Communally tinted glasses not correct for Orissa

DN Singh

It was more of politics than passion that, perhaps, unleashed the array of violence in the tribal-thick Kandhmal district of Orissa. And to know that, one neither needs any extra intelligence nor a telescope. But all those groups of `babus` who sit and reign, refuse to admit that for their own reasons. And our wily politicians are too smart to unfold their sleeves.

Either, it was strategic pressure or political need, but somehow Naveen Patnaik agreed to admit the reality and asked his minister to quit. The minister, a local MLA, was allegedly one of the few, who ignited the communal fire. But there are many elements yet to consider.

Since the last ten-twelve days many incidents have taken place, right from arsons to loss of lives. A vast and verdant landscape has suddenly turned to a festering sore. Although, by now, the fire has died down but the smoulders are still visible. Meanwhile, some elements are working overtime to keep the spat alive by stoking public emotion.

Here in Kandhmal any problem cannot be seen in isolation; they are interlinked. Tribals, Scheduled Castes and the converted Christians have been at loggerheads since the last few years. But the bone of contention was never communal. Rather it was the issue of land exploitation of the tribals by the Scheduled Caste people that had sparked one of the worst clashes in Kandhmal in 1994, in which the riot had refused to die down even after two months of violence, killing 16 people.

Subsequently, an animus took shape, which has its origin in religious fabrics. The trend of conversion into Christianity by the clerics can be traced to the British era in India. But gradually, its manifestation became an eyesore when at the grassroot level, it encountered opposition from the majority community, mainly against the alleged practice of conversion through lure. And, today it is like a raging civil war as both sides try to run parallel.

But the lesson from the recent incident is that, group interests are over-riding the real problems. In the aftermath of the December 25 violence, many interest groups have tried to paint the picture in their own way. Some sections dubbed the majority community as communal and demonised it by stating that it had bordered on committing `massacre`. ‘Massacre` word was ridiculously used by the so-called harbingers of the other community, which added fuel to the already raging communal fire.

But such opinion makers do not realise that it was not only a festering wound in the legacy of harmony of the tribal people in these areas but, it was a smudge on the once peaceful landscape now turned into a common shooting target. A place where poverty or unemployment remains the common enemy, where over seventy percent populace live in a bullock-cart economy, religious divide could never have been the warring cause among these people.

Groups of people are seen fleeing from the place, holding press meets and dishing out descriptions of the harrowing ordeal of one side, as if scripting a biopic memorabilia. Not a single individual has uttered a word about general amity. Through statements and website articles an impression is being created as if a certain community is running for life and a terror hierarchy is baying for its blood. This has aggravated the situation although in essence, the general mass here, irrespective of their religious allegiance, is not ready to swallow such bitter pills.