Introduction :-
- Communalism in a broad sense implies blind allegiance to one’s own communal group – religious, linguistic or ethnic – rather than to the larger society or to the nation as a whole. In its extreme form, communalism manifests itself in hatred towards groups perceived as hostile, ultimately leading to violent attacks on other communities.
- General amity and the peaceful coexistence of various faiths in India have been the envy of the civilised world. Nonetheless given the diversity of our society and our complex historical baggage, we are often beset with communal tensions which occasionally erupt into violence. At times, either bigoted and fundamentalist leadership, or unscrupulous political operators with an eye on short term electoral advantage, have deliberately and maliciously engineered communal passions, hatred and even violence to achieve sectarian polarisation. Most of the communal flare-ups have been between Hindus and Muslims, though conflicts involving other communities have also occasionally occurred. Similarly, there have been other ethnic clashes from time to time
Shortcoming in tackling Communalism:-
- Systemic Problems:-
• Conflict resolution mechanisms are ineffective;
• Intelligence gathered is not accurate, timely and actionable.
• Bad personnel policies – poor choice of officials and short tenures – lead to inadequate grasp of local conditions.
- Administrative Shortcomings:-
• The administration and the police fail to anticipate and read indicators which precipitated violence;
• Even after the appearance of first signals, the administration and police are slow to react;
• Field functionaries tend to seek and wait for instructions from superiors and tend to interfere in local matters undermining local initiative and authority;
• The administration and police at times act in a partisan manner .
• At times there is failure of leadership, even total abdication on the part of those entrusted with the maintenance of public order.
- Post-riot Management Deficiencies :-
• Rehabilitation is often neglected, breeding resentment and residual anger.
• Officials are not held to account for their failures, thus perpetuating slackness and incompetence.
Solution:-
- Community Policing:-
- Community Policing is an area specific proactive process of working with the community for prevention and detection of crime, maintenance of public order and resolving local conflicts and with the objective of providing a better quality of life and sense of security.
- The basic principle underlying community policing is that ‘a policeman is a citizen with uniform and a citizen is a policeman without uniform’. The term ‘community policing’ has become a buzzword, but it is nothing new. It is basically getting citizens involved in creating an environment which enhances community safety and security.
- Community Programs in various state in India has seen the success .For eg –
- Maithri – Andhra Pradesh
- Friends of Police – Tamil Nadu
- Mohalla Committees – Maharastra
- Confidence building measures between communities and building of mutual trust is essential to curb communalism.
- District Peace Committees/Integration Councils should be made effective instruments of addressing issues likely to cause communal disharmony.
- The existing provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code need to be strengthened.
- Enhanced punishments for communal offences
- Setting up of special courts for expeditious trial of cases related to communal violence.
- Giving powers of remand to Executive Magistrates in cases of communal offences.
- Prescription of norms of relief and rehabilitation.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.