(Estimated Pub Date) the Challenge of Ethnic Conflict to National and International Order in the 1990S: Geographic Perspectives- October 1995

Approved for Releas
~ Some Muslim leaders, insisting that Muslims belong
to a separate nation, carved Pakistan from a “part of
India.”
- The Indian Muslim population is la.rge enough to
make a significant difference.
If the BJP were to gain national power, it is difficult to
predict whether stability would be restored to the
nation. But we can predict that, if the right wing of the
Hindu nationalists should gain power, there would
most likely be mass, even widespread, conflicts in
areas where significant Muslim populations now live.
A plausible scenario would be massive outmigrations
similar to those that occurred during partition. A worst
case scenario would be another war between India and
Pakistan—this time with nuclear weapons.
In spite of several conditions that can lead to conflict,
there are strong reasons for believing that India will
not erupt into major ethnic wars, with the possible
exception of Kashmir. Other than Kashmir, there is
strong evidence that India is not as ethnically volatile
as many other regions in the world. First, note that the
population of India exceeds all of Africa, all of Latin
America, or all of Europe, none of which is in a single
nation-state or single country. All these other regions
are splintered into many states, and the people within
each show little evidence of uniting politically. In con-
trast, even with all the diversity among the people of
India, the nation has remained together for almost half
a century. Furthermore, this has been accomplished
within a mostly democratic environment again, some-
thing that has not been achieved in Third World coun-
tries in Africa or in Latin America. It also contrasts
with the situation in Eastem Europe and the former
Soviet Union, where ethnic feelings were suppressed
by dictatorial governments. That success provides a
basis for predicting that ethnic conflicts will not be
more severe in India than elsewhere.
A second reason for predicting fewer ethnic conflicts
within India than in many other major world regions is
based on the Indic culture. Maybe India’s success is
just a happenstance of outstanding secular leadership
at the time of, and immediately after, independence
and, therefore, will dissipate with time. Yet, secular
nationalism does seem to have a fimi foundation,
namely the Indic culture, which has nurtured tolerance
148
e: 2018/06/01 C00123268
and has accommodated differences through the ages.
The eclectic and nonideological nature of Hinduism
and the other indigenous religions of South Asia cer-
tainly provides a deeply ingrained cultural propensity
for the acceptance of differences. It is true that
throughout most of history the people of the subconti-
nent did not live in a single political unit and that the
various regional states did engage in fighting, but
most conflicts did not result from the kind of major
ideological crusade that separates people for centuries
and produces long-lasting hatreds.
Cenainly it is in the best interest of the United States,
as the leader of the democratic world, to support the
forces of pluralism in South Asia.
General Discussion
DR. GLADNEY: I am always, and I think everybody
is, amazed that India is still together. You mentioned
the term success in that regard. I wonder if you could
talk a little bit more about why this is a success, par-
ticularly considering the poverty of India, the civil
strife, the Hindu-Muslim clashes, and the separatists
like the Kashmiris. Why is it that keeping the country
together is successful‘?
DR. STODDARD: Maybe the term “success” is a lit-
tle bit strong, especially if we define a successful state
as one that eliminates poverty, as well as reducing
civil strife. And, I do not deny that the Hindu-Muslim
clashes are just as worrisome in India as religious con
flicts in Northern Ireland, in the Caucasus, or in Leba-
non. Furthermore, half a century may be too short a
time to declare full success. Moreover, the durability
of India as a state may partly reflect the lack of a
highly politicized populace. After all, the 67 percent
of the population that resides in rural areas live a life
that is pretty much circumscribed by their local envi-
ronment. Although there is a rising politicization, as
expressed by the percentage of people who have voted
in the recent elections, the stability of a peasant agrar-
ian economy or agrarian society probably goes a long
way toward explaining the relative success.
Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268