Dwayne Monroe wrote:

> Ulhas wrote
>
>> The basic quarrel is about the very idea of a secular
>> and democratic India and its existence.

>Ulhas can you develop this idea further or point us to
>.references that do so?

Hinduism is not the basis of Indian state, though BJP as well as Pakistan
see India as a Hindu state. In Punjab, Sikhs are the largest community. In
Kashmir, Muslims are the largest community. In states such Meghalaya and
Nagaland, Christians are the majority. If the religion was accepted the
basis for formation of nation-states, India will cease to exist. India has
been partitioned once with disastrous consequences for everyone. You can
imagine the fate of Yugoslavia played out over South Asia. Hasn't Pakistan
split into two parts despite common religion? Bangladesh.

> My impression of the situation in India, as regards
> terrorism and its intersection with politics, is this:

> Although there are Islamic extremists and Hindu
> extremists and a long running dispute with Pakistan
> over the fate of Kashmir these indisputable facts are
> being used (perhaps even maipulated to some extent) by
> Prime Minister Vajpayee's government to justify a host
> of questionable economic and military activities.

India has faced terrorism for over two decades. First, Khalistanis and now, Jihadis. Jihadi terrorism is the direct outcome of the US arming Jihadis against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. This is part of the "collateral" damage suffered by Afghanistan's neighbours. Terrorism is much older than BJP's rise in Indian politics. Both, Hindu fanaticism and Muslim Fanaticism are growing at the expense of secular politics. There can be no compromise with religious fanaticism of any kind.

Ulhas