
show their magnanimity and win the good will of the Hindus
who, in turn should offer to build an even better Mosque than
the desolate one that stood in that place.
Is this what the world's largest democracy is all about? Perhaps, the political establishment needs to look deeper and decide once and for all whether it wants to be a secular state or not.
The government has no choice but to uphold the
rule of law. However it is time for the Indian
government to conclusively determine if
indeed a temple existed at the site and at other
disputed sites. If the answer is yes, then the
very least the government should do is acknowledge
that these temples were destroyed. Indians of
all faiths must learn to face upto the past.
Otherwise there will be no genuine reconciliation.
The government should realize that a mandir or masjid is not going to help the 600 million starving Indians. Its sick, how these politicians bank on issues that do nothing for the country. As for now, the government has to make sure that no more senseless violence erupts from people that are on the payroll of the BJP/VHP/RSS. Innocent civilians have been butchered to death, and they are running scot-free around the country.
Indians all over the world, this is the time to show our support to our democratic principles. For the future, the place should be a monument to symbolize peace and tolerance. India is diverse, democratic, and secular, and it will stay this way; there are enough of us in this world that will challenge the right wing agendas of the BJP, RSS, and the VHP.
Faizal Tamton, U.S.A (non resident Indian - Muslim)
India is a place that assimilates cultures, and there are so many different ideologies and lines of thoughts that many people differentiate between Hinduism as a religion that most people follow and Hinduism as a culture that identifies India as a nation. The judges who passed the judgements against the fanatic Hindus recently, or the Army that brought the situation under control in Gujarat, consist mostly of Hindus.
The solution that I propose is essentially a compromise for both sides, unique to the Indian setting. I do not see a better formula to end the dispute. Allow Hindus to build their majestic temple in the disputed site and at the same time also build a mosque at an adjacent site. After all, Ayodhya is to Hindus what Mecca is to Muslims. Both places of worship should be built with active help from people from both communities. All disputes of similar nature, there are many of them, should be deemed frozen. I believe as a nation India will learn from its mistakes, and people will ultimately come out stronger.
I just want to say that Hindus will always be against us, and whenever they have an opportunity, they will try to eat us up, so that is the reason behind this tragedy, this was the reason we wanted independence, because our quaid knew about Hindus and their narrow mindedness.
I guess the government should abide by the court decision and at the same time have both parties come to an amicable solution.
I have seen with my own eyes how Muslim and Arab invaders destroyed Hindu, Jain and Buddhist temples throughout India. If Muslims allow Hindus to rebuild a temple in Ayodhya, it will serve as a great example of compassion and giving back. But an emotional issue like this has to be decided by Muslims. I personally feel Hindus will only be happy to help rebuild the destroyed mosque by this gesture.
Allow each major religion in India to build a shrine at the site, which should be named "Inter-faith Peace Park".
To be honest, there will always be such disputes. Some states of India should hand over to the Muslims such as Kashmir etc, so that they can live lives of their own.
Build both a new mosque and the temple on the site adjacent to the disputed land. They should leave the current site permanently off limits to both groups, because any action there would result in further bloodletting. Yet another reason why I am proud to be an atheist.
07 Mar 02 | Country profiles
14 Mar 02 | South Asia
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Top South Asian Debates stories now:
Links to more South Asian Debates stories are at the foot of the page.
|E-mail this story to a friend|
Links to more South Asian Debates stories
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> | To BBC World Service>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy