MGPE-008 Gandhian Approach To Peace and Conflict Resolution

UNIT 1 UNDERSTANDING PEACE
Structure
1.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
1.2 Understanding the Concept of Peace

1.2.1 Peace Traditions
1.2.2 Peace Movements
1.2.3 Peace-building
1.2.4 Peace-building Approaches
1.2.5 Conflict Transformation
1.3 State and Civil Society as Instruments of Peace

1.4 Gandhi as an Ambassador of Peace
1.4.1 Gandhi’s twin-principles of Peace: Truth and Non-violence
1.4.2 Truth
1.4.3 Non-violence
1.5 Peace Movements in the post- Second World War phase

1.6 UN’s Recognition of Gandhian Principles
1.7 Summary
1.8 Terminal Questions
Suggested Readings
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Peace is a term that refers to an absence of hostility, safety in matters of social or
economic welfare, the acknowledgment of equality and fairness in political relationships.
Reflection on the nature of peace is also bound up with considerations of the causes for
its absence or loss. Among these potential causes are: insecurity, social injustice, economic
inequality, political and religious radicalism, and acute racism and nationalism. In Wikipedia,
peace is defined as a list of synonyms which include ‘respite from war’, ‘quiet from suits
and disorders’, ‘rest from any commotion’, ‘freedom from terror’, ‘silence’, ‘suppressions
of thoughts’ etc. Despite religion, civilisation and culture, peace among people and nations
remains elusive. But for the future of humanity, peace deserves a chance. Peace is the
ability to handle conflict by peaceful means. Peace is a virtue, a state of mind, a
disposition for benevolence, confidence and justice. The comprehensive notion of peace
touches upon many issues that influence quality of life, including personal growth, freedom,
social equality, economic equity, solidarity, autonomy and participation.
Aims and Objectives
This Unit would enable you to understand
 The concept of peace and its related aspects
10 Gandian Approach to Peace and Conflict Relationship
 The role of state and civil society as instruments of peace

 The role of Gandhi as an ambassador of peace.
1.2 UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF PEACE

Aristotle said that we make war so that we may live in peace. Marx remarked that the
meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism. Martin Luther King, Jr had
the perception that one day we must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal
we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful
ends through peaceful means. True peace is not merely the absence of tension, it is the
presence of justice. Scholars in the positive peace research tradition, most prominently
Johan Galtung, identify conditions threatening human survival which include environmental
issues as well as poverty and economic disparity. Given that these problems are not likely
to be solved in the world’s current economic and political structure, the analysis of
shortcomings of the present system naturally leads to a search for policy and institutional
changes that can serve human welfare. According to Galtung , peace has two dimensions:
‘negative peace’ and ‘positive peace.’ Negative peace can be described as a static state
where there is an absence of war or violent conflict. Negative peace is focused on the
absence of manifest violence such as war, which could be realised by negotiation or
mediation rather than resorting to physical force. It recommends the use of non-violent
means, total disarmament and social and economic interdependence to avoid the physical
violence and discourage the use of force in conflict situations.
Galtung argues that violence is built into unequal, unjust and unrepresentative social
structure. Unequal social structures produce social groups who have low income, low
education, low health, and low life expectancy. One party’s existence, behaviour or
attributes prevent another from realising its full potential, and the human and social costs
of this kind of silent violence may be higher than those of direct physical harm. As a
matter of fact, the contexts in which we are born and brought up sufficiently influence our
attitude and behaviour. We have different sets of values, which guide our thinking and
behaviours. These values influence us to take certain actions and to reject other. This
reality of life, in fact, leads us to a situation where we find people who have different
perspective on life and things when we meet them or work with them. In which case,
conflict happens when people pursue different perspectives and goals that clash.
Positive peace is a dynamic process rather than an end state and implies a condition
where conflicts are addressed and solved. The concept of positive peace means the
removal of structural violence. Positive peace would not be obtained without the
development of just and equitable conditions. UNICEF describes positive peace as a
situation characterised by not only the absence of war or violent conflict, but also by the
presence of factors that reduce the likelihood of violent conflict and promote a better
quality of life for all. These factors include social and economic justice, inter-group
understanding, ecological balance, and opportunities for democratic participation in decision-
making.
Peace is visible when there is freedom, equality, justice, good governance, and the
enjoyment of human rights. Between the two directions of peace—negative and positive—
the former is the total absence of violence, that is, the state has a set of socio-political
structures to put down violence and to provide security of life and property of the
individual and the communities, while the latter places ‘global justice’ as the central
Understanding Peace 11
concept of peace, stressing on the full enjoyment of the entire range of human rights of
all people and the sovereignty of nations. The concept non-violence is thus a universal
phenomenon covering a wide area of social and political life. Further, its ultimate goal is
the harmonious co-existence of all life forms in the universe. Peace is the existence of
peaceful relationships, active association, and planned cooperation among persons and
groups for achieving greater aims such as justice, security, and constructive transformation
of conflict.
1.2.1 Peace Traditions

In order to move a conflict-habituated system to a peace system, we need to change the
way we think. From the early period of human thinking, there has been a clear
understanding that war is neither a natural phenomenon nor the irreversible will of God.
A peaceful world belongs to a society where people can work and live together in
harmony and friendship and the domination of one group over another is a major obstacle
to peace. The Buddhist traditions emphasise justice, equity, non-violence, concern for the
well-being of others and compassion among living beings. They also reflect a well ordered
state of mind, inner peace and harmony within a culture. Tranquility in the inner state of
mind and harmonious interpersonal relationship contribute to universal peace. Greek
philosophers conceptualised a peaceful world in terms of lack of civil disturbances. These
philosophical traditions are also linked to unity based on the moral substance of humanity
in each person and the principle of world citizenship; the vision of a world without war
was embraced as the core approach to peace in the Hellenic civilisation. In the Roman
and Medieval periods, peace implied stable relationship among units of society that led to
the control of organised violence. In Enlightenment thinking, violence and conflict, seen as
the greatest evils in history, are ascribed to a disorderly world.
With their goal to realise powerful changes in improving human conditions, socialist
movements since the 19th century stipulated that peace could be obtained in a classless
society. The primary causes of human misery are economic inequality and a repressive
political system associated with social injustice. Peace has a firm social dimension in which
equity and consideration of others’ well-being are crucial for a harmonious community life.
People from different cultural and political traditions would be united by the achievement
of an equal society. Peace thinkers like Gene Sharp view non-violent action as merely an
effective strategic instrument to achieve specific political objectives and score victories with
non-lethal means. Geoffrey Ostergaard who follows the traditions of Mahatma Gandhi
emphasised non-violence as a principle capable of preventing the origin or existence of
unjust social and economic system. Non-violent social structure in turn can be acquired
by establishing egalitarian social relations.
1.2.2 Peace Movements

The fact that there are now hundreds of groups working for disarmament and peace
suggests an enormous democratisation of the struggle for peace; even though their total
membership may be small, these organisations do provide open forums for expressions of
public opinion. The pre-war official peace movement had developed from an aspiration of
religious mystics, based almost exclusively on the principle of the wickedness of all wars,
into a movement favouring the creation of actual political machinery cooperating with the
legal profession for the reform and administration of international law and had become
respectable by the support by other peace movements and above all the Churches. The
peace movement received a terrible shock when World War I proved how much stronger
was attachment to the nation than adherence to internationalist and pacifist principles and
how much stronger was the fear of the sanctions of one’s own government and
compatriots than of the sanctions of fellow members of organisations.
1.2.3 Peace-building
Peacebuilding is usually understood as a transitional activity designed to prevent the
recurrence of past violent conflict and to lay the foundation for (re)building political,
economic and social systems that in the long(er) run will prevent further violence and
wars. A distinction is often made between the building of peace ‘from above’ and ‘from
below’. Peacebuilding ‘from above’ includes strategies such as peace mediation, negotiation
and peacekeeping aimed at getting armed factions to lay down their arms and turn to
nonviolent resolution of conflict, strategies to involve the international community and
neighbouring or influential states as guarantors of peace agreement. It also includes the
strategies to restore public order, encourage relief and reconstruction, and relationships
within and between individuals, organisations, communities and nations, attitudes and
behaviours including physical violence, discrimination, prejudice, humiliation, subordination
and domination, structures in particular economic, social, political, cultural and religious.
The building of peace ‘from below’ includes strategies to develop trust and build
confidence among communities at the local level.
Peacebuilding implies the strengthening of social, political and economic structures for
constructive transformation of conflict and promotion of social values such as benevolence,
compassion, cooperation and justice among persons and groups. Peacebuilding represents
attempts to overcome structural relationship and cultural contradictions which lie at the
root of conflict in order to underpin the processes of peacemaking and peacekeeping.
Peacebuilding is about undertaking programmes designed to address the causes of conflict
and the grievances of the past and to promote long-term stability and justice.
Goodhand and Hulme stress the need for making a clear distinction between peacemaking
and peacebuilding. Peacemaking is concerned with political, diplomatic and sometimes
military interventions directed at brining warring parties to agreement, while peacebuilding
focuses on the promotion of institutional and socio-economic measures that address the
context and underlying causes of conflict. Peace-building includes the local or structural
efforts that foster or support those social, political and institutional structures and
processes which strengthen the prospect for peaceful co-existence and decrease the
likelihood of the outbreak, reoccurrence or continuation of violence. Lederach describes
this as the ‘Process Structured Gap.’ According to Lederach, Peace Accords are often
seen as a culminating point of peace process. In the language of government and the
military, the Accords are referred to as an endgame scenario. We fall prey to this thinking
when we see the Accords as the way the war ended. In reality the Accords are nothing
more than opening a door into a whole new labyrinth of rooms that invite us to continue
in the process of redefining our relationships.
1.2.4 Peace-building Approaches

Three types of peacebuilding approaches have been described by the Institute for Multi-
Track Diplomacy (1993), all of which seem to be necessary for the successful transformation
to a peace system: political peacebuilding, structural peacebuilding and social peacebuilding.
Firstly, Political Peace-building normally deals with establishing political arrangements that
provide the over-all context within which to understand the relationships of the various
parties and their resources. Political Peacebuilding deals with agreements, negotiations,
peace accords etc. at the political level. It is about building a legal infrastructure that can
address the political needs and manage the boundaries of peace system. Negotiations,
technical-working groups, fact finding, etc. are some of the examples of the political
peacebuilding approach. Normally, political peacebuilding efforts tend to work on bringing
peace when conflicts occur either between groups (inter-community conflict) or between
nations (international conflicts). In this sense, the final outcome of the political peacebuilding
is for the parties and leaders to reach an agreement and sign a peace accord.
Secondly, Structural Peace-building deals with just distribution of resources and power,
correction of political and economic systems, economic activities etc. at grassroot level,
middle level and top level. Structural peacebuilding is about activities, which deals with
creating structures, systems of behaviour, institutions and concerted actions that support
the embodiment or implementation of a peace culture. It is about building an economic,
military, and social infrastructure that provides concrete and realistic avenues through
which a new peace system might express itself. Disarming warring factions, repatriating
refugees, monitoring elections, cooperative projects for economic and social development,
etc are the activities that are considered to be closely related with structural peacebuilding.
Structural peacebuilding or political development is a process of gradual change overtime
in which the people increase their awareness of their own capabilities, their rights and their
responsibilities; and use of this knowledge to organise themselves so as to acquire real
political power in order to participate in decision making at local level; and to choose
their own leaders and representatives at higher levels of government which is accountable
to the people; to plan and share power democratically; and to create and allocate
communal resources equitably and efficiently among individual groups. Therefore it may be
possible to avoid corruption and exploitation, realise social and economic development,
political stability and peace, and create a politicised population within the context of their
own culture and their own political system.
Lastly, Social Peace-building deals with issues of feelings, attitudes, opinions, beliefs,
values, skills (communication, negotiation and mediation) etc. It deals with feelings,
attitudes, opinions, beliefs, values, and skills as they are held and shared between people,
individuals and in groups. It is about building a human infrastructure of people who are
committed to engendering a new culture, a “peace culture” within the social fabric of
communal and inter-communal life. All people live within some form of political structure,
be it formal or informal. This political structure may or may not benefit the individual or
the general public as a collective entity. If the development, in its widest sense, is to truly
benefit the people, then the political structure must be responsive to their needs and
aspirations as well as protect their rights and their property. The terms political peacebuilding
and peacemaking are interchangeably used because they mean the same thing using
diplomatic, political and sometimes military means to end hostilities and promote negotiation
and negotiated settlement at the leadership level.
1.2.5 Conflict Transformation

Conflict transformation is a holistic and multifaceted process of engaging with conflict. It
aims to reduce violence and to protect and promote social justice and sustainable peace.
It requires work in all spheres, at all levels and with all stakeholders. Conflict transformation
needs to be accountable to those directly affected by conflict but requires networks and
linkages to sustain it; it is the ongoing process of changing relationships, behaviours,
attitudes and structures, from the negative to the positive. Conflict transformation, therefore,
requires timely interventions, respect for cultural context, patience, persistence, and a
comprehensive understanding of the conflict.
1.3 STATE AND CIVIL SOCIETY AS INSTRUMENTS OF

PEACE
State as Instrument of Peace
The debate over the welfare state has a very significant bearing on the concept of peace
and the state’s role in preserving and promoting it. In contemporary times when the
essence of the welfare state is made an inherent part of the state’s function, the state’s
role in the preservation and promotion of peace has undergone a great change. ‘Peace’
is now conceived as creating positive conditions that contribute to avoiding and even
totally eliminating conflict. The important point is that society and state are now entrusted
with new responsibilities in the task of promoting peace. The state has gradually evolved
to provide a framework for orderly organisation of society. Views differ whether the
‘orderliness’ is only in the interest of a single segment of society, like the rich, the strong,
etc., or in the general interest of the society as a whole.
The following devices accomplish the task of containing conflict. The first device is to
pass a framework of laws, rules and regulations. These laws and rules attempt to lay
down the limits for actions of individuals and groups with a view to ensure that such
actions do not disturb social peace. The second is the establishment of a vast network
of administrative mechanisms to execute the above-mentioned laws and regulations. It is
well recognised everywhere that crime is the most explicit and visible manifestation of
disturbance to peace. Prevention of crime is therefore recognised as the maintenance of
minimal peace in any society.
Civil Society Dimension of Peace
Conflict in society is always present and the state always has to cope with this given
situation. There are, however, other institutions in the society which also play a role in
containing conflict and restoring peace. This set of institutions, sometimes networks of
institutions, is called civil society. Non-governmental organisations, community welfare
organisations, and other such institutions, undertake many programmes of work ranging
from public health promotion, minority rights protection, providing legal aid to poor
people, making people aware of their rights, acting as watch-dogs on governments, to
promoting national integration. They are mostly non-profit-making institutions deriving
funding from charitable trusts from within the country and abroad. In this role, some of
the NGOs act as complimentary organs to government.
1.4 GANDHI AS AN AMBASSADOR OF PEACE

Gandhi once said: ‘I honour the place in you where the entire universe resides...a place
of light, of love, of truth, of peace, of wisdom. I honour the place in you where when
you are in that place and I am in that place there is only one of us. Each of us must
learn to work not just for oneself, one’s own family or nation, but for the benefit of all
humankind. Universal responsibility is the key to human survival. It is the best foundation
for world peace’.
Gandhi is universally known as an Apostle of Peace and Non-violence. Gandhi himself
made a skillful use of satyagraha to achieve peace and harmony and thus proved his
point. He always believed that peace contains a negative and a positive sense, the
absence of configuration, elimination of wars, absence of conflicts between different
classes, castes, religions, and nations is a negative sense and love, rest, mental equilibrium,
harmony, co-operation, unity, happiness are the positive indices of peace. Gandhi said that
the root of every violence or conflict is untruth and that the only permanent solution of
conflict is truth. Consequently, to resolve conflicts, he conceived of a novel technique
which he called Satyagraha. Literally, it means Satya with Agraha or, unwavering search
for the truth. And since the only way of getting to truth is by non-violence, it follows that
satyagraha implies an unwavering search for the truth using non-violence. Therefore,
Gandhi emphasised satyagraha as the most potent method of ensuring an endurable peace.
1.4.1 Gandhi’s twin-principles of Peace: Truth and Non-violence

In authoritarian societies, whether religious or political, where votes of people do not
count, where any opposition voice is silenced with bullets and imprisonment, peace cannot
be permanent. Having political power is, therefore, just the first step towards peace. We
have to accept the responsibility to change things. We have a responsibility to cultivate
some of the principles to look at sharing and ensuring that resources are distributed
equitably. We must ensure that people can see and feel the change and be able to identify
a niche for themselves in the world. In addition to political oppression, we have
economic, intellectual, religious, environmental, and gender oppression all over the world.
When people talk about peace, they cannot view the indiscriminate killings and destruction
of property in isolation from the poverty, illiteracy, religious intolerance, environmental
threats and gender oppression faced by the people.
Attainment of peace should be the ultimate goal of any youthful human emotions and
actions. Once their minds are at rest they can concentrate their energies for spreading the
message of peace. Youth should know that social harmony is an index of peace. They
should strive peacefully to make their and other people’s social lives happy and
undisturbed which is the aim of any society. Gandhi also warned youngsters against
misinterpreting religions. All the religions such as Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism,
Jainism, etc. have preached peace and harmony so that society can enjoy a happy and
peaceful life.
1.4.2 Truth
Gandhi dedicated his life to the wider purpose of discovering truth, or Satya. He tried
to achieve this by learning from his own mistakes and conducting experiments on himself.
Gandhi stated that the most important battle to fight was overcoming his own demons,
fears, and insecurities. Gandhi summarised his beliefs first when he said “God is Truth”.
He would later change this statement to “Truth is God”. Thus, Satya (Truth) in Gandhi’s
philosophy is “God”. Truth was Gandhi’s favourite human value which inspired his
autobiography “My Experiments with Truth”. Satya Meva Jayate was his slogan. Gandhi
wanted every individual and society to practice truth at any cost. He emphasised that all
religions, philosophies, societies have unambiguously advocated truth. According to him,
truth was God and that truth must manifest itself in the thought, word and deeds. He did
accept that the path of truth will always be full of hardship, difficulties, sufferings, and
sacrifice. To tell the truth one must be courageous. Treading the path of truth is a
continuous and unending process, which has to be followed by every generation.
Concepts and means of social transformation and reformation preceded in Gandhi’s mind
before they are applied as a mass weapon to political ends against the British.
1.4.3 Non-violence
Non-violence and truth are the essence of Gandhian philosophy. Bringing change in the
violent exploitative society through non-violent persuasive methods has never been witnessed
in the history. Wrong belief has taken possession of us that non-violence is preeminently
a weapon for cowardice, but this is not the case. Gandhi conceived it as weapon of
courageous and devoted people to the particular cause. Gandhi was the first to apply
non-violence in political field on a massive scale. Gandhi derived the idea of non-violence
from the principles ‘Ahimsa Paramodharma’ and ‘Vasudeva Kutumbakam’, which
mean to earn complete freedom from ill-will, anger and hatred, and to nurture love for
all. The concept of non-violence and non-resistance has a long history in Indian religious
thought and has had many revivals in Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Jewish and Christian contexts.
He was quoted as saying ‘when I despair, I remember that all through history the way
of truth and love has always won’.
Gandhi was aware that this level of non-violence required incredible faith and courage,
which he realised not everyone possessed. He, therefore, advised that one need not keep
to nonviolence, especially if it were used as a cover for cowardice. Gandhi stated that
non-violence is the rule of conduct for a society, if it is to live consistently with human
dignity and make total progress towards the attainment of peace. He observed that non-
violence is not a value principle alone but a science based on the reality of mankind,
society and polity. In this line, Gandhi’s idea of ahimsa entails not just abstaining from all
violence but embracing an enemy with love. Ahimsa is the largest love and the greatest
charity that implies generally an act not only of not-killing but also abstaining from causing
any pain or harm to another living being either by thought, word or deed. To practise
ahimsa, one requires the qualities of deliberate self-suffering intended to awaken and
convert the soul of the enemy and a harmless mind, mouth and hand; its opposite,
‘himsa’, means causing injury and harm to others and it needs no reference or discussion.
1.5 PEACE MOVEMENTS IN THE POST-SECOND

WORLD WAR PHASE
In the 1950s, there was an enormous concern about environmental issues surrounding
atmospheric nuclear tests, a worsening of Cold War, and changes in weapon technology
which led to an appreciation that Europe had become the major target area. In the
1980s, the breakdown of detente and the deployment of first-strike weapons in Europe
revived the dormant fear of nuclear war. The greatest achievement during this phase is
that the peace movements have raised public awareness of nuclear issues across
international boundaries. The peace movements generated mass protests; an unintended
consequence was that it taught governments how to successfully deflect and neutralise
mass protests. The peace movements were able to activate the very best in humanitarian,
liberal, and moral feeling.
1.6 UN’S RECOGNITION OF GANDHIAN PRINCIPLES

The UN General Assembly has unanimously adopted a resolution on June 15, 2007 to
declare October 2, the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi, as the International Day of Non-
Violence. The UN Resolution was in fact an effect of a suggestion made in an
International Conference on “Peace, Non-Violence, and Empowerment: Gandhian Philosophy
in the 21st Century”, held at New Delhi in January 2007. The UN Resolution to honour
‘the apostle of humanity and peace’ was unanimously sponsored by all the major countries
of the world and the subcontinent of India. Even Great Britain supporeted the resolution
against whom Gandhi successfully led an agitation through non-violent satyagraha for
India’s independence. The resolution is a reflection of the international community’s
collective yearning for peace and the recognition of the relevance of Gandhi’s ideals and
methods in today’s world which is confronted with violence, terrorism, intolerance,
discrimination and exclusiveness.
1.7 SUMMARY
Peace in the world cannot be achieved without understanding the concept and techniques
of Gandhi. Therefore, it is important to understand his techniques and try to replace the
present techniques which advocate violence all over the world. For instance, present
peace, as Morgantheau stated in his book, “Politics Among Nations” rests as violence,
force and power which create a cycle of violence among nations. Peace is more than just
the absence of war. True peace is justice, true peace is freedom. And true peace dictates
the recognition of human rights.” The preamble of UNESCO echoes this sentiment: “since
war begins in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that foundation of peace must
be constructed”. Change in the attitude and behaviour can be achieved through formal and
informal peace education. Peace education can promote the development of an authentic
consciousness that is necessary to change attitude and behaviour in order to achieve
greater cooperation and peaceful problem-solving.
People in power, whether political, economic, religious, civic or administrative power, need
to develop a holistic view of peace. If we want a better country for our future
generations, we need to act and ensure that such a holistic view is adopted and a
comprehensive approach is used in addressing the issue of peace. We also have a
responsibility to ensure that the community understands and approves of this approach.
We must be willing to share expertise and funds, and at the same time develop the
community’s capacity to meet the challenges of the future. We need to build a culture of
non-violence among our children and youth, through actively ensuring that we do not
support war toys or violent games, media, books, stories, etc., but instead promote a
culture of resistance to injustice. We need to inculcate a communal responsibility among
all our people.
1.8 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1. What do you understand by peace?
2. Critically evaluate the different approaches of peace-building.
3. Examine the role of state and civil society as instruments of peace.
4. Describe the role of Truth and Non-violence in ensuring peace.
5. What is the importance of Nobel Peace Prize?
SUGGESTED READINGS
Boulding, Kenneth., Stable Peace, University of Texas Press, Austin and London, 1978.
Bondurant, John V., Conquest of Violence: the Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict, University
of California Press, Berkeley, 1965.
Diwakar, R R., The Saga of Satyagraha, Gandhi Peace Foundation,Delhi, 1969
Elias, Robert, & Jennifer Turpin., Rethinking Peace, Boulder, Lynne Rienner, 1994
Fischer, Louis(Ed)., The Essential Gandhi, Vintage,1967
Fischer, Louis., The life of Mahatma Gandhi, Granada, London, 1982
Gandhi, M. K., Satyagraha in South Africa, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,1943
Gandhi, M K., The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Navajivan Prakashan, Ahmedabad,
1945
Gandhi, M.K, Non-violence in Peace and War, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1948
Gandhi, M.K., The Problem of Education, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1962.
Gandhi, M.K., Documents on Social, Moral and Spiritual Values in Education,NCERT,
New Delhi, 1979, p.20.
Gangal, S C, and Mishra, K P., Gandhi and the Contemporary World, Chanakya
Publications, New Delhi, 1981
Mathews, James K., The Matchless Weapon Satyagraha, Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad, 1978
Nayar, D. P., Building for Peace or Gandhiji’s ideas on social (adult) education, Atma
Ram & Sons, Delhi, 1952.
Nehru, Jawaharlal., The Discovery of India, Meridian Books, London, 1960
Pyarelal., Gandhi - Discovery Of Satyagraha, Vol.2, Navajivan Publishing House, 1974
Tendulkar, D G., Mahatma- Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Publications Division,
Government of India, Delhi, 1960
Tolstoy, Leo., Tolstoy on Education, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1968.
Sharp, Gene., Gandhi Wields the weapon of Moral Power, Greenleaf Books, 1960
(Introduction by Bharatan Kumarappa, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad).
UNIT 2 TOLERANCE, HARMONY AND
FORGIVENESS
Structure
2.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
2.2 Understanding Tolerance and Harmony

2.2.1 Importance of Tolerance and Harmony
2.2.2 Seeds of Intolerance
2.2.3 Dealing with Intolerance
2.2.4 Tolerance and Harmony at State level
2.3 Community and International Levels

2.3.1 Role of Education in making Harmonious Society
2.3.2 Foundation of Democracy
2.3.3 Moral Virtue
2.3.4 Religious Tolerance
2.4 Untouchability: An Obstacle to Harmonious Society

2.5 Limitation of Tolerence
2.6 International Day for Tolerance
2.7 Countering Intolerance
2.7.1 Law and Education
2.7.2 Access to Information
2.7.3 Individual Awareness
2.7.4 Local Solutions
2.8 Forgiveness as an act of Non-violence

2.9 Summary
Suggested Readings
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The modern world is characterised by diversity and escalating intolerance. Strife potentially
menaces in every region. It is not confined to any country, but is a global threat. In
Wikipedia, it is mentioned that alarmed by the current rise in acts of intolerance, violence,
terrorism, xenophobia, aggressive nationalism, racism, marginalisation and discrimination
directed against national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, refugees, migrant
workers, immigrants and vulnerable groups within societies, as well as acts of violence
and intimidation committed against individuals exercising their freedom of opinion and
expression - all of which threaten the consolidation of peace, harmony and democracy,
both nationally and internationally, and are obstacles to development, the emphasis on
tolerance and harmony is more essential than ever before.
The holistic understanding of man’s spiritual quest led Gandhi to adopt and preach a
theory of tolerance, harmony, forgiveness and mutual respect founded on truth and
maintenance of non-violence. Gandhi was also pained by the caste-based social structure
that India has consistently followed from time immemorial, and particularly the curse of
untouchability, which to Gandhi was the greatest sin of all; because it not only spelt
discrimination but debased a particular section of mankind on an occupational basis. He
felt the Indian society as weakened at its very core and embarked in a fight against it
with his heart and soul.
Aims and Objectives
 The concepts of tolerance, harmony and forgiveness
 The measures to counter intolerance
 The maintenance of tolerance and harmony at community and international levels.
2.2 UNDERSTANDING TOLERANCE AND HARMONY

Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world’s
cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is fostered by knowledge,
openness, communication, and freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is
harmony in difference. It is not only a moral duty, but also a political and legal
requirement. Tolerance, the virtue that makes peace possible, contributes to the replacement
of the culture of war by a culture of peace. Tolerance is not concession, condescension
or indulgence. Tolerance is, above all, an active attitude prompted by recognition of the
universal human rights and fundamental freedoms of others. In no circumstance can it be
used to justify infringements of these fundamental values. Tolerance is to be exercised by
individuals, groups and States.
Tolerance is the responsibility that upholds human rights, pluralism, democracy, harmony
and the rule of law. It involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism and affirms the
standards set out in international human rights instruments. Consistent with respect for
human rights, the practice of tolerance does not mean toleration of social injustice or the
abandonment or weakening of one’s convictions. It means that one is free to adhere to
one’s own convictions and accepts that others adhere to theirs. It means accepting the
fact that human beings, naturally diverse in their appearance, situation, speech, behaviour
and values, have the right to live in peace and to be as they are. It also means that one’s
views are not to be imposed on others.
2.2.1 Importance of Tolerance and Harmony

Tolerance is integral to different groups relating to one another in a respectful and
understanding way. In cases where communities have been deeply entrenched in violent
conflict, being tolerant helps the affected groups endure the pain of the past and resolve
their differences. In situations where conditions are economically depressed and politically
charged, groups and individuals may find it hard to tolerate those that are different from
them or have caused them harm. In such cases, discrimination, dehumanisation, repression,
and violence may occur.
Tolerance, Harmony and Forgiveness 21
2.2.2 Seeds of Intolerance

In the absence of their own experiences, individuals base their impressions and opinions
of one another on assumptions. These assumptions can be influenced by the positive or
negative beliefs of those who are either closest or most influential in their lives, including
parents or other family members, colleagues, educators, and/or role models. In education,
there exists school curriculum and educational literature that provides biased and/or
negative historical accounts of world cultures. Education or schooling based on myths can
demonise and dehumanise other cultures rather than promote cultural understanding and a
tolerance for diversity and differences.
2.2.3 Dealing with Intolerance

To encourage tolerance, parties to a conflict and third parties must remind themselves and
others that tolerating tolerance is preferable to tolerating intolerance. There is evidence that
casual inter-group contact does not necessarily reduce inter-group tensions, and may in
fact exacerbate existing animosities. However, through intimate inter-group contact, groups
will base their opinions of one another on personal experiences, which can reduce
prejudices. Conflict transformation NGOs (non-governmental organisations) and other
actors in the field of peacebuilding can offer mechanisms such as trainings to help parties
to a conflict communicate with one another.
Individuals should continually focus on being tolerant of others in their daily lives. This
involves consciously challenging the stereotypes and assumptions that they typically
encounter in making decisions about others and/or working with others either in a social
or a professional environment. To enhance communication between both sides, dialogue
mechanisms such as dialogue groups or problem-solving workshops provide opportunities
for both sides to express their needs and interests. In such cases, actors engaged in the
workshops or similar forums feel that their concerns have been heard and recognised.
Restorative justice programmes such as victim-offender mediation provide this kind of
opportunity. For instance, through victim-offender mediation, victims can ask for an
apology from the offender. The media should use positive images to promote understanding
and cultural sensitivity. The more groups and individuals are exposed to positive media
messages about other cultures, the less they are likely to find faults with one another-
particularly those communities who have little access to the outside world and are
susceptible to what the media tells them.
2.2.4 Tolerance and Harmony at State Level

Gandhi believed that a precondition for tolerance and harmony at the state level requires
just and impartial legislation, law enforcement and judicial and administrative process. It
also requires that economic and social opportunities be made available to each person
without any discrimination. Exclusion and marginalisation can lead to frustration, hostility
and fanaticism. In order to achieve a more tolerant society, States should ratify existing
international human rights conventions, and draft new legislations where necessary to
ensure equality of treatment and of opportunity for all groups and individuals in society.
It is essential for international harmony that individuals, communities and nations accept
and respect the multicultural character of the human family. Without tolerance there can
be no peace, and without peace there can be no development or democracy. Intolerance
may take the form of marginalisation of vulnerable groups and their exclusion from social
and political participation, as well as violence and discrimination against them. Gandhi
emphasised the responsibilities of states to develop and encourage respect for human
rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, gender, language,
national origin, religion or disability, and to combat intolerance. Gandhi resolved to take
all positive measures necessary to promote tolerance in our societies, because tolerance
is not only a cherished principle, but also a necessity for peace and for the economic and
social advancement of all in society.
2.3 COMMUNITY AND INTERNATIONAL LEVELS

Gandhi believed that tolerance is necessary for harmony between individuals. Tolerance
promotion and the shaping of attitudes of openness, mutual listening and solidarity should
take place in schools and universities and through non-formal education, at home and in
the workplace. The communication media are in a position to play a constructive role in
facilitating free and open dialogue and discussion, disseminating the values of tolerance,
and highlighting the dangers of indifference towards the rise in intolerant groups and
ideologies. Gandhi emphasised that particular attention should be paid to vulnerable groups
which are socially or economically disadvantaged so as to afford them the protection of
the laws and social measures in force, in particular with regard to housing, employment
and health, to respect the authenticity of their culture and values, and to facilitate their
social and occupational advancement and integration, especially through education.
Appropriate scientific studies and networking should be undertaken to co-ordinate the
response to this global challenge, including analysis by the social sciences of root causes
and effective countermeasures, as well as research and monitoring in support of policy-
making and standard-setting action by Member States.
2.3.1 Role of Education in making Harmonious Society

Gandhi emphasised that education is the most effective means of preventing intolerance.
The first step in tolerance education is to teach people what their shared rights and
freedoms are, so that they may be respected, and to promote the will to protect those
of others. Education for tolerance should be considered an urgent imperative; that is why
it is necessary to promote systematic and rational tolerance teaching methods that will
address the cultural, social, economic, political and religious sources of intolerance - major
roots of violence and exclusion. Education policies and programmes should contribute to
development of understanding, solidarity and tolerance among individuals as well as among
ethnic, social, cultural, religious and linguistic groups and nations. Education for tolerance
should aim at countering influences that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and should
help young people to develop capacities for independent judgement, critical thinking and
ethical reasoning. People must support and implement programmes of social science
research and education for tolerance, human rights and non-violence. This means devoting
special attention to improving teacher training, curricula, the content of textbooks and
lessons, and other educational materials including new educational technologies, with a
view to educating caring and responsible citizens open to other cultures, to appreciate the
value of freedom, respectful of human dignity and differences, and to prevent conflicts or
resolve them by non-violent means.
2.3.2 Foundation of Democracy

Gandhi believed that tolerance is not just agreeing with one another or remaining
indifferent in the face of injustice, but rather showing respect for the essential humanity in
every person. Intolerance is the failure to appreciate and respect the practices, opinions
and beliefs of another group. For instance, there is a high degree of intolerance between
Israeli Jews and Palestinians who are at odds over issues of identity, security, self-
determination, statehood, the right of return for refugees, the status of Jerusalem and many
other issues. The result is continuing inter-group violence. Tolerance is also the foundation
of democracy and human rights. Intolerance in multi-ethnic, multi-religious or multicultural
societies leads to violations of human rights, violence or armed conflict. Tolerance is
neither indulgence nor indifference. It is respect and appreciation of the rich variety of our
world’s cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. Tolerance recognises
the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms of others. Education for tolerance
should aim at countering influences that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and should
help young people develop capacities for independent judgement, critical thinking and
ethical reasoning. The diversity of our world’s many religions, languages, cultures and
ethnicities is not a pretext for conflict, but is a treasure that enriches us all.
2.3.3 Moral Virtue

People are naturally diverse; only tolerance can ensure the survival of mixed communities
in every region of the globe. The appreciation of diversity, the ability to live and let others
live, the ability to adhere to one’s convictions while accepting that others adhere to their’s,
the ability to enjoy one’s rights and freedoms without infringing on those of others’,
tolerance has always been considered a moral virtue. People must commit themselves to
promoting tolerance and non-violence through programmes and institutions in the fields of
education, science, culture and communication along with outright injustice and violence,
discrimination and marginalisation.
2.3.4 Religious Tolerance

Gandhi read the scriptures and doctrines of all major world religions with great interest
and finally arrived at a conclusion that they are all ‘more or less’ the same. The phrase
‘more or less’ was a term he systematically used because he thought that no religion
could grasp God in its entirety. He put great stress on prayer, non-violence and celibacy
as ways of spiritual enlightenment and believed that salvation was the ultimate goal of life.
Gandhi’s secular theories took on a special significance in the particular context of the
Indian national movement. The Indian society has been traditionally plagued by the evils
of caste and creed-based discrimination. The caste-oriented stratification of the Indian
society has hindered all chances of national unification from the early days of Indian
society. The situation was complicated by the presence of various religious groups within
the country, who were not ready to compromise any ground to reach a platform of
commonality. Gandhi preached tolerance of all religions. To him, his religion was love and
tolerance, his God were his principles to which he adhered no matter how great the
adversity was, and he was a fighter – one who fought with truth and non-violence. He
believed violence could get you victory but it would only be momentary. Instead, he
believed in conquering the enemy with love.
Gandhi upheld tolerance and had a lasting faith in non-violent co-existence of all religious
schools. Gandhi was critical of the term ‘tolerance’ as he thought it was patronising, as
if the one who uses it has a firm belief in the superiority of his own faith and was
magnanimous enough to allow other faiths to exist under his confirmed superiority. This to
Gandhi was an error. His particular brand of secularism was based on mutual respect. He
believed they were ‘branches of the same majestic tree’. Gandhi believed all religions
ultimately described only attributes of God but never His being. It was the fault of the
limitation of human understanding and imagination, and not of any particular faith.
Secularism for Gandhi was an absolute necessity to bring about any form of constructive
and all-encompassing political movement. Gandhi preached his ideals of secularism and
religious tolerance across the length and breadth of the country. He showed his
consolidation to the Muslim leaders through the support that Congress extended to the
Khilafat movement. Gandhi wrote extensively on the need of secularism in India, and
made speeches to the same effect all over the country. Tolerance is extended to policies,
conditions, and modes of behaviour which should not be tolerated because they are
impeding, if not destroying, the chances of creating an existence without fear and misery.
The political locus of tolerance has changed: while it is more or less quietly and
constitutionally withdrawn from the opposition, it is made compulsory behaviour with
respect to established policies. Tolerance is turned from an active into a passive state,
from practice to non-practice: laissez-faire the constituted authorities. It is the people who
tolerate the government, which in turn tolerates opposition within the framework determined
by the constituted authorities.
2.4 UNTOUCHABILITY: AN OBSTACLE IN

HARMONIOUS SOCIETY
Mahatma Gandhi highly grieved about the caste system that characterised the Indian
society. But it was untouchability that particularly pained him. All his life, he worked hard
for eradicating this heinous practice from its very roots. He drew sharp distinction
between caste and varna. Varna was based on profession. And in present day India,
wrote Gandhi, there is no other trace of varnashram, as they are easily interchangeable,
and are actually interchanged at times, except for the varna of the Shudra. Their plight
continued uninterrupted from the ancient times. Gandhi thought caste system to be a social
evil, but untouchability was a sin. All his life, Gandhi worked for the untouchables. In fact,
in one of his letters, Gandhi elevated the bhangis, or the night-soil cleaners as the very
epitome of service for God, as they do their unclean work and cleanse society of its
perils, and receive nothing but shame and admonition for it. Every man, thought Gandhi,
should find a lesson in it. They should dispense their services to society and expect no
reward in return. That would be the greatest service to God.
2.5 LIMITATION OF TOLERANCE

The function and value of tolerance depend on the equality prevalent in the society in
which tolerance is practised. Tolerance itself stands subject to overriding criteria: its range
and its limits cannot be defined in terms of the respective society. In other words,
tolerance is an end in itself only when it is truly universal, practised by the rulers as well
as by the ruled, by the lords as well as by the peasants, by the sheriffs as well as by
their victims. Universal tolerance is possible only when no real or alleged enemy requires
in the national interest the education and training of people in military violence and
destruction. Limitations of tolerance are normally prior to the explicit and judicial
limitations as defined by the courts, customs, governments, etc. Within the framework of
such a social structure, tolerance can be safely practised and proclaimed.
The tolerance which enlarged the range and content of freedom was always partisan-
intolerant toward the protagonists of the repressive status quo. The issue was only the
degree and extent of intolerance. Tolerance of free speech is the way of improvement, of
progress in liberation, not because there is no objective truth, and improvement must
necessarily be a compromise between a variety of opinions, but because there is an
objective truth which can be discovered and ascertained only in learning and comprehending
that which is and that which can be and ought to be done for the sake of improving the
lot of mankind.
Universal toleration becomes questionable when its rationale no longer prevails, when
tolerance is administered to manipulated and indoctrinated individuals who parrot, as their
own, the opinion of their masters, for whom heteronomy has become autonomy.
Impartiality to the utmost, equal treatment of competing and conflicting issues is indeed a
basic requirement for decision-making in the democratic process- it is an equally basic
requirement for defining the limits of tolerance. The real possibilities of human freedom are
relative to the attained stage of civilisation. They depend on the material and intellectual
resources available at the respective stage, and they are quantifiable and calculable to a
high degree. So are, at the stage of advanced industrial society, the most rational ways
of using these resources and distributing the social product with priority on the satisfaction
of vital needs and with a minimum of toil and injustice.
2.6 INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR TOLERANCE

The United Nations Charter states: ‘We, the peoples of the United Nations determined
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, ... to reaffirm faith in fundamental
human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, ... and for these ends to
practise tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours’. The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion’ (Article 18), ‘of opinion and expression’ (Article 19),
and that education ‘should promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all
nations, racial or religious groups’ (Article 26). In order to generate public awareness,
emphasise the dangers of intolerance and react with renewed commitment and action in
support of tolerance promotion and education, UNESCO proclaimed 16th November as
the annual International Day for Tolerance.
International organisations need to find ways to enshrine the principles of tolerance in
policy. For instance, the United Nations has already created ‘The Declaration of Moral
Principles on Tolerance’, adopted and signed in Paris by UNESCO’s 185 member states
on November 16, 1995, which qualifies tolerance as a moral, political, and legal
requirement for individuals, groups and states. The International Year for Tolerance, for the
first time, enunciated a personal virtue that is increasingly viewed as a political and legal
requirement for peaceful co-existence. Governments also should aim to institutionalise the
policies of tolerance. For example, in South Africa, the Education Ministry has advocated
the integration of a public school tolerance curriculum into the classroom; the curriculum
promotes a holistic approach to learning. The United States government has recognised
one week a year as international education week, encouraging schools, organisations,
institutions and individuals to engage in projects and exchanges to heighten global
awareness of cultural differences.
2.7 COUNTERING INTOLERANCE

2.7.1 Law and Education
Gandhi believed that each government is responsible for enforcing human rights laws, for
banning and punishing hate crimes and discrimination against minorities, whether these are
committed by State officials, private organisations or individuals. The State must also
ensure equal access to courts, human rights commissioners or ombudsmen, so that people
do not take justice into their own hands and resort to violence to settle their disputes.
Laws are necessary but not sufficient for countering intolerance in individual attitudes.
Intolerance is very often rooted in ignorance and fear: fear of the unknown, of the other,
other cultures, nations and religions. Intolerance is also closely linked to an exaggerated
sense of self-worth and pride, whether personal, national or religious. These notions are
taught and learned at an early age. Therefore, greater emphasis needs to be placed on
educating more and better. Greater efforts need to be made to teach children about
tolerance and human rights, about other ways of life. Children should be encouraged at
home and in school to be open-minded and curious. Education is a life-long experience
and does not begin or end in school. Endeavours to build tolerance through education will
not succeed unless they reach all age groups, and take place everywhere: at home, in
schools, in the workplace, in law-enforcement and legal training, and not least in
entertainment and on the information highways.
2.7.2 Access to Information

Gandhi said that intolerance is most dangerous when it is exploited to fulfil the political
and territorial ambitions of an individual or groups of individuals. Hatemongers often begin
by identifying the public’s tolerance threshold. They then develop fallacious arguments, lie
with statistics and manipulate public opinion with misinformation and prejudice. The most
efficient way to limit the influence of hatemongers is to develop policies that generate and
promote freedom and pluralism of the press, in order to allow the public to differentiate
between facts and opinions.
2.7.3 Individual Awareness

Gandhi realised that intolerance in a society is the sum-total of the intolerance of its
individual members. Bigotry, stereotyping, stigmatising, insults and racial jokes are examples
of individual expressions of intolerance to which some people are subjected daily.
Intolerance breeds intolerance. It leaves its victims in pursuit of revenge. In order to fight
intolerance individuals should become aware of the link between their behaviour and the
vicious cycle of mistrust and violence in society.
2.7.4 Local Solutions

Gandhi hoped that the realisation of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance
toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies,
attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed. In other words, today tolerance
appears again as what it was in its origins, at the beginning of the modern period- a
partisan goal, a subversive liberating notion and practice. Conversely, what is proclaimed
and practised as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving
the cause of oppression.
2.8 FORGIVENESS AS AN ACT OF NON-VIOLENCE

Gandhi stated that if everyone took an eye for an eye with respect to revenge, the world
would be blind. On forgiveness, Gandhi understood that forgiveness is a quality that
enhances the forgiver, one that takes courage and strength to achieve. For forgiveness is
giving up the right to harm others who have harmed you. The weak can never forgive.
Forgiveness is an attribute of the strong, because it is human nature to want to strike
back when hurt. However, when one strikes back against those who hurt, one undermines
the self and becomes the same kind of individual as those who hurt. When someone hurts
us or someone we care about, it is a quite natural human tendency to seek vengeance.
Gandhi refused to prosecute the assailants on the ground of forgiving the enemy. Such
forgiveness is a true spirit of nonviolence. Gandhi deeply felt that the act of being forgiven
is equally important to the act of forgiving. Gandhi believed that forgiveness was the best
weapon to be used against the wrong doers so that a change of heart in the opponent
could be achieved. He believed that change of heart in the opponent is the real victory.
Forgiveness is choosing to love. It is the first skill of self-giving love. Forgiveness grants
pardon without harbouring resentment. Forgiveness is giving a person another chance.
Truth in action is ahimsa and love. Truth and love, Satya and ahimsa are like the two
sides of a coin. All great religions enjoin the practice of love. It continues: “Non-violence
is complete innocence. Complete non-violence is complete absence of ill will against all
that lives. Non-violence is innocence in its action form, good will towards all life. It is
pure love…. hatred deflects our thinking, endangers the very sense of humanity. Love of
power takes the place of conscience. Forgiveness is the attribute of strong, he who is
weak cannot forgive. ‘Forget’ and ‘Forgive’ goes parallel. Mistakes, offences are made
by all. People get punished also for their deeds but very few allow such people to let
them go and forgive them. It is really difficult to forget and forgive sometimes but if
forgotten and forgiven, nothing can be more admiring than that. The tension, the load gets
lighten, a grudge can be a heavy weight to bear. Feeling of hatred and ill-will leave a
lasting effect on one’s mind. Forgiveness is seen as a practice to prevent harmful thoughts
from causing havoc on one’s mental well-being. One should practice forgiveness as the
victim ‘seeking pardon’ is the most unfortunate of all. Forgiveness is more manly than
punishment”.
2.9 SUMMARY
The way to harmony is a compilation of Gandhi’s reflections on certain problems which
divide mankind. Everywhere in the world, individuals and groups are divided because of
fear, suspicion and hatred. It depends on local conditions whether the division expresses
itself along religious, economic, political, caste or colour lines. Whatever be the form,
insecurity is perhaps the major cause of individual and social dissensions. A person who
is integrated and sure of himself fears none and consequently provokes no fear. Tolerance
is an end in itself. The elimination of violence, and the reduction of suppression to the
extent required for protecting man and animals from cruelty and aggression are preconditions
for the creation of a humane society. Such a society does not yet exist. It is the duty
of every cultured man or woman to read sympathetically the scriptures of the world. If
we are to respect others’ religions as we would have them respect our own, a friendly
study of the world’s religions is a sacred duty. The United Nations has adopted a
resolution to observe Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday as the International Day of Non-
Violence to recognise his life-long aim in spreading the message of peace, harmony and
non-violence.

1. Describe the role of tolerance in the making of a harmonious society.
2. Do you think that intolerance can be perpetuated?
3. Critically examine the role of education in bringing a more peaceful environment for
all.
4. Describe Gandhi’s views on forgiveness.
5. Analyse the different solutions put forward by Gandhi to fight intolerance.
6. Examine the statement that forgiveness and tolerance are the pre-requisites for
harmony.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Elias, Robert & Jennifer Turpin., Rethinking Peace, Boulder, Lynne Rienner, 1994
Fischer, Louis., (Ed), The Essential Gandhi, Vintage,1967
Fischer Louis., The Life of Mahatma Gandhi, London, Granada, 1982
Gandhi, M. K., Satyagraha in South Africa, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1943
Gandhi, M K., The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Navjeevan Prakashan, 1945
Gandhi, M.K., Non-violence in Peace and War, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1948
1962.
Gandhi, M.K., Documents on Social, Moral and Spiritual Values in Education, NCERT,
Ahmedabad, 1978
Nayar, D. P., Building for Peace or Gandhiji’s Ideas on Social (adult) Education, Atma
Pyarelal., Gandhi - Discovery Of Satyagraha, Vol.2, Navajivan Publishing House, Delhi,
1974
Tolstoy Leo, Tolstoy on Education, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1968.
UNIT 3 COMMUNITY PEACE
Structure
3.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
3.2 Peace as Social Harmony

3.2.1 Basis of Community Peace
3.2.2 Gandhi’s Vision of Community Peace
3.2.3 Satyagraha
3.2.4 Non-violence and Forgiveness
3.2.5 Focus on the Individual
3.3 People’s Participation in Peace Process

3.3.1 Equal Opportunity for all
3.3.2 Role of Political Freedom
3.3.3 Reform Development Model
3.3.4 Settle Internal Differences
3.4 Non-violent Army or Shanti Sena and Peace Committees

3.5 Value-based Culture and Moral Solution
3.6 A Critical Estimate of the Gandhian Approach
3.7 Summary
Suggested Readings
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The condition of peace covers a broad spectrum in human life both personal and social
as well. Here we will confine ourselves with the idea of peace in social relations at
community level, and the various solutions that seek to preserve community peace. Peace
seems to be humanity’s fondest dream. A situation that is peaceful for one group may be
oppressive for another. Many people understand peace to be the absence of war. While
this is of course vital, others see it as only the first step towards a fuller ideal, as an
interweaving of relationships between individuals, groups, and institutions that value
diversity and foster the full development of human potential. Peace is the existence of
peaceful relationships, active association, and planned co-operation among persons and
groups for achieving greater aims such as justice, security, and constructive transformation
of conflict.
Community is the centre of ideals in Gandhi’s scheme of holistic development. Before
going for any political demand, Gandhi always sought to bring about necessary changes
in community and get his ideas and methods well accepted by the community. Gandhi
tried to bring about major changes in the Indian society. He says that society is a group
of individuals dwelling together that symbiotically carries out various activities to bring
happiness and stabilisation. As it is a unique blend of diverse religions, cultures, and
races its structure keeps changing with respect to time. After all, nothing is constant but
“change”. Gandhi had stressed upon youth participation in bringing out various social
reforms during his struggle for independence: in the practices such as sati, purdah,
polygamy, child marriage, education of women, widow remarriage, untouchables, caste
system, exploitation and religious misguidance. And the attributes that make youth swim
through were non-violence, co-operation, justice, equality and love. Non-violence has a
religious, social, spiritual and personal significance. Force or aggression leads to a total
destruction of society. Violent feelings provoke conflicts, which grow in strength and
threaten the very existence of society.
Aims and Objectives
After reading this Unit, you would be able to understand
 The concept and basis of community peace
 Gandhi’s vision of community peace
 People’s participation in maintaining peace process
3.2 PEACE AS SOCIAL HARMONY

Gandhi believed that the ultimate notion of peace would signify that every human being
lives in peace with himself or herself, that is, without inner tensions. But inner peace for
individuals is itself normally dependent upon peace in relations with others in social or
natural domain. Peace in a society is, in its turn, conditioned by peace in and with
neighbouring communities. In actual practice, neither an individual nor a society lives in
total harmony. Conflicting emotions and inter-personal tensions of one sort or another
constantly disturb harmony. Therefore, the aspiration for peace is in a way automatically
pegged at a lower level of expectation. For the same reason, spontaneous prevalence of
peace without attempts to sustain it by conscious effort is also almost impossible.
The aim of peace, thus, is containment of conflict. Conflict between interacting individuals
is taken as inevitable. In the case of conflict avoidance, efforts are made to avoid the
causes of conflict as far as possible. Since avoidance of conflict altogether is not always
possible, conflicts are sought to be contained or restricted. By this, a society through
various degrees of collective strength, including the use of force tries to limit the spread
of conflict. Thus, social organisation is the most important step in preserving peace. One
feature of family, community, class, caste, and tribe is that they have a common function
- that of maintaining peace within the society. But it is also necessary to realise that these
social institutions do not always succeed in maintaining peace. More so, they may come
into conflict with each other. Gandhi’s ideas on society and politics are well-known. The
Gandhian vision of peace is derived from multiple sources and traditions. It was influenced
as much by the pacifist and anarchist writings, especially of the Russian writer Leo Tolstoy
and the American anarchist Henry Thoreau, as by the philosophical traditions of Hinduism,
Jainism and Christianity.
3.2.1 Basis of Community Peace

In order to understand the Gandhian approach to community peace, we must comprehend
the core of Gandhi’s general social and political thought. He had an integral philosophy
of life and society applicable to domestic and international situations alike. This philosophy
stemmed from his actions as well as his thoughts. His conceptions about man, society and
Community Peace 31
the state provide the basis for his approach to peace and world affairs. Gandhi enunciates
both the epistemology of peace as well as the sociology of peace. In the Gandhian
thought, metaphysics and social principles, religious values and political strategy are woven
together. The primacy of the moral over the political and of the spiritual over the temporal
is fundamental to Gandhi’s thinking. He considered Absolute Truth as the ultimate goal and
non-violence as the best method of achieving it. Absolute Truth is omnipotent and all-
encompassing. It is equivalent to divinity. Purity of means to achieve any end is also
fundamental to the Gandhian approach. Rejecting the Machiavellian approach that end
justifies means, Gandhi said that ends and means are inseparable. Good begets good and
evil begets evil. In fact, ‘end’ grows out of the ‘means’.
3.2.2 Gandhi’s Vision of Community Peace

Peace, as Gandhi envisaged it, is more than the absence of conflict and violence. It
implies a state of positive and constructive social order, where individuals, groups and
societies do not dominate or exploit one another and live in cooperation and mutual aid.
Peace is thus a cementing factor for the society and the community. It is a state of affairs
in which men can resolve their differences by talking to each other rather than by using
violence. Peace and truth cannot be separated. “The way of peace”, Gandhi said, “is the
way of truth. Truthfulness is even more important than peacefulness.” Hence, peace
achieved through untruth and deceit is not to be encouraged. Such peace cannot last long.
Peace-based truth is stable and also promotes internal spiritual growth in man and social
progress. Peace and justice are also integrally related. They are like two sides of the
same coin. The realist approach looks at conflict as a clash of interests between two
parties, which can be resolved either by the victory of one side or by some compromise
agreement between the two parties. The Gandhian approach does not accept conflict as
clash of interests. It regards them as products of mental illusions, misperceptions and
prejudices. Gandhi believes that conflicts are temporary irregularities in the normal flow of
life. Creative dialogue and negotiations have the potential to resolve the differences
between two actors. Such a method does not demand any party to sacrifice his position
or interest. Instead, the mental transformation during the conflict resolution process results
into a win-win situation.
According to Gandhi, war is not a natural phenomenon but a social and a cultural one.
It is not the nature of man to kill others and commit violence. Since individuals can be
pacific, the community that is composed of individuals can also be pacific. It is possible
to avoid war if we eliminate the root causes of war and create the right environment
through moral techniques. Gandhi had deep faith in the possibility of establishing peace
through non-violent action. He wrote: “Not to believe in the possibility of permanent
peace is to disbelieve in the Godliness of human nature.”
3.2.3 Satyagraha
Gandhi said that the root of every violence or conflict is untruth and that the only
permanent solution of conflict is truth. Consequently, to resolve conflicts, he conceived the
non-violent technique, Satyagraha, which is the most potent method of ensuring a durable
community peace. Satyagraha is applicable to all situations: from inter-personal to the
group relationships, from the micro- to macro-level problems. It can also be used to fight
against the problems of injustice, exploitation and conflict at the community level. The
Gandhian approach to peace relies heavily on satyagraha. In fact, Gandhi considers
satyagraha as a moral substitute of war, and as a superior means of redressing the
grievances of a state. It relies on persuasion and moral pressure rather than on physical
force or other coercive techniques to achieve the goal of peace and justice at the
community level. Satyagraha aims at liquidating the antagonisms but not the antagonists
themselves. In Satyagraha, the negative actions of the other party will have to be opposed
persistently and resolutely, at the same time maintaining the feeling of amity for the
opponent. Gandhi believed that we must not consider our opponents as our enemies. He
wrote: “While we may attack measures and systems... we must not attack men. Imperfect
ourselves, we must be tender towards others and slow to impute motives.”
3.2.4 Non-violence and Forgiveness

The basis of Gandhi’s pacifism is the supreme value of Ahimsa or non-violence. Non-
violence is the means to ‘achieve truth. Just as violence is the distinctive character of
animals, non-violence is the nature of man’. Violence and non-violence are two opposite
terms. The arguments against violence often revolve around the assumption that it does
not work, that there are inherent laws governing violence that prevent it from producing
positive results. Gandhi is opposed to violence because of five reasons. One, continuity,
i.e., once you start using violence you cannot escape it. Secondly, reciprocity, i.e.,
violence creates, begets and procreates further violence. On this point, Gandhi warned
that to answer brutality with brutality is to admit one’s moral and intellectual bankruptcy
and it can only start a vicious circle. Thirdly, Sameness, i.e., it is impossible to distinguish
between justified and unjustified violence, between violence that liberates and violence that
enslaves. No matter how high the goal, violence reduces all practitioners to the same
level. Or again, in Gandhi’s words that counter-violence can only result in further
brutalisation of human nature. Fourthly, violence begets only further violence, i.e., the end
grows out of the means used; and lastly, violence needs to be justified, but such
justification is hypocritical, there is no “pure” violence. Violence and hatred are always
linked to each other. “If violence is answered by violence, the result is a physical struggle.
Now, physical struggle inevitably arouses in the minds of those directly and even indirectly
concerned in emotions of hatred, fear, rage and resentment. In the heat of conflict all
scruples are thrown to the winds, and all the habits of forbearance and humanness, slowly
and laboriously formed during generations of civilized living, are forgotten. Nothing matters
any more except victory. And when at last victory comes to one or other of the parties,
this final outcome of physical struggle bears no necessary relation to the right and wrongs
of the case; nor in most cases, does it provide any lasting settlement to the dispute.”
Thus, Ahimsa is not passive but dynamic. It means not hurting anybody in thoughts, words
and deeds.
3.2.5 Focus on the Individual

For Gandhi, a crucial factor and first step for peaceful and just world order is the
individual. Gandhi was a humanist who put man at the centre of all social and political
activities. An individual is an integral part of the whole. There is an unbreakable link
between an individual and the family, a family and the neighbourhood, a neighbourhood
and the society, a society and the nation. Each level is as strong as the ties it has with
the other. Therefore, for strengthening the probability of peace at the societal and national
level, the beginning has to be made at the level of the individual psychology. Gandhi
believed that the sources of peace and conflict lie in the minds of men. The question of
world peace is ultimately about achieving conquest of the self. Man can appreciate and
live by the principles of truth and non-violence. Ultimately, the moral and spiritual forces
would triumph over the material and physical forces because the spiritual force and desire
for non-violence lies in every man’s heart. This spiritual force might be dormant, but it can
Community Peace 33
be awakened by right stimulus and training. Mere denunciation of violence will not result
into a peaceful world order. It is necessary to reform the individual for this. Peace cannot
be imposed from above but must grow from within. As both conflict and peace begin in
the minds men, a non-violent peacemaker must first establish peace within himself before
attempting to establish peace elsewhere. Continuous self-introspection, self-analysis and
self-purification are essential for the satyagrahis to achieve their goals. He stated further
“There is no freedom for India (or the world as a whole) so long as one man, no matter
how highly placed he may be, holds in the hollow of his hand the life, the property and
honour of millions of human beings….”
3.3 PEOPLE’S PARTICIPATION IN PEACE PROCESS

Gandhi was convinced that peace is possible not through diplomatic activities alone but
mainly through the participation of people and groups at all levels of the society. Peace
from below rather than above is the cornerstone of the Gandhian thinking. Thus
involvement of all the sections of the society - ordinary men and women, children, youth,
civil society organisations, educational institutions etc., in the peace process are imperative.
Gandhi described the term co-operation as all individuals come together to achieve the
designed goals and all of them share the fruits of the achievements. Nobody is
overburdened or over-regarded. Youth should co-operate with elders and children. It
should be looked upon as a way of life. He underlined that co-operation is the basis for
peace, love, equality and justice. Gandhi advocated joint families and village communities
as the co-operation among different individuals, classes, castes and groups in the society
ensures growth in all walks of human life from basic needs of food, clothing and shelter
to more complex requirement of the people like industries, transportation, recreation,
finance etc. Peace is a relationship between people. Peace begins with a harmony
between individuals. Gandhi lived and worked for the establishment of such relationship
among individuals and groups. He has a unique contribution to peace in the modern
context.
3.3.1 Equal Opportunity for all

Gandhi maintained that there cannot be lasting peace unless there are equal opportunities
for all. According to Gandhi, “You cannot have a good social system when you find
yourself low in the scale of political rights, nor can you be fit to exercise political rights
and privileges unless your social system is based on reason and justice. You cannot have
a good economic system when your social arrangements are imperfect. If your religious
ideas are low and groveling, you cannot succeed in ensuring equal status for women, and
the access to opportunities for all was the ultimate that would bring independence to the
people of India.” Gandhi believed that real peace cannot emerge unless the individuals
cease to exploit one another. A peaceful community would aim at resolving conflicts by
helping its neighbours alleviate their economic problems and try to remain friendly with
them. The other principle of Community peace is social justice. Peace cannot be
established in a society where a big class distinction exists.
3.3.2 Role of Political Freedom

According to Gandhi, political freedom is needed for every individual and the community.
He wanted the man to be the centre of all in a political cycle. The entire exercise should
be around him or her leading to benefit him/her and not destruct him/her. As the star is
believed to be the source of human life, it is good to have this companion. If star is the
‘life giver’ for the entire earth, the man is the ‘life giver’ of the entire games of politics.
Such a man should be helped economically. Therefore, Gandhi advocated his political
philosophy by taking mass as a centre of all activities. According to him, theory and
practice in politics should be equal and should be followed in a balanced way. Economic
uplifting is the ultimate goal of any individual and in this politics should help. If one is self-
punishing for his own wrong things himself, the politics he does would help the human
kind. If not, good political philosophy, even if it is good, will not work in practice.
3.3.3 Reform Development Model

Gandhi said that our development models too would have to be reformed to make them
people-oriented rather than machine-centred. Big technology aligned with big business
could create disastrous consequences for the society. Appropriate technology is the need
of the hour to encourage the movement towards a non-violent society. Decentralised
production that generates employment and does not marginalise and exploit men at the
lowest rung of the society alone can be conducive to peace and non-violence. The
Gandhian approach to community peace not only concerns human beings and society but
also includes the ecology and the cosmos. Gandhi anticipated and articulated the concern
for environment. The compulsion for conflict arises not just due to urge for power, but
also by the pattern of development based on disregard for nature and life forms. In his
famous book, Hind Swaraj, he dismissed the western civilisation as exploitative of nature
as well as of human beings, based on an over-use of earth’s resources, over-production
and over-consumption. Such a civilisation resting on the selfish nature of the individual
promotes amoral economics and amoral politics. A peaceful world will arise when man
learns to live in harmony with nature and when all men and women identify themselves
with all other living beings.
3.3.4 Settle Internal Differences

Gandhi also believed that without settling the differences within one’s own society, it is not
possible to work for or establish peace at the global level. A nation, which has achieved
internal harmony, will not need armed forces for its security. Thus, Satyagraha and
constructive programmes should be applied for mending social relations. Religious tolerance
and understanding, reconciliation of ethnic and racial differences etc. are of fundamental
importance in the quest for establishing peace. Gandhi analysed peace and conflict as
pertaining to the social order. He focused on the various methods by which society copes
with the challenges of peace and conflict. As we noted, both the state as well as civil
society have a role in controlling and even prevention of social strife. The state as the
chief regulatory agency has been in existence since time immemorial in almost all societies.
The state has been more concerned with containing conflict than in avoiding or preventing
conflict. And containing conflict is expressed in terms of the very familiar phrase:
maintenance of law and order, which also is characterised as the minimalist or minimal
conception of peace. With the rise of the welfare state, the functions of the state have
expanded. With this, there has been a broadening of the conception of peace and conflict.
3.4 NON-VIOLENT ARMY OR SHANTI SENA AND

PEACE COMMITTEES
One important condition of a peaceful world, according to Gandhi, is the raising of a
Shanti Sena. Gandhi felt that it should be possible to raise it if we are sincere about its
purpose. A non-violent army acts unlike armed men in times of peace and war. It brings
Community Peace 35
warring communities together, carries out peace propaganda, engages in activities that
bring and keep them in touch with other persons. Such an army should be ready to cope
with any emergency. The non-violent force must be small if it is to become efficient. The
trained satyagrahis of the Shanti Sena would be willing to make any sacrifice, including
of their own lives, for the sake of truth, peace and non-violence. The band of satyagrahis
in the Shanti Sena confronts the aggressors and tells them of wrongness of their action.
They are even willing to lay down their lives in the process of non-violent resistance. The
unexpected spectacle of endless rows upon rows of men and women simply dying rather
than surrender to the will of an aggressor must ultimately melt him (the aggressor) and his
soldiery. Gandhi claimed that “men can slaughter one another for years in the heat of
battle, for them it seems a case of kill or be killed. But if there is no danger of being
killed yourself by those you slay, you cannot go on killing defenseless and unresisting
people endlessly. You must put down your gun in self-disgust.”
Peace Committees
The peace Committees that have been formed must not go to sleep. The condition of
keeping peace in our midst is that all the communities in India must live at peace with
one another, not by force of arms but that of love than which there is no better cement
to be found in the world. If the truth and peace are with an identity of human kind, there
would be cycle of non-violence creating more rings all over. As a result, life dynamism
of non-violence can encircle the entire life-setting starting from individual unity to Global
writ or entity. War results when peace fails. Our effort must always be directed towards
peace. But it must be peace with honour and a fair security for life and property. Gandhi
suggested one Hindu and one Muslim standing surety for each Village: ‘The reality has to
be faced and a determined effort made by everyone of you to root out the least trace
of the feeling of hostility and make it possible for your Muslim neighbours to live in
brotherly love once more’.
3.5 VALUE-BASED CULTURE AND MORAL SOLUTION

Gandhi said that at the roots of violence lie in our infinite greed, consumerism and
materialism, a new life-style and a new culture are required for making the world
peaceful. The modern civilisation that glorifies and venerates self-interest debases the
moral basis of society. Restriction on human needs and inculcation of other-regarding
rather than self-regarding attitudes are vital components of the larger Gandhian vision of
peace. Attainment of peace should be the ultimate goal of any youthful human emotions
and actions. Once their minds are at rest they can concentrate their energies for spreading
the message of peace. Youth should know that social harmony is an index of peace.
They should strive peacefully to make their and other people’s social lives happy and
undisturbed which is the aim of any society. Gandhi also warned youngsters against
misinterpreting religions.
The problems of war and peace have been misconceived by the conventional approaches
and theories. The efforts for peace so far have failed because of the wrong methods used
and because of the lack of sincerity on the part of their practitioners. In the Gandhian
approach, conflict is primarily a moral problem and requires moral solutions. Gandhi
believed that every action- whether performed for self, family, group or community-
produces its own appropriate results. Evil actions create evil results while the good actions
lead to good results. In community, evil seems to have overtaken the good. Every conflict
becomes the cause of a subsequent conflict. Therefore, in consonance with the spirit of
the sages and prophets of ancient times, Gandhi prescribed moral means for the
settlement of disputes. Conflict is ‘mutual violence’ which breeds hatred, revenge and
bitterness. Hatred cannot be a foundation for future peace. Gandhi stressed that “Peace
is the temple or church of truth. Once that is being achieved in a human being, he or
she will be a productive peace maker”. A non-productive person has no right, according
to Gandhi, to enjoy the fruits from the sources of nature. He or she has to therefore
labour that too through peaceful means. Gandhi said that he honoured the place in us
where the entire universe resides... a place of light, of love, of truth, of peace, of wisdom.
“Each of us must learn to work not just for oneself, one’s own family or nation, but for
the benefit of all humankind. Universal responsibility is the key to human survival. It is the
best foundation for peace.”
3.6 A CRITICAL ESTIMATE OF THE GANDHIAN

APPROACH
Gandhi’s views and vision of peace have been criticised as utopian, idealistic, inconsistent
and contradictory. Critics question the ethical and practical basis of Gandhi’s non-violent
philosophy. According to them, even a violent act can acquire moral character under
certain circumstances. The relationship between means and ends is more complex than
what Gandhi recognised. Means and ends have to be understood in their wider contexts.
The Gandhian approach also relies greatly upon the potential for converting ruling elite to
justice and peace. According to some scholars, Gandhi did not comprehend all the
complexities of society or give an effective practical plan for community peace. However,
Gandhi was a practical idealist. His contributions should, therefore, be judged on the basis
of what he did rather than on the basis of what he wrote about peace. He was also not
a dogmatic thinker and was open to revising his ideas according to new realities and
developments. His shifting stand about conflict is also something that was known to
Gandhi himself. He believed that his aim was not so much to be consistent with his
previous statements but with truth as it evolved before him from time to time. Gandhi’s
approach to non-violence places him as a far-sighted, sensitive and perceptive man of
peace. He gave a dynamic and flexible meaning of peace in which peace is the best, but
not the only way, to achieve good. Modern peace researchers who have contributed to
the idea of direct and indirect violence and particularly structural violence find Gandhi as
an equally original contributor to the thinking of peace research. The concept of structural
violence is a product of social relationships of exploitation. Despite the inconsistencies of
his position on peace, no one can deny the fact that very few had given such a powerful
moral thrust in social relations and argued for justice at community level. In Satyagraha,
Gandhi gave a morally superior alternative to conflict as a means of achieving one’s goals.
3.7 SUMMARY
Gandhi claimed that his life was like a laboratory of truth and non-violence. Hence, this
can be reinterpreted and applied fresh to the emerging realities of the 21st century. His
teachings and personal examples do provide several practical tools and techniques that are
relevant for addressing the challenges of the contemporary society. Mankind today is
suffering from multidimensional crises such as terrorism, denial of human rights, economic
inequality, racial discrimination, ethnic violence, religious intolerance, poverty, and
environmental degradation and so on. Gandhian principles of truth, love, non-violence and
social order based on justice and goodness are of great relevance in this context. The
Community Peace 37
Indian Constitution incorporated as its main commitment the Chapter on Fundamental

Rights, which provides for guarantees against state interference with basic individual rights
as well as positive commitment from the state to ensure a just social order. Further, the
Constitution also incorporated a Chapter on Directive Principles of State Policy, which
direct or enjoin the state to pursue policies that promote a healthier natural and material
environment as well as ensure a just distribution of the material resources of the society.
Even though the provisions of Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles slightly
differ in the degree of their enforceability, they can together be regarded as one great
charter embodying the commitment to a broad conception of peace in society. In different
ways and in different fields, a growing number of initiatives to search for non-materialistic,
non-violent alternatives to present modes of living are being taken in the society today.
Whether or not these initiatives use the name of Gandhi, they are nevertheless promoting
the values and principles he stood for. The lessons from Gandhi’s life are, firstly, the goal
of the struggle for peace is for the good of all and not just the good of the majority;
secondly, one has to be prepared to make sacrifices to attain this and lastly, power in
itself does not result in peace; we have to work and strive for peace. Gandhi’s life taught
us that it is easy to postulate principles, but very difficult to put them into practice.
Believing in peace and a good life for all is an ideal principle but the final step is putting
into practice what we have learnt or begun to believe in. This final step is what eventually
determines the quality of our lives.

1. Critically examine Gandhi’s views on community conflict.
2. Examine the features and objectives of Satyagraha.
3. How does Gandhi’s approach to non-violence differ from pacifism?
4. What are the main elements of action suggested by Gandhi for a peaceful society?
5. Critically examine Gandhi’s views on Shanti-Sena.
6. “Non-violence and forgiveness are essential for the community peace”. Do you agree
with the Gandhian view?
SUGGESTED READINGS
Boulding, Kenneth, Stable Peace, University of Texas Press, Austin and London, 1978.
Diwakar, R R., The Saga of Satyagraha, Gandhi Peace Foundation, Delhi, 1969
Fischer, Louis., (Ed), The Essential Gandhi, Vintage,1967
Fischer, Louis., The Life of Mahatma Gandhi, London, Granada, 1982
Gandhi, M. K., Satyagraha in South Africa, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1943
Gandhi, M K., The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad, 1945
Gandhi, M.K., Non-violence in Peace and War, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1948
1962.
Gandhi, M.K, Documents on social, moral and spiritual values in education, NCERT,
New Delhi, 1979
Ahmedabad, 1978
Nayar, D. P., Building for Peace or Gandhiji’s ideas on Social (adult) Education, Atma
Pyarelal., Gandhi - Discovery Of Satyagraha, Vol.2, Navajivan Publishing House,1974
Tolstoy, Leo., On Education, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1968.
UNIT 4 PEACE AMONG NATIONS
Structure
4.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
4.2 International Peace Systems

4.3 Approaches to the Study of Peace
4.3.1 Political Economy Approach
4.3.2 Feminist Approach
4.3.3 Environmental Approach
4.3.4 Functional Approach
4.3.5 Critique of Functionalism
4.4 Movements for Peace

4.4.1 Regionalism and World Peace
4.5 Gandhi, World Federation and Peace among Nations

4.5.1 Arms Race and Materialism
4.5.2 Man versus Machine
4.5.3 Perfect Peace
4.5.4 Politics of Violence
4.5.5 Gandhian Solution for a Peaceful World
4.6 United Nations’s Agenda for Peace

4.7 Summary
Suggested Readings
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Peace thinking has influenced both the peace movements as well as peace research
worldwide. Absence of violence should not be confused with absence of conflict; violence
may occur without conflict, and conflict may be solved by means of non-violent
mechanisms. The distinction between negative peace and positive peace gives rise to a
four fold classification of relations between two nations: Firstly, war, which is organised
group violence; secondly, negative peace, where there is no violence but no other form
of interaction either and where the best characterisation is “peaceful passive coexistence”;
thirdly, positive peace, where there is some cooperation interspersed with occasional
outbreaks of violence; lastly, unqualified peace, where absence of violence is combined
with a pattern of cooperation. The recent transformation and settlement of protracted
international and societal conflicts and the radical transformation of previously authoritarian
and repressive societies have heightened attention to the challenges of building post-
conflict relations that are enduring and just. One long-standing area of peace studies has
been the effect of integration between societies and of sectors within societies. Integration
is indicated by the high rate of exchange of goods, people, and ideas across societal and
group lines, relative to exchanges within.
Research findings support the generalisation that integration improves communication and
exchanges between the integrating parties and more importantly, enhances mutual security
and reduces the probability of countries’ waging wars or threatening each other’s identity,
particularly, when such an integration is perceived to be equitable. Traditionally, efforts to
restore peace after a conflict ends include policies to redress the grievances that were
viewed as the conflict’s source. For communal differences within a country, this may entail
more autonomy for citizens with different languages or religions and provisions for popular
participation in determining the form and degree of autonomy. In recent years, peace
workers have been giving considerable attention to fostering mutual understanding and
tolerance among peoples with different cultural backgrounds living in the same society.
This attention extends to reconciliation between peoples who perpetrated gross human
rights violations and people who suffered profound losses during periods of repression or
of violent struggle.
Aims and Objectives
 The concept of international peace systems
 Approaches to the study of peace
 The movements for peace
 Gandhi’s scheme of world federation and peace among nations.
4.2 INTERNATIONAL PEACE SYSTEMS

Most of the peace thinking has centred on the problem of how power shall best be
distributed among the nations of the world. The first model is that of minimum equality
of power which is based on the theory that the international system is best served by
making power the monopoly of one nation or system, just as it is monopolised by some
states in the international system. Examples are the Pax Romana, Pax Ecclesiae, and Pax
Britannica. These are instances of Roman Empire, the Catholic Church and Britain
maintaining law and order over large areas in the globe. The second model focuses on
maximum equality, or what is usually referred to as a ‘balance of power’ in the sense that
no nation or alliance is strong enough to defeat another nation or alliance. A modern
version of this is the balance of terror, in which a nation may defeat other nations, but
only at the risk of itself being completely destroyed. The third model views military power
as best stabilised at a low level; this refers to all kinds of arms control efforts, especially
those that have taken place from the Hague Peace Conference of 1899 to the present
day, including contemporary thinking that aims at subtracting from a Hobbesian dictum that
denotes some means of violence and some objects of violence. The idea is to rule out
general and complete war. Finally, there is the model that views power as stabilised at
a zero level; this refers to the general and complete disarmament advocated by pacifists.
Pacifism asserts that this state may be obtained unilaterally by the effect of example,
because weapons become meaningless when they do not encounter similar weapons, and
by the refusal of soldiers to use arms, as well as by governmental decisions.
4.3 APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF PEACE

Peace education at its beginning, focused on arms race, disarmament and deadly conflict
Peace among Nations 41
and war. Peace studies today are inclusive of a vast range of approaches and experiments
and many innovative ways of thinking have been developed. Peace research is concerned
with the development, accumulation and discovery of knowledge about the causes of war
and condition of peace; peace education is concerned with the development of the
processes of education in and about peace; while peace studies is an area of concern that
relates to the substantive issues regarding the purposes and problems of the dissemination
of knowledge of peace as a process.
4.3.1 Political Economy Approach
The political economy approach draws attention to the political and economic structures
of the international system, which create conditions for inequitable distribution of wealth
among and within nations. The political economy approach examines the nature of the
modern political economy and its implications for social and international conflict. The
need for food and other basic economic necessities has not been met in many parts of
the world. The number of people suffering from nutritional deprivation has steadily
increased. In many poor countries, the populations also have a high level of illiteracy and
lack a proper level of education. These miserable life conditions are attributed to the
failure of economic systems. To produce opportunities for the marginalised, an equitable
global economic order is essential. In the classic economic liberalism, the role of
government is to nurture a political environment for promoting a free market society and
to protect the rights of private property. Marxism analyses social structure in terms of
relations between two antagonist classes, the proletariat, comprised of workers, who earn
wages for their physical work, and the bourgeoisie, who monopolise the capital needed
to make investment in production. Class antagonism can be resolved through the
achievement of an equal society that does not have an exploitative economic relationship.
Since individual actions would be ineffective in fighting against a ruling class, building
solidarity among the masses is important.
Competition between colonial powers in pursuit of foreign markets and raw materials is
a driving force behind international conflict. Marxist thinkers also attribute imperialism to
the economic structure of capitalist states. An external outlet for surplus goods and
financial investments is needed for the survival of capitalism. Imperialism is thus an
inevitable outcome of the expansion of capitalism on a global scale. With the rise of
international capitalism, the contradictions inherent in capitalism, particularly, the concentration
of wealth in the hands of a few reproduces itself on a global scale resulting in international
economic inequalities and the enrichment of one state at the expense of another. The
internationalisation of capitalism, creation of new political alignments, transformation of
social values, and the acceleration of scientific and technological advances have promoted
free market economy at both the national and international levels. Economic globalisation
reduces the role of states to adjusting national policies to the dynamics of an unregulated
global economy. The state mainly remains to enforce legal and political framework for a
free market mechanism. Industrialised states have supported private enterprises by enforcing
contracts and using an instrument of political leverage to impose market rules world-wide.
Many poor countries in the world today are former European colonies and share
experiences of years of exploitation and frustration with the dominant structure of
international political economy. The spread of markets into the domain of traditional life
increased the number of households losing control over subsistence means in the process
of being integrated into new economic relations. Global economic expansion created
conditions of social segregation and fragmentation within countries. Economic decisions are
disentangled from family, gender and social relations as well as cultural traditions. The
incorporation into a cash economy leads to the devaluation of traditional productive

activities of women. The costs of economic marginalisation include social polarisation and
destruction of internal linkages.
4.3.2 Feminist Approach

While both women and men are victims of sexism, racism, human rights abuse, and
poverty, there are particular types of violence that afflict women more than men. Family
violence and sexual and emotional abuse of women are major concerns in many parts of
the world. Feminine values of caring, compassion and nurturing have enriched the
conceptions of peace. Moreover, the application of feminine values to the radical
transformation of an oppressive social order serves as an important principle in the
struggle for achieving peace. The introduction of a market oriented economic system
deprives women’s income by assigning low monetary value to their economic activities.
Competitive, organisational and exclusive masculine values support a model of hierarchical
human relationships. These values are often reflected in the bureaucracies of states,
churches, corporations, political parties, and the military. Social welfare is traded for
military spending and it further exacerbates female poverty.
Feminist thinkers find a logical linkage between feminism, pacifism and socialism. The
elimination of violence in both private and public spheres is essential to achieving peace.
The Feminist conceptions of peace are extended to the conditions of social justice,
economic equity, and ecological balance. Equity and democracy have to be transformational
values for forthcoming social changes. Equal relations between men and women can serve
as the foundation for equality among all people and an end to racism and ecological
destruction. Social justice and development require the full participation of women.
Feminist values broaden the concept of security by including in it all people and all nations
based on a notion of kinship extended to the entire human family. An adversarial state-
centric security system negatively affects the conditions for protecting the most fundamental
roots of survival embodied in health and a decent quality of life. Feminist security agenda
seeks protection from organised state violence and the fulfillment of fundamental needs of
human harmony.
4.3.3 Environmental Approach

The environmental approach to the study of peace points out that the unbalanced
relationship of humans to bio-environmental system is a source of threat to human survival.
Human beings have a unique capacity to damage the planet that supports life-support
systems of all species. Global warming effects, river and ocean pollution, deforestation and
distortion of bio-diversity are related to the expansion of human activities which threaten
life-supporting ecosystems. The impact of deforestation, desertification, pollution, over-
fishing, and overgrazing on the ecosystem threatens our planetary biodiversity. The scarcity
and misuse of fresh water pose another serious threat to human health, welfare, food
security and the entire ecosystem. The rapid increase in population, especially in the
developing countries outstrips economic growth, deteriorates living standards, and results
in severe environmental degradation. The carrying capacity of land, that is, the number of
people an area can support without compromising its ability to do so in future, has been
rapidly deteriorating in these countries. The planet is gradually moving towards overloading
the carrying capacity with a rapid growing population.
Competition for limited or inequitably distributed resources may lead to violent conflicts.
Threats to subsistent life caused by resource scarcity increase the probability of social
unrest and war. Deteriorating resource bases, coupled with rapidly growing population,
produce a volatile social situation for group conflict. Population dislocation can be caused
by such environmental changes as deforestation, desertification, drought, soil- erosion and
floods. The protection of the local as well as global environment must be integral to the
development process throughout our increasingly interdependent world. Sustainability
cannot be achieved in one country, since ecological problems do not recognise any
borders.
4.3.4 Functional Approach

The main architect of functionalism as a theory is David Mitrany. His essay A Working
Peace System summarises the main arguments of the functionalists and by its very title
drew attention to their major claim: functionalism is the road to lasting peace. Written after
the World War II, Mitrany projected the growing domestic trend towards welfare statism
into the international arena and argued that wars are the result of social and economic
maladjustments. While the real task of our common society is the conquest of poverty,
ignorance and disease, the existing state system based on sovereignty is not only
inadequate but also an obstacle to finding solutions to global problems. Functionalists see
promoting peace in three different ways. It solves basic human problems that are the root
causes of war. Functional organisations, such as the FAO, enable countries to feed their
hungry by developing new strains of wheat and rice. It subverts the sovereignty of nation-
states. For instance, citizens of a nation, which receives support from international
organisations or other countries or international organisations, are inclined to offer similar
assistance to where it is needed elsewhere. They might be less inclined to support policies
of their own government that are hostile to countries that contribute to helping them.
Moreover, functional activities create within a country, even within a government, groups
whose interests are closely tied with international interests. For instance, a health ministry
which is making use of the WHO’s technical aid may become an advocate of world
cooperation. A village doctor who depends on a vaccine supplied by the WHO may
develop a vested interest in seeing that the WHO continues to function inside the country.
Apart from giving some people inside a country vested interest in international activity,
functional activities may foster international loyalty among people at large and counteract
the handful nationalistic activities. A third way in which functional activity supports peace
is by bringing people from different countries in face-to-face contact. Foreigners seem less
‘foreign’ and more human when they are living right in your midst. And it becomes difficult
to accept generalisations about other national groups when such groups are living and
working in one’s own village or town. Functionalism is, thus, very much a programme for
action. It is intended to be prescriptive and policy-oriented. It is also descriptive and
diagnostic as it is linked with perceptions of development in significant aspects of human
nature and institutional interaction.
4.3.5 Critique of Functionalism

Some members of the functionalism itself who suggested alternative routes to political
integration challenged Mitrany’s theory of functional integration. They are the neo
functionalists. In contrast to the functionalists who sought to create a new world order in
which the sovereign states take a back seat, the neo-functionalists or the integration
theorists seek to create new states through the integration of existing states. The neo-
functionalist theory developed by E.Haas in the 1960s was inspired by the intensifying
cooperation between the countries of Western Europe that began in the 1950s. Haas
builds on Mitrany. But he rejects the notion that ‘technical’ matters can be separated from
politics. Integration is a process whereby ‘political actors are persuaded to shift their
loyalties... towards a new centre whose institutions posses or demand jurisdiction over the
pre-existing national states’. The theory of functionalism is considered contradictory and
vague. The most frequent criticism of functionalism has been that it is not clear in what
way the work of the functional institutions would be coordinated.
The formulations of the functionalists are of a utopian kind. Some critics have argued that
functionalism does not take enough account of the working of politics. It has been said
that functionalism presumes a natural willingness of people and nations to work together.
It is based on the assumption of essential goodness of human nature. Functionalism implies
that man is innately good and rational. This, according to the critics, is a one-sided view
of human nature. Actually man is a mixture of both good and evil. He can be good and
rational and equally he can be irrational and selfish. Functionalism is essentially an
approach to world order. It is an approach which would overlay political divisions with
a spreading web of international activities and agencies, in which and through which the
interests and life of all nations would be gradually integrated. Functionalism is a combination
of two closely related processes: task expansion and loyalty transfer. According to the
functionalists, international functional organisations and agencies promise to eliminate war
by attacking the societal diseases such as poverty, ill-health, illiteracy, economic insecurity,
social injustice and exploitation which subvert human beings’ natural inclinations and lead
to war.
4.4 MOVEMENTS FOR PEACE

Hundreds of groups working for disarmament and peace suggest an enormous
democratisation of the struggle for peace. These organisations do provide open fora for
expressions of public opinion. The pre-war official peace movement had developed from
an aspiration of religious mystics, based almost exclusively on the principle of the
wickedness of all wars, into a movement favouring the creation of actual political
machinery cooperating with the legal profession for the reform and administration of
international law and had become respectable by the support by other peace movements
and above all, the Churches. The greatest achievement is that the peace movements have
raised public awareness of nuclear issues across international boundaries. The peace
movements created mass protest; an unintended consequence was that it taught governments
how to successfully deflect and neutralise mass protest. The peace movements were able
to activate the very best in humanitarian, liberal and moral feeling.
Regionalism and World Peace
The increasingly complex problems of modern international society have led to multilateral
cooperation in matters of mutual concern. The most interesting and significant development
of international society has been the growth of regional organisations as a means of peace
and security. Peace enforcement through regional security system has limitations because
of split among the members of the regional organisation; and economic sanctions could
not be used within a region because they could adversely affect the economic interests
of its own members. Regional arrangements are considered to be instruments of collective
self-defence and action against an aggressor; these would be undertaken not only more
willingly but also with more dispatch and efficiency by those within a region. Moreover,
the homogeneity of interests of various kinds such as language, culture or economic
interests produces a natural trend towards regional groupings.
4.5 GANDHI, WORLD FEDERATION AND PEACE

AMONG NATIONS
Peace in the world cannot be achieved without reaching the concept and techniques of
Gandhi. Therefore, it is much more important to understand his techniques and try to
replace the present techniques which advocate violence all over the world. The force or
violence was the basis of international politics. Therefore, according to him, politics is
power-oriented. Power, therefore, leads to competition. Competition makes in turn
violence. This was noticed in the Cold War era of the world. Thus, international politics
or even a national politics for that matter is centred around the “use of force” which
creates only force, all over the worId. Peace will never come until the great powers
courageously decide to disarm themselves. Exploitation and domination of one nation over
another can have no place in a world striving to put amend to all wars. In such a world
only the militarily weaker nations will be free from the fear of intimidation or exploitation.
Unless big nations shed their desire of exploitation and the inevitable consequence, there
is no hope for peace in the world. Further, violence to persons and property has the
effect of clouding the real issues involved in the original conflict while non-coercive, non-
violent action invites the parties to a dialogue about the issues themselves. Gandhi,
therefore, warns that we must hate the sin and not the sinner.
Gandhi fervently hoped for “a world federation of free and independent states”. His
concept of World Government transcended in the traditional thinking, the pattern of
conventional international organisations could not satisfy the conditions for bringing genuine
peace. He held that peace could not be established through mere conferences. Similarly,
he was not optimistic about the League of Nations and the United Nations. They lacked
the spirit of non-violence and failed to serve as vehicles of peace in the absence of a
force to enforce their decisions.
4.5.1 Arms Race and Materialism

It is not only the arms race that generates the violence but the mad rush also for the
Western material comforts which results in constant dependence, dissatisfaction, cut throat
competition, exploitation and hatredness that are responsible for untruth and violence. The
modern military weapons have become so indiscriminate and their efforts so catastrophic
that the very existence of mankind is threatened. Unscrupulous pursuit of material welfare
without heading ethical and human values, has crept into the very vitals of national life and
culture. As a result, the moral fibre of the people has been weakened. In the words of
Martin Luther King, “the choice before mankind is between non-violence and non-
existence.” To abolish war, we must get rid of our anger, hate, passion, pride, fear,
egotism and inordinate ambition and lust for power. He also believed that disarmament
was possible only through “the matchless weapon of non-violence.” And it was his hope
that India will prove herself worthy of being the first nation in the world to give lead to
other nations for the delivery of earth from the burden of war. He wanted the great
powers lead the rest by disarming themselves; they should give up ambitions and
exploitation and revise their mode of life. Thus, according to Gandhi, disarmament cannot
crystalise, unless the nations of the world cease to exploit one another. ‘Exploitation must
go’ is the essential precondition for the establishment of a world free from blood-spilling.
4.5.2 Man versus Machine

The Gandhian concept of world peace should be viewed as an integral part of his
philosophy of life and one should try to appreciate his attitude within the general
framework of his philosophy of ahimsa. Gandhi was able to initiate an educational
discourse outside the familiar East-West dichotomy yet forming part of the critique of the
West by locating the problem of education in a different dialectic, that of man versus
machine. In this dialectic, man represented the whole of mankind, and the machine
represented the industrialised West. Throughout his life, Gandhi had perceived his personal
life and the causes he fought for in a global context. The kind of life that Gandhi’s ‘basic
education’ proposal projected as the ‘good’ life was first practised by him at Phoenix
Settlement and, somewhat more rigorously and ambitiously, at Tolstoy Farm a little later.
As the name indicates, by the time of this latter experiment, Gandhi had read the works
of, and had established contact with, the Russian writer and thinker Leo Tolstoy. Tolstoy’s
celebration of the individual’s right to live in peace and freedom, and his negation of all
forms of oppression, brought him close to Gandhi. Gandhi’s concept of peace on earth
and goodwill among mankind has led to the development of Sarvodaya social order which
is India’s distinctive contribution to world of thought. If an individual can practise non-
violence, why not whole groups of individuals and nations of the world?
4.5.3 Perfect Peace

Gandhi, on the other hand, suggested that ‘love’ could be adopted as the ‘means’ for
achieving ‘perfect peace’. Peace without love, as he pointed out, is violence. And love
without peace is also violence. Therefore, as he aimed, the concept, love, should work
replacing the use of force concept which would create the cycle of love all over.
According to Gandhi, the ultimate goal of any peace maker should be of building up
peace army. It is necessary to quote here Gandhi’s statement, “... the moral principles on
which civilization rests are truth and love. If people everywhere respond to them truthfully,
the world will be brought closer together and the darkness which we see around us, may
be dispelled.” On the basis of his proposition, if the world leaders direct the world,
conflict resolution for all the problems of the present world can be achieved and the
world in the 21st century will be the century of love and not of violence. We also know
this fact that human nature is essentially peace loving. The way of world peace lies in
cultivating the spirit of non-violence and peace in the hearts of men.
4.5.4 Politics of Violence

Gandhi is opposed to violence and wars. He was an advocate of non-violence and
peace. According to him, “Truth and non-violence are as old as are the hills, I have
nothing new to teach the world.” War is said to be a way of ending wars. As a matter
of fact the Second World War was fought by the allies with a view to end all wars.
Gandhi was of the firm opinion that war can never end wars, and the same thing had
happened with the end of Second World War leading to further tensions. War, which is
a destroying and divisive force, can never contribute to establishment of peace. Hence,
the search for peace should be the way of non-violence alone.
4.5.5 Gandhian Solution of a Peaceful World

To eliminate war and to establish world peace, Gandhi looked to statesmen and nations
to use or develop certain methods and institutions. The chief of these are third party
settlement, world government, disarmament and an international police force. He argued
that because the individual can be pacific, states possess an equal potential since they are
equal to the sum of their citizens. In addition, he recommended satyagraha as a substitute
for military action. He denied that his technique of struggle is a method of war rather than
of peace and said that it has a spiritual quality which is not found in ordinary warfare.
As to its interstate employment, he claimed: ‘Satyagraha is a law of universal application.
Beginning with the family its use can be extended to every other circle.’
4.6 UNITED NATIONS’S AGENDA FOR PEACE

For establishing peace among nations, the UN’s Agenda for Peace can be broadly
separated into four groups: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking, Peacekeeping and Peace
building. Preventive diplomacy tries to put an end to a conflict by getting the concerned
parties to resolve the conflict before it becomes violent. Peacemaking tries to resolve the
conflict diplomatically but after the bout becomes violent. It tries to get the involved
parties to cease-fire. The Peacekeeping role of the UN comes into play at this stage to
make sure that the ceasefire is honoured. Peace-building is the last stage that promotes
peace and order by raising social structures, legal systems and sometimes even setting up
a new government. Non-diplomatic methods of resolving disputes are the adjudicative
methods where a third party is invested with power to decide the dispute. The method
by which the decision is reached is not, as in diplomacy, by persuasion, but by
determining the question of fact on which the parties are in disagreement and reaching a
decision on the dispute by applying the applicable law to the facts.
4.7 SUMMARY
In the positive conception of peace, peace is more than the absence of violence; it is the
presence of social justice through equal opportunity, a fair distribution of power and
resources, equal protection and impartial enforcement of law. Thus, while the negative
conception addresses the immediate symptoms, conditions of war and the use and effects
of force and weapons for peace, positive peace involves the elimination of the root causes
of war, violence and injustice. It also involves conscious efforts to build a society
reflecting these commitments.
The adherents of positive peace focus their efforts on establishing peace through world
order by supporting international law, compliance with multilateral treaties, use of international
courts, and non-violent resolution of disputes, participation in international organisation,
trade and communication. They also emphasise the estalishment of social equality and
justice, economic equity, ecological balance and eliminate indirect violence by meeting
basic human needs. Peace work and the ways of thinking about peace have greatly
expanded in recent decades. Peace is increasingly understood to be multidimensional and
dynamic. Consequently, the ways of promoting peace are also manifold, and they vary in
different settings for different actors. Theory and research about aspects of peace and
their promotion draws from and contributes to social theory and social practice. Recent
applied and scholarly peace work is based on past experience, but the realities of the
current world necessitate fresh thinking and innovative practice.
The Gandhian concept of world peace should be viewed as an integral part of his
philosophy of life and one should try to appreciate his attitude within the general
framework of philosophy of ahimsa. Good means alone can lead us to ever lasting peace.
If peace is established by violence, it will be of no use.

1. Bring out the distinction between direct and structural violence.
2. Explain the concept of positive peace.
3. Critically analyse the main features of feminist approach to peace.
4. Critically examine the models of international peace system.
5. Write an analytical note on Functionalism.
6. Trace the evolution of peace research in the post-war period bringing out the issue
confronting peace research.
7. Desribe the Gandhi’s idea of world federation and a peaceful world.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Fischer, Louis(Ed)., The Essential Gandhi, Vintage,1967
Fischer, Louis., The life of Mahatma Gandhi, Granada, London, 1982
Gandhi, M. K., Satyagraha in South Africa, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,1943
Gandhi, M K., The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Navajivan Prakashan, Ahmedabad,
1945
Gandhi, M.K, Non-violence in Peace and War, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1948
1962.
Gandhi, M.K., Documents on Social, Moral and Spiritual Values in Education,NCERT,
Mathews, James K., The Matchless Weapon Satyagraha,Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad, 1978
Nayar, D. P., Building for Peace or Gandhiji’s ideas on social (adult) education, Atma
Pyarelal., Gandhi - Discovery Of Satyagraha, Vol.2, Navajivan Publishing House, 1974
Tolstoy, Leo., Tolstoy on Education, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1968.
UNIT 5 UNDERSTANDING SOURCES OF
CONFLICT
Structure
5.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
5.2 Causes of Conflict
5.2.1 Proximate Causes
5.2.2 Underlying Causes
5.2.2.1 Human Nature and Conflict
5.2.2.2 Society and Conflict
5.3 Sources of Conflict

5.3.1 Information
5.3.2 Miscommunication
5.3.3 Resources
5.3.4 Relationships
5.3.5 Interests and Needs
5.3.6 Structures
5.3.7 Power
5.3.8 Governance
5.3.9 Rights
5.3.10 Culture
5.3.11 Ideology
5.3.12 Religion
5.3.13 Identity
5.3.14 Values
5.4 Summary
Suggested Readings
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Conflict is a relationship between two or more individuals and groups who have or think
that they have incompatible goals and needs. The incompatibility may thus be real or
perceived and may be over material and/or symbolic resources. Most people perceive
conflict as a negative term and ascribe negative connotations to it. However, inherently
conflict is neither negative nor positive. Some of its aspects may be either positive or
negative.
Conflict has positive aspects when it directs attention to the injustices that need to be
addressed, when it promotes much needed change in organisations and systems, and
especially when it leads to creative problem solving. The negative aspects of conflict are
the destructive behaviour (violence leading to loss of life and property), the pain and
trauma that is a result of the violence, and the wastage of resources that would have been
better spent on creative activities. Therefore it is the negative aspect of conflict that can
and should be avoided but conflict per se is a fact of life, inevitable, natural, unavoidable
and often creative. Gandhi too saw conflict as both positive and desirable. Therefore, it
is better to work on the resolution of conflict rather than avoid it or keep suffering as
a result of it. To facilitate conflict resolution, the first and foremost important step is to
understand and analyse the causes and sources of conflict.
Aims and Objectives
After going through this Unit, you will understand:
 The causes of conflict;
 Appreciate the debate on whether conflict is intrinsic to human beings or it is a
product of socio-cultural conditions; and
 And identify the specific sources of conflict.
5.2 CAUSES OF CONFLICT

There are different ways of examining the nature of a conflict and identifying the factors
that give rise to it. Even though one precipitating event may lead to an open confrontation,
most conflicts arise from a complex and multiple set of factors that may include the
history shared by people across the divide, the social, political, economic and cultural
dynamics, the nature of the issues at stake etc. Thus a distinction needs to be made
between
1. The proximate or immediate causes
2. The underlying causes
5.2.1 Proximate Causes

Proximate causes are those events, which may trigger violence for example, the assassination
of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria in June 1914, which was the immediate cause of the
beginning of the First World War.
5.2.2 Underlying Causes

Underlying causes are the fundamental and long-term causes, which create conditions in
which immediate triggers of conflict occur. The immediate and underlying causes are
interconnected but in conflict resolution more attention needs to be paid to identifying the
underlying and root causes if we want to work towards sustainable peace. Theoretical
explanations of the underlying causes of conflict focus on either the human agency or the
social structural conditions. Theories under each of these categories are a reflection of the
‘nature versus nurture’ debate: whether human beings are primarily affected by genes or
by social interactions.
5.3.2.1 Human Nature and Conflict
Theories focusing on the agency-based explanation seek to answer questions such as is
conflict inherent in human beings? Are human beings genetically programmed for violence?
These theories locate the causes of conflict at the level of the individual or collective
agency, based on human behaviour.
Understanding Sources of Conflict 51
i. One set of theories argues that aggressive behaviour is innate and biologically
programmed in the human species. Thomas Hobbes believed that human beings are
selfish by nature and “that humanity is characterized by careless, and indeed
relentless, thirst for power.” Edmund Burke “saw humanity as inherently conflictual.”
Sigmund Freud contends that aggression “is carried out in the name of self-
preservation, and is inherent to humans.” Aggression helps human beings to protect
and enhance their existence. However, Gandhi was in a different league altogether
as he believed in the essential goodness of human beings. He had a very positive
view of human nature and believed that humans could respond to “the call of the
spirit” and rise above selfishness and violence.
ii. Another explanation of the agency-based theory is psychoanalytical. This theory
argues that early differentiation among human beings between ‘self’ and ‘other’
manifests itself in a deep psychological need for enemies.
iii. The socio-psychological perspective focuses on processes of group formation and
differentiation, mainly the role that images, (mis) perceptions, stereotyping, and
dehumanisation play in the decision-making, which leads to violent conflict.
iv. The psycho-cultural viewpoint provides accounts of conflict behaviour in terms of
culturally shared images and perceptions of the external world.
5.3.2.2 Society and Conflict
Conflict occurs in human interactions that take place within the context of the family, the
community and the society. When individuals or groups believe that the family/society does
not meet their interests, they try to change the social and familial norms and structures by
force, which often leads to situations of violent conflict. Thus socio-structural theories
argue that aggression is not innate but its expression depends on factors external to the
individual.
Structural theories lay emphasis on the organisation of society that creates the causes and
conditions for conflict. Unjust social structures and institutions play a significant role in
creating and perpetuating social conflicts. Social structures and institutions often favour
some groups of people / communities and by extension disfavour others. This emerges as
an important source of violent conflict.
i. Albert Bandura argued that there are three primary sources of human aggression:
familial settings, sub-cultural context and symbolic modeling.
a) Social learning takes place first and foremost in the family and human beings
learn appropriate behaviour within family settings. Bandura argues that families
that have conflicts all the time are most likely to have conflictual children. Thus
violent families produce violent offspring. Additionally, American psychiatrist,
James Gilligan, known for his work with some of the most “violent criminals”
living in America’s prisons, put forth the theory that childhood abuse creates
violent personalities. Gilligan pointed out that most of the “criminals” living in
American prisons had had a brutal childhood- many had been beaten, sexually
assaulted, prostituted or neglected to a life-threatening degree by their parents.
He thus concluded that childhood abuse and neglect can create violent
personalities that will then manifest violent behaviour in social institutions.
b) Subcultures are another source of social learning leading to aggression. Bandura

argues: “The highest rates of aggressive behaviour are found in environments
where aggressive models abound and where aggressiveness is regarded as a
highly valued attribute.” However, all people raised in violent environments may
not be violent because “many people may simply aspire not to be violent.”
Bandura does suggest, though, that there is a strong capacity to instruct a group
in the ways of violence. He makes his point in suggesting that the military is an
excellent example of making otherwise relatively non-violent persons violent.
c) Another major source of social learning is symbolic sources such as television.
“Television transmits pictures of violence, impressions of violence and even the
symbolic culture of violence. We learn how to cope with ‘reality’ through
television, and are susceptible to its messages. This is especially true among the
young of society.”
ii. The non-fulfillment of basic human needs is another cause of conflict. John Burton
propounded the basic human needs theory. Needs refer to basic human requirements
for the continuation and propagation of life: material (food, shelter, health care,
employment- freedom from want), cultural (right to religion, language) and social
needs (respect, dignity and freedom from fear). The need for life to be perceived as
being predictable and safe is extremely important. These needs are non-negotiable
and universal and their satisfaction is essential for human development and social
stability. These universal needs must be satisfied if protracted social conflicts are to
be resolved. Thus the primary source of human behaviour is the satisfaction of human
needs; however, these needs have to be satisfied within the social context. If the
universal needs are not met in socially accepted ways, individuals/communities resort
to violence in order to meet these needs.
iii. Gandhi had a need-based conception of society and conflict. In his view, conflict is
the result of structural denial of human needs. The creation of new structures is
necessary for the satisfaction of human needs. This would require a method of
struggle that satisfies three conditions: destruction of need-denying structures, creation
of need-satisfying structures and respecting the needs of the conflicting parties during
the struggle. The Gandhian approach to conflict resolution, i.e., Satyagraha was an
attempt to satisfy all three conditions. Thus satisfaction of needs was central to
conflict resolution.
iv. An additional set of theories draw on critical social theory particularly the feminist
and post-structuralist perspectives. These emphasise the central importance of social
discourse- the language we use, the social practices we engage in- these generate
exclusionist identities (us/them, insider/outsider).
v. Karl Marx located conflict in the economic structure. Marx’s theory of class conflict
argues that social institutions and structures reflect the material reality of society. The
economic structure (economic determinism) has dominated over politics in the
development of human history (historical materialism). As long as capitalists control
the means of production, they would also wield power over social structures, making
them inherently unjust towards the working class giving rise to conflicts between the
capitalists and the proletariat (working class).
vi. However, Antonio Gramsci, a neo-Marxist, rejected the excessive emphasis on
economic determinism. He introduced the theory of “ideological hegemony”. This
theory takes into account not only the control of means of production by the ruling
capitalist class, but it also encompasses a whole range of values, attitudes, beliefs,
cultural norms and legal precepts which serve to justify the interests of the dominant
class. Thus, it is the ideological hegemony of the ruling class that when challenged
by the masses, gives rise to conflict.
vii. Johan Galtung, in his theory of structural violence, asserts that violence is built into
unequal, unjust and unrepresentative social structures. Social structures, systems and
institutions deprive some people of their rights and the ability to satisfy their basic
human needs; they discriminate between groups, communities and nations to the point
of threatening lives and livelihoods and prevent human beings from realising their full
potential.
5.3 SOURCES OF CONFLICT

From the underlying causes, we now move to the specific sources of conflicts, sometimes
also referred to as issues involved in a conflict or issues at stake in a conflict.
5.3.1 Information
Lack of information, misinformation and different interpretations of information can lead to
conflict. Disputants may not have sufficient information or even the same information about
a given situation. In other instances, groups and individuals may interpret the same data
or information in differing ways or they may assign different levels of importance to the
same data. Control and manipulation of information is a major weapon in conflict
situations.
5.3.2 Miscommunication
Ineffective communication is another source of conflict. Even if there are no basic
incompatibilities between groups and individuals, miscommunication and misunderstanding
can lead to conflict. Moreover, stakeholders may have different perceptions about the
facts in a situation and until they are clarified, there can be no resolution. Self-centredness,
selective perception, emotional bias and prejudices lead to differing perceptions between
the stakeholders of a conflict. Lack of skill in communicating one’s viewpoint in a clear
and respectful manner often results in confusion, hurt and anger, all of which fuel the
conflict further. Whether the conflict has objective sources or has arisen due to perceptual
or communication problems, the people involved experience it as very real.
5.3.3 Resources
This relates to conflict over material resources such as land, money or objects, which are
evidently identifiable and can be negotiated. Historically, disputes over access to and
control of territory, material, economic and scarce natural resources have been one of the
dominant sources of conflict. One major element in the colonial empire building of the
19th and 20th century was the competition for resources and defence of national
economic interests which were defined in territorial terms. Here each faction wanted to
grab as much as it could; its behaviour and emotions were directed towards maximising
gain. In extreme cases, disputants may resort to military action or the threat of it to gain
or defend access to resources perceived as vital for survival, for example, the developed
Western countries attach a great deal of importance to maintaining their access to oil
supplies in the West Asian region and are prepared to undertake extreme measures to do
so.
In the twenty-first century, demands for land, fresh water and other natural resources are
growing rapidly due to increase in population as well as consumption. But these
resources are limited and Gandhi had very aptly said, “Earth provides enough to satisfy
every [person’s] need but not for every [person’s] greed.” Besides, environmental
degradation has further complicated the situation and the consequences are being felt the
world over. In India, the shortage of water has given rise to several conflicts at the local
and regional level.
5.3.4 Relationships
Relationships are an important facet of human life. Gandhi was in fact always keen to
cooperate with the opponent to build relationships, which would form the basis for a
sound post-conflict life. As human beings, we have personal (family) and social (community)
and/or organisational (business) relationships. In these relationships, people have
disagreements over a variety of issues, which is very normal. However, sometimes the
interdependence created by these relationships introduces a destructive dimension to these
differences, for example, a wife is repeatedly subjected to abuse and domestic violence
but is unable to walk out of the relationship because (apart from other social and cultural
pressures) she may be economically dependent on her husband, who is aware of this
interdependence and uses it to his advantage.
5.3.5 Interests and Needs

Non-fulfillment of interests and needs are a major source of conflict. The non-fulfillment
of these needs may be either a reality or just a perception. In fact, important needs for
identity, respect or participation are often at the heart of conflicts that ostensibly seem to
be a contest for material things. Conflicts usually arise because of the denial of following
needs:
 Unfulfilled needs for economic resources or the perception that economic resources
are not distributed fairly;
 Unfulfilled needs for safety, respect and participation in social life or a perception of
unjust relationships and humiliation; and
 Unfulfilled needs for identity, culture, religious values or a perception that these are
threatened.
When the needs of individuals, communities and nations are denied in the above-
mentioned areas, it leads to structural violence. Vertical structural violence can operate in
the following arenas insulting the respective needs:
 Repression – political – the insulted need is freedom;
 Exploitation – economic – the insulted need is well-being; and
 Alienation – cultural – the insulted need is identity.
For Gandhi, exploitation was the essence of violence. He saw violence as anything that
impeded individual self-realisation and that violence could be either direct or structural in
nature. Dehumanisation is a case in point.
5.3.6 Structures
Structures- both social and organisational- determine who has access to power and
resources, who has the authority to make decisions and who is afforded respect. Conflicts
about or within structures often involve issues of justice and competing goals.
5.3.7 Power
Power can mean different things – legitimacy, authority, force, or the ability to coerce. It
is a vital ingredient in conflict situations; conflicts either centre on the search for more
power or a fear of losing the same. However, power is intangible; it cannot be counted.
But power does not exist in a vacuum; it is present in, and based on, relationships.
Besides, one should look at resources as a key area that determines the actual location
of power or the need for power.
Power conflicts can occur between individuals, groups or nations, when one or both sides
choose to take a power approach to the relationship and wish to maintain or maximise
the amount of influence that they exert in the relationship and the social setting. It is
impossible for one side to be stronger without the other being weaker, at least in terms
of direct influence over each other. Thus, a power struggle ensues which usually ends in
victory for one side and defeat for the other, or in a ‘stand-off’ with a continuing state
of tension.
Power can be either hard (coercive) or soft (persuasive). Hard power consists of the
ability to command and enforce while soft power comprises of the ability to bring about
cooperation, provide legitimacy and inspire. In violent conflict situations, hard power
dominates, as armies and militias grapple for victory. On the other hand, soft power is
essential for peacemaking and peace-building. Power should necessarily be accompanied
by accountability; otherwise it tends to give rise to more conflicts. Being accountable
would mean finding ways to report to others and being open to be questioned by others.
Gandhi had a very different notion of power- one that is humane and constructive- and
“that can transform and not destroy.” He was keenly aware of the difference between
power-over and power-with, and his own conceptions of society and conflict were firmly
rooted in the latter.
5.3.8 Governance
Governance relates to decisions that define expectations, grant power or verify performance.
It is concerned with the way in which society is governed, the distribution of authority and
resources within it, and the legitimacy of these in the eyes of the members of society.
Governance, basically, is a process of decision-making and the process by which
decisions are implemented or (not implemented). In simple terms, ‘governance’ is what a
‘government’ does. Politics provides the means by which the governance process
operates.
‘Good governance’ is an indeterminate term used in development literature to describe
how public institutions conduct public affairs and manage public resources in order to
guarantee the realisation of human rights. According to the United Nations, good
governance has eight characteristics: consensus-oriented, participatory, following Rule of
Law, effective and efficient, accountable, transparent, responsive, equitable and inclusive.
Good governance is considered to be integral to economic growth, the eradication of
poverty and hunger, and sustainable development. It makes violent conflict less likely. If
governments reflect the values and satisfy the needs of those over whom they exercise
authority, they will be legitimised. When the legitimacy is lacking or there is a doubt about
its existence, the demands for social change can result in political turmoil and social
unrest. If these demands are suppressed or ignored, violent conflict may arise. In
contemporary times, the major governance issues relate to greater autonomy (political,
economic and/or cultural), representative forms of government and equitable distribution of
resources.
5.3.9 Rights
Denial or violation of rights and the struggle for elimination of these violations are at the
heart of many conflicts. Civil and political rights are often called ‘first generation rights’
and include rights of the individual in society to life, liberty and freedom of opinion and
expression. Gandhi had always stressed on the centrality of the individual and felt that
society could not be built on a denial of individual freedom. Economic, social and cultural
rights are known as ‘second generation rights’ that comprise of rights to basic necessities
such as food, shelter, health and education. The ‘third generation rights’ refers to collective
rights like those of minorities and marginalised groups. Human rights are thus necessary
for individuals to lead a dignified life.
Some of the major Human Rights Conventions are the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, 1948; Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966; Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights, 1966; Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination
Against Women, 1979; Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment, 1984; Convention on Rights of the Child, 1989.
Rights may theoretically be guaranteed by the constitution of a state but in practice may
not be accessible to the marginalised or they may be intimidated by powerful people from
claiming their rights. Ultimately, the repeated denial of rights may lead to violent conflict.
Thus while analysing conflicts, it is necessary to look at structural violence and explore
the position and perception of stakeholders with regard to rights and freedoms.
5.3.10 Culture
Culture is an important factor in social conflict. It is learnt from the family, community,
school, and media; it is not something human beings are born with. Culture determines the
way individuals and groups act, the manner in which they relate to others and the way
they think about and perceive events happening around them. Thus it is necessary to
understand the cultural contexts of the individuals and groups involved in a conflict
especially in situations where the contending sides are from different cultures. In fact,
Marc Ross argues that there is a ‘culture of conflict’, which he defines as “a society’s
configuration of norms, practices and institutions that affect what people enter into disputes
about, with whom they fight, how disputes evolve, and how they are likely to end.”
5.3.11 Ideology
Ideology is mostly used in reference to the public world of politics. Political ideologies
such as Fascism, Nazism, and Marxism involve a set of fundamental beliefs about
economic organisation or governance of society. One of the most famous ideological
conflicts of the 20th century was the one between the Capitalist Bloc and the Communist
Bloc popularly termed as the Cold War, which manifested in ways such as the formation
of economic and military blocs, and proxy wars between client-states at the regional and
local level. The Cold War ended with the disintegration of the former Soviet Union and
withering away of the Communist Bloc.
5.3.12 Religion
Religion refers generally to the private world of spirituality. It is particularly relevant to
conflict because it may contain strong claims to exclusivity; the faithful are considered to
constitute distinct, exclusive communities. Besides, religious belief can become a motivation
in political action, and can be used by leaders for selfish political ends or as means
towards those ends. Moreover, scriptures have at various points in history been interpreted
and misinterpreted to justify slavery, racism and women’s subordination.
Conflict between religions has occurred throughout history but in the contemporary period
some of the major religions of the world are witness to a surge in fundamentalist elements.
Fundamentalists have attempted to extend their sphere of influence from places of worship
to the state and the society as a whole leading to escalation of conflicts not only between
religions but also within the moderate and extremist sections within religions as well as
with the state and society at large.
However, religion need not always be a source of conflict; it can also be a resource for
peace.
5.3.13 Identity
The oft-asked question of the Cold War era, ‘what is your ideology’ has been replaced
in the post-Cold War era by the question ‘who are you’. People are increasingly
conscious of ‘who they are’ and asserting their cultural and social identity. They are
realigning themselves on the basis of ancestry, religion, language, values and institutions,
and are rejecting distant and alien rule. This is an indication of the growing importance
of identity consciousness in the post-Cold War era.
Identity is used to describe a person’s sense of self and the relation of the self to the
world. It is a basic human need that provides meaning and a sense of security as well
as predictability for the individual and the group within a given social context. Without a
strong sense of “who we are” and how we can “be” and continue to exist and feel safe
in our surroundings, our relationship of the self or group to the world is threatened.
Personal identity and dignity were very important to Gandhi. He argued that the loss of
self-respect had to be avoided because without self-respect and inner security one cannot
reach the road leading to self-realisation or start on the road to nonviolence.
There are multiple identities- as broad as ‘woman’ or ‘man’ or a member of collectives
such as ethnic, religious, or racial groups or as narrow as a member of one particular
family. Identities concern people’s existential needs and values. They can be inclusive as
well as exclusive; they can endure for generations or change with shifting situations (in
response to threats, which may be either real or perceived, forcing people to adopt labels
because identity markers such as ethnicity and religion may be exploited for selfish ends).
Some identities are more important than others depending on how one perceives one’s
identity but also depending on place, times and circumstances. Some identities are nested
within each other, usually compatibly, for example, an individual can identify with both
Rajasthan (one’s state) and India (one’s country).
However, some identities may compete with each other, as in the case of former
Yugoslavia. In the 1950s and 1960s of the former Yugoslavia, many people felt pride in
having stood up to the Soviet Union in 1948 and creating a new economic system. But
the scenario changed in the 1990s, when most people in the former Yugoslavia started
feeling that their identities as Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Muslims, or Bosnians were much
more important than their Yugoslav identity. The process of disintegration of the former
Yugoslavia into several small states (such as Serbia and Montenegro, Croatia, Slovenia,
Bosnia and Herzegovina) was precipitated apart from other reasons due to large-scale
ethnic killings and ‘ethnic cleansing’.
With the rise in identity consciousness, religion, language and ethnicity are increasingly
serving as faultlines for conflict. In contemporary times, ethnicity is seen as one of the
most important elements of identity and the underlying cause of most ongoing conflicts.
However, it must be clarified that many conflicts that are labeled as ‘ethnic’, suggesting
that ethnicity is the cause. In reality ethnicity has been used there as a ‘method’ by which
people have been mobilised in support of a particular leader or movement. This happens
when a group or community first feels insecure or afraid and is then persuaded that a
particular group or leader can offer them safety.
5.3.14 Values
Values are dear to individuals and groups – these are the beliefs that shape their identity
and faith perspectives that give meaning to their lives. Incompatibility in ways of life and
ideologies such as preferences, principles and practices that people believe in can lead to
value conflicts. When states, groups and individuals assert the rightness and superiority of
their way of life and their political-economic system vis-à-vis other states, groups and
individuals, values can then become a major component in such conflicts. Values are often
seen as a part of one’s identity; and thus, challenge to values is often seen as a threat
to identity, resulting in defensive reactions by individuals and groups since they assume that
resolution of the conflict will require a change in values.
5.4 SUMMARY
In conclusion, it can be said that violent conflict is not caused by biological factors alone
but rather is a result of the interaction between biological, psychological and social
determinants. Gandhi too saw conflict as built into social structures and not into people.
There are several specific sources of conflict that appear in the polity, the society, the
economy and the cultural life of modern human beings. Most modern conflicts do not
involve just one source but a combination of sources and this is what makes them
complex. Complex conflicts can be broken down into manageable parts by identifying and
analysing the specific sources of conflict. Moreover, there can be overlap between the
different issues involved in a conflict. Additionally, a conflict may involve several issues in
differing degrees, which may change over time. The issues, which led to the origin of the
conflict and its violent expression, may not necessarily be those that make a conflict an
intractable one.

1. What is the difference between proximate and underlying causes of conflict?
2. What is the ‘nature versus nurture’ debate? Elaborate.
3. Discuss some of the major theoretical expositions with regard to conflict being
inherent in human beings.
4. ‘Conflict is not intrinsic to human beings; its expression depends on factors external
to the individual’. Elucidate.
5. What are some of the major sources of conflict in the contemporary world? Discuss
one source in detail and give examples for the same.
6. What is governance? How does it become a source of conflict?
7. Define identity. How and why is it related to most contemporary conflicts?
SUGGESTED READINGS
Tidwell, Alan C., Conflict Resolved: A Critical Assessment of Conflict Resolution, Pinter,
London and New York, 1988.
Kraybill, Ron., et al , Peace Skills: Manual for Community Mediators, Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, 2001.
Fisher, Simon., et al, Working with Conflict: Skills & Strategies for Action, Zed Books,
and Responding to Conflicts, New York, 2000.
Gilligan, James., Preventing Violence: Prospects for Tomorrow, Thames and Hudson,
2001.
Schellenberg, James A., Conflict Resolution: Theory, Research and Practice, State University
of New York Press, New York, 1996.
Burrows, Robert J., The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach, State
University of New York Press, Albany, 1996.
Galtung, Johan., Conflict Transformation by Peaceful Means – The Transcend Method,
[Participants’ Manual/Trainers’ Manual], United Nations Disaster Management Training
Programme, 2000.
Augsburger, David., Conflict Mediation Across Cultures: Pathways & Patterns, Westminister/
John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky, 1992.
UNIT 6 APPROACHES TO CONFLICT
RESOLUTION
Structure
6.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
6.2 Western Approaches to Conflict Resolution

6.2.1 Dialogue and Facilitation
6.2.2 Approaches to Negotiation and Mediation
6.2.3 Process of Negotiation
6.2.4 Process of Mediation
6.2.5 Arbitration and Adjudication
6.2.6 Essential Skills for Facilitation, Negotiation and Mediation
6.3 Non-Western Approaches to Conflict Resolution

6.3.1 Satyagraha
6.4 Summary
Suggested Readings
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Conflict resolution aims at the satisfaction of basic human needs, as it believes that the
non-fulfillment of basic human needs is at the root of violent conflicts. This opens up
space for ‘facilitative’ and non-violent solutions. Conflict is essentially a subjective
phenomenon, and therefore its resolution must involve analysis and reconstruction of
perceptions of beliefs (about) and attitudes towards, the other side, improving communication
and facilitating the development of trust and cooperation between the hostile groups and
individuals.
Gandhi too believed that conflict was the result of structural denial of human needs.
Satisfaction of needs was thus imperative for conflict resolution. For Gandhi, conflict
resolution entails a facilitated problem-solving process that is interactive, analytical and
actively involves all the individuals and identity groups directly concerned.
Between the two extremes of avoiding conflict and responding to it with violence,
societies and cultures all over the world have developed structured and active conflict
resolution approaches to address actual and potential conflicts between individuals, groups
and communities.
Aims and Objectives
After going through this Unit, you will be able to understand:
 The major western and some non-western approaches to conflict resolution;
 The process of applying these approaches; and
 The skills required for applying these approaches.
Approaches to Conflict Resolution 61
6.2 WESTERN APPROACHES TO CONFLICT

RESOLUTION
Most western approaches to conflict resolution require the usage of a go-between or an
intermediary. Heidi Burgess defines intermediaries (or “third parties”) as people, organizations,
or nations who enter a conflict with the aim of trying to help the disputants de-escalate
or resolve it. Intermediaries can play various roles depending on the circumstance and the
kind of help the disputants require from them (active or passive role). Sometimes the
hostile individuals and groups may decide to resolve the conflict of their own initiative- by
discussing the issues between themselves- without involving any intermediary. If the
discussion does not work, one could move to the process of one to one negotiation.
If the stakeholders are not able to work out a solution on their own, then they may take
assistance from an intermediary. The intermediary may initially focus on the process of
conciliation, where she/he has the limited role of focusing on reducing hostilities. Beyond
this, one could move to the process of mediation and seek active assistance from the
intermediary in exploring options and negotiating a settlement but the responsibility to
decide on acceptable solutions is ultimately in the hands of the contending parties. One
could next move to the process of arbitration where the arbitrator would behave like a
judge, decide on the right and wrong and impose a decision. Adjudication is also a form
of arbitration, wherein the adjudicator is the judge. Lastly, disputants have the choice of
going in for litigation.
The facilitator is a person who leads a collaborative process in which individuals and
groups with divergent views meet to reach consensus on a goal or to solve a problem.
The role of a facilitator is less active than that of an arbitrator or mediator as a pure
facilitator is responsible only for the process and not for the content.
Mediation and arbitration may seem to be a similar process but they are different.
Although both arbitration and mediation involve a third party, mediation places the
responsibility of deciding on acceptable solutions in the hands of the disputants, while
arbitration places it on the arbitrator. Negotiation, mediation and facilitation involve more
of individual and community decision-making, which ultimately aim at the possibility of
enhancing relationships between the contending groups and individuals while arbitration,
adjudication and litigation involve more of legally-enforced decision-making. So, in the
latter case, the law takes over and the role of the individual and the community in
decision-making becomes negligible. Thus, in arbitration, adjudication and litigation the
power of the conflicting groups and individuals to manage their own conflict decreases
and they have less control over the solutions in comparison to the processes of
negotiation, facilitation and mediation. (see Figure 1)
APPROACHES TO HANDLING CONFLICT
Figure 1
Source: Simon Fisher et al.: Working with Conflict - Skills and Strategies for Action, New York: Zed
Books & Responding to Conflict, 2000, p.18
6.2.1 Dialogue and Facilitation

Relationships are key to human existence. In relationships we experience differences – of
views, beliefs, attitudes, values etc. Differences can be used as dividers to foster hatred,
ill-will and animosity or they can be used as a connector to discover the underlying human
unity, to create new partnerships, and to build peace. Gandhi also believed in the human
unity structure at the level of social relationships, the structure to which all human beings
belong and which must be preserved. If we choose to view differences as a way to build
peace, the medium through which this can be done is that of dialogue. Simply speaking,
dialogue means to sit and talk with each other especially with those we have differences.
Talking together can however involve debating, discussing with a view to convincing the
other, arguing for our point of view, examining pros and cons. But in dialogue, the
intention is not to advocate but to inquire; not to argue but to explore; not to convince
but to discover.
Creation of a safe space is intrinsic to dialogue- psychologically as well as physically- only
when people feel safe will they be able to express their opinions freely. Secondly, the
purpose of a dialogue is to learn from each other and to discover each other. Besides,
usage of appropriate communication skills is essential in a dialogue. This would involve
putting aside one’s judgments and listening carefully and respectfully to the experiences of
other people. Moreover, dialogue participants must be prepared, for sometimes hidden
things surface—conscious or unconscious beliefs, perceptions, assumptions, fears—these
hidden aspects increase the level of understanding of the participants. Additionally, there
can be several ups and downs in a dialogue. It is important to stay through the hard
places—anger, frustration, emotional outbursts—and use them as learning opportunities.

But most of all, dialogue should not be approached as a means to change others; rather
dialogue participants must be willing to be changed by the whole experience.
If dialogue is a process or the end, the means through which this process is conducted
is known as facilitation. Facilitation is a process of helping a group complete a task, solve
a problem or come to an agreement to the mutual satisfaction of the people participating
in the dialogue or discussion. A facilitator is responsible for conducting the process
smoothly but she/he is not responsible for the content or the final product. Gandhi
believed in the unity of means and ends, which is necessary for a just and peaceful
society and dialogue and facilitation combine together to do just that.
In most organisations, people get into conflicts with others not because what decision was
made but how the decision was made – who made the decision, by what method and
by what level of majority. Decision-making, thus, lies at the core of building peace in
group, community or organisational settings and facilitators can help a group make a
decision.
In most democratic settings, decisions are made by voting. But voting means different
things to different people, so it is important to clarify and agree well in advance on what
percentage is required to pass a vote. This can range from 50 per cent to 60 per cent
to sometimes 100 per cent or simple majority, two-third majority, by consensus or
unanimously. The facilitator makes sure that the group agrees in advance on the
percentage of vote. She/he also clarifies the term ‘consensus’ as people have different
understandings of it (a decision in which all involved agree to support; even if it may not
be the decision which all prefer is a consensus decision). A decision made by consensus
is useful in any group situation, but in situations of conflict, it plays a crucial role, for
people are often unwilling to be bound by a single vote or a single decision.
6.2.2 Approaches to Negotiation and Mediation

Negotiation and mediation as instruments of peaceful conflict resolution have existed since
early history in Western societies but they were institutionalised as means of peaceful
resolution of inter-state conflicts only in the 20th century.
The Western approaches to negotiation and mediation make a distinction between formal
actors on the state level (governments and international or regional organisations) and
informal actors on the civil society level (international or local non-governmental actors viz,
religious institutions, research institutes, academics, former government officers, think tanks,
or individuals). State level mediators or Track I use traditional diplomacy whereas civil
society mediators or Track II use a variety of approaches.
States mediate with the outcome-oriented approach (traditional diplomacy), which identifies
the representative leaders of the conflicting parties and brings them together to negotiate
or mediate a ceasefire and a peace accord. This approach has been used as a major
instrument in ending a large number of wars but is the focus of criticism, as it tends to
concentrate solely on the top leadership and overlooks the root causes of conflicts. A
variant of the outcome-oriented approach is Power Mediation. Power mediation has all
the criteria of the outcome-oriented approach plus the possibility of use of power,
including force.
At the Track II level of non-official mediation, the third parties are non-directive and they
try to empower the conflicting parties to find their own solutions. These approaches are
long-term and they aim at rebuilding destroyed relationships between the conflicting
parties. One of the most popular approaches at the Track II level is the problem-solving
workshop. The aim of these workshops is to improve the relationship between the
conflicting parties and to get at the root causes of conflicts. This is done by having a
series of such workshops with the same target groups and mediators. The target groups
are representatives of the conflicting parties who have access to the top leadership. The
mediators here are usually a team of academic professionals with conflict resolution
expertise or regional or technical expertise. States are critical of this approach on the
ground that they are too long-term oriented and thus unable to stop wars.
The complementary approach aims to integrate Track I and Track II approaches as both
of them make important contributions to conflict resolution. Here it is necessary to identify
the appropriate actor and approach at a certain time in the conflict. Complementary
approach tries to identify the most efficient mediators at different phases of escalation of
the conflict.
6.2.3 Negotiation
As human beings we negotiate all the time: what to buy or not buy; how much to pay
for the things bought; what to eat or not eat, what to do or not do etc. It is this simple
and widely prevalent skill of negotiation that is used in conflict resolution as a strategy.
Negotiation is a process where individuals with shared and opposed interests, work out
a settlement in order to come to an agreement. One has two choices while negotiating—
go for a win-lose situation (adversarial or distributive approach) wherein one person will
win while the other will lose—or go for mutual problem-solving wherein both the
individuals or groups will try to maximise a joint outcome (integrative approach) which will
result in a win-win situation (gains for both the disputing individuals or groups). The latter
approach is preferable if the disputing individuals or groups have a stake in maintaining
ongoing positive relationships with each other. Gandhi was also of the view that an
approach to conflict that seeks defeat for one party is inconsistent with conflict resolution.
Negotiation normally works in the following way:
1. Disputing individuals and groups share information about the situation they are in (one
at a time without any intervention by the other);
2. They express their feelings (grievances) about the problem at hand or the situation
they are in;
3. Disputants state their positions (what they want) and give reasons that underlie their
positions and feelings;
4. They listen and communicate their understanding of the other individual’s or group’s
positions, feelings and reasons (leading to collective analysis of the conflict);
5. Disputants invent three or more possible solutions or options for resolution;
6. They try to find a common ground that will be acceptable to all and can be
sustained (they work on the details of the solution – what will be done, who will
do it, when will it be done, where will it be done and finally how will it be done);
and
7. Agree and shake hands on the solution that maximise mutual benefits and also agree
to observe and monitor commitments and arrangements (the agreement can be a
formally signed document).
In the initial phase of negotiation, parties maintain their stated positions (what we say we
want). But an expert negotiator will shift the disputing individuals or groups from positions
to interests (what we really want) and finally to needs (what we must have). The
negotiator will do so by asking the why question to the disputants. In most cases,
disputants have not thought through as to ‘why’ they want to do a particular thing or not
do it at all. The why question thus forces them to think about their interests and needs.
Certain principles should be followed in the process of negotiation. We must separate the
people from the problem. Mostly, relationships get entangled with problems. One should
thus pay attention to maintaining a long–term positive relationship between the disputants
and try to affirm the same symbolically and otherwise. Also, it is advisable that one is
hard on the problem but soft on the people (Principled Negotiation). This means that we
should attack the problem at hand but treat the other side as human, having emotions and
values. Gandhi did exactly that when he refused to see the British as evil; however, he
viewed the British policies and agendas as such.
Communicating effectively during the course of negotiation is a must and that involves
listening actively and respectfully and speaking for oneself and not about others. Focusing
on interests and not positions is necessary as positions are more conflicted than interests.
Additionally, one should generate multiple options for resolving a problem. However, the
process of generating options should be separated from the process of evaluating each
option, which will be the next step. The idea is to look for an option that meets the
interests and needs of the disputants. The final solution must be legitimate (it must be
based on some objective criteria or principles). We should try to look for alternatives as
well – what is the Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). And last but
not the least, the commitments made during the process of negotiation should be realistic.
6.2.4 Mediation
Sometimes people in conflict find it difficult to negotiate one-on-one, especially if issues
are complex, emotions are intense, or stakes are high. In such cases, mediation becomes
an option for managing conflicts constructively. Mediation is a process through which a
neutral third person facilitates integrative negotiation between disputing individuals and
groups. Although mediation is facilitated by a third person, it is a voluntary process where
the disputing individuals or groups work out their own solutions, and make informed
decisions to resolve their own disputes; the mediator does not make decisions for them.
Most mediators, however, are professionals who are unknown to the parties. Sometimes,
it is difficult to find any one person who is trusted as impartial and is acceptable to both
the sides. In such cases, a team of two or more co-mediators can work well so long
as each of the sides feels that the team is balanced in its totality. In case of a co-
mediator, it is necessary to check with him/her – who will take the lead role; how the
task will be divided.
Proper groundwork is a must for successful mediation: selection of a mediator/s; ensuring
the participation of disputing individuals and groups; and preparation by the mediator/s.
Mediators need to be aware of their strengths and weaknesses as well as that of their
co-mediator, in case there is one. Additionally, mediators need to remember that the long-
term goal of building relationships and empowering people to address systemic injustices
are sometimes more important than reaching a specific agreement.
Mediation approaches differ from one setting to another as each culture and community
is different. However, mediation generally is a four-stage process, which begins after
advance preparation and getting the parties to the table. The first step is the introduction
stage wherein the mediator provides a safe place for the conflicting individuals and groups
to begin a face-to-face discussion. The mediator introduces himself/herself to the conflicting
individuals and groups. She/he emphasises the goal of the meeting as well – it is a
voluntary process for them to reach a mutual agreement. He/she then describes his/her
role in the process – to help them talk to each other and not to judge or give answers.
The mediator makes sure to describe the process – each side will take turns to speak;
both will agree on the basic issues and will work with these one at a time with their
suggestions for resolution. Gaining commitment to the ground rules like not interrupting,
confidentiality and speaking respectfully is also very important at this stage. The mediator
should ask the conflicting groups and individuals to come up with the ground rules (if the
rules come from them, they will also feel morally responsible to be bound by them) and
not make suggestions initially; in case they are unable to do so, the mediator can then
suggest some of the ground rules and gain commitment from the participants for them.
The second stage is of storytelling, which allows the disputing individuals and groups to
express their concerns, explain the situation as they understand it, and gain a sense of the
other side’s view. It is the duty of the mediator to ensure that the participants speak
directly to each other and not via or through him/her (coaching direct dialogue is a must).
The mediator will get the perspective of each side one at a time and offer his/her
paraphrase identifying each side’s hopes and concerns. The mediator in his/her paraphrase
should also acknowledge the hurt, anger and frustration of the people in conflict. He/she
will then summarise the main issues of the conflict and the common grounds and positive
intentions, if any (identifying the common ground is essential as people in conflict do not
think that they have anything in common between them).
Problem solving is the third stage of the mediation process. The key here is to build a
sense of joint ownership of the problems (they are in this together – they got into the
conflict together and now they have to make an effort to get out of it together) by helping
identify the issues that separate them and generate, evaluate, and negotiate options for
resolution. In this context, Gandhi had also opined that instead of separating the two
sides, a conflict should actually unite them because their incompatibility is common. The
mediator will now pick up one issue at a time and get the conflicting groups and
individuals to work on it (usually start with the easiest to resolve, so that the disputing
individuals and groups get the feeling that it is possible to resolve issues between them).
Here the focus of the mediator should be on trying to move the conflicting individuals and
groups from their demands (positions) to their underlying interests. She/he should then
encourage them to generate options for resolution. The options for resolution will then
have to be evaluated one by one. Once all the options have been evaluated, the disputing
individuals and groups then need to select the best option. Each time there is a ray of
hope–-any constructive move is made or progress takes place—the mediator must
acknowledge and affirm them.
The last stage of mediation is that of agreement where the key is to ensure or seek a
sustainable agreement. The mediator should work out the terms of a fair and sustainable
agreement, including ways to deal with the problems or issues that may arise later during
the course of implementation. In order to do this, she/he needs to address the specifics
of the agreement – what will be done, who will do it, when will it be done, where will
it be done and finally how will it be done. We need to be realistic, clear and simple in
this stage while maintaining a balance between the responsibilities given to the disputants.
The agreement should be just and should contribute to the dignity of the disputants. It
should also leave an opening to tackle the issues that may arise in the future. Last but
not the least, the mediator must ask the individuals and groups to state their intent to
support the agreement. The agreement can be put in black and white (is mostly the case
in the western setting) and the participants can sign it formally or it can be an oral
agreement (non-western settings) as well. In case no agreement is reached, the mediator
should affirm the level of understanding reached; remind the participants of the confidentiality
agreement and offer to meet again.
6.2.5 Arbitration and Adjudication

In arbitration, the disputants take their dispute to an impartial third party, who provides
them with a decision to end their conflict. It may take varied forms (depending on
whether or not arbitration is freely chosen by the parties; whether or not parties have
agreed to be bound by the arbitrator’s decision etc.) and can be applied to different
kinds of circumstances (public or private arbitration). Arbitration has some of the
advantages of mediation such as privacy and flexibility while on the other there is a
prospect of an authoritative decision. Arbitration hearings can be formal or informal
depending on the nature and seriousness of the dispute.
Adjudication refers to a settlement by a court. In civil cases, one party (petitioner) goes
to court to demand something from another (defendant). The court then makes a decision
on the issues in dispute, unless a negotiated settlement occurs first. Here the framework
for considering cases is adversarial, court procedures are highly formal and lawyers are
an essential part of this process. Moreover, this is an expensive way of resolving disputes.
6.2.6 Essential Skills for Facilitation, Negotiation and Mediation

Certain skills are critical to the processes of negotiation, mediation and facilitation. The
first and foremost important quality that mediators, negotiators and facilitators need to
possess is to communicate effectively. It is said that mediators are only as effective as
their listening skills. That is why good listening is at the top of the list of skills needed
for mastery in learning mediation. Good listening helps in building rapport and trust
between the mediators and the disputants. A negotiator too needs to listen effectively and
check for meaning constantly. A facilitator can show respect and compassion only by
being a good listener.
Paraphrasing is another important skill. Through a good paraphrase the mediator
communicates understanding to each of the disputants. It also helps in bringing forth more
reflective responses from the contenders. Besides, it slows down the conversation
between the individuals and groups and serves as a buffer between their statements. The
ability or quality to summarise well is essential. A mediator uses summary to review the
key points that have been made by the disputants. This helps in communicating the sense
that they understand the entire situation being presented. Summarising can also be used
by the facilitator to summarise the content of a discussion every few minutes as a way
of keeping the discussion focused.
Monitoring body language is also a skill. Paying attention to the verbal and non-verbal
behaviour makes it possible to watch for contradictions and to discuss them with the
contenders. Moreover, by learning to observe and understand the body language of
others, mediators can gather useful information about how the participating individuals and
groups are responding. Every culture has its own body language and mediators, negotiators
and facilitators need to be aware of the same. Additionally, intermediaries need to be
good at problem solving. Mediators and negotiators should possess the quality of
generating a variety of possibilities/options/alternatives, picking the best course of action

and developing an implementation. A facilitator should be able to help the group define
a problem, analyse it and generate options for resolution. They should also know the art
of narrowing down options, for example by clubbing together more than one option or
removing the impractical ones.
Lastly, third party interveners need to be flexible. They should have the capacity to shift
from problem-oriented activities to people-oriented activities to process-oriented activities
and vice-versa, when progress is blocked in one of these areas. This means that if
disputing individuals and groups are stuck on the problem or the conflict, then the third
party should shift the discussion to the people, that is, the relationship aspect. If the
discussion gets stuck on the relationship aspect, then the intervener should shift it to the
process, such as what should be discussed first, what should be taken up later and so
on. Thus, one should be flexible enough to go back and forth between the three aspects
of problem, people and process. While undertaking this course of action, one should be
prepared to deal with emotional outbursts and difficult behaviour. To conclude, intermediaries
must possess a positive outlook and be fair, impartial and objective in their dealings with
the disputants.
6.3 NON-WESTERN APPROACHES TO CONFLICT

RESOLUTION
A variety of non-western approaches to conflict resolution are used in different parts of
Asia and Africa. In the African country of Rwanda, the Gacaca is chaired by elders,
generally wise old men, who lead group discussions that result in an arrangement that is
acceptable to all the participants. In Burundi, the bushingantahe or the Council of
Notables plays an important role in adjudicating local disputes and reconciling individual
persons or families. Parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan follow the Jirga system, which is
an assembly of elders that takes decisions by consensus on matters dealing with individual
and community disputes.
In India, the mediative approach has been the primary means of dispute resolution at the
community level. The Panchayat system in which a respected village elder(s) assists in
resolving community disputes has long been an accepted method of conflict resolution.
The traditional panchayat system comprised of intervention by third parties unconnected
with the conflict, with a view to overcome the antagonism of the disputants. The aim here
was to re-establish communication between them and the conflicting parties were persuaded
to talk to each other; the mediator was only a medium. However, in contrast to the
western approach, the mediator here is a known and respected third person who is
trusted by the disputants to assist in the resolution of their conflict. Sometimes, however,
mediations would actually turn into adjudication – decisions would just be imposed on the
disputants.
6.3.1 Satyagraha
The Gandhian method of conflict resolution is known as “satyagraha,” which basically
means “a relentless search for truth and a determination to reach truth”. Satyagraha, as
conceived by Gandhi, is a dialectical process that is creative, constructive and centrally
concerned with human needs.
To resolve conflict, Gandhi employed a combination of three basic approaches. First of
all, Satyagraha implied cooperation with the opponent as a person but noncooperation
with the opponent’s role in the context of the social structure (Johan Galtung called this
process as “decoupling”). Gandhi saw conflict as built into social structures and not into
people. Hence, he made a clear distinction between the actor and the deed: “Hate the
sin and not the sinner.” Thus the essence of Gandhi’s approach was to preserve the
people while systematically demolishing the evil structure.
Second, Gandhi was willing to compromise when basic principles had not been challenged.
He was thus ready to cooperate with the opponents, whenever possible throughout the
struggle, in order to build relationships and to create the basis for a sound post-conflict
life. Third, Gandhi sought synthesis or transcendence that was mutually agreeable and
satisfactory to all the parties and superior to any one of the original positions with the aim
of creating new choices and restructuring the opposing elements of a conflict. This would
include correction in the attitudes, reversal of behavioural polarisation patterns and removal
of the goal incompatibility.
The aim of Gandhian Satyagraha is neither to harm the opponent nor to impose on them
a solution against their will; rather, it seeks to help the parties achieve a more secure,
creative and truthful relationship. Besides, Satyagraha is not used against someone; it is
done with someone. The central idea being that moral appeal to the heart and conscience
are much more effective than violence or pain. In Gandhi’s view, conflict is the result of
structural denial of human needs and conflict resolution thus requires a method of struggle
that satisfies three conditions: it must destroy need-denying structures, create need-
satisfying structures and respect the needs of the conflicting parties during the struggle
itself. Satyagraha was Gandhi’s attempt to devise a method of struggle that satisfied all
the three conditions.
6.4 SUMMARY
In this unit, we have primarily looked at the major western and some non-western
approaches to conflict resolution. It can be concluded from the above discussion that both
western and the Gandhian approach to conflict resolution believe that the denial of human
needs causes conflict and damages relationships. Both agree that restoring relationships
through facilitated methods of problem-solving is thus the main aim of conflict resolution.
The conflict resolution process must target a change in the attitude, behaviour and the
structure (context).

1. What are the essential features of dialogue? What is the role of the facilitator in a
dialogue?
2. Describe the western approaches to negotiation and mediation.
3. What is negotiation? What are the principles of negotiation?
4. Discuss the process or stages of Mediation.
5. Distinguish between arbitration and adjudication.
6. Who is an intermediary? What skills are essential for intermediaries?
7. Briefly discuss some of the non-western approaches to conflict resolution.

8. What is the Gandhian approach to conflict resolution? What are the similarities and
differences between the major western approaches to conflict resolution and the
Gandhian approach to conflict resolution?
SUGGESTED READINGS
Reychler, L, & T. Paffenholz., (ed), Peacebuilding: A Field Guide, Lynne Rienner
Publishers, Boulder & London, 2001.
Tidwell, Alan C., Conflict Resolved: A Critical Assessment of Conflict Resolution, Pinter,
London and New York, 1998.
Kraybill, Ron., et al, Peace Skills: Manual for Community Mediators, Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, 2001.
Fisher, Simon., et al, Working with Conflict: Skills & Strategies for Action, Zed Books
& Responding to Conflict, New York, 2000.
Schellenberg, James A., Conflict Resolution: Theory, Research and Practice, State University
of New York Press, New York, 1996.
Jayne Seminare Docherty., The Little Book of Strategic Negotiation: Negotiating During
Turbulent Times, Intercourse, PA: Good Books, 2005.
Kelsey, D, & P. Plumb., Great Meetings! How to Facilitate Like a Pro, Handson Park
Press, Portland, Maine, 2001.
Chodosh, H.E, N. J. Bhatt, F. Kassam., Mediation in India: A Toolkit, United States
Educational Foundation in India (USEFI), New Delhi, 2004.
Ury, William, and Roger Fisher w/ Bruce Patton., (ed), Getting to Yes, Penguin Books,
New York, N.Y., 2nd edition, 1991.
Schirch, Lisa., The Little Book of Dialogue for Difficult Subjects, Intercourse: PA, 2007.
Kraybill, Ron, & Evelyn Wright., The Little Book of Cool Tools for Hot Topics: Group
Tools to Facilitate Meetings When Things Are Hot, Intercourse: PA, 2006.
Augsburger, David W., Conflict Mediation Across Cultures: Pathways & Patterns,
Westminister/John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky, 1992.
Burrows, Robert J., The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach, State
UNIT 7 GANDHIAN APPROACH TO CONFLICT
RESOLUTION
Structure
7.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
7.2 Fundamental Concepts in Gandhian Thought and Practice
7.2.1 Faith in Human Goodness
7.2.2 Truth
7.2.3 Non-violence
7.2.4 Creative Self-suffering
7.2.5 Means and Ends
7.2.6 Rejection of Coercion
7.2.7 Fearlessness
7.3 Gandhian Conception of the Individual, Conflict and Violence

7.4 Gandhian Approach to Conflict Resolution
7.4.1 Types of Nonviolent Action
7.4.2 The Dialectics of Satyagraha
7.4.3 Principles of Satyagraha
7.4.4 Process of Satyagraha
7.4.5 Application of Satyagraha to Various Kinds of Conflicts
7.4.5.1 Inter-personal Conflicts
7.4.5.2 Legal Conflicts
7.4.5.3 Industrial Conflicts
7.4.5.4 Social Conflicts
7.4.5.5 International Conflicts
7.5 Summary
Suggested Readings
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Conflict is a norm in human life; however, man has attempted conflict resolution since time
immemorial as well. There are two ways of resolving conflict – through violence or
through nonviolent means. As human beings, we constantly make the choice of resolving
conflict either through violence or nonviolent means. Gandhi is eulogised for making a
choice of resolving conflicts in nonviolent ways, which he termed as Satyagraha. Pre and
post-Gandhi, several scholars and individuals have outlined the nonviolent way of resolving
conflicts but Gandhi was one person who not only spoke and wrote a lot about it but
also demonstrated it in his thought, words and deeds.
Aims and Objectives

After going through this unit you will understand
 The fundamental concepts in Gandhian thought and practice;
 The Gandhian conception of the individual, conflict and violence;
 The ingredients and theoretical inputs of Gandhian approach to conflict resolution;
 The application of the Gandhian approach to conflict resolution to various levels of
conflict.
7.2 FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS IN GANDHIAN

THOUGHT AND PRACTICE
Before we outline the Gandhian approach to conflict and conflict resolution, it is
mandatory to understand the elements or concepts fundamental to the understanding of the
Gandhian approach. These elements acquire a particular meaning or worldview in the
Gandhian perspective.
7.2.1 Faith in Human Goodness

Gandhi believed that “Every one of us is a mixture of good and evil…The difference that
there is between human beings is a difference of degree.” Gandhi considers it violent to
classify human beings as inferior or dehumanise them. He wrote in Harijan in May 1936:
“Not to believe in the possibility of permanent peace is to disbelieve in the godliness of
human nature. Methods hitherto have failed because rock-bottom sincerity on the part of
those who have striven has been lacking.”
Gandhi also believed in human rationality and considered it important to Satyagraha. Thus
the twin beliefs in human goodness and human rationality or reason lead to a belief in the
possibility of conversion. Opponents can therefore be influenced to change their nature
and their worldviews as well.
7.2.2 Truth
Truth or Satya “is that which you believe to be true at this moment. And that is your
God.” Ahimsa or non-violence is the only means of realising the truth. Gandhi classified
truth into Absolute Truth and relative truth. He believed that “God was an impersonal, all
pervading reality” – this is Absolute Truth; “discoveries on the way to the realization of
Truth” is referred to as relative truth. A satyagrahi who lives a life of truth will be
harmonious in his thoughts, words and actions.
7.2.3 Non-violence
For Gandhi, the word Ahimsa or non-violence has a wide meaning. It is a positive
concept that requires doing, not just refraining from injury. Gandhi had a strong belief in
the unity of all life and thus non-injury to all living things. However, when one eats, some
injury does take place, but that is a necessary evil. Nonetheless, non-violence had to
become a creed to be lived day-by-day and not just a policy “…like a garment to be
put on and off at will.”
Gandhian Approach to Conflict Resolution 73
7.2.4 Creative Self-suffering

Self-suffering is a necessary part of Satyagraha. It has several benefits. First of all, it
appeals to the reason of an opponent. Secondly, it transforms both the sufferer and the
opponent – the sufferer is morally enriched as s/he is not compromising fundamental
principles and the opponent is forced to confront his/her views on the nature of the truth
of the given situation, which may possibly end in converting him/her. Besides, even if self-
suffering does not touch the conscience of the opponent, it may still have objective
benefits in conflict situations – self-suffering may move public opinion to the side of the
satyagrahi, which may indirectly force the opponent to convert. Gandhi mentioned both
practical and existential benefits of self-suffering. He said:
“Suffering injury in one’s own person is ………of the essence of nonviolence and it is
the chosen substitute of violence to others. It is not because I value life low that I can
countenance with joy thousands voluntarily losing their lives for satyagraha, but because
I know that it results in the long run in the least loss of life, and what is more, it ennobles
those who lose their lives and morally enriches the world for their sacrifice.”
Besides, there are other benefits. In the words of Robert J Burrowes, “The willingness
to suffer for the sake of others is also the ultimate test of love in action, as well as a
method of dramatizing the injustice to be remedied. It is demonstration, too, of sincerity
and of the commitment to satisfying the needs of the opponent………….And, finally, it
is the means for ensuring that others do not suffer because of the satyagrahi’s mistakes.”
7.2.5 Means and Ends

The relationship of means to ends is an essential principle of Gandhi’s thought. It was a
reflection of the Hindu belief in karma. However, for Gandhi the law of karma not only
applied to future lives but to the present life as well. He explained the means and ends
relationship in Hind Swaraj:
“The means may be likened to a seed, the end to a tree: and there is just the same
inviolable connection between the means and end as there is between the seeds and the
tree.”
He further elaborated upon it in July 1924 in Young India:
“They say ‘Means are after all means.’ I would say, ‘means are after all everything.’ As
the means, so the end. There is no wall of separation between means and ends.”
Gandhi therefore always devoted his energies to looking after the purity of the means.
For him, truth is the end and non-violence is the means to that end.
7.2.6 Rejection of Coercion

Thomas Weber defines coercion “as the use of force, including moral force, to compel
an opponent to act in a way that is contrary to either their will or judgement.” Gandhi
insisted on a principle of non-coercion and cautioned against the use of coercion because
perceptions vary from person to person and one can never be certain that their
perception is correct. However, Gandhi has been criticised for not sticking to this principle
as some scholars claim that his method of Satyagraha contains an element of coercion.
His supporters though contend that Satyagraha does involve elements of compulsion but
it is a positive element of coercion.
Gandhi’s usage of fast has been seen by some as a method of coercion. Thomas Weber,
however, clarifies:
“A fast amounts to coercion or undue influence if an opponent in a conflict gives in
because they did not want the person fasting to die rather than because they had been
converted. Gandhi unhesitatingly advocates resistance to such undue influence.”
Gandhi opined that the chance of coercion leading to conversion was very rare. He
“observed that things done under the pressure of a fast have been undone after the fast
is over. If such a thing happens it would be a tragedy of the highest degree.”
Gandhi thus believed that coercion was against the spirit of Satyagraha but if it had to
be used, then moral coercion was preferable to physical coercion because it would have
the support of the general public, which could eventually lead to conversion of the
opponent.
7.2.7 Fearlessness
Satyagraha entails self-suffering, which in turn requires some courage on the part of the
satyagrahi as it is not easy to endure self-suffering. Fearlessness is a great quality for it
leads to the growth of other noble qualities—”how can one seek Truth or cherish love,
without fearlessness”, Gandhi questioned. Satyagraha however, does not require courage
that is based on physical strength; it requires courage that comes from “determined and
constant endeavor, ..by cultivating self-confidence” and “from an indomitable will”.
7.3 GANDHIAN CONCEPTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL,

CONFLICT AND VIOLENCE
Gandhi gives prime importance to the individual because according to him the individual
has a soul while society does not. He had a very positive view of human nature as it
has the ability to rise above selfishness and violence. The individual was central and thus
a nonviolent society had to be created that could satisfy human needs. Self-realisation is
the “highest” need but that depends on the satisfaction of other needs. Only a nonviolent
individual could be the foundation of a nonviolent society and the creation of a nonviolent
society required nonviolent transformation of the individual.
Gandhi rejected the conception of conflict in terms of class war as elucidated by
socialism. He viewed conflict as a positive and desirable thing. It is in fact an opportunity
to transform the self and the society. Moreover, conflict “is an important means to greater
human unity”, for it reminds human beings of the bonds that relate them to each other.
Conflict, according to Gandhi, was built into social structures and not into people.
Therefore his approach to conflict resolution aimed to preserve the individual while
systematically targeting the structure. Gandhi “saw conflict as a perennial condition” and
was thus more concerned about managing conflict and creating new social arrangements
free of structural violence. Robert J Burrowes says, “In Gandhi’s view, conflict is the
result of the structural denial of human needs. If these needs are to be satisfied, new
structures are necessary. This requires a method of struggle that satisfies three conditions:
It must destroy need-denying structures, create need-satisfying structures, and respect the
needs of the conflicting parties during the struggle itself.”
In 1992, Johan Galtung, agreeing with Arne Naess (1974), summarised Gandhi’s conflict
norms. Firstly, one should act in conflicts, not out of necessity but out of conviction;
define the conflict well, which would include stating one’s goals clearly and trying to
understand the opponent’s goals; and have a positive approach to conflict, seeing it as an
opportunity to meet the opponent, as an opportunity to transform the society and the self.
Secondly, one should act nonviolently in conflicts, not harming or hurting with either
words, thoughts or deeds and act in a goal-consistent manner by including constructive
elements and acting openly, not secretly. Further one should not cooperate with evil or
with those who cooperate with evil; be ever ready to sacrifice; neither polarise the
situation nor escalate the conflict. Lastly, conflicts should be solved by insisting on
essentials and willing to sacrifice on non-essentials; seeing oneself as fallible and admitting
mistakes; being generous with opponents by not judging them harder than oneself and not
exploiting their weaknesses; and most of all, aim for conversion rather than coercion, not
only of the opponent but conversion of the self as well, by seeking solutions that can be
acceptable to both the parties.
Concentrating on the Gandhian conception of conflict, Robert J Burrowes said, “Three
principles underpin the Gandhian approach to conflict: the unity of means and end,
recognition of the unity of all life, and a willingness on the part of the satyagrahi to
undergo suffering.” The first and the last one have already been discussed in the earlier
section, so here we will touch upon only the second principle.
“The Gandhian approach to conflict presupposes the unity of all life.” The idea of unity
of all life runs through Indian thought, Hinduism and Jainism, all of which were a major
influence on Gandhi. According to Hajime Nakamura, the core of Indian thought, “is the
idea of the unity of all things.” He elaborates further that this idea is also characteristic
of Hinduism, which emphasises “Universal Being, to which all individuals and particulars
are subordinated.” Besides, this notion is a central tenet in Jainism as well. Gandhi said
in December 1924 in Young India: “I believe in the essential unity of [humanity] and for
that matter of all that lives.”
Gandhi believed that conflict is a part of human nature but violence is not. He therefore
looked for human ways to settle disputes rather than “return to our animal past and use
brute force.” He evolved the method of Satyagraha, which aims at the resolution of
conflicts without resorting to violence. Gandhi excluded violence “because man is not
capable of knowing absolute truth and, therefore, is not competent to punish.” He defined
violence as “anything that impedes individual self-realization.” This violence could be of
two kinds- direct or structural. Gandhi held that “exploitation is the essence of violence.”
On the question of whether aggression is a basic human instinct or an innate quality,
Gandhi had observed, “Fortunately for humanity, nonviolence pervades human life and is
observed by men without special effort.” In fact he believed that if human beings were
not essentially nonviolent in nature, it “would have been self-destroyed ages ago.” To
quote Gandhi: “Man’s nature is not essentially evil; brute nature has been known to yield
to the influence of love. You must never despair of human nature.” The cases and issues
of conflict and violence that have been recorded by history are in essence recordings of
happenings outside of the ordinary. Non-violence is the norm and widely prevalent in day
to day interactions and therefore, “History does not and cannot take note of this fact.”
Thus it can be concluded in the words of Thomas Weber, “In the Gandhian model the
individual comes to a conflict situation as one who is not innately aggressive and has the
freedom of will to resolve conflicts in a nonviolent way freely chosen.”
7.4 GANDHIAN APPROACH TO CONFLICT

RESOLUTION
The Gandhian approach to conflict resolution is popularly known as Satyagraha, which is
essentially a nonviolent method. It is based on the premise that a committed individual is
capable of resolving conflicts in a creative and fruitful way but for this to happen s/he
needs to put maximum effort into it. It further assumes that on a continuum conflicts can
move from the competitive to the cooperative. This happens not just between partners in
close relationships but is a possibility in distant relationships as well. The Gandhian
approach further emphasises on arriving at the truth – victory or winning is not important
here; satisfaction of all the parties to the conflict with the outcome is much more
important. This can only happen when something mutual is worked out between the
parties. When all the parties are satisfied with the outcome, the resolution is sturdy and
not fragile.
7.4.1 Types of Nonviolent Action

Gene Sharp categorises nonviolent action into three types:
1) “accommodation, where the opponent does not believe in the changes made but
nevertheless believes that it is best to give in on some or all points to gain peace
or to cut losses;
2) nonviolent coercion, where the opponent wants to continue the struggle but cannot
because they have lost the sources of power and means of control; and
3) conversion, where the opponent has changed inwardly to the degree that they want
to make the changes desired by the nonviolent activist (or indeed, the nonviolent
activist themself has so changed).”
Accommodation and nonviolent coercion have their basis in power; these methods depend
on power that the parties involved in the conflict can exert on each other. Conversion,
however, has nothing to do with power; “the touching of the conscience” is the focus
here. For Gandhi, conversion is not only the most effective method of conducting a
struggle but it is also “the morally correct way to conduct conflict because only through
a dialectical process can truth be arrived at, or at least approached, and such quest for
truth is, according to him, the aim of life.”
7.4.2 The Dialectics of Satyagraha

Violence to human beings and property clouds the real issues of the conflict while non-
violence results in a dialogue between the stakeholders on the real issues of the conflict.
Therefore, Gandhi warns us to “Hate the sin and not the sinner.” The satyagrahi
undergoes self-suffering in the belief that the opponent can be converted to see the truth
by touching his/her conscience or that a clearer vision of the truth will emerge out of the
dialectical process for both the parties. However, the satyagrahi should not only try to
convert the opponent but should also be open to persuasion. The main aim of
Satyagraha thus is to change the attitude of the opponent, which will result in a change
of behaviour.
7.4.3 Principles of Satyagraha

For Gandhi, Satyagraha is not just a set of actions; it is also an attitude, a way of life.
It entails ten principles:

1) Opponents should not be humiliated or provoked; otherwise it invites violence.
2) The satyagrahi should be clear about the essential elements of his case and the
purpose of the struggle. This is less likely to invite a violent attitude.
3) Honest dissemination of information is essential – opponents are less likely to use
violence if they are provided with a full understanding of one’s case and conduct.
4) Essential interests, which opponents have in common, should be clearly formulated
and cooperation established on these lines.
5) A satyagrahi should not judge opponents harder than the self.
6) A satyagrahi should trust his/her opponents.
7) A satyagrahi should always be willing to compromise on non-essentials. In fact,
Satyagraha requires willingness on the part of the opponents to “make large
concessions on all points except where a principle is involved.”
8) Satyagraha requires a just cause; it cannot be used for an unjust cause. Personal
sincerity on the part of the satyagrahi is thus the key.
9) If a satyagrahi wants to convince his/her opponent of his/her sincerity, s/he will have
to make sacrifices for the given cause.
10) A satyagrahi should never exploit a position of weakness in an opponent.
7.4.4 Process of Satyagraha

Thomas Weber opines that there are three prerequisites of a successful Satyagraha
campaign. “They are:
1) that there can always be found some elements of common interest to all the
contending parties;
2) that the parties are, or at least might be, amenable to an ‘appeal to the heart and
mind’; and
3) that those in a position to commence Satyagraha are also in a position to carry it
through to the end.”
Once these prerequisites are fulfilled the process of conversion can be initiated, which
involves several steps: first of all reasoning with the opponent, secondly persuasion or
moral appeal through self-suffering, which has been termed as “moral jiu-jitsu” by Richard
Gregg. In case none of these attempts are successful, then the tools of non-cooperation
or civil disobedience can be used.
7.4.5 Application of Satyagraha to Various Kinds of Conflicts

Gandhi was of the opinion that Satyagraha could be used in domestic situations as well
as in broader fields, but “he who fails in the domestic sphere and seeks to apply it only
in the political and social sphere will not succeed.” Thus, a satyagrahi had to start by
solving small conflicts at the home front before going out to resolve the larger issues, “For
it will be by those small things that you shall be judged.”
7.4.5.1 Inter-personal Conflicts

In conflicts such as domestic quarrels, “non-cooperation, civil disobedience of the orders
of the offender if he happens to be in exercise of authority, suffering of hardships that
came as a result of this resistance, fasting etc.” can be used. However, the main methods
that should be employed in such cases “will be persuasion and discussion.” In the
Gandhian approach, the resolution of inter-personal conflicts would depend largely on the
internalisation of the principles of satyagraha. Besides these, Thomas Weber has pointed
out some other techniques as well (not prescribed by Gandhi per se but on Gandhian
lines) that can be used for the resolution of such conflicts.
The first of these techniques is known as “I-Message”. It is appropriate for conflicts
where the focus is on personal needs rather than values or beliefs. The initial response
in inter-personal conflicts is to blame the other for unacceptable behaviour and its
consequences by sending “You-Message”, which masks the real issues of the conflict and
provokes resistance. When blame statements are reformulated into “I-Messages”, it helps
in clarifying issues by explaining the feelings of the speaker as a result of the unacceptable
behaviour by the other and giving the speaker’s perception of the consequences of
behaviour on them. The second technique is “the role-reversal technique of switching
viewpoints, where each party honestly tries to argue for the other’s viewpoint, while the
other listens.” It works in domestic situations or in situations where there is enough
rapport viz. between friends, between neighbours etc. The last technique is a combination
of “active-listening” and “mirroring”. It “could be used until hearing what the opponent in
a conflict is saying becomes second nature.” Active listening involves “mirroring back
what has been said.” This not only assures accuracy of listening but also “assures the
sender that he has been understood when he hears his own message fed back to him
accurately.” This technique can be used to solve immediate inter-personal conflicts. It can
also be used by a third party to help one of the parties in a conflict situation clarify his/
her own feelings and think creatively about solutions.
7.4.5.2 Legal Conflicts
Gandhi, being a lawyer by profession, has expressed his views on the resolution of legal
(cases that go via the legal court system) conflicts. Legal dispute settlement is seen as
a major method of nonviolent settlement of disputes in modern times. Gandhi, however,
views the appearance of a civil case in a court as failure on the part of the parties to
settle the dispute on their own. Once the case goes to the court, there is the risk of loss
for one party and victory for the other; moreover, both the parties will have to pay costs
as well.
Other kinds of cases that come before the courts are conflicts between individuals and
the state. These may arise out of disputes between friends, neighbours and relatives or
individuals unilaterally perpetrating a breach of the criminal code and getting detected for
doing the same. In such cases the parties to the conflict do not confront each other in
the court; the case is dealt by the lawyers that they hire to represent them. Here, as per
the Gandhian approach, the lawyer can play the role of a catalyst – a mediator – rather
than just indulging in legal negotiations in the court and bringing out points of law in favour
of their clients. Gandhi himself did that a number of times and thus claimed:
“I realized that the true function of a lawyer was to unite parties riven asunder. The lesson
was so indelibly burnt into me that a large part of my time during the twenty years of
my practice as a lawyer was occupied in bringing about private compromises of hundreds

of cases. I lost nothing thereby—not even money, certainly not my soul.”
Pointing out the negatives of the legal method of conflict resolution, Thomas Weber said,
“When disputes enter the legal process the disputants lose control not only of the
outcome of the process but also their own ability to handle the situation—they become
less than self-sufficient, more reliant on experts.”
7.4.5.3 Industrial Conflicts
Gandhi’s approach to industrial conflict is not zero-sum or compromise; he instead
advocates mutual problem-solving, which will lead to the truth. Conflicts within the
industry are a result of economic and/or social causes such as “changes in the social
structure of the plant or changes in management policies, frustrations that result from a
lack of communication with the management, a feeling of powerlessness resulting from the
lack of opportunity in having an effective voice in the running of the industry, and basic
conflicts of interests between workers and management.” If workers have greater
involvement in the affairs of the workplace, it is likely to lessen the occurrence of
industrial disputes. In order to avoid conflict between labour and conflict, Gandhi
suggested that “labour should have the same status and dignity as capital.” However, once
an industrial conflict breaks out, Gandhi leaves out the option of negotiations between the
management and the labour because in Satyagraha one can never ask for more than is
felt warranted. This would mean that one cannot bargain here.
Thomas Weber mentions two nonviolent measures of settling industrial disputes as per the
Gandhian approach: “(a) moral appeals to the conscience of the employers to concede
just demands, and (b) if these fail, a resort to voluntary arbitration, where the decision
of the umpire would bind the parties.” In case these two measures fail, Gandhi recognised
that workers have the option of resorting to strikes; in fact it is an “inherent right of the
working men but must be considered a crime immediately the capitalists accept the
principle of arbitration.” However, in situations where there are surplus labourers to
replace the strikers, strike as a measure will not work. Then the last remedy is
resignation, which may result in starvation but will at least ensure dignity of the worker.
7.4.5.4 Social Conflicts
Employing the principles of Satyagraha to group social conflicts are a difficult proposition
because it is easier to appeal to the conscience of an individual and make them see
reason in comparison to a group. Besides, it is also easy for individuals to remain truthful
and nonviolent in contrast to a group. However, Gandhi recommends ‘Mass Satyagraha’
as a method of resolving social conflicts. The general rules of Satyagraha such as truth,
non-violence, self-suffering, coercion and means and ends will also be applicable in ‘Mass
Satyagraha’. Before undertaking a ‘Mass Satyagraha’ all other means of resolving the
conflict must have been exhausted.
Bondurant has listed the following steps of a ‘Mass Satyagraha’ (especially in the context
of satyagraha against a repressive government):
(1) “Negotiation and arbitration. All established channels to be exhausted before undertaking
further steps.
(2) Preparation for group action. Discussion, examination of motives and self-discipline
exercises started. Issues at stake, appropriate action, circumstances of opponents

and public opinion examined.
(3) Agitation including the distribution of propaganda, marches, etc. commenced.
(4) Issuing of ultimatum. Future steps to be taken are brought to the notice of the
opponent if no agreement is reached.
(5) Economic boycott and strikes, including picketing and general strike, commenced.
(6) Non-cooperation. Non-payment of taxes, boycott of schools and other public
institutions undertaken.
(7) Civil Disobedience. Breaking of selected laws because they are central to the
grievance or are symbolic.
(8) Usurping the functions of government.
(9) Parallel government.
Large nonviolent campaigns such as civil disobedience should be coupled with constructive
work. Constructive work not only helps in influencing public opinion but it also equips
people with the discipline for non-violence. Moreover, “it aids morale by giving the
satyagrahi something positive to do rather than merely having him or her to suffer the
negative aspects of frustration while waiting for something to happen.”
Another Gandhian measure for resolving social conflicts is Trusteeship, wherein owners of
wealth are supposed to voluntarily convert themselves into trustees of their wealth for the
poor. Redistribution of wealth however, should not involve any coercion because the
foundation of a nonviolent state cannot be based on violence. Making trusteeship a social
reality may seem a difficult proposition in a modern consumerist society and Gandhi was
aware of that difficulty as well; however, he had faith in it, stating: “I adhere to my
doctrine of trusteeship in spite of the ridicule that has been poured upon it. It is true that
it is difficult to reach. So is nonviolence.”
In conclusion, Thomas Weber says, “This whole area of social conflict places a great
emphasis on the individual, first of all to refuse to be ruled or exploited any longer, and
secondly, as with the case of the rich, to examine one’s own life-style to determine the
degree to which he or she is also responsible for the oppression or exploitation of others.
This introspection is particularly important to ensure that the chain is broken…..”
7.4.5.5 International Conflicts
Principles like truth, non-violence and means and ends are also applicable to the
international arena. These principles should guide interactions between nations as well.
Gandhi expounded the concept of civilian defence to solve international conflicts instead
of doing so through the means of war. Civilian defence aims to defend the whole society,
not just borders or some crucial buildings. When a nation is attacked by another nation,
the aggrieved citizens should adopt the method of civilian defence instead of military
defence and start a political struggle employing the tactics of civil disobedience and non-
cooperation. A country that adopts civilian defence is less likely to be invaded by another
country because it is no longer seen as a threat. However, this can only happen when
unilateral disarmament is first undertaken. Such unilateral actions will reduce international
tensions. However, armaments are controlled by economic factors and therefore disarmament
cannot be a reality unless nations stop exploiting other nations.
If a nonviolent society is attacked, Gandhi suggests two ways of coping with the
aggressor, which he laid out in Harijan in 1940:
“to yield possession but not cooperate with the aggressor….the second way would be
nonviolent resistance by the people who have been trained in the nonviolent way. They
would offer themselves as fodder for the aggressor’s canon….the unexpected spectacle of
endless rows upon rows of men and women simply dying rather than surrender to the will
of an aggressor must ultimately melt him and his soldiery.”
Several scholars had subjected Gandhi’s method of civilian defence to severe criticism and
termed it as impractical. However, one thing is certain that Gandhi’s “nonviolent equivalent
to war suffer fewer of the moral deficiencies that war suffers from.”
7.5 SUMMARY
Gandhi had the firm belief that human beings were basically good and humanity essentially
had a nonviolent nature. The underlying sources of conflict are distrust and friction and
therefore the Gandhian method of conflict resolution does not focus on the immediate
grievances of the conflict; it goes beyond that to look at the underlying sources of the
conflict as well. Satyagraha essentially is a nonviolent method that touches all three
aspects: the attitude, the behaviour and the goal incompatibility and can be applied to
smaller as well as larger disputes occurring in different areas of human life.
To conclude in the words of Thomas Weber: “Satyagraha, then, from the Gandhian
perspective, is a viable, autonomy-producing method of conflict resolution. Its stress on
the shared humanity of all, including opponents, also makes it ethically superior to other
methods of conflict resolution.” Not only that, even when Satyagraha fails to resolve
conflicts, “the subjective benefits of dignity that comes from leading a moral life, is always
present and this is missing with other methods.”

1. Enumerate the fundamental concepts in Gandhian thought and practice.
2. How does Gandhi conceptualise conflict and violence?
3. Discuss and describe the various kinds of nonviolent action.
4. How does Gandhi propose to resolve inter-personal conflicts?
5. What are Gandhi’s views on legal conflicts?
6. Write a note on the concept of civilian defence as enumerated by Gandhi.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Parekh, Bhikhu., Colonialism, Tradition and Reform: An Analysis of Gandhi’s Political
Discourse, Sage Publications, New Delhi, 1999.
Sharma, Jai Narain., Satyagraha: Gandhi’s Approach to Conflict Resolution, Volume 3
(‘Rediscovering Gandhi’ Series) Concept Publishing Company in collaboration with Gandhi
Smriti & Darshan Samiti, New Delhi, 2008.
Bose, Nirmal Kumar., Studies in Gandhism, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,

1972.
Iyer, Raghavan N., The Moral and Political Thought of Mahatma Gandhi, Oxford
University Press, New Delhi, 1973.
Burrowes, Robert J., The Strategy of Nonviolent Defense: A Gandhian Approach, State
Weber, Thomas., Conflict Resolution and Gandhian Ethics, Gandhi Peace Foundation,
New Delhi, 1991.
Weber, Thomas., “Gandhian Philosophy, Conflict Resolution Theory and Practical
Approaches to Negotiation”, Journal of Peace Research, Volume 38, No. 4, Sage
Publications, http://jpr.sagepub.com, 2001.
UNIT 8 APPLICATIONS OF GANDHIAN
APPROACH TO PEACE AND CONFLICT
RESOLUTION (CASE STUDIES)
Structure
8.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
8.2 The Chipko Movement

8.3 SEWA
8.4 The First Intifada
8.5 Petra Kelly and the German Greens
8.6 Summary
Suggested Readings
8.1 INTRODUCTION
Gandhi’s main aim in life was to give people an alternative way. He not only expounded
the details of his alternative way but also practised it in his personal and political life. His
approach to conflict resolution was not only rooted in Indian traditions but was also
informed by the best of Western thought. Post-Gandhi several individuals, groups and
societies have tried to apply his alternative way to various kinds of situations –
environment, self-determination, women’s oppression, economic sphere, nuclear disarmament,
political arena, human rights, anti-war, opposition to the military etc. – at various levels
such as intra-personal, inter-personal, small group, community, organisation, society, nation,
state and international. This Unit gives an account of case studies where the Gandhian
approach to conflict resolution was applied – some were successful experiments, one was
partially successful and another one was eluded by success.
Aims and Objectives
After going through this unit you will understand
 The application of the Gandhian approach to conflict resolution to environmental
issues
 The Gandhian approach to conflict resolution to check economic exploitation
 The Gandhian approach to conflict resolution in the international arena in cases of
occupation of a territory;
 The complexities of application of Gandhian approach to conflict resolution by a
German political party and its leader.
8.2 THE CHIPKO MOVEMENT

The Uttaranchal division of Uttar Pradesh, a mountainous region in India was thickly
forested. With the laying of roads in the 1960s, the region was widely accessed. It also
witnessed massive deforestation with timber-felling inspite of people’s protest. The region
had had a history of protest against government forest policy since the early 20th century,
which in the 1920s started being linked up with the Gandhian Congress. The timber-felling
contracts were awarded to industrialists and contractors at concessional rates. Locals tried
to resist this by forming their own forest cooperatives with the help of local Sarvodaya
workers but they had neither money nor political clout, which was necessary to get the
contracts for timber-felling.
In late 1972, voices were raised to end the contract system of timber-felling and to
ensure that the locals got forest produce at cheap rates. Several demonstrations were held
towards this end. In the meanwhile, the region started facing the consequences of
unabated timber-felling – fuel-wood for cooking was becoming hard to obtain, springs
were drying up as rainwater was running off the hills unchecked resulting in underground
springs not being replenished, the running off of the rainwater was also causing floods and
landslides – causing severe hardship to the population in general but women in particular
as they were the ones responsible for cooking, cleaning and gathering water. Local
Sarvodaya workers learnt of all this from the local women with whom they had been
actively working on the anti-liquor campaign since the late 1960s.
In late 1972, the government awarded a contract to fell a large number of trees from a
forest in Gopeshwar in Chamoli district, to a sports goods factory based in Allahabad.
Earlier the same government had refused permission to a small local concern that
specialised in processing of forest produce to take a few trees from the same forest. The
small local concern, Dasauli Gram Swarajya Mandal, was run along Gandhian lines by a
Sarvodaya worker named Chandi Prasad Bhatt. Initially the villagers requested the
contractors not to fell trees but when the contractors persisted, the villagers decided to
hug the trees and prevent it from being felled physically. This act of ‘clinging’ to the trees,
gave the movement its name, chipko. Clinging to the trees saved them from being felled
and forced the contractors to go back. The same contractors then shifted to the
neighbouring forest of Rampur Phata to carry on with the operation of felling trees but
the villagers under the leadership of Chandi Prasad Bhatt organised chipko protests there
as well.
One year later, the women entered the movement in the village of Reni. It so happened
that the forest neighbouring Reni was being auctioned. Chandi Prasad Bhatt talked to the
villagers about the success of the Chipko Movement in Gopeshwar. The men decided to
protest the auction to the authorities in town. In the meanwhile, the contractors started
felling trees. The women of Reni decided to act and were led by Gaura Devi, a fifty-
one year old widow. The women barred the path to the forest singing
This forest is our mother’s home
We will protect it with all our might
This forced the contractors to go back. Gaura Devi was however socially boycotted by
the village, and even received death threats; the reason being the vested interests of some
of some of the men folk of the village, who were in favour of tree-felling as it provided
them the opportunity to make some money by renting their house to the contractors and
Applications of Gandhian Approach to Peace and Conflict Resolution (Case Studies) 85
the workers and also provided them with the job of cutting trees. However, Chandi
Prasad Bhatt rallied behind Gaura Devi and other women of Dongri Paitoli village, who
too were subjected to threats by their men folk but managed to stand up against it. The
Chipko Movement spread to the whole of Chamoli district and parts of Tehri Garhwal
and essentially became a women-centered movement (although it was initiated by men)
because the women of the region were at the forefront fighting actively to preserve the
forest around their villages. They evolved innovative methods of showcasing their protest.
In Henwal Ghati, the women dressed the ‘wounds’ of the trees with mud and sacking to
protest the indiscriminate tapping of pine trees. Radha Kumar says, “Each protest,
whether it was to embrace trees, or to bandage them, reinforced the women’s closeness
to nature and their belief that natural resources were theirs to protect and conserve, not
to exploit and destroy.” The women now felt the need to organise themselves and formed
Mahila Mangal Dals with the help of Chandi Prasad Bhatt and his organisation.
The movement continued throughout the 1970s under the able leadership of Sarvodaya
workers like Chandi Prasad Bhatt and Sunderlal Bahuguna. Bahuguna was in fact
convinced of the far-reaching impact of the Chipko Movement. He stated:
“I am waiting for the day when the non-violent movement of the hill woman will help turn
upside down the centres of power in this country.”
In order to force the government to stop giving contracts for felling trees, Sunderlal
Bahuguna launched a fast in 1979. He was arrested on the thirteenth day of his fast and
was jailed, where he continued with his fast but he withdrew when the authorities agreed
to discuss the issue. In 1980, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi invited the leaders of the
Chipko Movement for talks in Delhi. Earlier in 1972, Mrs. Indira Gandhi had spoken in
favour of environmental protection at the First International Environmental Conference held
in Stockholm. The Chipko leaders appealed to her to consider their requests on the basis
of the stance taken by her in the 1972 Stockholm Conference. Mrs. Gandhi conceded.
As a result, the following decisions were reached: commercial forestry at a height above
a thousand metres in the Himalayas was banned for the next fifteen years; food, fodder
and fuel-bearing trees were to be planted close to the villages; and village people were
given the right to take dry twigs and leaves from the government forests.
The salient features of the Chipko Movement need to be highlighted: it was led by
respected Sarvodaya leaders; these leaders enjoyed good relations with many Gandhian
politicians and top government officials; the leaders ensured that it progressed along
Gandhian lines and ideals; the movement rigidly adhered to the principle of non-violence;
the movement “was driven by a sense of moral outrage against a corrupt and rapacious
regime that was impoverishing the people and their environment”; and lastly the movement
managed to convince the Prime Minister to heed to their just demands.
Besides these, the active involvement of women in the movement has also added several
noteworthy features. First, the protest by women against commercial timber-felling was
done generally jointly with men but in several instances in opposition to the men.
Secondly, women continue to be actively involved in protecting trees, stopping auctions
and keeping a vigil against illegal tree-felling. Third, replanting trees is another notable
feature of the movement; however, here the men and women have different choices – men
choose to plant commercially profitable trees while the women prefer trees that provide
fuel and fodder and fulfill other daily needs. Further, Chipko is no longer just an ecology
movement in Uttarakhand; it has given rise to other movements – movement for safe
environment such as anti-mining as well as movement against gender inequalities such as
anti-alcohol. And finally, to quote Bina Agarwal, “implicit in the movement is a holistic
understanding of the environment in general and forests in particular…women recognize
that forests cannot be reduced merely to trees and the trees to wood for commercial use,
that vegetation, soil, water form part of a complex and interrelated ecosystem. This
recognition of the interrelatedness and interdependence between the various material
components of nature, and between nature and human sustenance, is critical for evolving
a strategy of sustainable environmental protection and regeneration.”
David Hardiman opines that the Chipko Movement had a far-reaching impact elsewhere
too. He says, “Chipko became well known throughout the world as an example of
Gandhian environmental action, with the image of women embracing trees becoming an
icon of the environmental movement as a whole. Chipko gave rise to a series of protests
since that time in which activists have embraced trees or established tree houses, so as
to prevent commercial felling operations.”
8.3 SEWA
Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) was a first of its kind women’s trade union
formed by Gandhian socialists attached to the Textile Labour Association (TLA) in
Ahmedabad, Gujarat in 1972. The TLA was originally founded by Gandhi. The SEWA
initiative was led by Ela Bhatt, who was attached to the women’s wing of the TLA.
Radha Kumar says, “In keeping with their Gandhian views, SEWA preferred the term
‘association’ to ‘union’ though it is possible that the acronym’s oral similarity to seva, the
devoted care of other people, played a part in this choice as well.”
SEWA “was an organization of women who worked in different trades in the informal
section but shared a common experience of extremely low earnings, very poor working
conditions, harassment from those in authority, and lack of recognition of their work as
socially useful labour.” The women members of SEWA were generally employed in
activities such as manufacturing goods at home, selling products on the street, pulling
carts, and working in the building industry. Initially, SEWA had a difficult time getting
registered as a trade union because as per the Indian Trade Union Act it was neither a
union of workers in a particular factory nor was it a group of employees of a particular
employer. However, SEWA argued that a trade union could be based on the ‘development’
of its worker members, defining development as the “freedom from exploitation, assurance
of regular work, and access to opportunities for advancement.”
SEWA aimed to improve the working conditions of its members through training, technical
aid, and collective bargaining. To this end, Ela Bhatt established a co-operative bank,
funded by self-employed women. The bank provided loans at low rates of interest. This
was a good strategy as middlemen exploited women by advancing loans at high rates of
interest. The initiative proved to be very successful in empowering the poor and “by 1993
there were 54,000 members of SEWA, with sixty co-operatives in nine districts of
Gujarat.” SEWA members usually belong to the marginalised and minority sections of the
population.
SEWA introduced “the members to the values of honesty, dignity and simplicity of life
goals reflecting the Gandhian ideals to which TLS and SEWA leaders subscribe.” It
emphasises solidarity through self-reliance and strictly non-violent campaigns. Besides, it
also works to build communal harmony in Gujarat. Thus, it best exemplifies “the best of
Gandhian constructive values.”
8.4 THE FIRST INTIFADA

The State of Israel was created in 1948. In the Six-Day War of June 1967, Israel
annexed East Jerusalem and extended its control over the occupied West Bank and Gaza,
now referred to as Occupied Territories. Since then the Palestinian people have been
resisting the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories. The Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) was formed in 1964. Yasser Arafat became the leader of PLO in
1969.
Since the Six-Day War, there was a general sense of frustration among the Palestinians
living in the Occupied Territories. In 1982, the PLO had been driven out in an invasion
of Lebanon by Israel. It was forced to move to Tunis, thousands of miles away from
Palestine. In 1985, Israel reaffirmed its ‘Iron Fist’ policy and authorised the military
administration to use roadblocks, searches, arrests, deportations, and refusals of family
reunification permits. Moreover, Israel continued to settle Jews in the Occupied Territories
especially the West Bank, which was “a creeping de facto annexation that embittered
Palestinians.”
The word Intifada connoted ‘shaking off one’s laziness’. The First Intifada was an uprising
of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. It began in December 1987 and
continued till 1993. The uprising started in the Jabalya refugee camp after a traffic
collision in which an Israeli army tank transporter ran into a group of Palestinians, killing
four and injuring seven. The crowd returning from the funerals hurled stones at the local
army compound. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) were unable to restore order and riots
broke out. People threw rocks and Molotov cocktails at the IDF. Soon word spread and
protests broke out everywhere. In the early days of the uprising, it was an improvised
protest as there was no real strategy and the campaign was steered by an unstructured
group of leaders. The Intifada’s leaders soon set rules that violence from the Palestinian
side should be confined to throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails. They did so for
strategic reasons – few Palestinians owned weapons like guns; secondly, usage of firearms
would give an excuse to the IDF to use heavy weapons like tanks and lastly, nonviolent
action could turn world opinion against the Israelis and in favour of the Palestinians. Early
in January 1988, an organisation was set up - United National Command for the
Escalation of the Uprising in the Occupied Territories – the public face of the Intifada
now had a name. At the heart of the Intifada was self-determination. The period was
marked by a revival of traditional Palestinian mores – there was a renewed interest in
Palestinian theatre, poetry, clothing, insignia etc.
In mid-January, Hanna Siniora, a respected Palestinian intellectual and editor of the
Jerusalem newspaper al-Fajr, laid out a systematic plan for nonviolent action in two press
conferences. The plan had four stages and was devised by Mubarak Awad, a Palestinian
American clinical psychologist: first, giving up Israeli cigarettes; two weeks later cease the
purchase of Israeli soft drinks; withhold tax payments to all Israeli authorities and finally,
Palestinian workers would stop going to their jobs in Israel. Comparing the Intifada to
other nonviolent movements, Siniora hoped that it could achieve what “the Gandhi
movement did in India and the black civil rights movement did in the US.” Non-
cooperation became all-pervasive and by mid-March mass resignations followed. On the
other hand, Israel intensified its campaign to break the Intifada. As the crackdown started,
Israeli groups like Peace Now and 21st Year protested against the use of violent force
on the Palestinians. Cracks started appearing in the IDF as some sections refused to
serve in the Occupied Territories. World public opinion was critical of Israel but that
could not sway it. However, a lot of damage had been done on the economic front.
Dissent within Israel grew as the scale of the crackdown expanded. In the summer of
1988, the Civil Administration ordered wholesale deportations of suspected Intifada
leaders and agitators. The campaign started faltering as leaders were either deported or
jailed and there was nobody to sustain it.
The Intifada may have resulted in more gains and successes for the Palestinians, if
violence had not been mixed with nonviolent sanctions. When Palestinians lashed out with
violence against the IDF, in the words of Gene Sharp, they fell into “the trap of shifting
to fight with the opponents’ chosen weaponry.” Palestinians may not have achieved
freedom with the First Intifada but it had two positive effects. First, “For the average
Israeli… the Intifada brought about the realization that the status quo—continued occupation-
was untenable; the Palestinians were not going to sit quietly and accept indefinite Israeli
rule over them.” Secondly, “For many Israelis, the Intifada instilled the beginning of an
awareness of the Palestinians as people. Everyday, one saw on television a civilian
uprising. This was not a war being fought by armies with tanks and planes but, rather,
women and children throwing rocks and stones and occasionally Molotov cocktails.” Thus
the Intifada did meet with partial success.
8.5 PETRA KELLY AND THE GERMAN GREENS

A prominent European figure who was inspired by Gandhi and his tradition of nonviolent
moral activism was Petra Kelly. She was the leader of the German Green Party (Die
Grunen).
Kelly was born in Bavaria in 1947 into a devout family of Roman Catholics. Her family
moved to southern USA in 1960. While in the US she was inspired by the civil rights
movement as well as the anti-Vietnam war movement. Martin Luther King was one of her
earliest political heroes. Kelly studied political science at university in Washington, where
she was introduced to Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience Theory. King’s acknowledgement of
Gandhi and Thoreau as inspirational examples had impressed her. Sara Parkin, Kelly’s
biographer says, “Petra’s gods were Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Her bibles were
Thoreau and Gene Sharp…”
Kelly returned to Europe in 1972 wherein she got actively involved in the anti-nuclear
movement. In 1980, she co-founded and became the first leader of the German Green
Party. The Green Party had tried to bring together a wide variety of ecological action
groups. Kelly, along with twenty-six other Greens, was elected to the Bundestag
(Parliament) in 1983 and remained there till 1990 when the Greens suffered electoral loss.
During the days of her Bundestag membership, she led a series of nonviolent protests
against nuclear installations and military bases, including protests in East Germany and
Moscow. Kelly also took part in an occupation of the German embassy in Pretoria
against German economic ties with the apartheid regime in South Africa. She went on to
protest human rights violations by the Chinese in Tibet. Kelly thus engaged with several
issues at the global level – human rights, women’s oppression, environment, structured
violence of the military, nuclear issues, and the divide between the rich and the poor. Her
main concern was the poor and the oppressed and to this end she said, “To my mind,
the purpose of politics and of political parties is to stand up for the weak, for those who
have no lobby or other means of exerting influence.”
Like Gandhi, Kelly was committed to active non-violence and her politics was based on
truth. Non-violence for Kelly entailed “seeking opportunities for dialogue or taking
actions which would liberate people from the violent system (of thinking) which prevented
them from seeing the power of rightness of non-violence.”
Like Gandhi, Kelly’s politics flowed from a deep inner spirituality. She believed that “we
cannot solve. …political problems without addressing our spiritual ones.” In fact, Kelly
“was drawn to Martin Luther King in part by his strong Christian faith.” Later, she was
drawn to Catholic liberation theology, which gave way to a more eclectic and humanistic
faith, a new “holy trinity of non-violence, personal responsibility and truth.” Kelly said,
“The spiritual dimensions of non-violence as lived by Gandhi are to me most important.”
She claimed that her ecological values flowed from Gandhi:
“In one particular area of our political work we have been greatly inspired by Mahatma
Gandhi. That is in our belief that a lifestyle and method of production which rely on an
endless supply of raw materials and which use those raw materials lavishly, also furnish
the motive for the violent appropriation of raw material from other countries. In contrast,
a responsible use of raw materials, as part of an ecologically-oriented lifestyle and
economy, reduced the risk that policies of violence will be pursued in our name. The
pursuit of ecologically responsible policies within a society provides preconditions for a
reduction of tensions and increases our ability to achieve peace in the world.”
David Hardiman says, “She saw her work as being informed above all by a respect for
all life forms and an understanding of their interconnectedness.”
However, unlike Gandhi, Kelly fought elections and represented her party in the Parliament.
She referred to Die Grunen as an ‘anti-party party’. Kelly believed that party work in
the parliament will have to be supplemented with action on the streets. This meant that
her party “remain a perpetual opposition, the assumption being that any holding of office
would lead to inevitable compromises with power and the violent apparatus of oppression
controlled by the state.”
Kelly tried to create a culture of Gandhian-style civil disobedience permeating all levels
of the polity. She wrote in her book Nonviolence Speaks to Power in 1992:
“All of us in Germany would benefit if we were to learn at last the liberating and
constructive art of civil disobedience- not just in the extraparliamentary movement, but
also within parliament and political parties. Civil disobedience has to be practiced in
parliament or even within our own party if we become too dogmatic, powerful, or
arrogant.”
There were several issues of tension and contradiction within the German Party as well
as within the professional and personal life of Petra Kelly. She and her party had been
unable to resolve and reconcile these tensions and contradictions in a satisfactory manner.
The first one concerned her party. There was one faction within the Green Party, known
as Realos, who wanted to become a partner in the governing coalition and push green
policies. Joschka Fisher was the leader of this group. The other faction, Fundis, rejected
the idea of the Realos. Kelly projected herself to be above the two factions, however,
“she was in practice more in tune with the Fundis than the Realos.”
Another issue was the role of the leader within the Green Party. Kelly had wanted to
create a party where people were committed to non-violence in thought, word and deed.
In her words, her party was “based on human solidarity and democracy among its
members and on the rejection of a performance and hierarchy-oriented approach governed
by rivalry hostile to life.” The members of the Green Party were supposed to relinquish
their position within the Parliament after two years, which would then be filled by another
party member. The idea was that activism within civil society was as important as
parliamentary work. Members who relinquish their position would go on to do activism
related work. Moreover, power within the party was to flow from the bottom up rather
than from top down. However, when it was Kelly’s turn to resign, she refused partly
because of personal reasons (she had resigned from her job to serve as a member of
parliament and also moved her base to the capital, Bonn). Besides, she felt that the
membership of the Bundestag provided her a good platform for her political and other
social causes; people took her much more seriously – giving up her position would make
all that work counterproductive for her as well as for the party. Moreover, Kelly
observed that the process of rotation did not prevent the concentration of power in a few
hands and it generated dangerous rivalry between the party members. Nonetheless, Kelly
was criticised for giving up her principles for her political ambitions. By 1986, she was
isolated within her own party and there was a lot of confusion within the party as there
were no clear structures of power and means of delegating authority.
Kelly, like Gandhi, appreciated the role of a good press and felt that a moral activist like
her could gain crucial publicity and support for her cause through the media. She said in
an open letter to the party in 1991:
“One of the great weaknesses in both the parliamentary group and in the party has been
that of media relations. The party must have the courage to appoint really independent,
bright, and audacious media spokespersons who are very experienced and competent in
dealing with the national and international media. One thing must change very quickly in
the Green’s public presentation. We have to try to brighten up our party’s image because
until now we have appeared unremittingly gloomy and intolerant. We are no longer able
to laugh or show a bit of enthusiasm and zest for life. This is particularly evident at the
national party conferences, and it is very depressing.”
Kelly was a media star but many people in her party had only contempt for the media.
In 1990, when general elections for the parliament were held for the first time, where
both East and West Germany voted together, the Green Party decided to run a
‘personality free campaign’ and therefore Kelly’s name was not among the ones contesting
the elections. Meanwhile, Die Grunen failed to forge an alliance with the Green Party of
East Germany. The Greens of the East performed better in the elections in comparison
to the Green Party of the West. If the two Greens had forged an alliance, they would
have managed to get around 40 seats in the Parliament. However, that was not to happen
and Die Grunen ended up not getting any seats.
On 19 October 1992, police found decomposed bodies of Petra Kelly and her partner,
Gert Bastian from a suburb house of Bonn. Kelly had died on October 1 of a single-
bullet wound to the head. Forensic evidence concluded that she was shot (It was believed
that Bastian shot Kelly and then killed himself); some believe that she was murdered by
the “nuclear mafia”. Who killed Kelly remains a mystery; infact, her death pointed out to
an irreconcilable contradiction and tension in her private life. Inspite of numerous death
threats, Kelly- in true Gandhian style- refused to accept police protection (However, she
allowed her partner Bastian, a soldier during the Second World War, who turned into a
peace activist later, to keep his guns from his army days. This was perhaps her way of
trying to accommodate Bastian). David Hardiman rightly points out, “Kelly’s death
represented a profound failure for the principle of non-violence at the most personal of
levels.”
8.6 SUMMARY
Several individuals and groups in India as well as in different parts of the world have
attempted to resolve issues of conflict via the Gandhian nonviolent approach. The above
section has tried to give a glimpse of few of such cases. The Chipko Movement in
Uttarakhand was a nonviolent movement concerned with environmental issues that directly
affected the lives and habitats of the common folk. Women’s groups were the main actors
there. The movement went on to become a success and inspired other social and
environmental movements. Another successful Indian initiative based on Gandhian ideals is
the Self-Employed Women’s Association of Gujarat. The Association has empowered the
poor and managed to cut out the middlemen by coming together to form co-operative
banks.
Among the international case studies, the first one is that of the Intifada I, which was
largely a nonviolent movement but not strictly nonviolent as per the Gandhian approach.
The First Intifada was an uprising of the Palestinians against Israeli rule. There have been
several other uprisings post the Intifada I and the Palestinian struggle for freedom from
Israel still continues. The last case study is from Europe and deals with the rise and fall
of Petra Kelly and her German Green Party. Kelly chose to work in the political arena
but her work was not confined to politics alone – she worked on a range of issues such
as nuclear disarmament, environment, human rights, women’s oppression, poverty etc.
Success however evaded Kelly because she was not able to reconcile her nonviolent
beliefs with her professional and private life, finally leading to her violent death.
The two international case studies may not be very good examples of strict application
of the Gandhian approach to conflict resolution but the idea here has been to create an
understanding of the range of issues, areas and arenas to which the Gandhian approach
has been applied within India as well as outside.

1. Enumerate the circumstances and conditions that led to the beginning of the Chipko
Movement.
2. What are some of the interesting and notable features of the Chipko Movement?
3. How did SEWA manage to stop the exploitation of women?
4. What was the nonviolent composition of the First Intifada? Was it successful?
5. Gandhi was a huge source of inspiration for Petra Kelly. Explain atlength her non-
violent activities.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Hardiman, David., Gandhi in His Time and Ours: The Global Legacy of His Ideas,
Hurst & Company, London, 2003.
Saunders, Harold H., A Public Peace Process: Sustained Dialogue to Transform Racial
and Ethnic Conflicts, Palgrave Macmillan/St.Martin’s Press, New York, 1999
Menon, Nivedita., (ed), Gender and Politics in India, Oxford University Press, New
Delhi, 1999.
Ackerman, Peter & Jack Duvall., A Force More Powerful: A Century of Nonviolent
Conflict, Palgrave, New York, 2000.
Kumar, Radha., The History of Doing: An Illustrated Account of Movements for Women’s
Rights and Feminism in India, 1800-1990, Kali for Women, New Delhi, 1993.
UNIT 9 FASTING
Structure
9.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
9.2 Fasting: Meaning and Purpose

9.3 Gandhi on Fasting
9.4 Fasting for Conflict Resolution
9.5 Gandhi’s Epic Fasts
9.6 Summary
Suggested Readings
9.1 INTRODUCTION
My religion teaches me that, wherever there is distress which one can not remove, one
must fast and pray.
I believe that there is no prayer without fasting, and there is no real fast without prayer.
Mahatma Gandhi
‘Gandhiji’s own life was a unique record of research in the technique of fasting. When
he found any sort of ill-will copping up in himself, a fast took the feeling away and
transformed it into love. Gandhiji’s fasts were meant for self-purification or arousing the
consciousness of people for justice’ (Kapoor and Gupta, p.98). Gandhi himself
acknowledged many a time that his thoughts and methods have roots in traditional
elements and religious sources. Fasting is one such method, which he evolved into a
method of Satyagraha. It was a moral weapon which he considered as effective to
counter violence and which can be used as a strategy to make the opponent begin the
work on the resolution of a problem. It is a method of self-suffering and self-purification
that has to be adopted to work effectively towards conflict resolution.
Aims and Objectives
 The meaning and importance of fasting
 Fasting as a method of conflict resolution
 Gandhi’s insistence on fasting as a means of self-purification
9.2 FASTING: MEANING AND PURPOSE

Fasting has a great religious significance. Many religions prescribe fasting (though not
mandatory) to attain control over one’s senses and not to give in to materialistic
inducement. It also serves the purpose of spiritual progress. As has already been
discussed in one of the earlier lessons, fasting is a method that can be employed both
at the individual and group/ mass levels. At the individual level, fasting is meant to convey
one’s displeasure or disagreement; it is largely employed in families or small groups as a
means of arousing the conscience of a loved one (Iyer, p.261). When employed by a
group, it conveys a message to redress the wrong done by the offending party/parties. It
conveys the urgency of the need to resolve the conflict and is usually employed as a last
resort to make the opponent take note of such urgency. It is less coercive in nature. It
is, in a way, a non-violent coercion. Unless it is done as ‘fast unto death’, fasting is taken
as a moral awakening to do the right thing or follow a right path. It is also viewed as
having an element of coercion. It is interesting to note here that John Bondurant suggests
that Satyagraha, as a method, contains a positive element of coercion. Moral coercion has
become a more acceptable form of conflict resolution for it rules out physical coercion
and further, the use of force.
Fasting as a means of conflict resolution or as a part of Satyagraha had immense
significance during the course of our freedom struggle. The learner is already familiarised
with the concept of Satyagraha as a non-violent weapon and also the other modes of
conflict resolution in the present and previous courses. Therefore, it would be imperative
to discuss here about the method of fasting and the importance Gandhi attached to this
method of mass awakening. According to him, it is a ‘fiery weapon’ and a device of the
last resort.
Jacques Maritain, the Catholic Philosopher, calls Satyagraha as the means of spiritual
warfare. It is a non-violent direct action and is meant for self-purification. Gandhi stressed
that the result of such action should not only lead to self-purification but also the paralysis
of the government that continues to suppress the poor and ignorant masses. Fasting and
public prayers have been the two most universal self-purification phases of Satyagraha in
India (J.N.Sharma, 2008, p.34). They can also act as great morale-builders. Further,
fasting is a way of voluntary suffering (which a satyagrahi undertakes most willingly) and
self-denial (a worthy principle which is unselfish in nature). These indicate that a satyagrahi
is willing to suffer for a noble purpose and is also willing to fight till the end with his/
her moral weapon. These, in a way, convey the message to the opponent that they
harbour no ill-will. ‘The satyagrahis, by emphasizing the spirit of self-sacrifice and
suffering, endeavour to raise the level of the issue. It ceases to be a matter of wrangling.
The issue revolves around the bringing about of a just settlement of the dispute. Thus the
level of fight is raised. The opponent is forced to operate at higher, less ruthless level’
(Ibid, p.36). It is precisely with this motive that Gandhi undertook periodic fasts to make
his opponents get down to working on the solution of the problem.
As Raghavan Iyer put it, ‘Gandhi regarded fasting as a great institution in Hinduism,
provided it is undertaken entirely voluntarily and also does not have a trace of coercion
over others. Fasting unto death is, however, more a Gandhian than a traditional device.
Gandhi’s fasts were often dubbed as coercive in nature, considering the fact that the
opponents are required to act in order to save a human life. His opponents largely
perceived his fasts as a technique of ‘blackmail’. Iyer rightly summarises what Gandhi said
about fasting, that ‘a particular device like fasting has its own well-defined limits. Fasts
are coercive when they are intended to attain a selfish object. No doubt the dividing line
between a selfish and an unselfish end is often very thin, but a person who regards the
aim of another’s fast to be selfish should resolutely refuse to yield to it’ (Harijan, May,
Fasting 95
1933). Fasting is a powerful means of purification, as Gandhi said, and occupies an

important part in the life of human family (CWMG, vol.55, p.345).
9.3 GANDHI ON FASTING

Gandhi opined that ‘a fast should be characterized by perfect truth and non-violence, and
should be undertaken only upon the prompting of one’s inner voice and not in blind
imitation of somebody. One should never undertake a fast for selfish end; the aim behind
a fast should always be common good. A fast should never be undertaken for any object
which is inspired by ill will towards somebody’ (CWMG, vol.51, p.316). Gandhi believed
that fasting is one of the most important means to achieve control over senses. He says,
‘if our senses cannot be controlled, we should undertake a fast. During a fast, impure
desires will probably subside; but fasting alone does not yield the required result.
Something more is needed. If we see God, our instinctive desire for objects of senses
will also subside. After a person has seen god, it is all one to him whether he eats or
does not eat’ (CWMG, vol.32, pp.131-132).
Gandhi’s experiments with fasting began with the purpose of self-restraint. It was purely
for health reasons, as he acknowledges in his Autobiography (Autobiography, p.276). It
is fascinating to note its beginnings in his words: ‘Having been born in a Vaishnava family
and of a mother who was given to keeping all sorts of hard vows, I had observed, while
in India, the Ekadashi and other fasts, but in doing so I had merely copied my mother
and sought to please my parents. At that time I did not understand, nor did I believe in,
the efficacy of fasting….’ (Ibid, p.276).
Gandhi, during his stay in South Africa, took up this practice for self-purification and
encouraged others like the Hindus, Parsis and Christians, especially during the Ramzan
days (Month of fasting by the Muslims). He said, ‘I explained to them that it was always
a good thing to join with others in any matter of self-denial’. Gandhi further states that
it had a tremendous impact as ‘all were convinced of the value of fasting’ and a spirit
of solidarity grew among them. Gandhi admits its positive impact on him, both physically
and morally. He was certain that ‘fasting can help to curb animal passions, only if it is
undertaken with a view to self-restraint. Some of my friends have actually found their
animal passion and palate stimulated as an after-effect of fasts. That is to say, fasting is
futile unless it is accompanied by an incessant longing for self-restraint. Fasting and similar
discipline is, therefore, one of the means to the end of self-restraint, but it is not all, and
if physical fasting is not accompanied by mental fasting, it is bound to end in hypocrisy
and disaster’ (pp.277-278). Further he reiterated that ‘fasting for the sake of personal
gain is nothing short of intimidation’ (Weber, p.58). Since fasting is a spiritual instrument
or weapon, Gandhi cautioned, it should not be handled by unqualified persons.
Gandhi considers that ‘fasting for the sake of loved ones is a forcible and unmistakable
expression of love and therefore affects those for whose sake it is undertaken. Those
whose love encircles the whole of life cannot but affect the whole creation by a supreme
act of love’ (CWMG, vol.55, p.345). Fasting has an ethical dimension, which Gandhi
emphasised time and again. If the necessity of fasting is admitted, the argument that it is
unnatural or an act of violence to one’s own body falls to pieces. Just as a fast for
regaining lost health is neither unnatural nor criminal self-torture, so is not a fast for
purification of self or others (Ibid.,). To the critics/skeptics who questioned his frequent
spells of fasting, Gandhi’s reply was that they need not be convinced by past testimonies
or his arguments. ‘Let them acquaint themselves with the rules and the science of fasting
for purification and then test its efficacy themselves. That fasting does not appeal to
people brought up in the midst of the dazzling materialism is an additional reason for
people not to reject summarily one of the most potent methods of purification and
penance’ (Ibid, p.346).
9.4 FASTING FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Gandhi did not approve of fasting as a weapon of coercion, as coercion rarely leads to
conversion. Gandhi himself had observed that things done under the pressure of a fast
have been undone after the fast is over. If such a thing happens it would be a tragedy
of the highest degree (cit in Weber, p.58). If a fast converts an opponent towards positive
mindset, the fast cannot be termed as coercion as it enables one to gauge the logic of
the problem and look for aspects of justice. It should not be taken up to extort rights
but to work for a reform; moreover, most importantly, a fast cannot be used as means
of conflict resolution if the opponent is a tyrant or not sympathetic. It can be used
effectively only in cases where there is a possibility of change in the heart of a person.
Gandhi was also against taking up fast randomly by anyone and reiterated that it should
be undertaken only by those who are capable of doing it in the most non-violent manner
and with steel resolve. During his fast in the Ahmedabad Textile Mills case, he dissuaded
the labour from fasting along with him.
Bondurant points out the example of Rowlatt Satyagraha as the true Gandhian Satyagraha.
“Preparation of satyagrahis was undertaken through self-purificatory fasting and instruction
in non-violent action. However, in the light of the results, it may be said that this stage
of preparation should have been extended, both in breadth and in intensity. Fasting, it
should be noted, was used only for the purpose of self-discipline and later by Gandhi as
a penance for the outbreak of violence; but fasting as coercion was no part of the
campaign” (Joan Bondurant, p.85). Gandhi was against yielding to pressure in the context
of fasting. Rather, he wanted a genuine change of heart or a positive conversion in an
opponent. Gandhi was categorical about his fasts as a means of working out towards
a solution. He felt that the non-violent aspect of Satyagraha determines ‘the aim of
converting rather than coercing the opponent. The conversion is not meant to take place
purely by an appeal to reason but rather through tapas or self-suffering’. It is apt to cite
from Iyer’s work in this context. “When Gandhi was told that ‘moral pressure’ was
involved in his Rajkot fast, he replied: If my fast …is to be interpreted as pressure, I can
only say that such moral pressure should be welcomed by all concerned”. He thought that
moral pressure was justified insofar as it evoked a moral response, i.e., if the conversion
was genuine (Iyer, p.333). Gandhi further justified his fasts on the following grounds
(CWMG, vol.55, p.412):
‘My definite opinion is that the general result of my numerous fasts was without doubt
beneficial. They invariably quickened the conscience of the people interested in and sought
to be influenced by fasts. I am not aware of any injustice having been perpetrated through
those fasts. In no case was there any idea of exercising coercion on anyone. Indeed, I
think that the word coercion is a misnomer for the influence that was exerted by the fasts
under criticism. Coercion means some harmful force used against a person who is
expected to do something desired by the user of force. In the fasts in question, the force
used was against myself. Surely, force of self-suffering cannot be put in the same category
as the force of suffering caused to the party sought to be influenced. If I fast in order
Fasting 97
to awaken the conscience of an erring friend whose error is beyond question, I am not
coercing him in the ordinary sense of the word’.
Gandhi laid down certain conditions for undertaking fasts. The conditions were meant to
be adopted in the good spirit of self-purification and voluntary suffering rather than coerce
the adversary into resolving conflicts. Fasts are part of the Satyagraha technique and are
conducted in a specified manner. R.R.Diwakar has summarily described the terms and
conditions of fasting in his work on ‘Saga of Satyagraha’ (pp.107-108).
 Fasts may be limited or unto death. Even when they are limited and are against the
lapses of friends, wards, relatives, or colleagues they have to follow a certain
method.
 Fast should not be undertaken in a huff or in anger.
 The motive must not be either punishment or publicity. Nor should the fast be
unsystematic.
 The body should not be roughly handled during the fast. There should be no violence
against it. It should be treated gently and with a view to cleanse it.
 The purpose of the fast should be made known to the person concerned. But even
here a fast should be the last remedy.
 During the fast, most of the time should be devoted to prayer, introspection,
meditation and the things that ennoble the mind.
 Since fasting is a fiery weapon and a great ordeal, one must sift one’s motives very
carefully before one undertakes it. There should not be even a trace of impurity.
 One who has not followed the path of ahimsa and studied how to fast should not
rush into it. One must earn the right to fast.
A satyagrahi should strictly follow the conditions of fasting in order to achieve the desired
results. Fast unto death constitutes the last step in the scheme of achieving the right ends.
Fast unto death should be taken up only as a last resort, only when all other means of
conflict resolution have failed, only when there is no hope of resolution and utter darkness
and despair. The step should be taken believing that this last resort would vindicate the
truth one is fighting for. It should neither be taken lightly nor resorted to without absolute
necessity. At no stage should there be resort to violence, lest the purpose of the fast is
lost. There is often a thin line between the effective use and abuse of the method of
fasting; it is too thin to be noticeable. In this context, it is necessary to exercise an utmost
caution.
As Gandhi often emphasised, one has to study deeply before contemplating to use the
method of fasting as the means of conflict resolution. Fasting as a weapon can only be
used against ‘a friend, a follower or co-worker for they easily realise the mistake and
correct themselves’ (CWMG, vol.24, p.90). Further, fasting should not make the opponent
yield because of the pressure or obligation of saving the affected party’s life. There should
be consideration for actual realisation. As Gandhi put it, ‘this is the worst form of
compulsion which militates against the fundamental principles of satyagraha’ (Ibid, p.91).
In case of mass fasting, it should open the eyes of the government towards the injustices
wrought by them and work for conciliation. No help should be taken from outsiders as
the opponents would believe in its inefficacy and this, in turn, affects the strength of one’s
sacrifice. Gandhi remarked that, ‘the volunteers (who are fasting) fed and financed with
outside help, appear to the opponent more as mercenaries than like satyagrahis who are
prepared to sacrifice their all for their principles. Such a fight is the trial of material and
not spiritual strength. Non-violent assertion of your rights with outside help may be
passive resistance but no satyagraha’ (Ibid, p.92). The act of fasting should not be
inclined to humiliate or subdue the opponents. This was rightly reflected in Gandhi’s
method of Satyagraha to which he adhered steadfastly. The methods employed in conflict
resolution have to be non-violent at all costs and at all times. Gandhi’s epic fasts stand
testimony to this fact and have been successful to a large extent.
9.5 GANDHI’S EPIC FASTS

Fast against the Communal Award (1932)
In 1932, the British government announced the communal award, wherein the depressed
classes were recognised as a minority community and were given separate electorate.
Gandhi was against this separate representation of the deprived sections, for which he had
been vociferously voicing his concerns. He was against their segregation from the
mainstream and being dubbed as minorities. The British government refused to accept his
stand and therefore, Gandhi announced his decision to fast unto death from September
20th, 1932. Prominent Congress leaders persuaded Dr.B.R.Ambedkar, who was one of
the most significant champions speaking for the rights of the untouchables, to withdraw the
demand for separate electorates. It was suggested that a scheme of primary and
secondary election for a limited number of seats (while simultaneously addressing the issue
of joint electorate) would be worked out to enable the depressed classes to choose their
leaders. It was followed by the question of timeframe after which the system of primary
and secondary elections would come to an end. No conciliation was achieved on this
timeframe between Gandhi and Dr.Ambedkar. In the meantime, Gandhi’s health was
deteriorating gradually due to the fasting; after thorough discussions between the Congressmen
and Ambedkar, it was decided that the issue of timeframe would be postponed until a
future date and until it would be decided by a mutual agreement. The weapon of fast that
was used by Gandhi aroused strong public opinion. Various public meetings held at
different places endeavoured to bring together the caste Hindus and the Depressed
Classes. Fervent appeals were made to the Depressed Classes not to pursue the demand
for separate electorate. Following this, the Poona conference was conducted and the
Poona Pact was signed. Consequently, the British too accepted this Pact in full and
Gandhi finally broke his fast on September 26th. It is necessary to note that through his
fast, Gandhi brought about an attitudinal change in Dr.Ambedkar apart from making the
British accept the Poona Pact to show that the Indians are united. Ambedkar rejected
Gandhi’s stance on Communal Award from the beginning. This incident indicates that
‘Ambedkar was most reluctant to change his position throughout the negotiations, that
Gandhi very definitely placed before Ambedkar the clear alternatives of accepting his
terms or the responsibility for his death and the former made each concession most
reluctantly with the progressive deterioration of Gandhi’s condition’ (J.N.Sharma, p.95).
Eventually, Dr.Ambedkar and Gandhi realised as to how close they are ideologically;
nevertheless the Poona Pact was signed under moral compulsion, owing the fasting that
Gandhi undertook. Nevertheless it prevented further segmentation of the Hindu community,
a need of the hour.
Fasting 99
Fasts for Hindu-Muslim Unity

Here we deal not with any specific case of Gandhi’s fast for Hindu-Muslim unity but
mention a few that he undertook at different stages of freedom struggle. While in South
Africa, Gandhi could bring together all the Indians but on his return to India, the issue
of Hindu-Muslim unity posed major challenge to him all through. In one instance in 1924,
the Hindu-Muslim unity was severely disturbed in the neighbourhood at Delhi. Gandhi,
throughout his life, immensely struggled to keep both the communities together and
observe solidarity and goodwill with each other. The tension caused immense grief to
Gandhi as one riot after another wrought havoc among the people. On 17th September,
he decided to undertake a fast for twenty-one days as atonement. As he remarked, “my
penance is the prayer of a bleeding heart for forgiveness of sins unwillingly committed”.
He further said that ‘to revile one another’s religion, to make reckless statements, to utter
untruth, to break the heads of innocent men, to desecrate temples or mosques, is the
denial of God’. Though there were efforts to dissuade him to refrain from fasting, Gandhi
was unrelenting in his resolve and commenced his fast on 18th September. Consequently,
the leaders belonging to both the communities addressed their respective communities and
resolved to remove the cause of the fast and suffering the communities had imposed on
Gandhi with their inadvertent acts. Gandhi appealed to people to forge the unity of hearts
and not a mere display of affection for each other in order to appease him. As Gandhi’s
condition deteriorated, they expressed their genuine concern to end the untold suffering.
The Statesman of Calcutta wrote, ‘where political arguments, obvious and cogent, had
utterly failed, the religious emotions generated by Mr.Gandhi’s fast succeeded. There
remains the yet harder task of inducing the millions to practise toleration’ (8th October).
Another instance may be cited regarding his travel to Noakhali during the independence
time, wherein he chose to soothe the pain suffered by the riot-affected people in the said
area. While eminent leaders were celebrating the independence, Gandhi decided to render
his assistance to the aggrieved people. He even underwent fast in order to bring the
people together and as a result, people responded by resolving not to target each other’s
community again. Gandhi’s fast was most aptly summarised by Most Rev. Foss Westcott
(Lord Bishop of Calcutta): “…Mr.Gandhi entered on his fast, to enthrone God in the
hearts of all men, must be accomplished if peace is to reign, for only thus can the warring
wills of men be brought under the supreme control of the one Will of God” (cit in
S.Radhakrishnan, p.253).
Chronology of some of Gandhi’s Fasts
 1913, Phoenix: penitential fast for a week for moral lapse of two inmates at
Settlement.
 1918, Ahmedabad: during the mill workers’ strike, settlement reached after three
days fast.
 1919, Sabarmati: fast against violence by people at Nadiad.
 1921, Bombay: five days fast following rioting and bloodshed on occasion of Prince
of Wales’ visit.
 1922, Bardoli: Fast against violence in Chauri Chaura incident.
 1924, Delhi: 21 days fast against Hindu-Muslim riots in Kohat.
 1932, Yervada prison: Fast against Communal award.

 1933, Yervada Prison: self-purificatory fast for better treatment towards untouchables.
 1939, Rajkot: against Rajkot ruler for breaking solemn pact with people.
 1943, Aga Khan Palace: 3 weeks fast in detention as appeal from the Government
of God for justice.
 1948, Delhi: against communal riots following the partition of India. It was an
indefinite fast to awaken all the communities to their sense of duty; broke the fast
after a written assurance from all the communities involved that pledged not to
aggravate tension again. This was the last fast of Gandhi that attracted worldwide
attention and was accompanied by good wishes for the successful breaking of the
fast.
9.6 SUMMARY
As discussed in the Unit, non-violent methods of conflict resolution do have great
significance. Fasting is one of them provided it is taken up with good intention rather than
with the aim of coercing the opponent. Gandhi mastered the task of undertaking fasts. His
fasts, though were criticised for being coercive and compelling, had a telling effect on the
psyche of the masses. He successfully and artistically mastered the art of fasting wherein
it evoked mass responses with an immediate result. He undertook fasts for numerous
causes- communal unity, against untouchability, against the repressive British policies,
against the violation of ethical code of conduct by Ashrams’ inmates, against violent
outbreaks during freedom struggle and so on. Gandhi’s method of fasting as a means of
conflict resolution is unique. As Gilbert Murray said, ‘In a world where the rulers of
nations are relying more and more upon brute force and the nations trusting their lives and
hopes to systems which represent the very denial of law and brotherhood, Mr.Gandhi
stands out as an isolated and most impressive figure…A battle of unaided human soul
against overwhelming material force; and it ends by the units of material force gradually
deserting their own banners and coming round to the side of the soul’ (cit in
S.Radhakrishnan, pp.157-158). Such was the power of non-violent moral weapons of
Gandhi that had higher spiritual and moral superiority!!

1. Analyse the meaning and purpose of fasting. What religious significance does it hold?
2. Examine Gandhi’s views on Fasting and its relevance today.
3. Fasting is an effective means of conflict resolution. Do you agree with this? Justify.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Bondurant, Joan V., Conquest of Violence, The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict,
University of California Press, Berkeley, 1969.
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Publications Division, Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting, GOI, New Delhi.
Fasting 101
Diwakar, R.R., Saga of Satyagraha, Gandhi Peace Foundation, New Delhi and Bharatiya
Vidya Bhavan, Bombay, 1969.
Gandhi, M.K., An Autobiography or The Story of my experiments with truth, Navajivan
Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1927 (1993 reprint).
Kapoor, A.N and V.P.Gupta., (eds), A Dictionary of Gandhian Thought, Ajanta Books
International, Delhi, 1995.
Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli., Mahatma Gandhi: Reflections on his life and work, Jaico
Publishing House, 1956.
Sharma, J.N., Satyagraha: Gandhi’s Approach to Conflict Resolution, (Rediscovering
Gandhi Series, vol.3), Concept Publishing Company in collaboration with Gandhi Smriti
and Darshan Samiti, New Delhi, 2008.
Weber, Thomas., Conflict Resolution and Gandhian Ethics, The Gandhi Peace Foundation,
New Delhi, 1991.
UNIT 10 STRIKE
Structure
10.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
10.2 Strike: Meaning and Basic Precepts

10.3 Gandhi on the Ethics of Strike
10.4 Pacific Strikes
10.5 Strikes: Conditions and Conduct
10.6 Case Studies
10.7 Summary
Suggested Readings
10.1 INTRODUCTION
Strike, primarily, is a cessation of all actions and a form of protest against existing unrest.
It is expressed by the dissatisfied public against the rulers and is a non-violent weapon,
which, to some extent, imposes coercion on the opponent. It is a method that tries to
secure the legitimate and just demands from the rulers. Strike is an expression of protest
against the recognised injustice and that, which intends to invoke in the offender/oppressor
a sense of guilt and wrongdoing. The terms ‘strike’ and ‘hartal’ are used interchangeably
to explain the modes of non-cooperation. Iyer explains hartal as a ‘traditional form of
protest in India, a temporary strike with advance notice as to its duration, the closing
down of shops and businesses and sometimes the halting of the work of administration’
(R.N.Iyer, p.302). Nevertheless, it has been used as a non-violent method protesting the
oppressive British rule. In this Unit, we learn the intricacies involved in the method of
‘strike’ and how it is used as a means of conflict resolution.
Aims and Objectives
 The meaning and significance of strike
 How strike can be used as a means of conflict resolution
 The case studies that illustrate the success of the strikes.
10.2 STRIKE: MEANING AND BASIC PRECEPTS

Satyagraha is the method adopted by Gandhi during his struggles against racial discrimination
in South Africa and also in India during the freedom struggle movement. R.R.Diwakar
categorises satyagraha into three main streams. Firstly, it is constructive wherein constructive
activities are taken up and there is a selfless service of the society; secondly, there are
Strike 103
methods like hartal, fasting and prayer that involve self-denying actions and purificatory in
nature; and finally, where there is direct action and a deliberate breach of law, Satyagraha
turns into an aggressive form, wherein repression and suffering are likely to lead to the
death of an individual in an attempt to remove the evil (R.R.Diwakar, p.56).
Though fasting, strike/hartal and non-cooperation are taken as part of Satyagraha, the
methods differ from one to another and are said to be consisting an element of coercion.
In the statement before ‘Evidence Before Disorders Inquiry Committee’, on January 9th,
1920, Gandhi in reply to the question of what Satyagraha is, termed it as ‘a movement
intended to replace methods of violence. It is a movement based entirely on truth. It is,
as I have conceived it, an extension of the domestic law on the political field, and my
own experience has led me to the conclusion that that movement and that movement
alone can get rid India of the possibilities of violence spreading throughout the length and
breadth of the land for the redress of grievances, supposed or real’ (CWMG, vol.16,
p.378). Drawing a sharp distinction between hartal and Satyagraha, he stated that ‘hartal
may sometimes be satyagrahic or may not be. Here civil disobedience as such had
absolutely nothing to do with hartal. Hartal had a two-fold purpose: one, to strike the
imagination of the people as also to strike the imagination of the Government; but the
second was a discipline for those who have to offer disobedience. I had no method of
understanding the mind of India except by some such striking thing. The hartal is a proper
index to show how far I could carry my principle’ (Ibid, pp.386-387).
Bondurant remarked that ‘a genuine Satyagraha campaign is, throughout, active and
constructive, aggressive and synthesizing. Insistence upon arriving at the truths of the
situation, together with persistence in exploring new and creative approaches, are
fundamental’ (Joan Bondurant, p.43). Bondurant also opined that methods like strike do
not fulfill the essentials for a movement qualifying as satyagraha. They can be at the most
used during some stage of satyagraha. Taken in this sense, Satyagraha enables ‘the usage
of distinct instruments to be utilised either simultaneously or separately’ (J.N.Sharma,
p.36). Strike is one such instrument used by the labour demanding a certain standard of
treatment from the employer. In a political movement, it is most often taken as extracting
certain demands from the government. The application of the strategy of strike is termed
as satyagraha in this context. As mentioned earlier, it means the cessation of all activities
and extending non-cooperation to the government in every possible way. Attacking these
vantage points through the instrument of strike, consequently, becomes satyagraha strategy
(Ibid, p.36). Hartal is a temporary strike of work and stopping of business, usually for
24 hours. It is a form of protest. It is prolonged if the cause is sufficiently serious and
the wrong very great (Diwakar, p.56). It was estimated that there were approximately
200 strikes in India during 1920 and no fewer than 400 in 1921 (CWMG, vol.19,
p.365).
Picketing is a method that spreads the message of the strike and adds to its effectiveness
though strike is not the only signal for picketing. It means a general appeal to people to
withdraw its patronage from concerns and shops. For example, during the freedom
struggle, some of the shops importing the British-manufactured goods were picketed; in
1942, there was picketing of administrative officers, police stations and public transport.
Dharna or the sit-in protest is also a form of strike and is one of the oldest methods of
protest. It draws the attention of the public to the cause for which it is being done and
thus compels the offender/ offending party to come to an agreement or solution. Whether
it is successful or crushed, dharna attracts and influences public opinion considerably.
Gandhi often restrained his supporters from sitting on dharna, as he was not in favour of
it on the grounds of coercion.
It is important to note that strike can be resorted to only after the legitimate methods of
conflict resolution fail to achieve the desired ends. Thomas Weber enlists them as follows:
a) moral appeals to the conscience of the employers to concede just demands, and
b) if these fail, a resort to voluntary arbitration where the decision of the umpire would
bind the parties.
An example may be quoted from the Ahmedabad Mill Workers’ strike wherein Gandhi
sought to bring about peaceful resolution to the problem by appealing to the good sense
of the employers to accept the arbitration principle. Strike becomes inevitable when the
disputes go out of hand and call for urgency to solve the matters. A peaceful conducting
of strike can be an absolute success and a violent strike would not only lead to violence
but also its perpetration. It would ultimately lead to the loss of trust between the disputing
parties making it all the more complex to resolve the conflict. The strikers should maintain
tolerance so that the targeted party does not cave in to the pressure of the former.
10.3 GANDHI ON THE ETHICS OF STRIKE

Though Gandhi successfully used strike as a non-violent method of protest, he advised his
supporters to follow an ethical code of conduct. For a successful strike he laid down the
following principles:
1. never to resort to violence
2. never to molest blacklegs
3. never to depend on alms, and
4. to remain firm, no matter how long the strike continued, and to earn bread during
the strike by any other honest labour.
Gandhi’s principles were well understood by the workers who, in turn, accepted them and
‘pledged themselves at a general meeting not to resume work until either their terms were
accepted or the mill-owners agreed to refer the dispute to arbitration’ (CWMG, vol.39,
p.339). True to Gandhi’s ethical principles, the workers adhered to their pledge and duty
to maintain peace and self-respect. They daily paraded the streets of the city in peaceful
procession, carrying their banner bearing the inscription ‘Ek Tek’ (Keep the pledge).
Gandhi noted that “strikes are an inherent right of the working men but must be
considered a crime immediately the capitalists accept the principle of arbitration” (Young
India, 5-5-1930). Gandhi preferred giving enough work to those who are striking;
especially, the spinning and hand-weaving ensure enough incentives and income to live.
Instead of leading an ordinary life, labourers may work toward making their living
conditions better in many a way. There should be better awareness in order to demand
their legitimate rights and even demand a respectful behaviour from their employers
keeping in view their (labour’s) contributions to the organisation. If these conditions are
not fulfilled, there is justification in the labourers resorting to strike. ‘Strikes, therefore, for
the present should only take place for the direct betterment of the labourers’ lot, and
when they have acquired the spirit of patriotism, for the regulation of prices of their
manufactures’ (CWMG, vol.19, p.366).
Strikes carried out on the basis of untruth or for unjustified demands negate the very
Strike 105
purpose of non-violent methods of protest or reasonable demands. They are also said to
have the elements of coercion but can be justified on the grounds of addressing
grievances that have been in practice for long. Gandhi never supported such strikes that
had no moral grounds. He felt that they would blur the vision towards attaining truth and
self-realisation.
At the same time, Gandhi opined that frequent calls for hartal or strikes would amount
to their abuse and also result in their inefficacy. The government would cease to respond
and reform itself in response to such incidents and the very purpose of targeting the erring
government is lost if these methods are abused and when they are reduced to the status
of cheap gimmicks. It would render them invalid. Hartals are meant as a protest against
something extraordinary; therefore, the frequent calls to observe hartals would be in bad
taste.
10.4 PACIFIC STRIKES

Gandhi, in the Young India edition on 18th November 1926, refers to the extract titled
No More War, an organ of the British Pacifists. Gandhi provided the extract for the
benefit of the readers. A. Fenner Brockway authored the conditions towards this
direction.
1. A strike in protest of social evils, which destroy human life, can be as much an act
of pacifism as a strike against war. (Starvation wages kill as many human beings as
are killed by guns).
2. If it be said that “constitutional” means could be used to end these evils, the same
can be said of war. Our “Constitutional” machinery is inadequate. The voters two
years ago had neither wage reductions nor war in mind.
3. If it be said that a strike (and particularly a general strike) against wage reductions
is an effort to “coerce” the nation or the Government, the same can be said about
a general strike against war. As a matter of fact, neither has any promise of success
unless the greater part of the nation supports it.
4. It is not accurate to liken a strike to an economic blockade. So far as there is
danger of hunger, it would be the strikers themselves who would suffer first. In actual
fact, in the recent General Strike, the T.U.C. (Trade Union Congress) was prepared
to co-operate in maintaining life and health. The Government refused co-operation.
5. The determining factor as to whether a strike is pacific or not is the spirit from which
it springs. A strike against war in which the motive was hatred of members of the
Government rather than of war and which represented a spirit which might be
transformed into civil war, would not be an act of pacifism, nor would a strike
against wage reductions animated by hatred of the employers or of members of the
Government, or by anti-social feeling. But both are acts of pacifism when inspired by
the spirit of protest against the evil themselves.
6. Whilst it is admitted that a non-pacifist spirit occasionally showed itself in the
utterances, and still more rarely in the acts of strikers, I have not the least hesitation
in saying that the dominant motive in the Great Strike was that of self-sacrificing
moral protest and not anti-social force or personal hatred. It was this, which gave
it spiritual power; in this the secret of the wonderful self-discipline of the mean was
to be found.
Gandhi added one more to these admirable conditions that a ‘pacific strike must be
limited to those who are labouring under the grievance to be redressed’. Gandhi cautioned
that strikes and hartal, though are effective means, it is definitely not difficult to misuse
them. Workmen, he said, have to organise themselves into strong labour unions and the
strike should be undertaken only with their consent. It is wrong to resort to strike without
previous negotiations with the owners or management. It is all the more important not to
strike when the management opts for arbitration and ensures scope for conflict resolution.
In this case, panchayat principle (the traditional Indian practice of settling the local
disputes by the five elder members chosen by the local community) is important where
both the parties respect the decision.
10.5 STRIKES: CONDITIONS AND CONDUCT

Gandhi enumerated the following conditions for a successful strike. If a strike fulfills all the
conditions as given below, it is said to have been successful.
1. The cause of the strike must be just.
2. There should be practical unanimity among the strikers.
3. There should be no violence used against non-strikers.
4. Strikers should be able to maintain themselves during the strike period without falling
back upon Union funds and should therefore occupy themselves in some useful and
productive temporary occupation.
5. Successful strikes have taken place even when all the above conditions have not
been fulfilled, but that merely proves that the employees were weak and had a guilty
conscience. We often make terrible mistakes by copying bad examples. The safest
thing is not to copy examples of which we have rarely complete knowledge but to
follow the conditions, which we know and recognize to be essential for success.
In the instances of disputes with management, the labourers should follow certain general
principles. These are summarised by Thomas Weber in the following words:
1. The workers or their leaders (among whom there must be perfect correspondence
and understanding) should not exaggerate their demands; they should study the pros
and cons of the case carefully before formulating their demands. They should always
be ready for correction if the opposite party is able to convince them that they are
wrong.
2. The weapon of the strike, which is really the very last weapon in the armoury of the
industrial workers, should not be resorted to unless all peaceful and constitutional
methods of negotiations, conciliation and arbitration are exhausted. Even during the
course of a strike, workers should be prepared for any just settlement or a reference
to arbitration (This assumes “practical unanimity among the strikers”).
3. Peaceful and nonviolent behaviour, even under provocation, is the sine qua non for
obtaining justice through any mass struggle of this type. While on strike the workers
should not damage the property or injure the person of anybody. They should bear
no ill-will towards their employers or their officers, as they are fighting the evil in the
employers and not the employers personally.
Strike 107
4. The workers should be self-respecting and, therefore, they should not rely on the
funds raised by sympathisers for the successful conduct of the strike. A striking
worker should find alternative employment during this period to maintain themselves
and their family, and no work should be considered below one’s dignity. This is
because “there is nothing more injurious to…morale and self-respect than enforced
idleness”, and because labour cannot “prolong a strike indefinitely, so long as it looks
to pecuniary support from public subscriptions or alms or depends on the resources
of its union and no strike can absolutely succeed which cannot be indefinitely
prolonged”.
5. A strike is a form of satyagraha. Strikers, therefore, must not submit to superior
force or hardship. Once they make a resolve they keep firm to it and even at the
cost of privations, including starvation, they stick to the resolution.
6. While on strike the workers should be truthful, courageous, just and free from hatred
or malice towards anybody, and should be prepared for voluntary service putting
their faith in God. (Weber, 1991, pp.78-79).
10.5.1 Duties of the Workers

While Gandhi was vocal about these conditions and spoke of workers’ right to strike for
reasons that are genuine, he enlisted the duties of the workers and the necessity to
conduct themselves in the right spirit.
(1) If the workers wish to improve their conditions and want the goodwill of their
employers, they should be honest and give up their addictions.
(2) They should be industrious, hard working, efficient and courteous.
(3) Carry out orders and speak with due respect not only with the employer but also
with everyone else.
(4) More important than the strike is the weapon of non-violence wherein justice for any
unsettled matter may be sought from panch (as in the panchayat system).
(5) In case a matter is with panch, during this course the workers should not continue
their strike.
(6) If any member of the Union is rude and refuses to back to work, they should cease
to be the members of the Union.
(7) Workers should not adopt coercion to concede the demands.
(8) If a worker is unreasonable, it would only benefit the employer and not the worker
as unreasonable demands do not justify strike in any form.
(9) While a hartal may be taken up in true religious spirit, it should rule out any direct
action that is damaging in nature.
10.5.2 Sympathetic Strikes

Gandhi found the sympathetic strikes to be humanitarian or political and those that are
undertaken expressing sympathy for the others in need. Citing the example of the Assam-
Bengal Railway and the steamer strikes, he termed it as the out of the ordinary attempt.
It is necessary to gauge the pros and cons of such strikes and the consequential
sufferings. He remarked in this context that the ‘labourers were not ready for a
philanthropic strike. In my opinion the labourers and artisans of India have not yet arrived
at that degree of national consciousness, which is necessary for successful sympathetic
strike’ (Young India, 22-9-1921). Gandhi was never inclined towards taking up these fasts
and attributes it to the lack of our understanding regarding the wants and aspirations of
these classes and our own inability to inform them of the political situation in the country.
It is important not to exploit them for any ends. The best service, he said, is to ‘teach
them self-help, to given them an idea of their own duties and rights, and put them in a
position to secure redress of their own just grievances. Then and not till then are they
ready for political, national or humanitarian service’ (Ibid). Secondly, as in other strikes,
in sympathetic strikes Gandhi excluded the idea of causing embarrassment to the
government. Sympathetic strikes have to be self-purificatory in nature and enable the
wrong doer to see his folly and redress it. The merit of the sympathetic strike lies in the
inconvenience and the loss suffered by the sympathizers (Ibid). These strikes should
continue inspite of the threats and temptations that are held against them. The feeling of
patriotism and fellow feeling is as much necessary during the conduct of these strikes.
10.6 CASE STUDIES

Here, the learner is appraised with two case studies, i.e the Ahmedabad Mill Strike of
1918 and the protest against the Rowlatt Act, which have been dealt at length in some
of the previous courses.
10.6.1 Ahmedabad Mill Strike (1918)

The textile mill owners and the labour force of Ahmedabad got embroiled in a dispute
over the grant of a bonus ultimately boiling down to the issue of allowances. Gandhi was
approached for resolution and he found it appropriate that the method of arbitration
would resolve the issue. Though it was agreed upon in the beginning, the issue further
escalated into a strike by the workers that deeply anguished the mill owners. On 22nd
February 1918, a lock-out was declared; though Gandhi tried to prevail upon both the
parties to solve the issue, it was of no avail. On disagreement over the wages, the
labourers began a regular strike from 26th February. The labour adhered to an ethical
code of conduct during this time. They pledged not to go for work till their demand for
just wages was met; decided to observe absolute non-violence and not to create any
trouble; not to indulge in looting or any bad behaviour; not to harm the property of the
mill and maintain peace at all costs. Gandhi and his co-workers and supporters helped
the labour by apprising them of the merits of maintaining hygiene, educated them about
the issue and conducted daily meetings on the problem solving methods. Though the
morale of the labour was high, the mill owners tried to thwart the workers to go further
with their strike.
At this stage, Gandhi announced his decision to fast till the problem was solved. This led
the mill owners to term the fast as a method of coercion; Gandhi, in the meantime, felt
that fast was the only means through which he could keep the morale of the workers
high. He said in this context: ‘Instead of five to ten thousand blooming faces full of the
lustre of iron determination, I saw but a thousand or two who seemed worn out and
dejected…I am one of those who believe that one has to stick to his vow in any
circumstances. I cannot even for a moment tolerate the idea that you should violate the
solemn pledge you have taken. Till such time you would all get your 35 per cent
increment or you are all completely defeated in your object, I am not going to touch my
food nor am I riding a car’. Finally, through arbitration, the issue was resolved with the
Strike 109
management deciding to pay the increment of 35% to the workers. Gandhi’s non-violence
and his approach of no ill-will for the workers and mill owners was remarkable. His
secretary Mahadev Desai noted that the ‘strike was conducted with the cleanest means,
on the strength of sheerest determination, and with least bitterness on both sides. The
result too was beneficial to both the parties’ (J.N.Sharma, p.69).
10.6.2 The Rowlatt Satyagraha

The Rowlatt Bill was the outcome of the recommendation made by the Sedition
Committee presided over by Sir Rowlatt in 1918, and was prepared to strengthen the
hand of the government in the control of crime and sedition. The Rowlatt Act (Govt. of
India Act No XI of 1919) “was formed to enable an archical offences to be tried
expeditiously before a strong court, consisting of three High Court Judges, with no right
to appeal.” It gave the powers of preventive detention i.e., the arrest and confinement of
those suspected of acts threatening public safety, and to ask such people to abstain from
any specified act. It basically bestowed with Government the emergency powers to deal
with any situation viewed as subversive. Gandhi actively campaigned against its
implementation traveling all over the country. He termed it as the most repressive. Gandhi
mooted the idea of Hartal to protest against the Rowlatt Act on 6th April 1919. The
response, undoubtedly, was widespread. Gandhi noted in his Autobiography on the
beginning of the Rowlatt Satyagraha thus: “The idea came to me last night …that we
should call upon the country to observe a general hartal. Satyagraha is a process of self-
purification, and ours is a sacred fight, and it seems to me to be in the fitness of things
that it should be commenced with an act of self-purification. Let all the people of India,
therefore, suspend their business on that day and observe the day as one of fasting and
prayer. The Musalmans may not fast for more than one day; so the duration of the fast
should be 24 hours. It is very difficult to say whatever all the provinces would respond
to this appeal of ours or not, but I feel fairly sure of Bombay, Madras, Bihar and Sindh.
I think we should have every reason to feel satisfied even if all these places observe the
hartal fittingly” (Autobiography, p.383). Consequently, the whole country, with few exceptions,
went on an unprecedented strike. People did not report to work, banks did not operate,
public transportation came to a stand still, and so did other government offices. There
was an astounding non-activity everywhere proving the effectiveness of the non-violent
means. The British authorities treated this movement as “sedition”. Unfortunately, even
before the objectives- both short-term and long-term were accomplished, Gandhi’s
detention enraged the masses, that escalated towards widespread violence. Gandhi
admitted his ‘Himalayan Miscalculation’ and realised that people were still unprepared for
a non-violent movement. The hartal was thus a failure in this case and instead of leading
to the repeal of the Act, it led to mass violence. He immediately suspended the movement
and undertook a three-day fast as penance for the violence committed by the people.
This case illustrates that the desired results of a movement need not always end up being
successful. But it clearly demonstrated Gandhi’s leadership acumen, his courage to take
up a non-violent movement and his readiness to withdraw it in the event of violence, thus
condemning violence as a means of conflict resolution.
10.7 SUMMARY
This Unit dealt with strikes/hartal as a means of non-violent conflict resolution, its meaning,
methods, ethics and conditions. Unlike fasting, strike evokes a sharp response and has
also an element of coercion. It is said to be one of the fastest ways of conflict resolution
because of this characteristic. Nevertheless, Gandhi himself was vary of its use as it might
create a feeling of bitterness between the offending as well as defending parties to the
conflict. But, applied with the right intent and will, it would yield positive results. But for
a strike/hartal to be successful, it is befitting that non-violence be adhered to for greater
gains and achieving the desired objectives. C.E.M. Joad, hailing Gandhi as the icon of
moral force, remarked that Gandhi ‘announced a method for the settlement of disputes
which may not only supersede the method of force, but, as men grow more powerful in
the art of destruction, must supersede it if civilization is to survive’ (cited in S.Radhakrishnan,
p.124). Thus, he demonstrated to the world that the power of non-violence as a method
of conflict resolution is unparalleled.

1. What do you understand by strike/hartal? What are its basic precepts?
2. What are the ethics of conducting a strike? How did Gandhi envision it as a method
of conflict resolution?
3. What are the conditions and code of conduct involved in the method of strike?
Examine in detail.
4. Illustrate two case studies depicting the success and failure of strike as a method of
conflict resolution.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Bondurant, Joan V., Conquest of Violence, The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict,
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Publications Division, Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting, GOI, New Delhi.
Diwakar, R.R., Saga of Satyagraha, Gandhi Peace Foundation, New Delhi and Bharatiya
Vidya Bhavan, Bombay, 1969.
Gandhi, M.K., An Autobiography or The Story of my experiments with truth, Navajivan
Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1927 (1993 reprint).
Kapoor, A.N and V.P.Gupta., (eds), A Dictionary of Gandhian Thought, Ajanta Books
International, Delhi, 1995.
Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli., Mahatma Gandhi: Reflections on his life and work, Jaico
Publishing House, 1956.
Sharma, J.N., Satyagraha: Gandhi’s Approach to Conflict Resolution, (Rediscovering
Gandhi Series, vol.3), Concept Publishing Company in collaboration with Gandhi Smriti
and Darshan Samiti, New Delhi, 2008.
New Delhi, 1991.
UNIT 11 DIALOGUE AND NEGOTIATION
Structure
11.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
11.2 Dialogue
11.3 Negotiation
11.4 Gandhi’s Methods
11.5 Relevance of Dialogue and Negotiation
11.6 Summary
Suggested Readings
11.1 INTRODUCTION
In the realm of conflict resolution, Satyagraha stands tall for its espousal of non-violence.
It stresses on those methods that are non-violent in nature and insists on following
methods that allow the conflicting parties to amicably discuss the issue at hand rather than
opting for violence to resolve it. In this context, two methods play a significant role- one,
dialogue and two, negotiation. These two methods of communication intend to reduce or
even mitigate the conflict to considerable extent and bring the negotiating parties together
to resolve the contentious issues. We have already studied about other methods of
resolution like mediation, reconciliation, adjudication and arbitration and how effective they
can be in unraveling the conflict situation. Gandhi, during the years of freedom struggle,
used all these methods extensively for he abhorred violence in thought, word and deed
to deal with the opponents. As Weber has said, ‘Gandhi was a lifelong practitioner of
conducting major public conflicts and a profound conflict theorist. In short, it could be
argued that Gandhi should be viewed from within conflict resolution theory, rather than
being distinct from it’ (Weber, 2001, p.493).
Aims and Objectives
After reading this Unit, you would be able to
 Understand the method and levels of dialogue
 Examine the negotiation process of resolving conflicts
 Analyse their relevance in the contemporary times.
11.2 DIALOGUE
Dialogue, essentially, is a conversation between two or more people. According to the
Encyclopaedia of Evaluation, it is an interaction between people with different perspectives
and interests who are intent on learning from one another. It can be engaged in numerous
ways like conversation, debate, discussion, critique, lesson and the like. It also presumes
a certain respect for others (especially among those who may be different from each
other), mutuality, honesty, and the ability to engage in critical thinking. Engaging in dialogue
creates the opportunity for new understandings—the focus is on exploring others’ and
ones’ own perspective or viewpoint. There is less agreement about whether dialogue
should result in consensus or mutual deep understanding, whether of similarities or
differences (see Encyclopedia of Evaluation). Dialogue can take place between two or
more people, and is primarily a face-to-face interaction of the individuals. Modern
technology has enabled it to take many other forms like online conferencing, collaborating
and expressing views through various forums.
The encyclopedia also describes dialogue as ‘a key element in a number of approaches
to evaluation, including the democratic deliberative, empowerment, participatory, and
critical approaches to evaluation. Dialogue in evaluation is intended to promote inclusion
and understanding of stakeholders’ interests. It is also understood to be an essential step
in identifying issues and opportunities within a program, organization, or community that
can ultimately lead to a better quality of life’. It helps in resolving long-standing
contentious issues and helps dispel misgivings apart from building trust. Dialogue enables
one to inquire, explore and discover others’ perspective in a most constructive and non-
violent manner.
Dialogue enables the stakeholders to identify, involve, be sensitive and plan to represent
one’s interest as well as understand the interests and intentions of the opponent groups.
It should also have a degree of openness and receptiveness that is essential for both the
parties. It is, as pointed out by Gergen and his associates, is critical to the success and
failure of the organisations. David Bohm views it as ‘a constructive endeavour in which
new meaning and insight are creatively coproduced’.
Dialogue is found both in literary and philosophical genres. The dialogue introduces us to
the thought process of the author who records the words between the people -living or
imaginary- thus giving us an insight into the issue concerned. Dialogue also exists in the
philosophical genre. It gives us an idea of particular time, period, age, people, thought,
art, literature and the existing conditions of the time. This explains the philosophy of that
age and people. Dialogue is said to have originated in Greece, and the historians usually
attribute it as a method, which Plato introduced for a systematic use and elevated this art
to its highest perfection. In essence, he can be called as the master of the art of
‘dialogue’. It is to be noted that most of Plato’s writings are in the form of dialogue. He
used it for depicting Socrates and others as engaged in conversation, which is prominently
known as Socratic method of teaching. This gained prominence as philosophical dialogue.
Socrates remained the protagonist of Plato’s dialogues. This form is said to have inspired
others including Xenophon, Aristotle, Cicero and scholars from Hellenistic Schools who
carved their own methods of dialogue. Thomas Aquinas and Augustine adopted it as
philosophical format. Eminent scholars have viewed dialogue in different ways. Martin
Buber sees dialogue as an effective means of on-going communication; the second Vatican
Council preferred to use it for dialogue with other religions, modern society and political
authorities; Paulo Freire, the eminent educationist used it as a type of classroom
pedagogy; and Mikhail Bakhtin, the Russian Philosopher, views dialogue as something that
enables to create a new understanding of the situation that demands change. Bakhtin, in
1981, used the term ‘dialogism’ to interpret the approaches of the organisation (apart
from the literary connotations); these include appreciative inquiry (as to what should be
and what will be), dialogic communication (trying to understand better one’s own position
and of others), transformative dialogue (constructive and generative forms of interaction
Dialogue and Negotiation 113
and reconfiguring existing realities) and dialogical scripting (to form plurivocal accounts and
richer insights).
In the process of dialogue, it is necessary that enough space be created for the parties
to engage in conversation freely. Dialogue facilitates the process of not just talking but
allows the parties to discover or empathise with the other party, which leads to the
realisation that the other party too is an affected one and is seeking a meaningful solution.
The purpose of a dialogue is to learn from each other. It is necessary to use appropriate
language, communication methods and skills. Dialogue is not to judge in a prejudiced way
but to listen with attention and respect other’s opinion. If a dialogue has to be successful,
it should be cautious regarding conscious or unconscious beliefs, insight, and assumptions
etc. Dialogue need not always end up in a successful conclusion. It is crucial that the
parties do not give way to anger, frustration or impatience during the process. It can often
be marred by poor communication, rigid stance, and mutual distrust, unwarranted exercise
of power, external pressure and other distracting instances.
Sometimes, dialogue is taken up by the parties, which are in asymmetrical power
equations. This creates the apprehension of the powerful one gaining an upper hand and
subordination of the weaker party. Therefore, it is imperative to create an atmosphere of
mutual trust and democratic engagement. Another problem might be the reluctance of the
parties involved in dialogue to shed their rigid stance and unwillingness to accommodate
other’s viewpoint. This creates an ambience that is biased rather than the one with deeper
understanding and trust. Much of the success depends on the participants’ ability to
accommodate and respect others’ views, facilitation and sharing of information, democratic
and participatory approach. Dialogue is necessary for conflict resolution without whose
positive involvement, a solution can never be in sight. Gergen points to its continuous
relevance and momentum.
The first crisis in the process of dialogue comes when the parties involved in it come
together with their own preconceived (or biased) and pent-up differences. The parties
need to observe and be open to being observed, apart from reaching an understanding
and come to a settlement. Peter Senge analyses it as a very crucial stage. Gradually, the
members realise that they do have an option of suspending their view and adopt a flexible
method. The whole process comes under intense introspection wherein members delve
into the roots of the conflict. This thought usually carries the process of dialogue forward.
Senge also observes that the situation may be vice versa wherein members can choose
to become further rigid and diverge, and hold on to their pre-set notions and bias. This
is also likely to lead to dialogue because of the ‘reasoning they use to support their
positions, moving to skillful discussion’. Senge analyses other stages of dialogue as
instability, inquiry and finally, creativity that can generate a breakthrough in the conflict
resolution.
11.3 NEGOTIATION
The Wikipedia defines negotiation as ‘a dialogue intended to resolve disputes, to produce
an agreement upon courses of action, to bargain for individual or collective advantage, or
to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests’. According to the Dictionary of International
Relations, ‘negotiation is the process whereby macropolitical actors interact in order to
effect a number of goals that can only, or most effectively, be realized by joint
agreement’. The Encyclopedia of Law and Society defines it as ‘the process of joint
decision making in social interactions dealing with conflict resolution, or handling collaborative
future interaction’. Of all the methods of dispute/conflict resolution, negotiation is the most
opted method for it ‘allows the parties involved to resolve their differences without any
third-party intervention, to manage the decision-making process and to control the
outcome’. As Thomas Weber puts it, ‘negotiation is a search for an outcome that is
adequately suitable to both parties, but unlike mediation, the dispute is settled bilaterally,
that is, the two parties are themselves the decision makers’ (Conflict Resolution ad
Gandhian Ethics, 1991, p.22). The parties to negotiation can identify a common interest
and can attain it by joining together and a complimentary interest in an exchange of
different objects, which they can grant to each other.
Negotiations allow the parties to engage in constructive interaction and to improve their
conditions. Since there is no appropriate, or procedural system, the parties usually work
outside the system to work out better ways to settle as to what each party can give and
take, and is willing to execute and obtain. It is necessary for the parties to recognise the
need to secure mutual interdependence. Negotiation is supposed to be the most informal,
and flexible of the methods available for conflict resolution. Negotiations have the
advantage over the other methods of dispute settlement in that they are most likely to
effect lasting resolution to conflict as well as reduce dependence on “experts” thereby
making the parties self-reliant, giving them control over important decisions that need to
be made concerning their own lives (Weber, p.22).
Negotiations take place at interpersonal, interstate and intergovernmental level apart from
managing labour-management disputes. Some of the social theorists consider negotiation as
‘any interpersonal communication that seeks to present the self’ in the context of
numerous social relationships and interdependencies. Negotiations may take place at an
informal level i.e., among individuals and within groups such as families, firms, tribes,
religious groups, or nations. Negotiations offer the opportunity for personal growth by
exposing each party to the views of the other, providing a situation for learning- the
decision being “the culmination of an interactive process of information exchange”. This
prevents personal, and in the long term and on a larger scale, social and national
stagnation- when an agreement between the parties is reached “the position of each has
been subtly changed not only by terms offered, but by its experience of the other and
exposure to the other’s persuasion” (cit in Weber, p.23).
There are different approaches to negotiation that also include Distributive (Adversarial)
and Cooperative (Integrative) approaches. The earliest theories of negotiation focused on
the distributive approach in which each party is trying to win as in a contest (Schelling,
1960). These emphasised looking into the strategies used by the parties to maximise their
share of the resources in dispute, to minimise losses, and to achieve dominance. The
cooperative approach emphasises on creating a cooperative atmosphere as against a
competitive and individualistic one. It was developed during the Cold War years, in
1980s, and insisted on cooperative activity. The parties see themselves as ‘collaborative
problem solvers and principled negotiators’. The term ‘integrative bargaining’ emerged to
symbolise the ‘cooperative, collaborative, win-win, or problem solving’, and takes the
parties’ goals are not mutually exclusive but those which both the sides can amicably
achieve.
The advocacy approach involves the services of a skilled negotiator to advocate for a
particular party and bring out the most favourable outcomes. The negotiator moves with
caution wherein the favourable outcome does not make the other party break off from
negotiations regarding the outcomes. The creative approach involves constructive talks
between the parties, exchange of information and interests that further lead to innovative
ways of solving the problem. The pre-negotiation preparations, flow of information,
understanding and seeking solutions, evolving new methods in negotiation- all contribute to
creative approach. Shell R.G. in ‘Bargaining for Advantage’ (2006) identified five styles
or responses to negotiation (prone to change as and when necessary) that are crucial-
accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, competing and compromising.
Negotiation involves three basic elements: (1) process: refers to how the parties negotiate,
context, parties, tactics, sequences and stages; (2) behaviour: communication methods
involved, skills and styles; (3) substance: agenda, issues and interests, options and
agreements. Other elements are added to this that comprise of strategy, tools and tactics.
The first comprises goals, and final outcome; the second comprises the steps to be
followed, role of the parties and preparation; and the third comprises statements, actions
and responses. The recent additions have been the factors like ‘persuasion and influence’
that play a prominent role in swinging the fortunes of the parties involved. Two norms
operate in the process of negotiations (1) the parties want to induce the opponent to
reciprocate (though not mandatory) and (2) they want to facilitate agreement.
Roger Fisher and William Ury, in their work ‘Getting to YES’, suggested that the
negotiations be based on the following four principles:
1. Separate the people from the problem. They advised negotiators to be soft on the
people and hard on the problem, to depersonalize, save face, and maintain the
relationship.
2. Focus on interests, not positions. The antifoundational assumption of the principled
negotiation approach is that positions in negotiation veil its true movers or interests—
that is, needs, desires, concerns, and fears. Later approaches differentiated between
types of interests, some focusing on needs and values as the key for understanding
interests.
3. Invent options for mutual gains. Keeping a collaborative, respectful atmosphere
enables parties to brainstorm and generate creative options. Other scholars noted that
the parties should work on their differences, avoid making premature judgments or
fixating on one solution to expand the pie, create alternatives, and construct a “bridge
solution” to the problems they encounter.
4. Insist on using objective criteria. This latter principle involves choosing between the
options and regulating the negotiation by the parties’ own agreement. They can
choose a standard of fairness, efficiency, science, and even law, and avoid the
dominance battle.
(Source: Encyclopedia of Law and Society).
The effects of negotiations can be both positive and negative. Before we discuss this, it
is important to note that emotions play an important role in the negotiation process. The
positive aspects include developing confidence, using cooperative strategy, less contentious
and aggressive behaviour, enhancing the integrative gains, tendency to honour the agreements,
flexible attitude, respect and tolerance towards others, reposing faith and confidence in the
other party, and commitment to carry the negotiations forward with positive approach.
The negative effects comprise of anger, less cooperation, distrust, narrowed focus on
issues, rigid attitude, and use of negative communication skills, clouding the other party’s
judgement and commitment and developing unwarranted hostility. These can mar the
negotiations and lead the parties to reject each other’s propositions and finally end in the
failure of negotiations. In this context, it is important to note that compromise is an
essential characteristic of negotiations. Reaching an agreement is essential for the parties
involved. For this, sometimes, the goal evaluation is necessary wherein the goals are much
more modest; settlement of such goals often proves to be satisfactory to the parties in
negotiation.
The following strategies should be kept in view by the parties before initiating negotiations:
 identify the common problems,
 find a mutually accepted definition to the problems and for framing it,
 determine the goals and objectives of the process and create a mutually accepted
plan of the negotiation’s agenda, procedures, and setting,
 evaluate and prioritize one’s goals and possible payoffs, including identifying ones’
best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA),
 agree on the order in which the issues should be discussed,
 keep awareness of the concerns, fears, and positions that lie beneath the interests of
self and the other since their interrelation is a pathway to the solution,
 determine the zone of possible agreement (ZOPA) between the least and most-
favorable solutions,
 identify the other’s emphasized issues,
 identify points where issues could be packaged,
 develop and locate supporting facts and arguments to one’s views and anticipate
counterarguments the other side might present, and
 try to find out about the other’s interests, alternatives, personal negotiation style, and
approach to negotiation.
(Source: Encyclopedia of Law and Society)
The most important factor is the understanding of cultural differences involved. The factors
are language, values, non-verbal behaviour and thinking and decision-making processes.
Unfamiliarity with these is likely to create misunderstanding and trust deficit. Sometimes,
even the managerial values lead to misconceptions. For example, objectivity, competitiveness,
equality and punctuality- the factors that are most valued by Americans is likely to be
unappreciated by others. The success or failure of negotiations depends mostly on the
perceptions of the negotiators. One most important factor is the background of the
traditional relationship between the countries. In case of traditional positive and friendly
relations, the negotiating parties are likely to be more accommodating, and offer concessions
while in parties with traditionally hostile relations, they are likely to be more rigid and
adamant to give concessions or even dishonour commitments. While bilateral negotiations
can be manageable, the multilateral negotiations may turn out to be otherwise, except that
all parties are equally represented. It is said that there is thin line between enmity and
amity in the process of negotiations. During negotiations, the use of force should be
controlled or prohibited altogether, for they send positive signals to the parties. As pointed
by Kenneth Boulding, all parties must appreciate that the price of continued conflict is
higher than the costs of reducing demands. The onus lies on the parties involved to bring
about amicable solutions.
11.4 GANDHI’S METHODS

Gandhi’s non-violent methods had a telling effect on the masses during the freedom
struggle. The effect was equally impressive on the British government that ruled the
country. Gandhi was ready to investigate into the roots of the problem wherever it
existed, petition, negotiate, arbitrate, mediate and engage in dialogue where necessary. He
left no stone unturned before launching his mass Satyagraha movements or individual
initiatives like fasting. Except for the non-cooperation movement where the masses turned
violent, most of the cases taken up by Gandhi for dispute settlement with the government
turned out to be successful though there are criticisms regarding the elements of coercion.
Dialogue and negotiations were taken up in most of the cases like Ahmedabad Labour
Strike, the Champaran Movement, Bardoli Satyagraha, Gandhi-Irwin Pact and Poona
Pact concluded between Gandhi and Ambedkar. Since the details regarding the above
cases have already been discussed in previous Courses and Units, the details are not
being discussed here to avoid repetition. As Weber said, ‘Gandhi’s well-publicized
examples of nonviolent resistance and the voluminous writings on his techniques at least
set the tone for the later development and phenomenal growth of conflict resolution
literature in the guise of modern problem-solving and win-win (as opposed to power-
based and zero-sum) approaches leading to integrative conflict resolution (as opposed to
mere compromise and distributive outcomes)’ (in Journal of Peace Research, 2001,
p.493).
Gandhi was conscious of the difference between evil and evil-doer. Thus, he did warn his
satyagrahis not to commit the mistake of hating those involved as the other party in
conflict but abhor the sin that is committed by the persons involved. Gandhi’s Satyagraha,
thus, is a crucial method of conducting conflict apart from its goal of resolving it. Gandhi
set the goals and the code of conduct in conflicts (what to achieve in the process of
resolving a conflict and how to conduct oneself, i.e., not to hurt the opponent); defined
the conflict (what the problem is about, views of both the parties and their goals); had
a positive approach towards conflict (by taking it as opportunity to resolve long-standing
issues, know the opponent’s viewpoint, change the situation to better one’s and other’s
condition); act non-violently in conflicts (adhere to non-violent methods, not to hurt or
humiliate opponent); willingness to sacrifice and inflict self-suffering(as in fasting); to act in
goal-consistent manner ( for example, take up constructive work for positive transformation)
and not to escalate the conflict (by indulging in violence and other deviating methods that
are inconsistent with non-violence). Gandhi insisted on converting the opponent through
Satyagraha, law of love and ahimsa instead of imposing coercion. Gandhi insisted on the
right means and ends concept; therefore if the conflict is to be resolved (the end), it
should be done so non-violently (the means). This, to him, was the goal to reach and
realise the ultimate truth.
11.5 RELEVANCE OF DIALOGUE AND NEGOTIATION

The contemporary world has been witnessing wars of all sorts as it did in the 19th and
20th centuries. The war-torn and Cold War years have given way to a multipolar (or
unipolar as some would call it) world where there are pertinent dangers of poverty,
displacement, ethnic conflicts, environmental problems and terrorism. Often, the conflicts
are being handled through military violence (as in armed intervention) and through other
forms (like imposing embargoes, economic sanctions) that hurt the people directly and
indirectly. With migration of people to different parts of the world, multiculturalism is on
rise. This, sometimes, is leading to the clashes in cultural values and perceptions and
distrust. Under these circumstances, the solutions are being sought but not via non-violent
methods. For peaceful existence of different cultures and people, dialogue is an essential
feature. Thus there have come up forums promoting inter-faith or inter-religious dialogues.
These are promising in nature though the visible evidence regarding its effectiveness is yet
to emerge. Similarly, territorial/boundary disputes or economic disputes are on the rise.
Though dialogue or negotiations are going on, these are marred by traditional/historical
record of distrust and disharmony. The capacity to understand the opponent and engage
in constructive one-to-one talk is waning. The rising violent incidents are adding to the
existing conflicts thereby leaving no scope for dialogue and negotiation. Unless there is a
massive change in the mindsets and strategies of the parties, the solutions seem to be
unresolved. In the interest of mankind and in the interest of promoting world peace and
order, it is imperative that non-violent methods are taken up. To repeat what Kenneth
Boulding said, it is much costlier to handle an escalated conflict. The best possible
solutions can be brought about through non-violent methods that impose no costs at all.
11.6 SUMMARY
Dialogue and negotiation constitute the non-violent methods of conflict resolution. They
help in resolving the conflicts in an amicable manner and in understanding one’s and
other’s position in a constructive manner. Both the methods help in forwarding one’s
interests; at the same time they give us an insight into others’ problems. The resolutions
are aimed through integrative approach, increased awareness about other’s culture and
values apart from constructive approach towards achieving cordial gains. It would also
help in forging harmonious relations between parties or nations in order to work for a
better and peaceful order in the world.

1. What do you understand by dialogue? Trace its origins and advantages.
2. Define the concept of negotiation. Analyse its principles and strategies.
3. Write short notes on:
a) Gandhi’s methods of non-violent conflict resolution
b) Relevance of dialogue and negotiation in the contemporary world.
SUGGESTED READINGS
New Delhi, 1991.
Weber, Thomas., Gandhian Philosophy, Conflict Resolution Theory and Practical Approaches
to Negotiation, Journal of Peace Research, vol.38, no.4, July 2001, pp.493-513.
Sharma, Jai Narain, Satyagraha: Gandhi’s Approach to Conflict Resolution, Concept
Publishing Company, New Delhi, 2008.
Web Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/negotiation
“Dialogue.” Encyclopedia of Evaluation. 2004. SAGE Publications. 26 Feb. 2010.
<http://www.sage-ereference.com/evaluation/Article_n148.html>.
Oswick, Cliff. “Dialogue.” International Encyclopedia of Organization Studies. 2007.
SAGE Publications. 26 Feb. 2010. <http://www.sage-ereference.com/organization/
Article_n129.html>.
Alberstein, Michal. “Negotiation.” Encyclopedia of Law & Society: American and
Global Perspectives. 2007. SAGE Publications. 26 Feb. 2010. <http://www.sage-
ereference.com/law/Article_n486.html>.
Lewicki, Roy J. “Negotiation.” International Encyclopedia of Organization Studies.
2007. SAGE Publications. 26 Feb. 2010. <http://www.sage-ereference.com/organization/
Article_n328.html>.
Pogue, Keith. “Plato.” Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration.
2006. SAGE Publications. 26 Feb. 2010. <http://www.sage-ereference.com/edleadership/
Article_n439.html>.
UNIT 12 MEDIATION AND RECONCILIATION
Structure
12.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
12.2 Gandhi on Violence, Conflict and Conflict Resolution

12.3 The Concept of Mediation
12.4 Reconciliation
12.5 The Idea of Shanti Sena
12.6 Summary
Suggested Readings
12.1 INTRODUCTION
The term conflict is understood as any situation, event, or opinion in an inter-personal or
other relations where there is more than one position and these are at variance with one
another. When these variant positions are made to coexist within the same social matrix,
conflict occurs. Thus, conflict is a process of rearrangement of variant positions to enable
them to resolve differences and attempt coexistence. Conflict is seen, witnessed or
experienced in every society at one point of time or the other but it is imperative that
such a conflict is brought to an end if a society has to rejuvenate itself, flourish and
survive peacefully thereafter. One must also understand that conflict is not inherently
adverse or unhealthy; it can be a productive occurrence and it can rather help a society
to reinvent itself and learn to coexist peacefully. Conflict lends dynamism to a situation that
allows for a dialogue and reconsideration of existing situation and a possible rearrangement
of interpersonal or international relations. Every society goes through a process of social
and political churning whenever internal and external situations warrant it. It is an inevitable
part of the process of social development and change. Lewis Coser and Ralf Dahrendarf
propose in their conflict theory that conflict can be used to resolve social tensions and
maintain interpersonal relations. For them, conflict is a natural manifestation of social
change because in this process some groups benefit more than the rest. Resolution of
tensions through the use of conflict is more desirable than prolonging the differences. Such
resolution of conflict is particularly marked in pluralistic, open societies as it provides
avenues for citizens to challenge the established norms and institutions.
Conflicts can be violent and non-violent, armed resistance or peaceful opposition.
Whatever is the nature of conflict, while it is desirable to bring an end to the conflicts
amicably and early, some conflicts are less amenable to resolution than others. Protracted
conflicts elude solutions because of various factors such as complex and competing issues
involved, divergent opinion on the possible solution, different methods adopted by the
main actors, and a general lack of concert of interests in favour of a solution. Since all
conflicts cannot be successfully resolved one way or the other, some conflicts and
disputes have to be lived with. However, even as some conflicts are difficult to resolve,
Mediation and Reconciliation 121
they must however be contained to a level that does not endanger human life and social
existence in general.
In this unit we will look at the concept of mediation and reconciliation as tools of
conflict resolution, and their application by Gandhi in his efforts to resolve conflicts. While
both mediation and reconciliation are important for conflict resolution, they are employed
at different stages of conflict. Mediation is a method of peaceful resolution that is used
to bring about a solution to an on-going conflict. Reconciliation, on the other hand, is a
process of coming to terms with the reality at the end of the conflict and of preparing
oneself for a renewed coexistence with other groups. Usually, mediation as a procedure
comes into prominence during a conflict when parties try to seek a way out of an
imbroglio; reconciliation is a process that normally comes into effect after a conflict has
come to an end to heal the wounds and help a community to march on with life.
Aims and Objectives
This Unit will help you to understand
 Gandhi’s position of conflict and conflict resolution;
 the concept of mediation and its utility in conflict resolution;
 the features and facets of reconciliation;
 the practice of peaceful conflict resolution through satyagraha and Shanti Sena; and
 the means and application of mediation and reconciliation by Gandhi.
12.2 GANDHI ON VIOLENCE, CONFLICT AND

CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Gandhi’s position on violence and conflict appears ambivalent on the face of it but a
deeper inquiry shows that he had a considered opinion on both conflict and violence.
While he unequivocally advocated non-violent resistance as a means of achieving resolution
of conflict, he did believe that there might be situations in public life where violence
cannot be wished away. Although he believed that violence thrives on counter-violence
and begets the violent result that does no one good, he was not averse to the use of
violence if the choice was only between violence and cowardice. It was better to wage
a just war, take recourse to violence or use arms to safeguard one’s people than be seen
as coward and incapable of defending one’s subjects. It is in this context that Gandhi
supports war as a legitimate or just war if it is to save the annihilation of one’s race.
When Gandhi was fatally assaulted in 1908, his eldest son, Harilal Gandhi, asked him
what was the right course of action he should have taken, ‘whether he should have run
away and seen his father killed or whether he should have used the physical force’ to
defend Gandhi, the father replied that ‘it was his (Harilal’s) duty to defend me even by
using violence’ (Weber, p.62). However, while practising satyagraha, Gandhi felt that it
had to be employed at every level by those wanting to succeed in it. It had to be
practised by applying it in everyday situations and in the larger social and political context.
He added that ‘he who fails to apply in the domestic sphere and seeks to apply it only
in the political and social sphere will not succeed’ (Weber, p.62). Gandhi does not take
extreme or unqualified position on his opposition to war or support for non-violence.
The Gandhian notion of conflict and the method of its resolution i.e., satyagraha, is
premised on such sound beliefs as ahimsa, truth and moral conviction. Satyagraha is
Gandhi’s articulation of conflict resolution. He held that hatred, fear, anger and cowardice
lead to conflict. In order to be able to rid the society of conflict, one must first resolve
conflict at the individual level. There is no redemption from social conflict unless the
individual is at peace with his own self and can see his social goals clearly. The individual
must seek both emancipation of the self and the opponent. The idea was to eliminate the
evil and not the evil-doer. The intention of a satyagrahi is never to embarrass the wrong
doer; his object ‘is to convert, not coerce, the wrong doer’ (Gandhi cited in Weber,
2006, pp.145-6). For him, the notion of mediation is not merely a procedural intervention
of a third actor; it is the spiritual mediation powered by non-violence and self-
introspection for the ultimate realisation of truth. Gandhi is more concerned about ‘the
processes of conflict [and its resolution] rather than the substance’ (Weber, p.13) or the
types of conflict. Gandhi seeks to apply satyagraha as a means of conflict resolution at
the level of the individual, community, society and the world outside.
Insofar as the means of resolution of the conflict is concerned, Gandhi was unwavering
in his conviction that coercion of any kind was to be avoided. There are some (e.g.,
Bondurant, 1967; Case, 1923) who argue that Gandhi’s practice of non-violence and
fasting were coercive in essence in forcing the opponent into submission. Gandhi’s
decision to undertake fast during the Ahmedabad mill workers’ strike discussed later in
this unit was construed to be so, although Gandhi himself acknowledges that he allowed
the mill owners to stick to their reasoning so that his fast should not be seen as a
pressure tactic. In fact, Case asserts that ‘satyagraha is explicitly nonviolent and implicitly
coercive’ but Gandhi understood it as a means of arriving at truth and deciding on the
right course of action, and not as a weapon of coercion (Case cited in Weber, p.57).
Every means employed to the resolution of conflict had to be necessarily peaceful, non-
violent, non-coercive, leading to the realisation of truth.
12.3 THE CONCEPT OF MEDIATION

Mediation as a method and approach to peaceful resolution of conflict is characterised by
the participation of a third party in the negotiations besides the directly concerned parties.
When parties to the conflict are either not agreeing to talk to each other or where
negotiations fail to lead to a common ground, mediation is used to make headway in the
negotiations. The mediator acts as a neutral third party to promote settlement without
judging the merit of a case on either side. Such a mediator is a person or a group of
persons who is impartial and trusted by all the parties to the conflict. The mediating party
takes the thread of negotiations in its own hands and acts as a channel of communication
between the conflicting sides.
Once a mediator has been identified, the process consists of actual transmission of
suggestions and solutions to the parties concerned. However, there is no compulsion that
the parties must accept the solutions presented by the mediating side. It is this nature of
voluntary acceptance of a solution and the cooperation of the parties to a conflict that
makes mediation a peaceful process, devoid of any coercion.
In order for mediation to be successful, two conditions are essential. Firstly, the mediator
should be well informed about the problem at hand and should be able to project a
neutral and an impartial image. If not, the mediator always runs the risk of alienating one
or the other party. Such discontentment often acts as a hurdle in successful mediation
when one of the parties is reluctant to accept the compromise solution. Secondly, both
the parties should be willing to resort to mediation and the mediator should be acceptable
to them. The consent to mediation and the confidence reposed by the conflicting parties
in the mediator is crucial for the successful settlement of a conflict. Any deficit in trust,
impartiality and confidence may jeopardise the process of mediation.
Gandhi attempted to practise non-violence through mediation wherever it was required.
Although he was not always successful, he persisted with his efforts again and again. He
firmly held that non-violence never begot defeat; the inability to achieve the desired result
is because of the lack of perfection in practising satyagraha. The first trace of mediation
efforts by Gandhi is seen in his twenty years of life in South Africa. As a lawyer, he was
bound to resolve the disputes through persuasive arguments in the court but he realised
soon enough that it was possible and desirable to bring about private compromises and
avoid the acrimony and defeat in an adversarial situation like litigation. His first instance
in mediation was a case involving Dada Abdullah Sheth and Sheth Tyeb Haji Khan
Mohammed. There are many such instances where he successfully brought about
reconciliation (Bhaskaran, pp.430-431).
There are two instances of conflict in India in the early years of Gandhi’s political life
where he is said to have resorted to mediation between two conflicting parties. One was
the conflict relating to farmers in Champaran in 1917 and the other was the conflict
between the labourers and mill owners at Ahmedabad in 1918.
The strike by the Ahmedabad mill workers was one of the first instances where Gandhi
used strike, fasting and mediation as the methods of conflict resolution. When Gandhi
initially received information about the workers’ unrest at the textile mill, his opinion was
that the case of the mill workers was strong. However, his own position was awkward
because the main mill owner was his friend. He advised the mill owners to submit the
dispute to arbitration but they refused. Then he advised the labourers to go on strike
because he felt that they were perfectly in their right to do so in the face of mill owners’
intransigence. Strike was also a peaceful form of protest when labourers had no other
means of pressing for their demands. Gandhi himself joined the strike, attended the
meetings and the mill workers every evening and took a pledge from them that they will
not return to work until either their demands were met or the mill owners agreed to resort
to arbitration. The strike continued successfully for a fortnight but thereafter the workers
became anxious and showed signs of restlessness and anger. It was difficult to maintain
the protest as a peaceful one and channelise the energies of the workers into fruitful and
gainful engagement. In this whole process of being a part of the conflict, Gandhi reflects
on the dilemmas and consternation faced by the mediator himself thus: ‘The mill-hands
had taken the pledge at my suggestion. They had repeated it before me day after day,
and the very idea that they might now go back upon it was to me inconceivable. Was
it pride or was it my love for the labourers and my passionate regard for truth that was
at the back of this feeling–who can say?’ (Jack, p.155). In order to resurrect a flagging
strike, Gandhi decided to go on fast ‘unless the strikers rally and continue the strike till
a settlement is reached, or till they leave the mills altogether’.
Gandhi’s dilemma was once again in attendance on his decision to go on strike since he
‘enjoyed very close and cordial relations with the mill owners,’ and his fast could have
affected their position and decision on the dispute. On the face of it, it appeared that the
fast was against the millowners but as a satyagrahi- in search of truth- Gandhi was
certain that this was the only right course of action to induce the labourers to continue
a non-violent protest that was agreed upon. He confessed that his ‘fast was undertaken
not on account of a lapse of the mill owners, but on account that of the labourers’ in
which he had a share. ‘With mill owners, I could only plead; to fast against them would
amount to coercion. Yet…I felt I could not help it’ (Jack, p.156). The net result of
Gandhi’s cordial relations with both the disputants (the mill owners and the labourers), a
non-violent strike coupled with the conviction that the mill hands were justified in their
demand, and the eventual decision to fast in order to keep the labourers on strike from
becoming violent and unruly, led to the creation of an atmosphere of goodwill and
understanding that paved the way for the resolution of conflict. The mill owners agreed
to submit the dispute to arbitration and the strike was called off within only three days
of fasting.
What is instructing in this episode is that although Gandhi could have taken up the case
as litigation, he decided to initiate a form of peaceful protest as a means of resolving the
conflict. Secondly, he decided to support the position of the labourers because he was
convinced that labourers had genuine concerns in spite of the fact that one of the mill
owners was his acquaintance. Thirdly, Gandhi believed that such change of heart and a
climb down from their position (mill owners) was made possible in this case because the
path of satyagraha and non-violence touched the hearts of the mill owners. They were
equally keen to resolve the conflict and set about discovering some means for a
settlement.
12.4 RECONCILIATION
Reconciliation as a concept is part of the process of rebuilding peace after the conflict
has come to an end or when has been brought down to manageable levels. Every conflict
passes through two stages. The first one is the process of conflict management that is
effected through such methods as negotiation, mediation, dialogue, arbitration, etc. The
second stage involves reconciliation when the conflict has been resolved. Reconciliation
is a challenging process because the entire process of peace building is hinged on it. It
has a dual role to play in the resolution of conflict: one, successful conflict resolution is,
in the immediate sense, premised on reconciliation; second, it prepares the conflicting
communities to eventually coexist with each other and thus acts as the ultimate basis for
lasting peace.
Reconciliation requires developing a web of peaceful relationships between the communities
and a change in socio-psychological and emotional outlook towards each other. This in
turn is an uphill task when the communities have seen conflict for an extended period of
time coupled with a general lack of confidence in the other group’s intentions. It requires
a tremendous leap of faith and belief to find emotional connection in each other so as to
counter the trust deficit and renew efforts towards coexistence. Many a time, successful
peace agreements have failed to establish lasting peace or to sustain negotiated solution
in the absence of genuine reconciliation on the part of the communities. This is so because
the peace agreements or blueprints for resolving the conflicts are negotiated by the leaders
and political representatives of the warring factions but reconciliation depends on the
active involvement of people and their perception about the other community. When there
is incongruence between the popular perception of a conflict and the political calculations
of the leaders involved in negotiations for its resolution, it is unlikely that the conflict will
be successfully put to an end without effecting a change in that popular perception.
Sometimes structural mechanisms for reconciliation are woven into peace agreements by
way of creating interdependencies, linkages, affinities and other channels of interaction to
create conducive atmosphere for mutual respect and understanding but there is no
guarantee that such structures and mechanisms will necessarily bring about a change in
popular perception and orientation towards each other (Bar-Tal, p.365). Thus, no matter
how successfully peace has been negotiated, reconciliation is a necessary and inevitable
process to sustain that negotiated peace. James Baker, the former US Secretary of State,
once famously stated that no amount of ‘international conciliation can replace national
reconciliation’ in bringing about lasting peace.
The process of reconciliation, by definition, is a gradual, reciprocal and voluntary one. It
must involve respect for, forgiveness towards, and appreciation of the rival group and its
socio-political position. Although it is extremely difficult to countenance such dramatic turn
around in one’s perception, it is commonly held that transition and acceptance of a group
from rival to a legitimate partner and stakeholder in peace is necessary for reconciliation.
Intra-social reconciliation must be based on four elements: truth, regard, justice and
peace. Truth involves ‘open revelation of the past, including admission, acknowledgement
and transparency’; regard is a term used by Kriesberg to denote acceptance, forgiveness,
and compassion; justice ‘requires rectification, restitution, compensation and social
restructuring’; and peace (or security in Kriesberg’s view) calls for building ‘common
future, cooperation, coordination, well-being, harmony…and security for all the parties’
(Lederach and Kriesberg quoted in Bar-Tal, pp.366-67). Influenced by this understanding
of reconciliation and Gandhi’s emphasis on spiritual aspect of it, the South African
Commission was named as Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
Social reconciliation is contingent upon many factors such as the perceptions of the
incumbent leaders and the members of the community, levels of social cohesiveness, the
ability of everyone to enmesh in the local cultural matrix (if it is an intra-community
conflict), and traditional, emotional ties shared by a community. Social group as a
repository of cohesive identity and cultural values gets disintegrated when dissimilar
attitudes are made to coexist. Traditional values are sacrificed out of sheer necessity and
desperation to survive in hostile conditions. Moreover, retrieving one’s sense of self-
esteem and emotional fabric is an arduous task for those who have seen conflict for too
long. They tend to suffer from a sense of helplessness and seething anger at being forced
to endure conflict. The problem gets amplified when an entire community shares such
emotional attributes of anger, helplessness and retribution and continues to live with
ruptured emotional balance and a deep sense of loss. These grievances must be known,
acknowledged and redressed to the extent possible by those involved in conflict resolution.
Since a conflict is rarely one-sided, its resolution requires forgiveness and healing on the
part all those involved in it.
Usually reconciliation is understood in Western-Christian religious-cultural context. However,
in Da Silva’s view, ‘Gandhi’s satyagraha (truth force) is an Eastern articulation of
reconciliation. [Satyagraha] sustains and drives nonviolent behaviours, which are expressions
of forgiveness and reaching out to the other. Nonviolence is implied in forgiveness, since
we cannot be violent and promote reconciliation at the same time. Reconciliation through
nonviolence has much in common with the four dimensions of forgiveness, namely, moral
judgment, forbearance, empathy, and repairing of broken relationships. The assumption of
human interdependence that underlies ahimsa is also an important part of the reconciliation
process that seeks to bring together the perpetrator, the victim, and the community
through restorative justice’ (Da Silva’s views cited in Meiring, p.1395).
During the 1940s, until his death in 1948, Gandhi devoted much of his time and energies
to Hindu-Muslim reconciliation in which Shanti Sena also had a major role (see the
following section 12.5). He famously stated that ‘[a] bullet destroys the enemy; non-
violence converts the enemy into a friend’, and has the ability to change the heart of even
a hardcore fanatic. The last months of his life were spent in bringing about reconciliation
between Hindus and Muslims in Noakhali, Bihar and Calcutta that had seen worst riots
following the partition of the country. He travelled from village to village, accepted
hospitality of Muslim families and addressed gatherings in the evenings in an effort to bring
peace to the troubled communities. An incident that took place on 31 August 1947 in
which a mob of unruly rioters arrived at his place and attacked him but the blow
narrowly missed Gandhi. It made him realise that his efforts at resolving the differences
had not been entirely successful. He undertook fast unto death on the following morning
that continued for the next three days. That fast brought peace to the neighbourhood and
forced leaders of rioting mobs, hooligans, representatives of communities and every
conceivable group to rally around Gandhi and take a written pledge that there would not
be communal tension in the area. Thereafter, communal disturbances occurred in many
other parts of the country but Bengal remained largely peaceful. Gandhi was ready to
forgive and condone those who had killed others, even those who were not clear of
blood on their hands, if they owned up to their crime and if there was a true repentance.
12.5 THE IDEA OF SHANTI SENA

Gandhi tried to develop alternative structures of conflict resolution to help sustain the idea
of satyagraha in action. Shanti Sena is one such structure of non-violence. Gandhi’s idea
of Shanti Sena is important here both as a means of peaceful resistance as well as a
method of achieving reconciliation in the society when it is torn by conflict. The earliest
experiments in evolving the idea of Shanti Sena can be deduced from the peace march
he held in Transvaal in October 1913 and the establishment of Tolstoy farm to rehabilitate
the satyagrahi families in 1910 in South Africa. In India, his efforts in resolving the issue
of Champaran agriculturists and Ahmedabad mill workers (both in 1917) are in the same
league (Bhaskaran, p.431). The idea of Shanti Sena as a band of volunteers germinated
during the communal riots in 1921 but it could not be brought to fruition then. It was
organised much later in 1947.
He believed that just as there is an army to wage war, there must also be dedicated
soldiers of peace and non-violence to hold the weave of social fabric together. The
concept of Shanti Sena has been variously translated as peace brigade, peace army,
shanti dal and soldiers of peace to denote a group of volunteers who are practitioners
of non-violence and are soldiers aiming to resolve social conflicts peacefully.
The Shanti Sainiks, as essential satyagrahis, must believe in fundamental concepts of
satyagraha, which were: ‘faith in human goodness, truth, non-violence, creative self-
suffering, means and ends, rejection of coercion, and fearlessness’ (Weber, pp. 41-59).
While these are the concepts in which Shanti Sainiks must believe, there are yet other
principles, which they must ideally try to follow. The five guiding principles are search for
truth, stopping and preventing direct violence, removing structural violence, nonviolent
ethics and values, and self-realisation leading to inner peace. Since these guiding principles
are difficult to follow in their entirety, Gandhi believed that they must abide by as many
principles as they can while endeavouring to imbibe and emulate all of them. In Gandhi’s
philosophy, as in his strategy, perfection must be aimed for and attained through constant
efforts; but lack of perfection need not lead to forsaking that effort altogether. He said
that Shanti Sena cannot always consist of ‘perfectly nonviolent people. It will be formed
of those who will honestly endeavour to observe nonviolence’ (Cited in Bhaskaran,
p.431).
The first guiding principle of search for truth has been discussed before in the unit on
Truth is God (Unit 8 in Course 3). The second principle that believes in stopping and
preventing direct violence involves the mechanisms of peaceful conflict resolution such as
negotiation, mediation, dialogue, arbitration, and others. A
Shanti Sainik must know to employ these methods skillfully as also to try and pre-empt
the reasons that lead to conflict in the first place, such as structural violence. Structural
violence is understood as the prevalence of inequality, exploitation, injustice or any form
of discrimination like the system of untouchability that is the breeding ground for violence.
It is the duty of the Shanti Sena to eliminate such structures of violence so that social
cohesion can be established. The fourth principle of nonviolent ethics and values has to
be followed all along, even in the face of conflict. A Shanti Sainik must only offer peaceful
resistance without resorting to violent counter attack; he should prefer to die rather than
kill others.
It is pertinent to note here that Shanti Sena was predominantly meant for resolving social
conflicts such as communal riots and caste conflicts within a country although he did
envisage its larger role as a substitute for police and eventually even the army. Though
the latter part of his dream was difficult to be realised within his lifetime or thereafter,
Shanti Sena (with a band of 79 volunteers) did play a major role in dousing the flames
of communal conflict in the aftermath of the partition and the riots that followed in
Noakhali, Calcutta and other parts of Bengal in 1947. Thus, Shanti Sena was to act as
a neutral mediator of peace during a conflict as also to act as a healer in the process
of reconciliation and coexistence in the aftermath of violence. It was a useful idea at every
stage of the conflict resolution even while following the avowed principle of non-violence.
This context and original mandate of Shanti Sena was not appreciated in right perspective
in the post-independence period by Gandhi’s followers. Two reasons can be ascribed for
this loss of direction. Firstly, Gandhi was assassinated within months of successfully
resolving the communal tension at Noakhali where Shanti Sena had been an active agent
of restoring peace. It was robbed of the vision and guidance that Gandhi could have
offered for its larger role in national and international affairs. Secondly, there were
competing opinions about the role of Shanti Sena among the followers of Gandhi in the
post-independence period. While one section led by Jayaprakash Narayan assumed the
position that it should replace the army and fight the armed soldiers of China through
peaceful resistance, the other opinion held by Vinoba Bhave understood its role more
moderately as that of working towards rural reconstruction and building a peaceful society,
free from internal conflicts (Weber, 2006, pp.236-238 and Upadhyaya, p.75). Shanti
Sena became a splintered group torn between these two competing positions.
12.6 SUMMARY
Conflict is seen, witnessed or experienced in every society but it must be contained at
a level that enables a society to survive peacefully. All conflicts are not bad. In fact, some
conflicts allow the differences in society to come to the fore and seek their resolution. It
is an inevitable part of the process of social development and change. If conflict is a
pervasive phenomenon, methods and means will have to be devised for its peaceful
resolution. In India, Gandhi stressed on peaceful means of resolving conflicts through
satyagraha, ahimsa, Shanti Sena, spiritual and social reconciliation through forgiveness and
penance. Mediation is one such means of peaceful resolution where intervention by a third
party attempts to find a solution to a dispute while circumscribing the adversarial
behaviour of the disputants. Gandhi believed in values like truth, non-violence, non-
cooperation, satyagraha, forgiveness, inner purification as the mediating forces to bring
about a change of heart in the opponent for effective and lasting resolution of a conflict.
Amicable resolution of conflict creates a positive atmosphere for reconciliation and the
resolve among all parties to the conflict to make a fresh beginning. It holds a better
promise for peace than military victory since it is perceived as a victory of all rather than
a party to the conflict. For Gandhi, moral and spiritual aspect of the resolution of a
conflict as reflected in genuine reconciliation was more important than external structures
of peace. Therefore, Shanti Sena was his attempt to build a structure of conflict resolution
to put his idea of non-violence and peace into practice. The test of a good resolution of
conflict lies in retaining cooperation of all parties, after having addressed the historical
realities, a sense of justice for all and a genuine effort at reconciliation.

1. Elucidate the term conflict and discuss Gandhi’s views on violence and conflict.
2. Examine the features of mediation citing examples of its application by Gandhi.
3. What do you understand by the concept of reconciliation?
4. What are the factors that contribute to the success of mediation and reconciliation?
5. Discuss the idea of Shanti Sena and its role in conflict resolution.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Bar-Tal, Daniel., ‘Reconciliation as a Foundation of Culture of Peace’ in Joseph de
Rivera, (ed), Handbook on Building Cultures of Peace, Springer-Verlag, New York,
2009.
Bhaskaran, M. William., ‘Mahatma Gandhi’s Peace Army: A Paradigm’, Gandhi Marg,
vol. 43, no.4, January-March 2002, pp.429-439.
Bondurant, Joan V., (ed.), Conquest of Violence: The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict,
Case, C.M., Non-Violent Coercion: A Study in Methods of Social Pressure, Century,
New York, 1923.
Da Silva, A., ‘Through Non-Violence to Truth: Gandhi’s Vision of Reconciliation’ in R.
Helnick, et al, eds., Forgiveness and Reconciliation, Templeton Foundation Press,
Philadelphia, PA, 2002.
Jack, Homer A., (ed), The Gandhi Reader: A Source Book of His Life and Writings,
Samata Books, Madras, 1983.
Kataria, Pooja., Conflict: Forms, Causes and Methods of Resolution, Deep and Deep,
New Delhi, 2007.
Meiring, PGJ., ‘Truth and Reconciliation in South Africa: Hindu Experiences and Concerns’,
HTS, 60(4), pp.1383-1398. This can be accessed at http://www.up.ac.za/dspace/bitstream/
2263/13384/1/HTS%2060.4%20MEIRING.PG (RED).pdf
Upadhyaya, Priyankar., ‘Peace and Conflict: Reflections on Indian Thinking’, Strategic
Analysis, vol. 33, no.1, January 2009, pp. 71-83.
Weber, Thomas., Conflict Resolution and Gandhian Ethics, Gandhi Peace Foundation,
New Delhi, 1991.
Weber, Thomas., Gandhi, Gandhism and the Gandhians, Roli Books, New Delhi, 2006.
UNIT 13 NOAKHALI
Structure
13.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
13.2 Why Noakhali? Gandhi’s Mission

13.3 Bihar Riots and Critical Dilemma
13.4 Gandhi’s Lonely Journey
13.5 Idea of Fearlessness and Courage
13.6 Responsibility
13.7 Moral and Ethical Critique
13.8 Summary
Suggested Readings
13.1 INTRODUCTION
When the national movement was reaching a crescendo in 1946-47, there were tremendous
expectations of the impending freedom all round. At the same time the idea of having a
free Pakistan, which the Muslim League had been demanding and mobilising for, had also
been agitating human emotions. Communalism, which had attacked a composite Indian
nationalism, was coming to the centre stage and there were violent overtones of the
communal mobilisation that could be seen from across the country. On 16 August 1946,
Calcutta, the capital of the Bengal Presidency witnessed one of the worst communal riots,
which consumed the life of many a people in a span of four days. Seven weeks later the
easternmost districts of Bengal bordering Burma, Noakhali and Tippera, burst into
violence. There were attacks on people of different communities and violence overtook
the humanitarian outlook. It was in such a situation that Gandhi decided to come to
Noakhali.
Aims and Objectives
 The context of dilemmas prior to the Partition
 Gandhi’s peace mission in the riot-affected areas
 The moral and courageous stand of Gandhi in a critical phase.
13.2 WHY NOAKHALI? GANDHI’S MISSION

Gandhi, it seems, had already seen in the Calcutta riots of August 1946 the potential for
greater, escalated violence probably on the scale of a civil war: ‘We are not yet in the
midst of a civil war’, he said, ‘but we are nearing it. At present we are playing at it.’
Noakhali 131
It was, however, the news of violence in Noakhali and Tippera that prompted him to
come to Bengal. In the meantime violence erupted in Bihar in an unprecedented manner
and a very large number of minority population was either killed or rendered homeless.
‘Why and why only Noakhali whereas rioting had been taking place in Ahmedabad,
Bombay or for that matter in the neighbouring Bihar’, was the question repeatedly asked
of him. ‘Why do you want to go to Noakhali? You did not go to Bombay, Ahmedabad
or Chapra, where things have happened that are infinitely worse than Noakhali. Would
not your going there only add to the existing tension? Was it because in these places the
sufferers were Hindus?’ Gandhi’s answer to this question was that ‘he would certainly
have gone to any of the places mentioned (not Bihar) by the friend if anything
approaching what had happened at Noakhali had happened there and if he had felt that
he could do nothing without being on the spot’. Thus, it seems, he attached greater
significance to the happenings in Noakhali despite the fact that the number of people
killed either in Calcutta or Bihar far outnumbered those killed in Noakhali.
The Noakhali riot was qualitatively different from the earlier communal riots including the
Calcutta killings of August l946, which immediately preceded it. It may be that Gandhi
could sense that the difference lay in the transformation of a communal discourse, as a
politics based on religion, to one in which violence was sanctified by religion. It was
evident from the pattern of violence that a total rupture of an essentially peasant society
had occurred and that communal ideology could entrench itself in that social milieu and
could legitimise itself as a source of valid and just political action. It was not difficult for
Gandhi, being an astute reader of the peasant psyche as he was, to understand the impact
of such a rupture. Noakhali, therefore, became important not only because it demonstrated
an intensity of violence, but also the power of an ideology, i.e., Communalism.
At the end of the elections of 1945-46, it was quite clear that the League had achieved
some sort of a mandate of being the representative agency fighting for the partition of the
country based on Two-nation theory and sought people’s support. Neither the Muslim
League nor its leader Jinnah had ever espoused a critique of colonialism, so that the
movement for achieving Pakistan could be galvanised by critiquing the Colonial power.
Instead it was the Congress, which the League argued, was the representative of the
Hindu population that was attacked. By the forties, it was not only the Hindu Congress
but also the general Hindu population that was depicted as opposing the creation of
Pakistan.
Gandhi, it seems, was practical enough to see the writing on the wall. In September l944
itself, he sensed the increased hold of Jinnah on the Muslim masses, and therefore, while
writing to Jinnah he acknowledged the latter’s hold over them. His meeting with Jinnah
was basically an acceptance of this realisation. Aware of the significance of ‘symbols’, he
wanted to attack the idea of ‘two-nations’ by attacking communalism. He was prepared
to accept any kind of partition as long as it was not based on this theory. He forewarned
Jinnah regarding the dangers of its operation.
The Noakhali riot presented for Gandhi the first field demonstration of the ruin that he
had already envisaged in 1944. In Noakhali, it came in a form most intense and most
frightening. And it is here that one finds a very serious effort at conflict resolution tried
at a societal level. ‘In any war’, he said, ‘brutalities were bound to take place; war is
a brutal thing’. Once Gandhi accepted this, he started looking beyond the violence and
the violations taking place there. He told his audience at Dattapara, ‘Whether you believe
it or not, I want to assure you that I am a servant of both the Hindus and the
Mussalmans. I have not come here to fight Pakistan. If India is destined to be partitioned,
I cannot prevent it.’ Instead he concentrated on ‘discovering the political intentions
working behind the move and the way of combating them successfully’.
While it was ‘the cry of outraged womanhood’ which brought him to Bengal, (Harijan,
10 Nov. 1946, p. 396. ‘It was the cry of outraged womanhood that had peremptorily
called him to Noakhali’, CWMG, Vol. LXXXVI, p.65) he was equally aghast at the
religious intolerance shown by the local populace. He took it upon himself to combat the
operation of the ‘two-nation theory’, while also delegitimising the violence of its apparent
religious sanctions.
This attitude of combating the war brought out a novel form of experience in its train
significantly entitled Gandhi’s Noakhali experiment. In this experiment, Gandhi’s principles
were at stake. ‘My own doctrine’, Gandhi said to N. C. Chatterjee, ‘was failing. I don’t
want to die a failure’. But what was his doctrine that was failing? Throughout his sojourn
he would mention about this failing doctrine but one does not come across any specific
instance where he is explicit about his doctrine. It raises a very serious question. The
Noakhali riot was no different from other communal riots as such. Then, why was it that
only in the case of Noakhali, Gandhi would talk about the failing of his doctrine? It seems
to us that it was phenomena like forced conversions and the way that religion was made
to legitimise violence, which shook Gandhi’s previous understanding of communalism.
13.3 BIHAR RIOTS AND CRITICAL DILEMMA

While he was fighting this uncertainty vis-à-vis the Noakhali situation, there erupted in the
neighbouring province of Bihar ghastly communal riots. Many were slaughtered in the
process of taking revenge of the rumoured massacre of people of their respective
communities in Noakhali. In Bengal, however, this made Gandhi’s mission in Noakhali
very delicate. The number of casualties in the Bihar riots was much more than those in
the latter. Though there were conflicting reports about the casualties, the Bihar Government
had given the figure of 5,246, which is suggestive of the intensity of the violence that
swept across the area. Therefore, the Muslim League Ministry in Bengal, which from the
very beginning had been trying to minimise its own responsibility in the Noakhali riots,
now found some justification for asking Gandhi to shift his attention to Bihar instead of
Noakhali. The details of the Bihar riots were exaggerated and made the centre of
projection. The Bihar riots were presented as another stage of the vicious campaign led
by the Congress Ministers, which, according to the Muslim League, wanted to annihilate
their culture and religion.
The League workers opposed Gandhi’s visit to Noakhali for they felt that the world
attention would get focused, projecting to be in connivance with rioters. It, therefore,
exerted pressure through propaganda and personal insinuation against Gandhi. Even those
holding responsible positions attacked Gandhi and asked him to leave Noakhali, and
attend to the Bihar situation. Gandhi and the relief workers were put to tremendous
pressure so that they would perforce leave the place. Members of the Feni sub division
of the Muslim League sent Gandhi a post card, containing a copy of the resolution passed
by that body, which read:
It is appreciated that Mr. Gandhi’s presence in Bihar is much more useful than at
Noakhali where the situation is normal. He is therefore requested to leave for Bihar.
Noakhali 133
Gandhi remained undeterred by these attacks. His reply to the Feni sub division was
direct. He wrote that he was unable to follow their advice as it was based on ignorance
of the facts. ‘In the first place, I know that the situation is not normal here and that so
far as I can contribute to the Bihar problem, I have to inform you that such influence as
I have on Bihar can be and is being efficiently exercised from Srirampur.’
Gandhi was well aware of the magnitude of the Bihar riots and could see the logic of
communalism and the relationship between the Noakhali and Bihar riots. He perceived
that Noakhali was the disease, while Bihar was just an outgrowth or casualty of the
former. Gandhi’s reply to the statement of Hamiduddin Choudhury bears out this
understanding. He wrote:
It will not serve the cause of peace if I went to Bihar and found the Bihar Muslims
League’s report to be largely imaginary and the Bihar Government’s conduct substantially
honourable, humane and just. I am not anxious to give them a certificate of good conduct
as I am to give you, much though you may not want it. My spare diet and contemplated
fast, you know well, were against the Bihar misdoings. I could not take such a step in
the matter of Noakhali misdoings. It pains me to think that you, a seasoned lawyer should
not see the obvious.
With the society showing heightened polarisation and intolerance and when there were
attempts to portray Gandhi as a Hindu and the greatest enemy of the Muslims, this seems
to be a sound judgment. He was aware of his ability to influence the Ministers and
people of Bihar even from a distance. His presence in Noakhali, on the other hand, was
a deterrent for any further retaliatory action anywhere else. At another level, he neither
had a hold on the Ministers in Bengal, nor did he have any strong influence, as he had
witnessed, on the local populace of Noakhali, many of whom had even condemned him
as an arch enemy of their faith.
Gandhi, on his part, faced all these charges with the simple statement that he was as
much a friend of the Muslims as he was of the Hindus. However, this was increasingly
disbelieved by the villagers, and towards the end of his sojourn they not only boycotted
his prayer meetings, but also dirtied the roads which he used everyday from village to
village. He accepted this as the misdemeanours of those who had failed to understand him
and his work. But he, Bose says, resolved not to ‘surrender his own love for men even
if they were erring’.
Though outwardly unfazed, the situation in Noakhali, the Bihar riots and its reaction, the
strong and entrenched opposition from the Muslim League quarters in Bengal, and his
own search for a way out, created some intense moments of self doubt, and consequently,
Gandhi was not at peace with his inner-self. This forced him to put his ‘will’ to the test.
He not only reduced his food intake and retained but two of his aides, he also
experimented with his personal purity. Though it created a stir even among his close aides,
this shows the desperation with which Gandhi was fighting the last battle of his life a
battle against communal ideology.
13.4 GANDHI’S LONELY JOURNEY

Gandhi was in Noakhali from 6th November 1946 to the end of February 1947.
Beginning his tour with the villages of Gopdirbag, he reached Srirampur on 20th
November 1946, where he decided to spend the next one and half months. His visits to
these villages on the one hand stirred the entire area with new life, and on the other
strengthened his own determination to contest communal politics, with Noakhali as his
battleground. In combating communal ideology and the forces that represented it, he
sought to heal the societal rupture that had sustained the communal breach. The battle
was a difficult one, because the communalisation of the population was complete. This
made him more determined to fight it with all his strength.
After a long sojourn in Srirampur, which had soon become the nerve centre of his mission
in Noakhali, Gandhi embarked on his journey into the interior of Noakhali and Tippera
from 2 January 1947. He repeatedly expressed his desire to be left alone on this journey,
and in fact, desired that the military protection provided to him be withdrawn. He felt
it prevented him from showing the people that his concern was genuine, and that they
could approach him without any fear. He wrote to Suhrawardy on 8th January 1947,
All my attempts at bringing about real friendship between the two communities must fail
so long as I go about fully protected by armed police or military.... The fright of the
military keeps them from coming to me and asking all sorts of questions for the resolution
of their doubts....
13.5 THE IDEA OF FEARLESSNESS AND COURAGE

Gandhi felt that the anger that is being openly expressed would clear avenues for
dialogue, rather than continue with the present scenario of sullenness. He wanted both
the communities to be brave but, as he wrote, ‘Unfortunately both lack this very
necessary human quality’.
In almost all the villages he visited and the congregational prayer meetings he addressed,
he urged them to be fearless. He was aware of the fear that prevailed, and of the fact
that the Hindus were really in danger, without adequate protection. The total social rupture
that was demonstrated by the brutality of the communal attacks was soon compounded
by instituting false cases against Hindu villages, at times with the active connivance of the
local authorities. Even the army found it difficult to tackle the situation.
Therefore, talk of fearlessness in such an atmosphere of all-pervasive tyranny of fear was
seen by many as unwise. Leaders of political parties demanded military protection for the
Hindus of Noakhali. Contesting this line of argument, Gandhi refuted the claims that he
was not practical in advocating military protection for the Hindus. ‘I am an idealist’, he
said to the Hindu Mahasabha delegation, ‘but I claim to be a practical idealist’. And as
a `practical idealist’, he must have realised that any talk of army protection would make
the Muslim villagers more belligerent against the Hindus, as well as hamper the return of
a normal social existence in these villages. In the same vein, he contested the idea of the
‘segregation of Hindu population in protected pockets’. For him, this `would be interpreted
as preparation of war’ by the Muslim League. ‘For myself’, he declared, ‘the path is
different.’ He wanted one worker in each village ‘to steal the heart of the inhabitants’. It
did not matter, he added, if there was only one or many Hindus in a village. His
prescription was that they should stick to their posts and even face death if necessary
with courage and willingness. If they live in clusters it would only mean accepting the
‘Two Nation Theory’.
Here, the idea that the villagers, irrespective of their religious affiliations, should take
responsibility for each other was a very fundamental one for Gandhi. It was this idea of
responsibility that he attempted to use as an antidote against the atmosphere of violence,
Noakhali 135
created in order to legitimise their acts of irresponsibility. It is on this level that a face-
to-face community could be validated against an abstraction, which was proving to be
negative and anti emancipatory. Therefore, the path he chose was different. The talk of
migration was in the air but in his opinion if it had to take place, ‘it must be complete’.
‘No police or military would protect those who are cowards’ (Ibid.,). Gandhi emphasised
the need for Hindus to be courageous and shun their inferiority complex. On 12
November at Dattapara he said that he ‘had seen the terror-stricken faces of the
sufferers. They had been forcibly converted once and they were afraid the same thing
would be repeated. He wanted them to shed that fear.’ In fact, he tried to attack the
tyrannical hegemony of fear that the communal violence had created in the minds of the
people. It was here that he reflected on his idea of an imminent civil war that
communalism posed at this stage. Therefore, Gandhi in his talk with Nalini Mitra and
Rasomoy Sur of Noakhali, at Srirampur, concluded that ‘the present problem was not the
question of Noakhali alone; it was a problem for the whole of Bengal and the whole of
India’ (Srirampur, 22 November, 1946, ibid., p.145). This was why Gandhi was so
perturbed about Noakhali. In fact, his determination to go back to Noakhali, even after
the Partition, reflects his idea of attacking communal ideology and the `two nation theory’
from here. Thus, unlike his `search for light’, as far as his actions were concerned, he
was determined that Noakhali was going to be his testing ground.
Noakhali in his mind was like Champaran or Bardoli the ‘model site’ for launching his
movement. His speech at Nabagram reflected what was going on his mind. He said,
‘Noakhali offered an almost ideal situation for testing whether ahimsa could effectively be
used by a small number of people against an almost sullen if not hostile majority all
round.’ He was conscious that ‘the problem here was also complicated by the fact of the
existence of a popular Government controlling the destinies of the people’. About the
contrasting psyche of the two communities in Noakhali, he stated that he had been
‘moving amidst a sullen population on the one hand and a frightened one on the other’.
Conciliation, he resolved, was to be achieved through one’s openness and the other’s
fearlessness. Gandhi’s presence and his attempts at meeting people in `their home’ were
itself a symbolic attack on the prevailing atmosphere marked by fear.
Gandhi was very upset by the targeting of violence against women, who were the worst
victims. The male population in most of the villages had to run for their lives and the
women lived in great fear and danger. Gandhi asked them to be courageous without
sounding patronising – he shared their grief. Manubehan Gandhi, his grand daughter, who
was there with him, wrote:
As the husbands and sons of some of them had been murdered, they were plunged in
grief. With sobs and tears they poured out their stricken hearts to Bapuji. ‘The only
difference between you and me,’ he consoled them, ‘is that you cry and I don’t. But my
heart sorrows for you. Your grief is my grief; that’s why I have come here. There is no
remedy for our pain except faith in God. Is the one, most efficacious panacea dead? If
one imbibes this truth, there will be no cause for such outbursts of grief.’
Later, Gandhi in a sad tone told Manubehan, ‘the meeting with those sisters is still vivid,
who knows how many more tragic sights like this I am fated to see’.
Speaking at Jagatpur on 10th January 1947, he advised his audience ‘about courage and
the need of never surrendering one’s honour even on pain of death’ (Bose, My Days,
p.126). Gandhi’s presence, his prayer meetings, which encouraged women to come out
confidently in the open after a long time, and his constant evocation of courage,
fearlessness, honour and death, had a significant impact. Women began to come out and
share their tales of woe with him. In Bansa, they put before him their dilemma, ‘what is
a woman to do when attacked by miscreants run away or resist with violence’. Gandhi
shared their concern and advised them to come out of the trap of violence. He said,
My answer to this question is very simple. For me there can be no preparation for
violence. All preparation must be for non violence if courage of the highest type is to be
developed. Violence can only be tolerated as being preferable always to cowardice....
For a non violent person there is no emergency but quiet dignified preparation for death.
He asked them to be like Sita and Savitri who by their deeds refuted the fact that
women were ‘weak’. While speaking at Bhatialpur he noted, ‘It was often said that
women were naturally weak they were abalas’. His advice to women was that they
should not believe such things. They could be, he opined, as hard as men.
While advising Hindu women to become courageous and fearless, he at the same time
asked them to help the neighbouring Muslim women shed their ignorance and illiteracy,
as also in other aspects where they lagged behind the former. As Gandhi’s journey
progressed, a sense of confidence built up in the Noakhali villages. Women started
coming out more often and they even displayed the courage that Gandhi was exhorting
them to live with. Bose wrote that after one prayer meeting a girl came up to tell her
story without the slightest fear, and on being asked whether she would be able to go
back and stay once more in the midst of scenes she could never forget, the girl answered
in the affirmative. Bose recorded that she answered in this manner because now she knew
that she could save herself by dying. This forced Bose to think about the transformation
Gandhi had caused. Though equivocal in his judgement, he could not negate the influence
of Gandhi’s speeches on that girl.
When told that the Muslims were willing to receive the refugees back in their villages,
provided they withdrew the criminal cases arising out of the disturbances, Gandhi
provided the guilty with two alternatives either they could admit the crimes and justify their
conduct on the ground that whatever they had done was for supporting in the creation
of a separate nation or they should report and submit to penalty of law by way of
expiation. But he negated any compromise such as dropping the cases. Hence, personal
responsibility was to be accepted, as also the root of those acts, which had forced
people to create such a situation.
He rejected the idea of the Hindu Mahasabha that the entire Hindu population should be
segregated in pockets. Gandhi’s counter argument contained his idea of responsibility. For
him, the former was an unworkable proposition. He said to N. C. Chatterjee:
Put yourself in Mr. Suhrawardy’s shoes; do you think he would favour it, or even the
Muslim residents of Noakhali? For it would be interpreted as a preparation for war.
He could see that by putting forth that demand, they would practically be conceding the
logic of Two-nation theory. He opined, and quite forcefully, that if migration had to take
place, it must be systematic and complete, and it was not therefore to be thought of so
long as there was any hope of co operation. And so long as there was any hope, efforts
were to be made for a permanent solution to the communal problem. It is here that he
could see the Hindu Mahasabha and the Muslim League actions as complementary to
each other. Gandhi, on the other hand, insisted that for a permanent solution responsibility
Noakhali 137
as well as proximity were absolutely necessary and was against running away in fear
giving up their hearths and homes. He said that he ‘ wanted to see every Hindu family
settle down in its own village and face the situation fearlessly and with courage’.
13.6 THE IDEA OF RESPONSIBILITY

While Gandhi asked them to seek protection through their inner strength, he also tried
through the Peace Committees to create bridges between the communities, to come into
physical proximity with one another, which again would bring moral responsibility into the
social life of the population.
The enactment of this idea of the sense of responsibility lay in his idea of Peace
Committees of the local population. Initially, the idea to have Peace Committees was
mooted by the Bengal Muslim League Government while Gandhi was in Srirampur. The
plan was to have equal number of Hindu and Muslim members in these Peace
Committees, with a government official as Chairman. Gandhi was favourably disposed to
the idea because it fulfilled his idea of responsibility. This is why he asked the Hindu
members to give it a chance to succeed when the latter insisted on first bringing the
miscreants to book. Gandhi advised them not to summarily reject the proposal by placing
any conditions. Thus, the Hindus had to trust and honour the work of these Committees.
The functions of the Peace Committees were defined as:
a) Undertaking intensive propaganda work to restore confidence;
b) Helping in constructing shelters for the returning refugees, and in processing and
distributing relief, e.g., food, clothing etc.;
c) Drawing up lists of disturbers of peace, who should be rounded up. These lists
would be checked with the First Information Reports already lodged with the police,
and arrests would be made on verification. If an innocent person was found to have
been arrested, the Peace Committee would recommend to the Magistrate his release
on bail, or unconditionally as the case might be;
d) Preparing a list of houses destroyed or damaged during the disturbances.
Similarly Gandhi asked the people to trust representatives of the Government. When the
Government’s efforts proved wanting, Gandhi even went to the extent of advocating that
‘one brave man’ in a village could achieve the desired peace, if he was ready to lay
down his life when the occasion arose rather than shun responsibility. He felt that a single
man could change the entire complexion of societal thought by his acts. He was glad to
meet the Maulvi at Muraim who ‘helped in sustaining his theory that one individual can
transform the entire society’. There was no riot in Muraim where, according to Pyarelal,
the Maulvi was like an oasis amidst the desert; he saw to it that there was no panic
among Hindus and made himself responsible for their well-being.
13.7 MORAL AND ETHICAL CRITIQUE

The notion of responsibility therefore was a crucial link in Gandhi’s idea of reconciliation.
Gandhi’s battle in Noakhali Tippera was an attack on communal ideology from a high
moral and ethical plane. First, he emphasised the right of every individual to profess or
follow any religion as long as it did not negatively affect the others’ religious creeds. He
was appalled to witness the religious intolerance shown during the riot and which
continued during his visits.
He then appealed to the ‘Muslim brethren’ to assure him ‘of that freedom which is true
to the noblest tradition of Islam. There was no sense of appeasement, in his words and
the prayer meetings testified to his fight for religious freedom. Here again, it will not be
out of place to suggest that prayer for him broke all religious and communal boundaries
and, in addition, it even gave voice to the protesting soul. The prayer meetings of Gandhi
brought people out into the open for the first time after 10th October 1946, and thereby,
broke the tyranny of fear. Gandhian defense came as an attack on that particular
undercurrent of communal ideology, which legitimised religious intolerance’.
Further, by bringing up ethical-moral questions, Gandhi tried to delegitimise the forces of
communal ideology, which, in fact, claimed religious sanction for their agenda of violence.
In retrospect this seems quite significant, because clerics of religion, and religion itself, had
become the main prop and legitimising factor in the Noakhali riot.
Gandhi’s encounters during his visit made him realise that the acts of communal violence
and attacks on religion during the riot had the strong sanction of the clerics and religious
teachers. The large scale of conversions was a living testimony of that. He requested the
Muslims to join the Peace Committees to restore the confidence among the Hindus that
they would be able to pursue their religious practice in freedom.
He himself referred to Jinnah so that the local Muslim Leaguers did not commit misdeeds
by using the latter’s name. He said,
Qaid i Azam Jinnah has said that every Muslim must show by his conduct that not a
single non Muslim need be afraid of him, the latter would be guaranteed safety and
protection. For, thus alone can the Mussalmans command honour and respect.
Gandhi proclaimed that ‘if people had known the true meaning of their scriptures,
happenings like those of Noakhali could never have taken place’.
13.8 SUMMARY
By advocating fearlessness, invoking a sense of responsibility and discoursing at an ethical
moral plane, Gandhi prioritised his ideological fight against the ideology that had created
the circumstances in which violence of this kind took place. He understood, from the very
beginning, that the hegemony of communal ideology was partially a reflection of the socio
economic structure of that society. And this was quite significant because his own earlier
understanding of communalism was not as focused as it was beginning to look like now.
This makes his efforts at reconciliation a matter of not only historical importance but also
of significant contemporary relevance. It is here that the question of communal violence
becomes quite crucial. Quite often, historians and social scientists equate communal riots
with communalism. They are however not the same thing- neither analytically nor in their
nature. Violence in the form of the communal riot itself is not the cause of communalism;
rather it is the product. Violence can certainly be a reflective index of the communalisation
of society but there can be communalisation without any violence. Therefore, escalated
violence and its aggressive insensitivity indicate the intensity and depth of ideological
penetration that has taken place. A discourse on violence without taking cognisance of the
ideological apparatus is to naively ignore the entire process that went into making that
violence. Communalism, given its ideological apparatus, legitimises, sanctions and creates
occasions for violence. And it is here that one needs to see that the reconciliation efforts
should not merely attempt at stopping violence but try and critique the ideology that
produces such violence.
Noakhali 139

1. What was the mission envisaged by Gandhi in Noakhali?
2. Critically analyse Gandhi’s ideas of fearlessness and courage in the Noakhali context.
3. How did Gandhi envisage the meaning of responsibility? What meaning does the
ethical perspective hold?
SUGGESTED READINGS
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. LXXXVI
Bose, Nirmal Kumar., My Days with Gandhi, Orient Longman, Delhi, 1974
Star of India, English, 1946
Amrita Bazar Patrika, 1946
Batabyal, Rakesh., Communalism in Bengal From Famine to Noakhali 1943-47, Sage
Publishers, New Delhi, 2005
Bose, Nirmal Kumar., My Days With Gandhi, Orient Longman, Hyderabad, 1974
Bondurant, Joan, Conquest of Non Violence: The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict,
Chakravarty, Gargi., Gandhi and Communalism, Delhi, 1988.
Chatterjee, Joya., Bengal Divide: Hindu Communalism and Partition,1932-47,
Cambridge,1994
Das, Suranjan., Communal Riot in Bengal, 1906-1947, Delhi, 1992
Gandhi, Rajmohan., Good Boatman, Viking, 1995
Mahajan, Sucheta., Independence and Partition The Erosion of Colonial Power in India,
Delhi, 2000
Pyarelal., Mahatma Gandhi, The Last Phase, Book One, I, Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad, 1958
UNIT 14 NORTH-EAST / KASHMIR
Structure
14.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
14.2 The Gandhian Approach

14.3 The Case of Kashmir
14.4 The North-East Experience
14.4.1 The Naga Case
14.4.2 The Role of Peace Mission
14.4.3 From Conflict to Ceasefire
14.4.4 Insurgency in Assam
14.5 A Comparison between Kashmir and the North-East

14.6 Summary
Suggested Readings
14.1 INTRODUCTION
Although Gandhian approach to peace and conflict resolution is widely considered as a
normative approach and even criticised at times for being too normative to be followed
in any concrete, real-life situation. Gandhi himself was of the firm opinion that whatever
he wrote was intended to provide practical solutions to practical problems. However, it
has to be kept in mind that his approach was by no means a mere problem-solving
exercise; it was over and above an exercise in solving problems in accordance with
certain moral principles. Gandhi would not mind continuing to suffer the conflicts than
trying to solve them by flouting and violating these basic moral principles. Gandhi’s
approach, to say in simple terms, was essentially a moral approach to peace and conflict
resolution.
Aims and Objectives
 The normative approach of Gandhi to peace
 The case of Kashmir and overtures to peace
 The case of North-East India and efforts towards peace.
14.2 THE GANDHIAN APPROACH

The Gandhian approach to peace, as we have already pointed out, is essentially a
normative approach that seeks to solve problems by way of observing certain moral rules
and principles. According to Thomas Weber, “… Gandhi clearly states that living within
rules required for successful satyagraha is the type of life that is worth living”.
North-East/Kashmir 141
1. Peace is desirable but certainly not at any ‘price’. Even conflicts are preferable to
peace that is achieved at the expense of rights. Peace - more than a mere cessation
of hostilities - must be based on rights, justice and democracy.
2. Gandhi felt that truth and non-violence were more powerful than any instrument of
violence including an atom bomb. He observed: “I am not afraid of atom bomb”. No
amount of violence can conquer our moral commitment to truth and non-violence.
For Gandhi, registering moral protest itself is victory. He always asserted superiority
of moral force to physical force.
3. The strength of moral power is capable of winning the hearts and minds of enemies.
As Gandhi argued: “It is not enough to be friendly to one’s friends. But to befriend
the one who regards himself as your enemy is the quintessence of true religion. The
other is mere business”. Satyagraha, in this sense, means the discovery of truth and
working steadily towards it, thus converting the opponent into a friend.
4. Violence breeds violence and triggers off chain reaction. Besides, we cannot distinguish
between justified violence and unjustified violence. For both imply brutalisation of
human nature. Gandhi had an abiding faith in human nature. As Gandhi argues, we
must hate the sin and not the sinner. While violence is an alluring game that tempts
us to apply it, it leads us nowhere. Resolution of conflicts presupposes changing the
game altogether. He would believe that eventually good will win over evil.
5. Conflict resolution may require the mediators who help in reaching an agreement
between the conflicting parties. But in order that they are accepted as mediators, it
is essential that they wield the necessary moral authority and enjoy their trust.
14.3 THE CASE OF KASHMIR

During the colonial rule, Jammu and Kashmir was a princely state, and the British did not
establish any direct rule over the state. The Dogra Rajput monarchs used to rule this
multiethnic region on behalf of the British Raj. While the rulers were Hindus, a vast
majority of the population in Kashmir is Muslims. ‘Kashmiriyat’ or a separate Kashmiri
identity that developed over the centuries was essentially multiethnic and free from many
of the orthodoxies. The Dogra rule was highly authoritarian and the discontent against the
rulers was simmering particularly in the Muslim-dominated valley during the late-colonial
times. The discontent turned into a popular movement for national identity against the
‘alien’ Dogra rule in 1946. National Conference, the party that led the movement under
Sheikh Abdullah, raised the slogan: “Dogra rulers quit Kashmir”. The ‘Quit Kashmir’
movement was in favour of and for attaining the right to self-determination. The Dogra
rulers, aided by the British government, used all possible forces to suppress the movement
and arrested Sheikh Abdullah.
At the time of Transfer of Power in August 1947, the Dogra ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh,
opted for maintaining the independent entity of Jammu and Kashmir, without joining either
India or Pakistan. In September, the revolt of the Muslim population in Poonch posed a
serious threat to the Dogra rule. On 24 October 1947, a large number of tribesmen from
North West Frontier Province of Pakistan, emboldened by all accounts, intruded into the
valley. The rebels of Poonch soon joined the intruders. The brutal raid of the tribesmen
cost thousands of human lives, sparing neither Muslims, nor Sikhs nor Hindus. Maharaja
Hari Singh desperately needed India’s help to thwart the invaders and ultimately decided
to accede to India for saving his kingdom. The Instrument of Accession was finally signed
between the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his Kashmiri counterpart Meher
Chand Mahajan on 26 October, 1947. Maharaja Hari Singh conceded authority to the
Indian Union only in matters related to defence, external affairs and communication. On
2 November 1947, Nehru declared in a radio broadcast, “As soon as law and order had
been restored in Kashmir and its soil cleared of the invaders, the question of the state’s
accession should be settled by reference to the people”. This was and continues to be
construed as his pledge for plebiscite. On 1 January 1948, Nehru referred the issue to
the Security Council of the UNO (United Nations Organisation). On the basis of Nehru’s
pledge, the Security Council decided that the future of Kashmir should be settled by a
reference to the people of Kashmir. In 1952, India refused to hold any plebiscite in
Kashmir on the ground that India ‘would never have the conditions which were necessary
for a plebiscite’. Moreover, it was argued that the consecutively held elections in Kashmir
had more than ratified its incorporation into the Indian Republic. As a result the plebiscite
in valley never took place.
A quick review of Kashmir’s political history since Independence points to its essentially
unstable nature. Sheikh Abdullah, as the Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, took
certain steps meant primarily for protecting the Kashmiri peasants from time-old oppression
of predominantly Hindu landlords. On 9 August 1953, he was removed and arrested on
the ground that he had joined hands with ‘alien powers’. Abdullah spent almost 20 years
in several spells in Indian jails. In the 1970s, Sheikh Abdullah finally compromised with
New Delhi and renounced his demand for full self-determination. He reached an
agreement with the Indian Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi in February 1975. The
agreement declared Kashmir as a ‘constituent part’ of India. The earlier steps for
completing the process of Kashmir’s incorporation into India were recognised as valid.
Sheikh Abdullah remained the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir until his death in
1982. His son Farooq Abdullah took office as the new Chief Minister. In July 1984, the
ministry- headed by Farooq - was dismissed by invoking Article 356 of the Constitution.
Ghulam Mohammad Shah was installed as the new Chief Minister. In March 1986,
Ghulam Mohammad Shah was again removed from power by the Central Government
and Jammu and Kashmir came under ‘Governor’s rule’. In March 1987, Farooq Abdullah
became the Chief Minister with the support of the Indian National Congress.
The Governing institutions never took their roots in the state so much so that India Today
(30 April, 1990) remarked that the state about this time represented a “virtual abdication
of governance”. The new phase of agitation continued leaderless for a while. Finally a
new leadership from the younger generation took charge of the situation. In 1987, five
youths in jail, with a view to “liberate” Kashmir from the Indian rule formed an
organisation called Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). By the time the new
leadership took over, the state was under the grip of violence and there were many
organisations that openly advocated the importance of violence in the movement for
national self-determination. Some of them were raised and nurtured in Pakistan. The first
signs of storm were felt in 1988. On 10 June, spontaneous demonstrations took place in
different parts of Srinagar, the capital of Kashmir, to protest against a steep rise in power
tariffs and erratic supply of electricity. What initially remained a movement against bad
governance gradually assumed a violent character and threatened to challenge the Indian
state.
Violence continued unabated in the state throughout the 1990s. The use of violence and
counter-violence allows the same game to be played around and makes solution
impossible. The years between 1990 and 1995 saw the use of the Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities Act, 1985 (TADA) in the valley. On 5 July 1990, two more acts
were clamped down in Kashmir, which gave extraordinary power to the Armed forces
and the Police. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) empowered the army
and paramilitary forces “to arrest without warrant, any person, who has committed a
cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable suspicion exists that he had committed
or was about to commit a cognizable offence and enter and search any premises to make
any such arrest”. The Disturbed Area Act (DAA) conferred almost similar power upon
the state police force.
The Kashmir case indicates that Gandhi is a forgotten man now. But he has clear
message for us in spite of the fact that the case takes a toll on three of Gandhi’s cardinal
principles of conflict resolution. The more they take a toll, the more we recognise their
relevance: One, counter-violence cannot be an answer to violence. It only contributes to
the spiraling of violence and makes solution difficult. Two, Gandhi’s firm belief that human
beings are sovereign insofar as they listen to their inner voice is in jeopardy. Gandhi
observed in 1947, “common sense dictates that the will of the Kashmiris should decide
the future of Kashmir”. But unfortunately we seem to have reached a stage when people
are caught in violence, rendered helpless and unable to respond to the call of their inner
voice. It is essential that the conditions for a meaningful dialogue with the people that will
help reduce their helplessness should be created. But there is no way to underestimate
the courage of the people. We have stories of valiant people- particularly women- who
have stood against the use of macabre violence, voiced against militarisation of society
and negotiated the communal divide. Three, peace can return to the valley only by
ensuring rights and not by curtailing and abrogating them. The militant organisations that
issue fatwas and diktats (particularly relating to women’s dress code etc) and the
extraordinary legislations that take away the constitutionally recognised rights cannot
provide an enduring solution. The basis of these rights is enshrined in Article 370 of the
Constitution of India that recognises the ‘special status’ of the state and provides for
widespread legislative autonomy. Development is the need of the hour in this trouble-torn
state.
14.4 THE NORTH-EAST EXPERIENCE

India’s North East is a highly heterogeneous region with as many as eight states including
Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura
and with hundreds of indigenous groups and communities living in them. The main sources
of conflict are given as follows: First, this region has historically served as the gateway
to the countries of South-East Asia and people migrated across the region from both the
east and the west. Besides, it also forms part of the Ganga-Meghna-Brahmaputra (GMB)
basin with a very long history of peasant migration. Again in 1947 when India became
Independent and the subcontinent was partitioned, sharply deteriorating living conditions,
climate changes and submergence of land under the sea, systematic persecution of the
minorities in the countries adjoining the region have only aggravated the population influx.
This is perceived to have strained the availability of land and employment for the locals
and autochthones and posed a threat to their language and culture. The Assam Movement
(1979-1985) that was directed against the ‘foreigners’ is illustrative of this fear. Secondly,
the backwardness in the fields of economic and human development is believed to have
been responsible for the proliferation of militancy in the region. Insurgency is regarded as
the only booming ‘industry’ drawing the vast army of unemployed youth at a time when
the overall industrial scenario is very grim. Thirdly, the Partition of 1947 by definition was
expected to bring the otherwise historically thriving cultural and economic continuities to
an end with the effect that the region became landlocked sharing more than 98 percent
of its land border with foreign countries. This has cut many an ethnic community into
pieces and members of the same community are strewn across more than one nation-state
and administrative unit. This has only reinforced their desire for consolidation.
14.4.1 The Naga Case

The Nagas consisting of a number of subgroups living in different parts of the region as
well as Myanmar have been the first to challenge the Indian State and declare their
‘Independence’. The British policy towards the hill tribes in general and the Nagas in
particular was inspired by the imperative of exercising ‘minimum interference’ in the
pattern of life of the Naga tribes and keeping the outsiders from entering the tribal areas.
On the eve of Independence, Angami Zapu Phizo, who headed the Naga insurgency
through the Naga National Council (NNC), sent a memorandum to the British Government
for establishing an interim government for a period of 10 years, at the end of which the
Naga people could be left to form government of their choice. When the Advisory
Committee on Aboriginal Tribes of the Constituent Assembly visited the Naga Hills in May
1947, the NNC maintained that the Nagas retained the right of deciding their future at
the end of this ten-year period. In 1956 and with the completion of ten-year period,
NNC informed the formation of the Federal Government of Nagaland (FGN). The NNC
rejected the provisions of the Sixth Schedule and held a plebiscite on the question of
Naga independence. Around 99.9 percent of the Nagas, according to NNC sources, cast
their vote in favour of ‘independence outside India’.
Thus began an era of conflict and hostility. As hostility intensified, there were attempts at
making peace. In the early part of 1957, a meeting consisting of church leaders from
Kohima and Impur (of Naga Hills, then a part of undivided Assam) sent out an appeal
for peace. Its main objective was to oppose violence and win over the rebels. A
breakaway group of NNC- a section of moderates, wrote to Jawaharlal Nehru- the then
prime minister of India - to settle the problem within the framework of the Indian
Constitution. A Sixteen-Point Agreement, popularly known as Delhi Agreement, was
reached in July 1960. The Agreement paved the way to the formation of a separate state
of Nagaland within the Indian Union. Like Article 370, the Agreement also provides that
no Act and Law passed by Indian Parliament relating to (1) the religious and social
practices, (2) Naga customary laws and procedures, (3) civil and criminal justice
concerning decisions according to Naga customary law and (4) ownership and transfer of
land and its resources would have any legal force in Nagaland unless specifically applied
by a majority vote in the Nagaland Legislative Assembly. On 1 August 1960, Nehru
announced the proposed formation of Nagaland as a separate state comprising the existing
district of Naga Hills and the Tuensang Area although Phizo denounced the pact from
London on 30 July 1960. Nagaland however became a state in 1963.
14.4.2 The Role of Peace Mission

The role of Peace Mission deserves a special mention insofar as it involved direct
intervention by at least two very well-known Gandhians in the resolution of conflicts. With
a spurt in the hostilities between the security forces and the underground forces
immediately after the formation of the separate state of Nagaland, the Nagaland Baptist
Church Council (NBCC) held a convention in Wokha from 31 January to 2 February
1964. This convention unanimously resolved to request the Government of India and the
underground Federal Government of Nagaland to negotiate with a Peace Mission that it

formed with members comprising B. P. Chaliha (then Chief Minister of Assam), Jaya
Prakash Narayan (the noted Sarvodaya leader) and Rev. Michael Scott (a British
missionary). A ceasefire (technically ‘suspension of operations’ by both sides) was arrived
between the Naga underground leaders and the Government of India on August 15,
1964.
After at least five rounds and four years of deliberation, the Mission finally came out with
a proposal and urged both the warring parties to make flexible their otherwise ‘rigid’
understandings of ‘sovereignty and independence’ and called for the ‘Union of Nagaland
with India with certain distinct characteristics that are absent in the case of other states’.
The proposal was intended to reach a middle point. The Naga Federal Government
refused to accept the ‘Constitutional Status’ of the state of Nagaland within the Indian
Union while its assertion of the right to self-determination and the demand for a sovereign
Nagaland State was not acceptable to the Government of India. To overcome these
conflicting positions, the Peace Mission came with the proposal that “the NFG (Nagaland
Federal Government) could on their own volition decide to be a participant in the Union
of India and mutually settle the terms and conditions for that purpose. On the other hand,
the Government of India could consider to what extent the pattern and structure of the
relationship between Nagaland and the Government of India should be adapted and recast
so as to satisfy the political aspirations of all sections of Naga opinion.” The resolution
of conflicts, according to the Gandhian approach, can take place only when the conflicting
parties meet themselves halfway on their own volition.
The proposal found no acceptance among the parties. The Government of India welcomed
the first part of the proposal in which it urged the NFG to participate ‘on their own
volition’ but understood the second part in terms of providing greater autonomy to
Nagaland. The NFG wanted to keep it open and asked for holding plebiscite supervised
by a neutral body and the Naga people, through the plebiscite, would decide on the
future according to ‘their own volition’. Thus no agreement could be reached between
them. While the Peace Mission was flooded with complaints of violation of ceasefire from
both sides, Jaya Prakash Narayan pleaded their helplessness. As he pointed out: “The
Peace Mission has no machinery to enable us to go into these complaints; we work
merely as a Post Office, however sufficient grounds to conclude that one of the terms of
the agreement, namely the personnel of the Naga Army will not move about in villages
in uniform and/or with arms, this to a considerable extent is not being implemented”. It
seems that their moral authority could not prevail over the military power of the armed
groups.
The Peace Mission was however keen more on the continuation of talks for it felt that
it was easier to break them off than to resume them all over again. Y. V. Gundevia, the
then Foreign Secretary of India directly involved as the chief delegate in many of these
negotiations, for example in a letter dated 21 January, 1965 to B. P. Chaliha pointed out:
… we welcome the conclusion which the Peace Mission has arrived … that a peaceful
solution of the Naga problem can only be found within the Indian Union, by Nagaland
continuing to remain within the Indian union.
Jaya Prakash Narayan reacted to this:
The GOI (Government of India) attaches an utterly wrong meaning to the proposals in
that, while the PM (Peace Mission), conceding the Nagas’ right to self-determination, had
invited them on their own volition to become participants in the Indian Union, the Indian
chief delegate’s letter said that the PM had come to a conclusion that the final solution
of the problem of Nagaland can only be found within the Indian Union by Nagaland
continuing to remain within the Indian union. The phrase ‘continuing to remain within
the Indian union’ destroyed completely the principle of voluntary participation which was
the heart of the PM proposals (italics ours).
While Narayan thought that this openness might have given the talks a new lease of life,
it would take a little for the Government of India to ‘fail’ them. As he argued:
If the Nagas decide to participate in the Union, the effect would be not the beginning of
balkanisation, but further consolidation and strengthening of the Union. If, on the other
hand, they refuse to be participants, there would be no commitment on India’s part to
accept separation of Nagaland, which the GOI would be free to resist in the manner it
chose.
Indeed, the problem also lay squarely with the rebels who found one of his statements
unacceptable. Jaya Prakash Narayan was the first to resign from the Peace Mission. It
was observed that:
The Nagaland Peace Mission was fortunate to have a person like him. Very unfortunately,
he was the first person who resigned and left the Mission, when the underground
protested against one of his alleged pronouncements: ‘if the government of India desires,
she can liquidate the Naga rebels’. Because of this … he immediately withdrew his
membership from the Peace Mission just after the first meeting with the Indian Prime
Minister on the ground that the federal leaders had no confidence in him. It was in
February 1966.
Did Jaya Prakash Narayan’s resignation from the Peace Mission help in resolving the
conflict? In fact as we will see, the conflict turned worse as the Peace Mission collapsed.
Even Narayan knew this. But the basic issue here was the perceived loss of confidence
and trust and Narayan seemed to realise that it was immoral on his part to remain in the
Mission when he had lost confidence and trust from those for whom the Mission was set
up. For a devout Gandhian, nothing is more serious than the loss of trust and credibility.
He made a clear moral choice: for him it was better to continue with the conflict than
to impose a solution on the unwilling parties.
14.4.3 From Conflict to Ceasefire

The NFG leaders rejected any offer short of ‘complete Independence and Sovereign
Nagaland’. It was at this point that Naga underground was seriously afflicted by
factionalism within its ranks. The Indo-Pak war of 1971 that led to the liberation of
Bangladesh dealt a blow to the Naga insurgent movement: “Foreign support to the Naga
rebellion from China and Pakistan also dropped substantially after the creation of
Bangladesh, and the defeat of the Pakistan army in 1971”. The Indian army launched
massive counteroffensive against the Naga underground in 1973 and this was also the time
when many cadres of Naga Federal Army who went to China for arms training, returned
with sophisticated arms.
The Church intervened for the second time, as there was a spurt in violence. They
appointed a Liaison Committee to bring all sections of the Naga underground leaders and
the Government of India. After months of negotiation, the Peace talks were held on 10-
11 November 1975 culminating in what became known as Shillong Accord (1975). The
Accord was signed by them – not as FGN representatives but ‘on behalf of the
underground organisations’. In spite of being excruciatingly brief, Article 3 clause (iii) held
out the promise of arriving at what it had described as the ‘final settlement’ in the
following terms. The rather dismissive phrase of ‘other issues’ never came for discussion
in the first place – let alone reaching a solution. The National Socialist Council of
Nagaland (now Nagalim) emerged as a political force from the ashes of the aborted
Shillong Accord. Describing the Accord as a ‘surrender pact’, it also referred to the
NNC in its manifesto of 1980 as a spent force. It wanted a ‘Greater Nagalim’.
Accordingly, the ‘Government of the People’s Republic of Nagaland’ (GPRN) was
formed. It wanted to create this proposed state by integrating Naga-inhabited areas in
Myanmar with those in India.
The ceasefire and Naga peace talks officially announced, during the United Front
government led by I. K. Gujral in August 1997, for a peace dialogue on the more than
five-decades-old protracted Naga issue. The ongoing peace talks between the New Delhi
and NSCN are conditioned by the following terms: (i) talks between the two groups be
held without either side stipulating any precondition, (ii) that the talks be held at the
highest (prime ministerial) level, and (iii) at a venue anywhere outside India. So far the
talks have not yielded any concrete political understanding and documentation.
14.4.4 Insurgency in Assam

As one refers to the insurgency in Assam, one cannot but refer to one of the largest
insurgent organisations that have been leading it. Although the United Liberation Front of
Assam (ULFA) was born on 7 April 1979, it was not until 1983 that ULFA surfaced
in the public arena and people could become aware of its political presence in Assam.
It started as a more militant stream of the anti-foreigners’ movement (1979-1985)
mentioned above and gradually broke away from the moderate forces that were
associated with it. But ULFA shot into prominence by organising bank heists, undertaking
rural development works and meting out summary justice in remote areas where state’s
presence is thin and even by carrying out retributive killings. The organisation was
declared illegal only as late as on November 27, 1990. The year 1990 marks the
watershed as the army moved in and the first ever army operations were launched with
the objective of ‘liquidating’ ULFA. While ‘Operation Bajrang’ ended up in an anticlimax,
another operation codenamed ‘Operation Rhino’ began in September 1991 with the
objective of ‘flushing out’ the ‘terrorists’ and isolating them from the people of Assam.
Although one faction of ULFA was engaged in talks with the Government of India and
reportedly came close to arriving at a negotiated settlement, another faction surrendered
to it and became subsequently known as SULFA or Surrendered ULFA. Unlike
‘Operation Bajrang’, the objective of the second operation was quite different. ‘Operation
Rhino II’, which is operational now, aims at ‘bringing the boys to the negotiating table’.
A military operation in effect is launched for holding talks with the armed militants.
Although offers of talks have been extended to this organisation, talks - whether directly
or through backchannels - could not take place. On November 16, 2004 Indira Goswami
– an eminent litterateur from Assam - met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and handed
over a memorandum drafted in consultation with the academics. The memorandum urged
on the Government to initiate talks with ULFA. On November 18, Arabinda Rajkhowa
– the Chairman of ULFA, confirmed that ULFA would enter into a dialogue if the
organisation were invited on the Government of India’s letterhead with a signature and
office seal, and with ‘sovereignty’ on the agenda. Both Goswami and the Government of
India consulted legal experts for an interpretation of ‘sovereignty’ and its place in the
Indian Constitution. As The Telegraph reported it: “Legal opinion seems to be that there
could be various kinds of sovereignty, some of which are not against the Constitution.
Economic sovereignty is a possibility, for instance.”1 On 19 November 2004, in one of
her meetings with the Prime Minister, she was successful in attracting the attention of the
Government to the serious problem of insurgency in Assam. She appealed to him to
initiate a process of dialogue on the outfit’s demand for “sovereignty” for Assam, but the
Prime Minister put to rest any such speculation and said in Guwahati on 22 November
2004 that “if they shun violence, then I will invite them for talks but violence and talks
cannot go on simultaneously.” Both Baruah and Mamoni Goswami however maintained
that the latter was talking with the Prime Minister in her own capacity and initiative but
Baruah lauds her effort in bringing the issue of ‘sovereignty’ into the agenda. She
maintained that “sovereignty” of Assam was an issue, which had to be discussed, even
though it should not be seen as a ‘precondition’. On a number of occasions, she said that
there was no harm in talking about ‘sovereignty’ of Assam.
It is in such a context that an 11-member People’s Consultative Group (PCG) consisting
mainly of civil society activists was set up by ULFA to conduct negotiations with the
Government. This is the first time that ULFA induced the civil society persons into the
peace process. It too seemed to realise the necessity of involving the larger civil society
in the peace process so that the issue gets widely discussed. The Prime Minister met
them in late November 2005 and the members of PCG expressed satisfaction over their
first meeting with the Prime Minister. Yet there were many hiccups in the way: First, even
though talks were going on, there was no letup in the military operations. While according
to one estimate at least 13 rounds of talks were held between the Government of India
and PCG, no less than 36 ULFA cadres were killed by bullets of the security forces.
Moreover, while ULFA stuck to its demand for release of five of its top leaders who
were arrested in course of the Bhutan operations in 2003 on the ground that they might
take part in peace dialogues, Tarun Gogoi- Assam’s Chief Minister - wanted a written
response from the organisation assuring the Government of its commitment to talks. It may
not be irrelevant to note in this connection that ULFA too insisted on written assurance
from the Government on the question. The formalistic stand on both parts is reflective of
the persisting mutual distrust and caught both of them in a stalemate. As a result, PCG
disengaged from talks and a fresh round of army operation (Operation Rhino II) was
launched against it. Recently, some of the top cadre of the ULFA was arrested; the
organisation now stands cornered for want of strategy and support. As on date, the
region is witnessing a spell of peace and its duration depends on further developments.
14.5 A COMPARISON BETWEEN KASHMIR AND THE

NORTH-EAST
Both Kashmir and the North-East represent two regions which have historically developed
highly tolerant and syncretic cultures. Both fall within world’s two important arterial routes
connecting Central Asia and South-East Asia respectively and thereby constantly sending
and receiving people across regions. The ever-spiraling violence and militancy have
created an atmosphere of mutual distrust and hostility. Violence, as Gandhi would have us
believe, exists first of all in people’s minds and then finds its material expression.
Yet both represent two rather different situations: On the one hand, while the state has
been in dialogue mode with one militant organisation or the other in the North-East, the
talks have been extremely difficult insofar as Kashmir is concerned. The proliferation of
militant groups with diverse agenda makes it impossible for the state to conduct peace
dialogues and to reconcile the mutual differences. Besides, the direct involvement of
foreign country makes it imperative that the dialogues also include it. But dialogues with
them, to say the least, have not been sustainable for reasons not unknown to us.
How do we break the vicious circle? It is true that interventions made by such eminent
Gandhians like Jaya Prakash Narayan did not of course bear fruit. He withdrew from
Peace Mission on the grounds of losing trust of the conflicting parties. Although not
explicitly stated, Indira Goswami’s unwavering commitment to non-violence brought her to
the centre of peace politics. She too dropped out on the same ground of perceived loss
of confidence. In other words, individual interventions were called off on moral grounds.
But these cases, in no way, undermine the importance of Gandhian approach. For one
thing, appropriate social conditions need to be created to break the vicious circle.
Truthfulness and local autonomy as suggested by Gandhi and enunciated by the Indian
Constitution can still serve as the essential first step to conflict resolution in both cases.
The foundations of local autonomy are already laid down in Articles 370 and 371 of the
Constitution of India. For another and as a corollary to the above, individual interventions
need to be backed up by broader social movements for peace. If individual interventions
fail, a vibrant social movement cannot. Gandhi’s success lay not in making individual
interventions but in taking people along in each of them.
14.6 SUMMARY
Although the Gandhian approach was never truly tested in either case, whatever little was
done particularly in the form of Peace Mission in respect of the Naga conflict was
saddled with its own contradictions: On one hand, not all in the Peace Mission were
inspired and guided by the same Gandhian principles. There were very different kinds of
interests playing within it and its internal schisms were too significant to be brushed aside.
For another, although initially encouraged by both Naga civil society groups and the
Government of India, the members of the Mission gradually discovered that they had lost
trust from both sides. Modern statecraft is far too complex than what Gandhi would have
thought. That Gandhian approach does not seem to produce quick and instant results
does not mean that it has exhausted all its potential. Gandhi after all would have preferred
to suffer the problems than to resolve them in ways that violate the normative principles
that he held so dearly throughout his life. Sufferance of conflicts per se is not a failure
but as Gandhi would have us believe, is a step towards the resolution of conflicts. For
it is likely to melt the heart of the enemy. Even that crucial one step was ‘enough’ for
him.

1. Draw out, in line with the Gandhian approach, an outline for the possible resolution
of the Kashmir issue. What do you think are the constraints to such resolution?
2. Discuss, in the light of the Gandhian approach, the role of Peace Mission in the
Naga conflict. Do you consider it as only an unsuccessful experiment?
3. Make a comparative assessment of the conflicts in Kashmir and in the Northeast and
point out where the Gandhian approach is likely to be more successful in the near
future and why.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Bose, Sumantra., The Challenge of Kashmir: Democracy, Self-Determination and Just
Peace, Sage, New Delhi, 1997.
Chakraborty, Amalendu Kishore., The Quest for Identity: The Tribal Solidarity, 2004.
Das, Samir Kumar., ULFA: A Political Analysis, Ajanta, Delhi, 1994
Das, Samir Kumar., ‘Nobody’s Communique: Ethnic Accords in Northeastern India’ in
Ranabir Samaddar & Helmut Reifeld (eds), Peace As Process: Reconciliation and Conflict
Resolution in South Asia, Manohar, New Delhi, 2001/ Konrad Adenauer Foundation,
New Delhi, 2001.
Das, Samir Kumar., Conflict and Peace in India’s Northeast: The Role of Civil Society,
Policy Studies 42, East-West Center, Washington DC, 2008.
Engineer, Asghar Ali., (ed), Secular Crown on Fire, Ajanta, Delhi, 1991.
Lamb, Alastair., Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy, OUP, Delhi, 1991
Misra, Udayon., Periphery Strikes Back: Challenges to the Nation-State in Assam and
Nagaland. Indian Institute of Advanced Studies, Shimla, 2000.
Movement in North-East India, 1947-69, Asiatic Society, Calcutta, 2000.
Samaddar, Ranabir., The Politics of Dialogue: Living under the Geopolitical Histories of
War and Peace, Ashgate, Aldershot, 2004.
Samaddar, Ranabir., (ed), The Politics of Autonomy: Indian Experiences, Sage, New
Delhi, 2005.
Shimray, U.A., ‘Socio-Political Unrest in the Region Called North-East India’, Economic
and Political Weekly, 16 October, 2004.
New Delhi, 1991.
Younou, Asoso., The Rising Nagas, Vivek Publishing House, New Delhi, 1978.
UNIT 15 SRI LANKA/ PALESTINE
Structure
15.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
15.2 Gandhian Techniques as Applicable to Conflict Situation

15.2.1 Sri Lanka
15.3 Sinhalese ‘Majoritarian Radicalism’

15.4 India’s Involvement in the Sri Lanka Conflict
15.5 LTTE’s War-For-Peace Strategy
15.6 Gandhi and Palestine
15.7 Summary
Suggested Readings
15.1 INTRODUCTION
“I believe it is possible for a single individual to defy the whole might of an unjust
empire to save his honour, his religion, his soul and to lay the foundation for an
empire’s fall or its regeneration.”
“The golden rule is to dare to do the right at any cost.”
M.K. Gandhi
The end of Cold War has seen the global resurgence of ‘Himsa’ in the form of poverty
and inequality within and between nations, intolerance through racial, religious and ethnic
outburst, environmental degradation, proliferation in Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs),
inhuman treatment meted to women and children, with an ever mushrooming growth of
terrorist groups aimed at annihilating the human race. Amid such troubled times, most
decision-makers have preferred ‘violence’ over ‘non-violence,’ the use of ‘might’ to bring
down resistance movements, the unwanted division of the globe between “us” vs. “them,”
“axis-of evil” vs. “axis-of good,” and ‘clash within civilizations’.
In such troubled times Gandhian techniques of ‘Satyagraha’ and ‘Ahimsa’ have often
been looked down upon as meekly sublime and weak to solve the injustices unleashed
on mankind. However, on most occasions Gandhi and his philosophy has been misread
and misunderstood. For both his philosophy- that of non-violence (Ahimsa) and
‘Satyagraha’ was placed not as an abstract principle, but as a practical solution to the
largest and smallest problems of contemporary life in particular or political situations. It
was, in fact, a constant endeavour at self-purification of the inner-self through the search
for truth, love and compassion from ‘within.’ “To attain perfect purity,” Gandhi said, “one
has to become absolutely passion-free in thought, speech and action, to rise above the
opposing currents of love and hatred, attachment and repulsion. So long as a man does
not of his own free-will put himself last among his fellow creatures there is no salvation
for him. For ‘Ahimsa’ is the farthest limit of humility. It stands for moral opposition to
immorality. It believes in the essential goodness of human nature and aims to overcome
evil by good, ‘Himsa’ by ‘Ahimsa’ and enlightenment through inner purity of the soul”
(M.K Gandhi, 1927). From Rev Martin Luther King to Nelson Mandela, those fighting
for the just rights have enormously relied on non-violence as primary means.
Aims and Objectives
After reading this Unit, you will be able to understand:
 The relevance of Gandhian techniques worldwide.
 Gandhi’s philosophy as applicable to conflict situations today.
 The progressive nature of nonviolence that can be conceived through various stages.
15.2 GANDHIAN TECHNIQUES AS APPLICABLE TO

CONFLICT SITUATION
15.2.1 Sri Lanka
In judging Gandhian techniques as applicable to the conflict situation in Sri Lanka
underpinned by the ethnic strife between the majority Sinhala Buddhists and the minority
Tamils of Indian origin (according to a 1981 census the Sinhalese constituted 74 percent
of the population; Sri Lankan Tamils 12.7 percent; Indian Tamils 7 percent concentrated
in the Northeast of the country, Moors 7 percent and others 0.6 percent), a few points
have to be kept in mind:
One, the systematic exclusion of the Tamil speaking minorities practised by the Sri Lankan
government over a decade- following a dual-faced approach of preaching peaceful
settlement of dispute (through negotiation and agreement) between the two communities,
while allowing the military to operate in a ham-fisted fashion to crack down on the Tamil
minorities;
Two, the extra-regional support meted out by the Lankan government through the
involvement of United States, Pakistan (for arms supply) and India to address the ethnic
problem. Throughout, the Indian government has pursued a two-pronged strategy of
persuasion and coercion against the Sri Lankan government and the Sri Lankan Tamils on
different occasions. The objective behind such a strategy was to advance a viable political
settlement to the ethnic issue through negotiations on one hand, and on the other in
deterring the Lankan government’s search for extra-regional help from outside. In support
of this latter objective, there were allegations that India even trained, armed and extended
refuge to the militant Tamil groups (Mayilvaganan, 2007, pp.398-403). However, most
believe that the Indian leadership firmly ruled out intervention in the internal affairs of Sri
Lanka, while it provided peace-keeping forces to settle the dispute.
Three, there was overriding influence of the Tamil Tigers, under the leadership of Velupillai
Prabhakaran. Under him the group had graduated from a moderate militant group to a
‘full-blown’ terrorist organisation. Started in 1972 as the ‘Tamils New Tigers,’ and later
renamed as the ‘Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam’ (LTTE) on 6 May 1976, the outfit has
been spearheading militancy for the last 37 years, occasionally pausing for peace talks but
single-handedly pursuing its goal of a separate state. In its Eelam War, the guerilla fighters
Sri Lanka/Palestine 153
acquired conventional military capability, building a loyal network of Tamil cadre—the

Black Tigers—whose deadly suicide terror attacks made the LTTE one of the most
gruesome guerilla fighters in the world.
Prabhakaran set up a training camp in a jungle near Vavuniya, which raised funds from
illicit sources—bank robbery, money laundering, transshipment of arms and ammunition,
deadly suicide missions through the deployment of human bombs (women and child
soldiers). Prabhakaran even supplemented his ground troops with a naval wing– the Sea
Tigers- and managed to build an air wing to fight for the Tamil cause. His expertise lay
in his systematic decimation of prominent political figures—the suicide attack on Sri
Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993 and the brutal assassination of the
Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991. The LTTE also detonated truck bombs
directed to paralyse Sri Lanka’s economy, while it decimated Lanka’s infrastructure by
targeting commuter trains, buses, oil tanks and power stations.
Throughout the 1970s, non-violent methods (often inspired by Mahatma Gandhi) were
used to protest against the discriminating politics of the state. The Sarvodaya Movement
(started in 1958) staged large peace mediations and promoted youth exchanges between
Tamils and Sinhalese. NGOs worked for peace with activities both at national and local
levels. They included the National Peace Council; research institutions like the International
Centre for Ethnic Studies; women’s organisations working for peace, movement for inter-
racial justice and equality. But all these peace efforts finally succumbed to, a) unbearable
‘majoritarian’ radicalism unleashed by the Sinhalese; b) it lacked the strength and charisma
to run a durable mass movement, and c) the Tamil Tigers ‘militancy’ stole the region’s
attention away from peace. At the end of the day it was widely accepted that: “We have
tried peace, but it did not work” and now military means are dominating.
15.3 SINHALESE ‘MAJORITARIAN’ RADICALISM

Sri Lanka attained universal suffrage in 1931 and the island gained independence from its
British colonisers in 1948. Soon after independence, the island’s political structure enabled
particularistic and ethnic-based groups to hold sway- leading to its triumph over interethnic
and minority groups to generate adverse political change and illiberal governance. The
Indian Tamils, who came here as indentured labourers, were the worst victims of Sinhala
‘majoritarian radicalism.’ Their systematic ‘exclusion’ first came to the forefront in the form
of the Swabasha Movement that made Sinhala the sole national language replacing English
(as the Tamil were well-versed in English and held important government posts) as the
country’s only official language.
The Sinhala-only Bill was passed on 5 June, 1956. This led to widespread protest by the
Tamils who wanted equal representation of their respective languages. The Tamils gathered
outside the Parliament to non-violently fast and meditate. The Sinhala Language Protection
Council attacked the Tamils and soon their violence killed around 150 Tamil minorities.
Around this time, the minister of transport issued a directive calling for the Sinhala ‘sri’
to be included on all vehicle number plates. When the Tamils started replacing the Sinhala
‘sri’ with the Tamil ‘shri’ many Sinhalese protested by smearing tar over Tamil lettering
on buses, public buildings and street signs (Sahadevan and Neil Devotta, 2006).
A standardised system and a subsequent district quota system for higher education were
also designed to lower the number of Tamil students gaining access to higher education.
Policies were implemented to ensure that the government hired only Sinhalese for the civil
service. Post 1977—the Jayawardene’s government resorted to hand-fisted practices to

silence its critics and rein amid a growing Tamil rebel movement. The government passed
the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1979, which retaliated against Tamil insurgency by
inciting the August 1977, June 1981 and 1983 anti-Tamil riots. In most instances, military
personnel raped, tortured and murdered Tamil civilians. To hurt the cultural sentiment of
the Tamils, the SLA even torched the Jaffna Public Library. Successive governments in Sri
Lanka (except Chandrika Kumaratunga’s regime) have used the Tamil issue as a trump-
card to (a) intimidate, harass and murder opponents who ever spoke otherwise, and (b)
as a powerful weapon to continue in power in the centre.
Post-1983, the Kumaratunga regime took some bold steps to bring the Tamils closer to
her government. She tried to draw a distinction between the Tamil people and the LTTE.
War was declared as “against the enemies of peace” and not against the people. She
partially lifted the economic embargo, offered a rehabilitation and reconstruction package
worth Rs 40 billion to the North-east as a goodwill gesture. Restoration of supply of
electricity to Jaffna and reconstruction of the Jaffna Library were also offered. The
government proposed to supply food, clothes, medicines and other essentials to the
people affected by war. A Human Rights Commission was set up by an act of Parliament
in July 1996, while the armed forces were given strict instructions to spare the civilians
from their attacks. In a bid to restore the democratic process and grass-roots level
administration in the war-torn Jaffna peninsula, the government held civic elections on 29
January 1998. However, Chandrika Kumaratunga’s peace initiatives were only short-lived
as the peace process dwindled due to several reasons (Sahadevan and Neil Devotta,
2006). Firstly, there had been steady efforts on the part of the government to dilute the
original peace proposals under pressure from the Sinhala hard-liners. Secondly, the long-
drawn-out delay in giving constitutional status to the proposals due to lack of consensus
among the Sinhalese, eroded the Sri Lankan Tamil faith in the proposed constitutional
exercise. Thirdly, the continuation of war, persistence of misery, hardship of the people in
the North-East after re-imposition of the economic embargo failed to alter the view of the
Tamils in favour of the government. The people’s continued reliance on the LTTE, as a
result of the collective sacrifices made at the behest of its leaders, made it exceedingly
difficult for the government to win their support through any political and economic
concessions.
15.4 INDIA’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE SRI LANKAN

CONFLICT
As far as India is concerned, there are distinctly two phases in India’s policy vis-à-vis the
ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka. The first phase (1983-90) saw India playing a proactive
interventionist role, while in the second phase (since 1990) it has been changed to a
policy of non-intervention without abandoning its interest in the conflict.
Since 1984, India followed a two-pronged strategy of ‘persuasion’ and ‘coercion’ both
against the Sri Lanka government and Tamil militants on different occasions. The objective
behind such a strategy was to evolve a viable structure of political settlement through
negotiations without augmenting one party against another. According to Sahadevan, if
India had supplied arms and extended training facilities to the militants, it was to increase
the Sri Lankan Tamils’ bargaining power vis-à-vis the government. It would also compel
the Sri Lankan government to give up its military approach through the strategic
involvement of extra-regional powers- US, UK, China and Pakistan, thereby destabilising
the balance of power in the region.
On 29 July 1987, then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and President Jayewardane
signed an accord, whereby they agreed that a) Tamil majority northern and eastern
provinces would be merged to ensure distinct Tamil nationality without disturbing the
integrity of Sri Lanka; b) to hold election to Provincial Councils of north and east before
31 December 1987; c) To invite an Indian peace-keeping contingent to guarantee and
enforce cessation of hostilities in Jaffna; d) India shall ensure that its territory is not used
for activities prejudicial to the unity and integrity of Sri Lanka.
However, this goodwill accord was short-lived. The new President Premadasa was
opposed to the Indo-Sri Lankan accord from the beginning and he insisted on the
replacement of the accord by a friendship treaty and called for withdrawal of the Indian
Peace Keeping Forces (IPKF) from Sri Lanka by 29 July, 1989 (the role of IPKF
became controversial for its alleged atrocities and ruthless use of force). It refrained from
taking part even in the SAARC meeting held at Islamabad in July 1989. On 19
September, 1989 the IPKF unilaterally suspended its military operations.
After the IPKF’s withdrawal, there were drastic changes in India’s Sri Lanka policy.
Since then successive governments in New Delhi expressed their anguish by deciding
against any form of direct intervention in the ethnic conflict. Sri Lanka, since the mid-
1990s, sought India’s direct politico-military role, but the brutal assassination of Rajiv
Gandhi on 21 May, 1991 turned the tables against any direct involvement in the conflict.
India strongly preferred a home-grown solution to the conflict, reached through a serious
negotiation process involving all the ethnic stakeholders. It was strictly opposed to
assume the role of a mediator in chalking out a peace process, while it increasingly
approved greater international involvement in peacemaking. India now, openly approved
the involvement of Norway, Japan and the European Union for engaging the LTTE into
negotiations. On the LTTE’s demand for a free Eelam, India has taken a stand that
would enable both the adversaries—the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE—adopt a
reasonable stand on the issue of interim administration for the Northeast (Sahadevan and
Devotta, 2006).
15.5 LTTE’S WAR-FOR-PEACE STRATEGY

Prabhakaran was the product of a generation that felt Tamil rights and equality could not
be obtained through moderate politics and Gandhian methods. Based on the level of use
of violence and the duration of fighting, LTTE’s ‘war for Tamil Eelam’ highlighted all the
traits of a total war, encompassing:
 Intense regular fighting;
 Heavy deployment of forces (above a level of 50,000 men) and use of sophisticated
weapons (tanks, artillery, helicopter, gun-ships);
 A higher level of battle-related deaths (more than 1,000 people per year);
 Large-scale displacement of people and refugees (over 20,000 people per year);
 Extensive damage to property and economic infrastructure (source: Sahadevan and
Devotta, 2006).
His entire war-for-peace strategy had six distinct phases: the first phase (1983-87) saw
highly intense military confrontation between the insurgent groups and the Sri Lankan
Army (SLA) that led to opening up of multiple war fronts. The SLA’s counter-insurgency
operations during this phase were to wrest control of territories from the LTTE and
marginalise the Tigers militarily.
The second phase (1987-90) of the war was solely between the Indian Peace Keeping
Force (IPKF) and the LTTE: the former with strength of about 70,000 troops supported
by heavy tanks and artillery went to the island to implement the bilateral peace agreement
signed in 1987. The IPKF through its counter-insurgency operations chased the Tigers out
of the Jaffna peninsula to the Vavuniya and Mullaitivu jungles and hideouts in the east.
But, the IPKF soon withdrew from the island.
Thereby, the LTTE entered the third phase of its war (1990-94) with the SLA. The Army
regained its hold over the eastern region, while the Tigers, in order to maintain their
control over the north, engaged in a series of set-piece battles and hit-and-run operations.
This was followed by the breakdown in any attempt to chalk out a peaceful settlement
to the dispute, the LTTE having entered its fourth phase of Eelam War in April 1995. The
Tigers, by this time, shifted their headquarters to Mullaitivu and Kilinochchi and spread
their sphere of influence in the east. The LTTE had also developed the Sea Tiger Wing-
a daring guerilla Navy that played havoc with the Sri Lankan Navy. With territorial victory
forming the core objective of both the rebel group and the government, this phase of war
continued till 2002 when the government and the LTTE signed a cease-fire agreement and
held peace talks facilitated by Norway.
Although Prabhakaran had demonstrated strategic military capability, he appeared to have
failed to analyse two warfront disadvantages: a) there was no factoring the impact of the
defection of Karuna, his able military commander from Batticolao on the LTTE’s overall
military capability; b) the second was in misunderstanding the determination of the Sri
Lankan political and military leadership to eliminate the LTTE thoroughly.
Ultimately, in its last two phases (2002-04; 2004-09) when the security forces launched
their offensive in the north with huge numerical strength, the LTTE did not have the
essential force to face the onslaught. Somehow Prabhakaran failed to use his superior
insurgency tactics to overcome his limitations in conventional warfare. By the beginning of
the Eelam War VI, Prabhakaran had lost all the 15,000 sq km of land he lorded over
in the east and the north. President Mahinda Rajapakse evidently scored better over his
opponent, Ranil Wickremesinghe, as he promised in his election manifesto to eliminate
LTTE terrorism at any cost.
Prabhakaran’s ‘aggressive’ nature, his monolithic and egocentric leadership style had been
a major obstacle in his strategic decision-making process. His manhandling of the
international community and violation of international humanitarian laws, post 2002,
following recruitment of child soldiers, using civilians as human shield, illegal arrests and
abduction and suicide bombings, brought it disgrace at home and abroad. By 2005, LTTE
was banned in 32 countries across the globe.
At the end of 37 years, what Prabhakaran earned for his people in the name of
‘independence,’ is the onus of a deceased leader who has left thousands dead (6,432
according to UN report, mostly by LTTE mines and those shot by Tiger’s suicide wing,
besides Prabhakaran’s own demise on 19 May 2009), several injured and homeless,
children and mothers brutally tortured and the Lankan Tamils speculative of either a
peaceful solution to their decades-old ethnic strife or those juxtaposed with terms that will
leave them more physically vulnerable and politically marginalised.
To the world, 19 May 2009 marked a new beginning in the history of counter-terrorism,
as it once again proved that violence as a means to peace is bound to crumble
shamelessly, its fight for claiming the freedom of its people would denigrate to ‘outright
mockery,’ and as Gandhi said, its success through violent means would only be ‘short-
lived’.
Gandhi once said, “Non-violence is not abstention from the real fight against evil. It is,
as I understand it, a more vigorous fight against evil. It is, more effective than the eye
for eye law which normally leads to the aggravation of evil.” (M K Gandhi, Autobiography,
1927). Twenty seven years of Gandhi’s non-violent fight for Indian independence (from
the launch of the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1920 to our independence in August,
1947) earned us freedom from the British rule, well recognised by the international
community. Thirty seven years of Prabhakaran’s violent fight against the Sinhalese has
earned him and his organisation the epithet of a ‘terrorist organisation’ and the Tamils
speculative about their freedom.
Had the LTTE embraced ‘non-violent’ means to voice the legitimate cause of the Sri
Lankan Tamils, the organisation would have continued with general protests (hartals),
sustained agitations involving both the rich and poor Tamils, occasional peaceful gherao
of government institutions, surrender of titles and honorary offices and resignation of
nominated post in local bodies, closure of economic and cultural sources which the
Sinhala government drew from these Tamil-dominated areas, boycott of Sri Lankan goods
and services, draw media (print and electronic) attention through frequent involvement of
national and international Press. The organisation would have kept the educated Tamils
living abroad upbeat on the plight of the Tamils at home and seek their help through
extensive signature campaigns, written petitions and articles sent to foreign journals and
publicists to (a) keep the unity of the community intact and (b) enable the international
community to take serious notice of the issue.
The Tamil minority cause is closely comparable to the plight of the Natal Indians in South
Africa. The treatment meted out to the indentured Indian labourers through racial
discrimination, non-renewal of their contract to stay in South Africa, imposition of a hefty
tax and invalidation of all marriages not conducted according to Christian rights, hold
similar glimpses of ‘soft’ discrimination against Tamil minorities in Sri Lanka.
At Natal, Gandhi’s techniques of ‘moderate’ methods of struggle in its initial phase and
later the use of civil disobedience through Satyagraha stood in good stead as it
compelled the South African government to accept most of the Indian demands and to
treat the immigrant Indians in a sympathetic manner. Through South Africa, Gandhi
inculcated the feeling of Indian-ness among all its proponents- Hindus, Muslims, Christians
and Parsis, rich, poor, women and old. He learnt in the hardest way that leadership
involves patience to face the ire not only of the enemy but also of one’s followers.
The Tamil minority cause lacked the strong leadership necessitated to successfully drive
the movement. As the issue involved ‘political exclusion’ and ‘marginalisation’ of the Tamil
minorities, the leadership should have been over-cautious of violating law that would have
given enough reason to the state to further segregate the Tamils (Using the propaganda
of the ‘war on terror’, the Lankan government has unleashed a racist war. According to
reliable sources nearly 20,000 civilians face starvation and mass genocide in the North-
East of the country).
The LTTE’s ‘any means to an end’ has also seen it denigrating from a moderate separatist
group to a militant organisation and finally into a terrorist organisation. The brutal
assassination of important political figures, mishandling of the international community, the
illicit nexus it wove to procure arms and ammunition, the forcible recruitment of children
and women to carry suicide missions only highlighted the arrogance and greed of its
leadership. Its central leader, Prabhakaran enjoyed absolute power. Prabhakaran was both
the Chairman of the Central Committee of the LTTE and Commander-in-chief of its
military wing. Field commanders could have a role in the planning of operations and in
the formulation of strategies, but in matters of war and peace, Prabhakaran had absolute
discretion. Anyone who showed even the slightest inclination to prescribe peace for the
Tamils was condemned as a traitor. Even those who showed reluctance to further continue
within the organisation were subjected to abject punishment- ranging from retirement to
unpublicised execution. While Prabhakaran had a stable family life, most cadres were
debarred from falling in love or leading a grihastha / family life (Sahadevan and Devotta,
p.12).
Over time, for most, the biggest enemy of the Tamils was the LTTE itself. It was the
LTTE, which had taken away their democratic rights in the name of winning a victory for
the Tamils in the Northeast. The people were not able to express themselves freely
especially in matters involving the LTTE. Their oft-repeated declaration that “we are
representing the political aspirations of our people,” who are “solidly behind” them, and
their assertion that they constitute the “vanguard of- revolutionary armed resistance
movement” were part of their consciously designed strategy to build up opinion in favour
of themselves and their claim of an extensive support base in Tamil society in the
Northeast. A part of LTTE’s claim to Tamil support was artificially created- actually
created by means of coercion and sustained by propaganda. What the Tamils needed was
a leader like Gandhi and a policy that persistently adhered to non-violence and Satyagraha
that could have turned world opinion in their favour.
15.6 GANDHI AND PALESTINE

Several letters have been received by me, asking me to declare my views about the
Arab-Jew question in Palestine.
My sympathies are all with the Jews. I have known them intimately in South Africa.
They have been the untouchables of Christianity. The parallel between their treatment
by Christians and the treatment of untouchables by Hindus is very close. But my
sympathy does not blind me to the requirement of justice.
The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The
sanction for it is sought in the Bible and the tenacity with which the Jews have
hankered after return to Palestine.
Why should they not like other people of the earth make that country their home
where they are born and where they earn their livelihood? Palestine belongs to the
Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English as France to the
French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs.
If the Jews look to Palestine as their national home it is wrong to enter it under
the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of
the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the
Arabs.
Gandhi’s view on Palestine, 1938.
The Jewish people settled in the region of Palestine about 1,200 years before the birth
of Christ. From about 70AD to 700 AD, the region was under the control of the Romans
who dispersed most of the Hebrews from the region. With the collapse of the Roman
Empire, The Ismaelites (Arabs) settled in the region and remained there until the Turkish
(Ottoman) Empire subjugated them in 1516.
By the later part of the 1800s, the Ottoman Empire, controlled by Turkey, was in total
disarray and internal factional disturbances as Turkey’s influences waned. The Turkish
Empire bordering Persia was under the imperialistic control of the Russians and the
British. During the First World War as Turkey was fighting on the side of the German
Empire against Britain and France, it suited Britain to turn the Arabs against the Turks,
while it also promised the Jews a homeland of their own (Balfour Declaration) to win the
economic and political support of the Jews in Europe and elsewhere. After World War
I, Palestine was assigned to UK as a mandated territory by the League of Nations.
Many of the Arab leaders were willing to render Palestine up to Jews as long as the rest
of West Asia was under Arabs’ control. But the Arabs who lived in Palestine desperately
opposed the Jews’ establishing their own nation within their territory. From then on,
countless riots have broken out in the territory. The British, who finally found that
Palestine would never reconcile with the Jews, proposed ‘a two-nation’ solution to the
problem. They handed the problem to the United Nations. According to Resolution 181,
the UN General Assembly proposed the partitioning of Palestine into Arab and Jewish
states, with Jerusalem and Bethlehm as a corpus separatum under a special international
regime. The UN Partition Plan granted the Jews over 56% of the area at a time when
they owned less than 7% of the land and constituted one-third of the population. On 14
May 1948, the State of Israel was declared and the first Arab-Israeli War began. From
then, the Arab resistance has continued in the face of overwhelming odds. By the end of
the First Arab-Israeli Conflict (1948-49), Israel controlled 77.4% of the land of Palestine,
including much of the territory assigned to the Arab states. Jewish military activities,
massacre and expulsion orders caused the depopulation of 418 Palestinian villages and the
flight of 750,000 Palestinians. The Palestinians found themselves divided into four
communities. Some were refugees within Israel, some fled to the West Bank, those who
fled to the Gaza Strip lived under Egyptian administration. The rest sought refuge in the
neighbouring Arab countries. By the end of the Third Arab-Israeli War in June 1967 (also
known as the Six-Day War), Israel controlled the entire Senai Peninsula up to the east
bank of the canal. The cost to human life was beyond all apprehension. Negotiations
towards a permanent ceasefire began in December 1973 which resulted in the first
disengagement agreement of 18 January 1973 and a second agreement signed on 1
September 1975. The agreement provided for a partial Israeli withdrawal from Sinai and
limited the number of troops and weapons Egypt could have on the eastern side of the
canal.
Even though the ground firing stopped, what fermented underneath was the growth of
Palestinian resistance groups—the Palestine Libration organisation (PLO), the Hamas—
better traced to the Intifada resulting in civilian uprising in the West Bank and the Gaza
Strip from December 1987. The Arabs fought the first Intifada (1987-1993) with stones
and were answered with Israeli bullets. They fought the second Intifada (2000-04) with
weapons and were answered with Israeli tanks and airplanes. The Intifada led to the
peace talks in Oslo, but it did not end the occupation, and it certainly did not end fresh
Israeli settlements. There were always some fundamentalist Palestinian groups that advocated
violence; these have gained greater credibility in the light of recent Israeli actions and their
backing by the United States’ government. Paul Wolfowitz, once in his address to the
students of Georgetown University, said that terrorism is the greatest obstacle to Palestine.
“If Palestine had adopted the ways of Gandhi, they could, in fact make an enormous
change very quickly.” Gandhi, however, counselled non-violence to the Jews. He suggested
them to offer Satyagraha to the Arabs, not under the shadow of the British but on the
basis of their own will and determination. A Gandhi for our times would very likely have
told the Palestinians to abandon the methods of Hamas in favour of civil disobedience.
To the Israelis, he would have preached Satyagraha by discarding the Western (US)
support and lend a patient hearing to the Palestinians, make friends with them, and
acquire their goodwill (Ramachandra Guha, 2006).
15.7 SUMMARY
Whether it is Palestine or Sri Lanka there is no doubt that it is not possible to abstain
from violence altogether. Violence is a fact of life, but it cannot be our ideal or destiny.
Violence has been at the centre of human history but there is an unmistakable evidence
of the march of mankind from savagery to civilisation, from ferocity to gentleness, from
violence to non-violence. Human society, as a whole, has been steadily progressing
towards nonviolence. Our remote ancestors were cannibals; then they took to live on
chase. Next came the stage of agriculture and industry. Thus from being a nomad he
settled down to civilised stable life. All these were signs of human endeavour at
progressive nonviolence and diminishing violence.
Nonviolence is not an individual but social virtue. It can be practised by all, not merely
individually but collectively as well. India had the privilege to proudly own people who
preached and practised nonviolence not as an abstract principle but as a practical solution
to problems of daily life. Gandhi was such a gift to mankind. His relevance will resonate
again and again whether in war or peace. Since every war is man’s lasting penchant for
a durable peace and in every peace lays the foundation of a better civilisation bond with
love. In his Autobiography, Gandhi once rightly said: “I have nothing new to teach the
world. Truth and non-violence are as old as hills.”

1. Do you think Gandhi’s technique of non-violence would have offered a lasting
solution to the Sri Lanka-Tamil ethnic problem?
2. ‘Gandhi’s non-violent method would have amicably solved the Arab-Israeli conflict.’
Justify this statement in your own words.
3. Write short notes on:
a) Majoritarian radicalism of Sinhalese
b) India’s role in Sri Lanka ethnic conflict
SUGGESTED READINGS
Gandhi, M.K., An Autobiography or The story of my experiments with truth, Navajivan
Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1927.
Roy, Ramashray., (ed), Gandhi and the Present Global Crisis, Indian Institute of Advanced
Studies, Shimla, 1996.
Hardiman, David., Gandhi in his time and Ours, Permanent Black, Delhi, 2003.
Cortright, David., Gandhi and Beyond: Nonviolence for an Age of Terrorism,
Paradigm, 2007.
Ghosh, Sudhir., Gandhi’s Emissary, Routledge, 2008.
Nanda, B.R., (ed), In search of Gandhi: essays and reflections, ICCR, New Delhi, 1995.
Sahadevan, P, and Devotta, Neil., Politics of Conflict and Peace in Sri Lanka, Manak,
New Delhi, 2006.
Gelvin, L, James., The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
Mayilvaganan, M., Indian Perceptions on Sri Lanka: Changing Dynamics, World Focus,
November-December, 2007, pp.398-403.
Reddy, Muralidhar., Endgame in Sri Lanka, Frontline, 22 May 2009.
Bowles, Chester., What Americans Can Learn From Gandhi, Span, January/ February,
2008, pp.22-28.
Guha, Ramachandra., Gandhi and Palestine, The Hindu, 2006.
Website Sources:
1. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prize/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html.
2. www.the kingcenter.org.
3. http:// www.mkgandhi.org.
4. http://www.meaindia.nic.in.
5. http://peaceinsrilanka.com/peace2005/Insidepage/printV/GOSLpv/011205PV.htm.
UNIT 16 TIBET/MYANMAR/BHUTAN
Structure
16.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
16.2 Introduction to the Issue

16.2.1 Bhutan
16.2.2 Tibet
16.2.3 Myanmar
16.3 Problems of Nation Building

16.3.1 Bhutan
16.3.2 Tibet
16.3.3 Myanmar
16.4 Political System

16.4.1 Bhutan
16.4.2 Tibet
16.4.3 Myanmar
16.5 Foreign Policies

16.5.1 Bhutan
16.5.2 Myanmar
16.6 Movement for Reforms

16.6.1 Bhutan
16.6.2 Tibet
16.6.3 Myanmar
16.7 Relevance of Gandhism in Tibet, Myanmar and Bhutan

16.8 Summary
Suggested Readings
16.1 INTRODUCTION
Tibet, Myanmar and Bhutan are India’s immediate neighbours. Bhutan and Tibet are
landlocked. On the other hand, Myanmar is situated along the Bay of Bengal. Bhutan and
Myanmar are sovereign independent countries but Tibet is occupied by People’s Republic
of China since 1950. All the three are Buddhists and influenced by Indian culture and
civilisation. Bhutan, Tibet and Myanmar retain their faith in Buddhism whereas India is
secular. Although Buddhism was born in India, it is preserved in letter and spirit in the
Himalayan nations, where Buddhism is an important pillar of their nationalism and identity.
The Chinese communist system or India’s democratic system have not been able to
transform the social values and religious faith of the people in Bhutan, Tibet and Myanmar.
Aims and Objectives

After reading this Unit, you would be able to understand:
 The problems of nation-building in Tibet, Myanmar and Bhutan
 The nature of their political systems and foreign policies
 The movement for reforms along the Gandhian lines
16.2 INTRODUCTION TO THE ISSUE

16.2.1 Bhutan
Bhutan lies in the Himalayan range of mountains with Tibet in the north and India in the
South. Stretching along the southern slopes of the Himalayas for 250 miles, Bhutan is
comprised of the people of Tibetan stock, culture and outlook. Lamaism is the prevailing
religion and the political order is led under the hereditary monarchical system.
The official language is Dzongkha, spoken mainly in Western Bhutan. Written Dzongkha
is based on Tibetan script. The state religion is Mahayana Buddhism. Drukpa and
Kagyupa sects are considered indigenous, but there are thousands of Nepali settlers, who
comprise about one quarter of the country’s total population. The Nepali speaking
population of Bhutan inhabits in southern part and is known as southern Bhutanese.
Bhutan indeed is a buffer state between India and China. In 1865 Wangchuk ruler of
Bhutan had signed Sinchula Treaty with British by which Kalimpong and Duars had been
ceded to British India and Wangchuk had promised to stop Bhutani raids into British
territories. In return Wangchuk was granted an annual subsidy of Rs.50, 000. The
relations with Great Britain started growing thereafter to the extent that the Bhutanese king
accompanied Col. Younghusband to visit Lhasa to sign a convention in 1904 through
which Tibet agreed to end its special ties with Bhutan in favour of the Britishers. In 1910
a fresh treaty was drawn up between Bhutan and British India by which Bhutan
surrendered her foreign relations to British India and accepted the latter as arbiter in her
disputes with Cooch bihar and Sikkim. In return Britain increased the annual subsidy to
Bhutan to 100000 and also assured that they will not interfere in the internal affairs of
Bhutan.
After India became independent, the Anglo-Bhutanese Treaty (1910) was replaced by
Indo-Bhutan Treaty of Friendship in 1949, whereby Bhutan agreed to seek the advice of
government of India with regard to its foreign relations. India also assured that it would
not interfere in the internal affairs of Bhutan and also agreed to pay annual subsidy of
500000, which was five times more than the Britishers. India also returned some territory
to Bhutan in Devangiri area and promised facilities for transport of all imports-exports,
including arms, machinery and stores. Jigme Dorji Wangchuk (1952-72) introduced
structural reforms in the political system. He established the National Assembly (tshogdu
Chen mo) in 1953 and Royal Advisory council of Ministers (Ihengye Zhungtshog) in
1968. Bhutan became a member of the UN in 1971.
Bhutan has landlocked status and it is full of hilly terrain, forests and snow. It faces
developmental problems because of its geography. Besides, it has some ethnic groups like
Drukpa, Nepali and Tibetans who are concerned about protecting their distinct identity
and culture. Situated along Tibet (China), Bhutan has to address the concerns expressed
Tibet/Myanmar/Bhutan 165
by the Chinese authorities from time to time. When China occupied Tibet, Bhutan gave
asylum to 6000 Tibetan refugees on humanitarian grounds. When China raised the alarm
that those refugees were engaged in spying and subversion in Tibet, Bhutan dispersed
them in 1976 in different parts of the country, and in 1979 Bhutan told those refugees
either to take Bhutanese citizenship or be repatriated to Tibet. By 1985 most of the
Tibetans took Bhutanese citizenship but some also entered India to join the entourage of
Dalai Lama at Himachal Pradesh.
16.2.2 Tibet
Tibet, situated between India and China, has been the ancient centre of Buddhist learning
and civilisation. In 1950 China ignored Tibet’s traditional buffer status and sent its army
to change its independent status in China’s favour. The communist rulers in China were
afraid that Tibet might be used against China by the Western world to destabilise the
communist system. Although there was lot of opposition to Chinese military moves, China
proclaimed the formation of Autonomous Region of Tibet and usurped the functions of
local government led by the Dalai Lama. There were violent protests and revolt in Tibet
against Chinese actions in 1959 but they were suppressed with an iron hand. The Dalai
Lama, who symbolised Tibetan sovereignty, fled to India in 1959. China removed the
Dalai Lama from his post in 1964 and Tibet was declared an Autonomous Region of
China. The Dalai Lama lives in exile in India and is leading the movement against Chinese
occupation. He is highly revered by the Tibetans and has been awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize in 1989.
The population of Tibet, according to the 2000 census, is 2.62 million. The ethnic Hans
are encouraged to migrate to Tibet and Tibetan culture and national identity have been
marginalised. The political dissidents are severely punished and there are restrictions on
religious freedom, as the Chinese authorities dislike the expression of Tibetan Buddhism.
The Chinese occupation, however, cannot erase the glorious history of Tibet, which
existed in the past.
Tibet exercised cultural influence in the neighbourhood, especially in Bhutan and Ladakh.
While Buddhism came to Tibet from India in the seventh century, both Bhutan and
Ladakh derived it from Tibet. The geographical and genealogical similarity of Bhutan,
Ladakh and Tibet are close and similarities in gesture, rituals, language and the social
customs are more pronounced.
Religious mask dances, folk songs, including Gesar war songs from gesar epic are
extremely popular in Ladakh and Bhutan. Every festival assumes a religious tone with the
sounding of cymbals, clarinets and drums, all suggestive of the sanctified atmosphere of
a Tibetan festival. Masked dances entertain their audience with humour. Chham, the
religious dance, is popular that shows the triumph of good over evil. The most spectacular
is the observation of death rites in Ladakh, Bhutan and Tibet, which is similar. Offerings
to Lamas and monasteries are made for the deceased and prayer flags and thang-ka are
erected for the departed soul. The actual date of cremation is decided by astrological
calculation and the corpse is kept for forty nine days during which there is continuous
recitation of the holy Tibetan book of the dead (Bardo Thodrol) in front of the dead
person.
Tibetan interaction with India had been from time immemorial. Buddhism was the
important subject of our discourses. Along with Buddhism, traders also used to travel in
the area and thus religion and trade had been interlinked. According to Geshe Gedun
Chophel, Tibetan King Trisong (836-43) sent a large expedition of caravans to Magadh,
to import relics related with Lord Buddha for the Samya Stupa in Tibet. When the
caravan arrived at Magadh, they were unwilling to return back to Tibet. They settled in
different parts of the Himalayan regions. These people were eventually known as Tamang,
from whom the numerous Himalayan hill tribes descended, including Tamang tribes of
Nepal.
Trade was an important channel of cultural exchange and influence. Leh, Ladakh’s capital,
used to be the foremost barter centre of Central Asia and caravans from Tibet, India,
Turkey and China used to gather there to sell their wares. K. Thondup (1977) says that
Bhutan used to collect dyes, coarse silk arecanut and tobacco from Assam and Bengal
and exchange them for wool, tea, salt and musk from Tibet. Again the spices, timber,
agricultural products were also bartered for the merchandise of Tibet. It is also well
known that Hah (Bhutan), situated closer to Chumbi valley (Tibet), was also a busy
centre of trade where numerous caravans of horses and pack mules passed back and
forth until quite recently.
16.2.3 Myanmar
Myanmar (Burma) lies to the east of India and Bangladesh and to the southwest of
China. It shares common frontiers with China, Laos, Thailand, Bangladesh and India. It
has a long coastline facing the Bay of Bengal and the Andaman Sea. Irrawaddy, Chindwin
and Sittang are the major rivers and Patkai, Naga, Chin Hills and Arakan Yoma are
important mountain ranges.
Myanmar’s population is about 48,379,000 and their major concentration is in the
Irrawaddy delta. Ethnic Burmans (Bamar) form the majority but the number of ethnic
minorities is substantial. The Bamar, whose ancestors came from the Sino-Tibetan borders,
comprise 68 per cent of the total population and Shan seven per cent, Karens six
percent, Arakanese four per cent, Mon two percent, Kachins two percent, Chin two
percent and others comprise nine percent of the total population.
Myanmar had powerful kingdoms in the past. Although the Mons and Pyus had
dominated initially, there was large-scale migration of Tibeto-Burmans in the 10th Century
and they conquered the Mon and Pyus. Tibeto-Burmans absorbed the culture and religion
of Mons and Pyus and laid the foundation of a large Kingdom known as Pagan in the
11th century. Theravada Buddhism became the religion of the majority.
Pagan was destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1287. Its successor Ava proved a weak
state because of the infighting between ethnic Mon and the Shan. In 16th century, the
Toungoo dynasty expanded the frontiers but it was not sustainable. Toungoo was
succeeded by Konbaung in the 18th century, which tried to unite the country. They, at
the same time, began to expand the territories but in doing so, it came into conflict with
Britishers who had established a strong foothold over India. The Britishers retaliated
against Burmans against their expansionist policies. The British India intervened militarily
and colonised Burma. Hence monarchy was abolished in 1885.
Burma was integrated with British India and thus it was projected as a part of Indian
Territory. A number of Indians migrated there to be inhabited and their representation in
police and civil service is substantial. Indians helped in the expansion of agricultural land
and Burma emerged as one of the largest rice exporting country. Subsequently, the Indians
emerged as big land-owners, which was disliked by the ethnic Burmans. Therefore a
campaign was launched against the Indian interests and ‘hate Indian’ was one of the
agenda of the Burma nationalist movement. Thus, when the country became independent
in 1948, the government of Burma passed citizenship laws to turn their Indian population
stateless. Their landed properties were nationalised in due course and the majority of
Burmese Indians were compelled to migrate elsewhere.
When Burma became independent, it adopted the system of parliamentary democracy.
There was a national assembly and multiparty system. Anti-Fascist people’s Freedom
League, which led the freedom movement under the leadership of Bogyoke Aung San,
had popular mandate to rule. Unfortunately, Aung San was assassinated in July 1947 and
his successor Thakin Nu (U Nu), whose skills of governance were so inadequate, could
not stay in power for long. He was ousted from power by General Ne Win in 1962.
Therefore, the military came into power and suspended the democratic institutions
including the constitution. The military has been in power in that country ever since and
the struggles for restoration of democracy have been crushed.
16.3 PROBLEMS OF NATION-BUILDING

Bhutan, Tibet and Myanmar are facing the problem of nation building, but the nature of
their problems differs from one another. Tibet is occupied by China and it does not
recognise the existence of Tibetan refugees in contrast to their policies vis-à-vis overseas
Chinese. Again ethnic Hans who have migrated to Tibet in recent years, find difficulties
in integrating with the Tibetans. On the other hand, Bhutan has thousands of settlers from
Nepal and their integration with Drukpas is difficult. Further, Myanmar is witnessing ethnic
conflict ever since its independence. The integration of ethnic Burmans with Rohingyas,
Karens, Kachins and Nagas are intricate issues for political leaders.
16.3.1 Bhutan
The ethnic unrest was witnessed in Bhutan for the first time in 1990, when the southern
Bhutanese (Nepalese), organised demonstrations to protest against the domination by the
Buddhist Drukpas. They demanded greater role in the country’s political and economic
life. The demonstrators resented official attempts to strengthen Bhutanese sense of national
identity derived from Tibet.
The government of Bhutan had earlier, in June 1989, issued an order that all Nepali-
speaking Bhutanese nationals in southern Bhutan are required to wear the national dress
(Gho for men and Kira for Women). Failure to observe the order would first invite a
police warning, then a fine, and lastly disciplinary action. Another order was passed
declaring that the learning of national language Dzongkha is compulsory for southern
Bhutanese. Yet another order was issued to prevent the Bhutanese nationals from getting
married to non-nationals, to stand for election to the National Assembly. All these orders
were disliked by the migrant population from Nepal and this prompted Teknath Rizal to
appeal to the King to stop discrimination against the Nepali speaking people. The king
was unhappy with Rizal’s appeal and the reports are that he has been persecuted on the
grounds of holding pro-Nepali sentiments. The activities of pro-Nepali dissidents are
banned and many have been arrested. A number of ethnic Nepali population have
deserted their homes in Bhutan and have come to Darjeeling, Sikkim or Nepal to carry
on agitations against the royal government in Bhutan for a separate ethnic identity.
16.3.2 Tibet
Tibet, which has been permanently occupied, is under the influence and control of Han
Chinese. In their daily lives, ethnic Tibetans have not gained anything after occupation. The
Chinese authorities continue to arrest political dissidents and there are many instances of
human rights abuses as their cultural and religious rituals and customs are under control.
The completion of their first railway line in 2005 to China increased the fears of the
Tibetans that they would lose more of their culture and that Han Chinese will forever
remain in the dominating position.
In November 2005 when the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson
visited China and expressed concern about separatist groups in Xinjiang and Tibet, the
Chinese authorities declared that anti-human rights strategies were part of the global anti-
terror battle. Sidney Jones, the Asia Director of Human Rights Watch, on the other hand
has argued that the war on terrorism has been a heaven-sent opportunity for some
governments in Asia to justify oppression against government critics.
China has consolidated its grip over Tibet. Education policies are aimed at Tibetan
integration. Although Tibetan has been recognised as the official language, the university
and technical education are uniformly given in Chinese language. China’s western
development campaign is geared to link Lhasa with Beijing by railways and roadways and
migration of Chinese from other provinces to Tibet will certainly dilute the essence of
Tibetan life and culture, which had been the source of inspiration in all parts of the
Himalayan region.
16.3.3 Myanmar
Burma came under military dictatorship in 1962. General Ne Win emerged as the
supreme leader in the new dispensation that believed in the policy of “Burma for
Burmans”. He did not care for other ethnic groups like Rohingyas, Karens, Shans, Chins
and Kachins. He disliked the Indian diaspora and envisaged no role for them in business,
trade or farming. His policy of Burmanisation forced Indians to desert their homes and
emigrate elsewhere. Rohingyas were targeted to the extent that thousands of them
deserted their homes and took shelter in Bangladesh. Shans and Karens have been
persecuted especially in the post-1988 era, when the military gave logging contracts to
Thai merchants in that area and purchased weapons from China to contain ethnic
insurgencies. In short, it can be stated that the military rulers are trying to integrate the
country through terror and intimidation. The ethnic minorities such as Shans, Karens and
Rohingyas are frequent targets of state repression and the most common abuse being their
induction into forced labour. On occasions the villagers are displaced and their lands are
confiscated. A policy of burning homes and planting landmines to terrorise the Karens and
others have been executed.
In March 2006, the Geneva based Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC)
reported that at the end of 2005 Myanmar had the worst internal displacement situation
in Asia. There were 540,000 internally displaced people in Myanmar and approximately
92,000 were hiding in forests. The most popular leader of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi
has been kept under house arrest and the movement for the restoration of democracy has
been ruthlessly suppressed.
16.4 POLITICAL SYSTEM

16.4.1 Bhutan
Bhutan has the system of monarchy, which is introducing the democratic reforms. A new
constitution has been framed, which has made the provision for the establishment of a
democratic constitutional monarchy in accordance with the principle of hereditary succession,
the establishment of a parliament consisting of the monarch, a 25-member National
Council (Upper House) and a 47-member National Assembly (Lower House), with
members of the latter body to be elected by universal secret ballot from constituencies
with approximately equivalent populations, and for two political parties to be represented
in the National Assembly, the election campaigns of which would be funded by the state.
Within the National Council, 20 members - one representing each of the 20 electoral
districts – were to be directly elected by a national vote, with the remaining five ‘eminent
members’ to be selected by royal appointment. According to 2006 royal decree (Kasho),
Prince Jigme Khesar Namgyel is the head of the state, who advocated the establishment
of parliamentary democracy in Bhutan. The two recognised national political parties are
(a) the Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT) led by Lyonpo Jigmi Yozer Thinley and (b)
People’s Democratic party (PDP) headed by Lyonp Sangye.
DPT secured 45 seats in 2008 elections and PDP got the remaining two seats and DPT
leader is now the Prime Minister of Bhutan. The King of Bhutan is keen to provide
enlightened leadership to his country and therefore the powers are divided into legislative,
executive and judicial branches of the government.
16.4.2 Tibet
On the other hand, Tibet is occupied by the Communist China. When the Chinese
invaded Tibet in 1950, Tibetan leaders were forced to sign the “17 Point Agreement” in
1951 surrendering Tibet’s independence to China. However, under that agreement, China
gave a number of undertakings, including promises to maintain the existing political system
of Tibet, to maintain the functions of the Dalai Lama, to protect freedom of religion and
the monasteries and to reform, from compulsory reforms. These undertakings were entirely
violated subsequently. Thus the government of Tibet was entitled to repudiate the
agreement, as they did in 1959. Today, the International commission of Jurists Report
(1997) observes that, “Tibetans are a people under alien subjugation, who are entitled
under international law to the right of self-determination, by which they can freely
determine their political status. The Tibetan people have not exercised this right, which
requires a free and genuine expression of their will”.
All powers of the government in Tibet are centralised in the hands of the Chinese
Communist Party. The Chinese have been oppressive against the Tibetan nationalist dissent
and trying to marginalise Tibetan culture. There have been numerous instances of
destruction of houses belonging to the ethnic Tibetans and forced evictions. There is no
freedom of speech, expression and religion. In 1996, a patriotic education campaign in the
monasteries was initiated wherein monks were called on to denounce the Dalai Lama.
Hundreds of monks were forced to leave their monasteries and many were arrested for
maintaining their allegiance and links with the Dalai Lama.
In fact, in 1964, China had formally removed the position of the Dalai Lama and
Pancham Lama posts and in 1965 the Autonomous Region of Tibet was created. 301
delegates were elected to the first People’s Congress, of whom 226 were Tibetans. But
these exercises could not legitimate the sovereignty of China over Tibet. There is a large
concentration of Tibetan refugees in India, who expose Chinese actions intermittently. The
essence of Tibetan Culture is preserved at Dharamshala (Himachal Pradesh), where the
headquarters of the Tibetan government in exile is located. The Dalai Lama’s office is
placed there and they articulate the response of Tibetans. Several Free Tibet organisations
in India and abroad have connections with Dalai Lama’s office, who believe in larger
Buddhist tradition and culture. To sum up the political system in Tibet, it can be stated
that the Chinese have established an authoritarian system there, which is disliked by the
indigenous people.
16.4.3 Myanmar
Myanmar on the other hand, is under military rule and they have established an
authoritarian political structure to perpetuate their rule. State Peace and Development
Council (SPDC), led by General Than Swe, supports the regimentation in which there is
no respect for human rights and democracy. Thousands of political prisoners are detained
since 1988. Ethnic minorities have been persecuted and men, women and children are
forced to work for the regime to construct railways, roadways, dams and other projects.
There is repression and therefore thousands of people have deserted their homes. State
Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), which usurped power on 18 September
1988 under General Saw Maung, had announced that general elections would be held to
frame a new constitution. The election took place on 27 May 1990 and the National
League for Democracy (NLD), under Aung San Suu Kyi won 392 out of 485 seats but
the military did not respect the mandate of the people. NLD was not given a free hand
to frame a new constitution and restore the democratic system. The national convention,
which was called by the military for a new constitution since 1993, has been adjourned
several times and there is no consensus on various provisions despite the absence of core
NLD leaders. The rulers stress the central role of the military (as permanent representative
of the people) to be enshrined in the new constitution. The key chapters of the
constitution regarding legislature, judiciary and executive at the Union, State and Regional
level are required to include representatives of the military. People’s Assembly must have
one-third members from Tatmadaw (armed forces) and the military must remain above the
purview of civilian authorities. The military rulers are trying to incorporate the provisions
of dwifungsi (dual role of the military) as adopted in Indonesia under Suharto. However,
Suharto had neither abrogated the 1945 constitution, nor the elections for the two houses
of parliament after five years. The military in Myanmar is apprehensive about holding any
elections, as they have no trust of getting popular support through an election. The
political system has generated the violation of basic rights of life, liberty and property.
16.5 FOREIGN POLICIES

Foreign policies are formulated to fulfill domestic requirements and Bhutan and Myanmar
are not much different in their approaches while dealing with their neighbours. Bhutan
attaches importance to India whereas Myanmar attaches importance to China on vital
security and economic matters. Tibet, on the other hand, is occupied by the Communist
China, and the main task of the government is to assimilate Tibetans with Han Chinese.
The Tibetan government in-exile, under the Dalai Lama, is trying to mobilise international
support for self-determination in Tibet. They organise demonstrations, seminars and
workshops to keep the momentum for “Free Tibet” alive.
16.5.1 Bhutan
Bhutan is land-locked and sandwiched between India and China. It uses Indian Territory
for access to sea or gateway to the outside world. The country does not have railway
network or effective roadways because of the mountainous terrain and thick forests.
Bhutanese commercial contacts traditionally have been with India, particularly Ladakh,
Lahaul, Spiti and Kinnaur in the West; Tibet in the North; and Sikkim, Cooch Behar and
Northern Assam in the East. After the occupation of Tibet, Bhutan’s trade with that
country was disrupted. Hence Bhutan has to depend upon India for its trade and transit
with the rest of the world. Its geo-strategic importance for India after the Chinese
occupation of Tibet (1959) and Chinese aggression on India (1962) has been increasing.
Although India and Bhutan had signed a Friendship treaty at Darjeeling on 8 August 1949
through which India promised to respect Bhutan’s independence, and Bhutan had
reciprocated it by assuring that it would maintain the same relationship with India which
existed in the past with the British, certain adjustments were required to keep pace with
the changing international system.
Article Two of the Indo-Bhutan treaty stated that “the government of India undertakes to
exercise no interference in the internal administration of Bhutan. On its part, the
government of Bhutan agrees to be guided by the advice of the government of India in
its external relations”. The Indian leaders were so happy with the outcome of talks in
Bhutan that they decided to return Dewangiri hill strip (Deothan) back to Bhutan as a
goodwill gesture. Indo-Bhutan Treaty was subsequently ratified by King Jigme Wangchuk
of Bhutan and the Governor General of the newly Independent (India) C. Rajagopalachari
of India on 22 September 1949. This treaty also allowed free trade and commerce
between India and Bhutan.
The Indo-Bhutan friendship is the cornerstone of Bhutan’s foreign policy. Bhutan had
always appreciated India’s security concern in the Himalayan region, especially after the
Chinese occupation of Tibet. India’s Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, remarked that “the
protection of the borders and territorial integrity of Bhutan is the primary responsibility of
India. India would consider any aggression on Bhutan as aggression on India”. India thus
had mutual security arrangements like the Indian Military Training Team in Bhutan, which
would keep surveillance over the subversive elements. But insurgents from Assam and
Nepal have been creating problems for the governments of the two countries. The entry
into the Royal Bhutanese Army, which is under the direct command of the King, is
through voluntary recruitment. The Indian military training team provides army-training
facilities. In 2007, the Indo-Bhutanese relations entered a new phase, because a revised
India-Bhutan Friendship Treaty was signed in February and ratified in March, which
ensured greater autonomy to Bhutan in external and military affairs and increased
economic cooperation between the two countries. The Treaty also allowed Bhutan to
import arms from and through India, and guaranteed equality and justice for citizens of
each country when residing in the other.
Bhutan’s economic linkages with India are close. India is the main market for Bhutan’s
apples, oranges, cardamom and timber. Besides, the hydro-electric power produced in
Bhutan is purchased in bulk by India. Chhukha hydroelectric power (HEP) project,
generating 336 MW, provides electricity for domestic consumption and also for export to
India. The Kurichhu HEP and Tala HEP are supplying most of its electricity to India.
Bhutan is slowly trying to diversify its relations with neighbouring countries. In 1985 it
became a member of SAARC and in 2003, Bhutan became a member of the Bay of
Bengal Initiative for multi-sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) and
a signatory to the group’s free trade area. In 2004, Bhutan signed the framework
agreement on the South Asia Free Trade Area (SAFTA), which is likely to be fully
operational by 2016. It has opened dialogues with China. In 1998, the Ministers of
Foreign Affairs of China and Bhutan signed an official interim agreement to maintain peace
and harmony in the border areas and to observe the status quo of the border existing
before 1959. The contentious areas were Doglam, Sinchulumba and Dramana areas.
16.5.2 Myanmar
Burma (Myanmar), under the democratic rule (1948-62), pursued a policy of neutrality
and Non-Alignment. It was a founder member of the Non-Aligned Movement (MAM) in
1961. However, when the military usurped power in 1962, it introduced changes in
domestic and foreign policies. Initially Burma was isolationist under Ne Win and it sought
to exclude foreign influences for almost a decade but later it realised the importance of
foreign contacts and investments.
Myanmar, together with northern Thailand and northwestern Laos, has been known as
Golden Triangle, where cultivation of opium has been substantial. The bulk of the opium
and drugs are supplied in the Western markets. Burma, under Ne Win, began to give an
impression to the UN and the US that it would suppress the cultivation of opium and in
1976 took part in the drug enforcement programmes, but it turned out to be an empty
promise. Ne Win had to resign in 1988 but it did not usher in the era of democracy.
General Saw Maung came into power who had ruthlessly suppressed people’s movement
for democracy. Burma stood isolated at the international level during 1988-91, when
China started pouring support to the military rulers. The two countries signed cross border
trade agreement, which opened the Burmese market and resource to the Chinese.
In 1990 China became the major supplier of consumer goods to Myanmar. In 1991
China became Myanmar’s main supplier of weapons, sales of which were valued at more
than US$1000 million. Myanmar purchased fighter aircraft from China to curb insurgency
problems. China improved roads and bridges and the Chinese firms became important in
timber industry. Various places in Myanmar have become tourist centres for gambling,
drugs and prostitution. The Chinese Yuan is an acceptable currency there. The Chinese
Prime Minister, Li Peng paid a visit to Myanmar in 1994 and signed some agreements
for providing soft loans for building infrastructure which included the construction of air
base at Mandalaya, a highway to connect Mandalaya to Yunnan, a port at Hanggyi and
a passage through Irrawady delta to Bay of Bengal. Another agreement worth US$400
million for naval frigates, jet aircraft, tanks, APCS etc was also signed. Hence China has
emerged as an important strategic partner.
Myanmar became a member of ASEAN in 1997. As the member countries of ASEAN
wanted constructive engagement with the military rulers, they supported Burma at the
regional level. They wanted to prevent Myanmar to be totally dependent on the Chinese.
Myanmar was subsequently offered the membership of ARF also, but ASEAN has
proved ineffective to change the pro-China tilt of Myanmar. Thailand has been one of the
important protagonists of the constructive engagement. After 1988 it was a major source
of foreign investments. The SLORC had granted licences to Thai business interests to
exploit raw materials in Burma, especially teak and timber, in return for foreign exchange.
Plans were to construct a bridge across Sai River, which would facilitate communication
between the two countries for a gas pipeline to Thailand. However, the efforts of Thailand
and other ASEAN leaders for constitutional processes in Myanmar have been a frustrating
experience.
India has been trying to cultivate relationship with Myanmar because of their association
in ASEAN, ARF and BIMSTEC and also because of its policy of Look East. It has
been developing roadways to link Myanmar and Tamu-Moreh road, which has become
vibrant for people-to-people contacts. The project to construct other roadways at
Mizoram and Nagaland frontiers with Myanmar are in progress. The joint collaboration to
explore oil and gas are in the pipeline and initiatives have been taken to promote strategic
cooperation in the Andaman region.
16.6 MOVEMENT FOR REFORMS

There are undercurrents for reforms in Bhutan, Tibet and Myanmar because of several
domestic and external challenges. The culture generated by globalisation in the 21st
century demands liberal democratic system, free trade, human rights and environmental
protection. The developing countries have to set standards to cope with the challenges
and introduce reforms accordingly to exploit the opportunities in the new world order.
Again there is also a threat of international terrorism led by Al Qaida, Taliban or the like.
A new culture has to be evolved in order to face those challenges through political
system, educational curriculum and ideals so that the younger generation remains immune
from the virus of communal and fanatic elements.
16.6.1 Bhutan
Bhutan has Buddhists and Hindus who argue the importance of their identity and culture
and there is a need to develop respect for multiculturalism. The country has been facing
ethnic unrest and there were several demonstrations by the ethnic Nepalese in 1990 to
protest against the domination of Drukpas. King Jigme Dorji Wangchuk (1952-72) and
his successor Jigme Singye Wangchuk have been sensitive to political developments in the
country and have introduced reforms. The King was responsible for the establishment of
National Assembly, Royal Advisory Council, Council of Ministers in 1950s and the system
of Constitutional Monarchy in 2008. The king also wanted to nurture the party-system in
the country, to keep an effective watch on legislative and executive bodies and on the
expenditure of the major political parties that are funded by the government treasury.
In 1990-91, a number of ethnic Nepalese left Bhutan and came as refugees to Jhapa
district in eastern Nepal. For Bhutanese refugees the UNHCR also arranged a relief
programme. The number of refugees in that camp started growing by the number of ethnic
Nepalese not only from Bhutan but also by Indian territories of Assam. Bhutan People’s
Party began to articulate the grievances of the so-called Bhutanese refugees to pressurise
the government for more concessions and reforms. The king was sensitive to address the
grievances but repeatedly said that his government could not tolerate pressures for change
if they were based on intimidation and violence. The violence in Samtse, Chhukha,
Tsirang, Sarpang and Gelephu in 1990s had a disturbing impact on the political system.
However, the monarchy has been accommodative and is trying to work out a middle path
for peaceful coexistence. Bhutan is expected to change gradually as the constitutional
system has been evolved only recently, which is likely to support pragmatic reforms. But
the victories of Maoist forces in Nepal and the growing Chinese influence in the region
have empowered southern Bhutanese. These issues have to be addressed in the new
dispensation. Bhutan has always tried to prove itself as a model of welfare state where
all the citizens have the right to free education and free health care facilities.
16.6.2 Tibet
Tibet offers a different case for reforms. Although the Tibetan movement revolves around
the preservation and promotion of Tibetan Culture and about three lakh Tibetan refugees
struggling in India have ambition to return back to their homeland, the developments in
Tibet under the Chinese reign are not favourable. China has been advocating autonomy
for Tibet in the name of “one country, two systems”, but substantial steps in that direction
have not been taken. For any political solution in Tibet, the presence and consent of the
Dalai Lama is required. The Dalai Lama may be keen to visit Tibet with the support of
the Chinese to find out an amicable solution but authorities in China are unwilling to invite
him. However, the Chinese authorities are so afraid of the popularity of the Dalai Lama
in Tibet, that they block every proposal of bringing the Dalai Lama for conflict resolution
in Tibet.
According to the 2000 census, Tibet has a population of 2.62 million of which 2.42
million were Tibetans. Most of the indigenous people find their spirits stifled under the
Chinese occupation. They aspire to have the functions of old monasteries restored, the
role of the ousted Buddhist monks back and above all the return of their most revered
leader, the Dalai Lama to Tibet. China is not willing to concede to such demands. There
have been demonstrations against Chinese rule in Tibet and outside Tibet. There were
mass demonstrations in Lhasa in 1987 against the Chinese rule, but that was suppressed.
On the eve of Olympics (2008) in China, there were demonstrations once again but
China did not show any sensitivity to address the grievances of the Tibetans. China is
pursuing the policy of massive campaign against Tibetan nationalism. Many Tibetans,
particularly the political detainees, are deprived of even the elementary safeguards of due
process of law.
Further, the educational system needs to be reformed. The exclusive use of Chinese
language in middle and secondary schools discourage children; so there is low enrolment
rate and a high drop-out rate among Tibetans. Tibetan language teaching has low priority,
with the result that Tibetan illiteracy rate is three times the Chinese national average. The
objective of Chinese is to generate respect for Han cultural identity, language and values
at the cost of Tibetan language, culture and identity. Again Tibetans have no right to
homing in TAR and there is a continuing destruction of Tibetan neighbourhood, forced
evictions and demolition of their homes. The Han Chinese are given preference in housing
policies and Tibetans are discriminated. The Chinese interference and repression of
religious freedom and activity in Tibet have been painful. In 1996 China started “patriotic
education campaign” in the monasteries. Thus monks were called on to denounce the
Dalai Lama. Hundreds of monks were persecuted and forced to leave their monasteries
and many more arrested for not understanding the questions of Chinese officials.
16.6.3 Myanmar
Myanmar is one of the most authoritarian and repressive regimes, where any norms and
values of the civilised society are disliked. The civilian leaders campaigning for restoration
of democracy are detained, tortured and persecuted. It is one of those countries, where
government abolished private e-mail service and Internet is totally banned. Illegal possession
of a fax machine or modem is punishable with seven to 15 years’ imprisonment. Naturally
there is movement for reforms, but the military rulers have been able to suppress them
with an iron hand. There are about 1300 to 1400 political prisoners detained since 1988
and 70 NLD leaders have died while campaigning for restoration of democracy. The most
respected popular leader of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi is under house arrest and
strategies are evolved to delay any election for a popular mandate. (Has been released
now).
There is also the difficult question of ethnic minorities, such as Karen, Shan and
Rohingyas. They are frequent targets of state repression and violations. Sometimes they
are forced to flee to neighbouring countries. Although the military has been calling for the
meetings of national convention to finalise the broad contours of the constitution, it has
been postponed because the rulers are not determined to restore democracy. It is well
known that a roadmap for democratic reforms had been evolved under the leadership of
General Khin Nyunt, but he is under house arrest at present. The respect for individual
life, liberty and property, is more or less absent; the military wants to remain in power
perpetually. Hence, Myanmar is witnessing silent movement for reforms.
16.7 RELEVANCE OF GANDHISM IN TIBET, MYANMAR

AND BHUTAN
There is a deep impact of Buddhist philosophy in the social life of the people in Tibet,
Bhutan and Myanmar. The broad meaning of Buddhism is not only confined to Sangha
but it covers all aspects of humanism, internationalism and eternal peace. Mahatma Gandhi
has taken numerous ideas from Buddhism and hence his political philosophy has relevance
for the struggling masses in the Buddhist societies.
Gandhi always opposed the oppression and subjugation policies of the colonial masters.
His tools to oppose the oppressive system were truth and non-violence. Lord Buddha
had also opposed the political system of King Ajatashatru of Magadh. He was opposed
to rigid rituals and animal sacrifices. He preached austerity and brotherhood. He had a
great appeal on the social and political life for centuries. Similarly Gandhi wanted to
transform social and political values of the masses in such a way that the oppressive
regimes would crumble into pieces.
Gandhi had given the ideals of Rama Rajya, which signified great respect for human
values. It was a system in which there was to be no oppressor and no oppressed. His
Rama Rajya was to give equal opportunities to all the people and set an example of civil
society worth emulating. The powers of the government were to be decentralised and all
the villages were to be self-ruled and vibrant. Gandhi was also an exponent of the
concept of “Unity in diversity”, where all the ethnic groups and races were to be treated
without any discrimination.
Tibet is under an alien system. The Communist China has occupied it and any opposition
to its governance is ruthlessly suppressed. Strategically the government has superior power
and the changes cannot come through violent means. Similarly, Myanmar is firmly under
the control of the military and every move against it by the opposition forces is unable
to weaken the hold of the military. However, if there is proper mobilisation of public
opinion and if there is united action to oppose the imposed political system, the
oppressive establishment would be compelled to address their grievances. All this requires
the support of an able leadership and leaders who can lead the people for renaissance
and reformation. The Gandhian path is difficult to pursue, but in view of the presence of
well-armed and strong adversary, this is the only pragmatic alternative to change the
society and politics in those countries.
Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement, civil disobedience movement or Quit India movement

against colonial rulers were non-violent, and successful to arouse the masses. It generated
patriotic ideas to throw out the colonial rule. The essential ways through which the
movements were launched were not only through demonstrations but also through
appropriate literature, dance, drama, short stories and various other activities. The religion
and religious symbols were extensively used by Gandhiji to mobilise support. Although the
dissident leaders in Tibet and Myanmar are using religion and religious symbols, the
political masters are unwilling to give up. The international society has not been able to
influence China to hold the act of self-determination in Tibet or free and fair election in
Myanmar. Thus the civil societies in those countries have to build up pressure for
democratic changes and peaceful coexistence.
16.7 SUMMARY
Tibet, Bhutan and Myanmar constitute different political systems and foreign policies
inspite of many similarities in terms of culture and religious systems. All the three of them
have been following different modes of struggles to assert their freedom and sovereignty.
Nation-building often involves a great amount of statesmanship, community work, cooperation
and a larger vision of individual entity. Violence has often been witnessed in the course
of these struggles but it is to be noted that the Gandhian way of mass mobilisation is still
relevant. Truth and non-violence generate favourable environment for political resolution
and bring about positive outcomes. Thus Gandhian method of non-cooperation, mass
mobilisation and non-violent means becomes relevant for conflict resolution.

1. Analyse the characteristics of socio-political life in Tibet.
2. Examine the nature of ethnic conflict in Bhutan.
3. Discuss the role of military in the politics of Myanmar.
4. Evaluate the relevance of Gandhi for democratic movements in Myanmar.
5. What is the common factor in the society and politics of Tibet, Bhutan and
Myanmar?
SUGGESTED READINGS
Goyal, Narendra., Political History of Himalayan States-Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim and
Nagaland since 1947, New Delhi, 1966.
Hla Min, Lt. Col., Political Situation of Myanmar and its role in the Region, Yangon,
1999
Rajeshwar., “Courting the Burmese Junta”, Economic and Political Weekly, 16 September,
2000, pp.3393-94.
Norbu, Dawa., Red Star over Tibet, London,1974
Norbu, Dawa., “China’s Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, 1978-90", Pacific Affairs, 1991,
pp.65-78.
Mathou, Thierry., “Bhutan in 2001 At the Cross road”, Asian Survey, January-February,
2002.
Warikoo, K., Himalayan Frontiers of India, London, 2009.
Dhondup, K., Tibet’s influence in Ladakh and Bhutan, The Tibet Journal, Dharamshala,
1977.
Monique, Skidmore., Burma at the turn of twenty first century, Honolulu, 2005.
Lintner, Bertil., Outrage: Burma’s Struggle for Democracy, Hong Kong, 1989
Harris, Ian., Buddhism and Politics in Twentieth Century Asia, London, 1999.
Kharat, Rajesh., “Indo-Bhutan Relations”, in K. Warikoo, ed., Himalayan Frontiers of
India, London, 2009.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Aubert, V., “Competition and Dissensus: Two Types of Conflict and of Conflict Resolution”,
Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 7, 1963, pp. 26-42.
Aubert, V., “Courts and Conflict Resolution”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 11,
1967, pp. 40-51.
Azar, E.E, and Burton J.W., (eds), International Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice,
Wheatsheaf, Brighton, 1986.
Banks, M., (ed), Conflict in World Society: A New Perspective on International Relations,
Wheatsheaf, Brighton, 1984.
Bercovitch, J., Resolving International Conflicts: The Theory and Practice of Mediation,
Lynne Rienner, Boulder, 1996.
Bercovitch, J., Social Conflicts and Third Parties: Strategies of Conflict Resolution,
Westview Press, Colorado, 1984.
Bercovitch, Jacob and Jeffrey, Z. Rubin., (eds), Mediation in International Relations:
Multiple Approaches to Conflict Management, Macmillan, London, 1992.
Bondurant, J.V., (ed.), Conflict: Violence and Nonviolence, Aldine- Atherton, Chicago,
1971.
Bondurant, J.V., “Satyagraha Versus Duragraha: The Limits of Symbolic Violence” in
Ramachandran and Mahadevan., (eds.), Gandhi: His Relevance for our Times, pp. 99-
112.
Boserup, A, and Mack, A., War Without Weapons: Non- Violence in National Defense,
Schocken, New York, 1974.
Boulding, K.E., Conflict and Defence: A General Theory, Harper Bros., New York, 1962.
Boulding, K.E., Stable Peace, Texas University Press, Austin, 1978.
Cenker, W., “Gandhi and Creative Conflict”, Humanitas, 10 May, 1974, pp 159-70.
Dalton, D., “Gandhi and Roy: the Interaction of ideologies in India” in Ray., (ed.),
Gandhi, India and the World: An International Symposium, 1970, pp. 156-70.
Desai, M., A Righteous Struggle: A Chronicle of the Ahmedabad Textile Labourer’s Fight
for Justice, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1951.
Desai, Mahadev., Righteous Struggle, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad 1971.
Deutsch, M., Conflicts: Productive and Destructive, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 25,
1969, pp. 7-41.
Deutsch, M., The Resolution of Conflict, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1973.
Diwakar, R.R., Saga of Satyagraha, Gandhi Peace Foundation, New Delhi, 1969.
Suggested Readings 179
Duffield, Mark., Post-Modern Conflicts: Warlords, Post Adjustment States and private
protection, Civil Wars, 1998, 1: 65-102.
Elton, McNeil., (ed), The Nature of Human Conflict, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall,
New Jersey, 1965.
Enders, Walter, and Toda Sandler., Terrorism, Theory and Applications, North Holland,
Amsterdam, 1996.
Falk, Richard A., Robert, C. Johansen, and Samuel, S. Kim, (eds.), Constitutional
Foundations of World Peace, State University New York Press, Albany, New York,
1993.
Falk, Richard A, Samuel S. Kim, and Saul H. Mendlovitz., (eds), United Nations and a
Just World Order, Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1991.
Folberg, Boulder, and J. Taylor A., Meditation: A Comprehensive Resolving Conflicts
Without Litigation, Jossey Francisco, California, 1984.
Fox, H., Arbitration, International Disputes- The Legal Aspects, Europa Publications,
London, 1972.
Galtung, Johan., Peace by Peaceful Means, Peace and Conflict, Development and
Civilization, Sage Publications, London, 1996.
Gray, J.G., On Understanding Violence Philosophically and other Essays, Harper, New
York, 1970.
Gregg, R. B., “The Best Solver of Conflicts”, Gandhi Marg, vol. 6, 1962, pp.116-121.
Gregg, Richard B., The Power of Non- Violence, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad,
1960.
Guyde, Mallac., Seven steps to Global Changes: Gandhi’s Message for Today, Ocean
Tree Book, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 1987.
Hirshleifer, Jack., Theorizing Adult Conflict, Amsterdam, North Holland, 1995.
Holsti, Kalevi, J., Peace and War: Armed Conflict and International Order, 1648-1989,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991.
Johnson, D.H.N., International Arbitration- Back in favour? Yearbook of World Affairs,
1980.
Johnson, L. Gunnar., Conflicting Concepts of Peace in Contemporary Peace Studies,
Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1976.
Kleiboer, Marieke., “Understanding Success and Failure of International Mediation”,
Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 40, No. 2, June 1996.
Klineberg, O., Tensions: Affecting International Understanding, Routledge, New York,
1964.
Kolb, D.M., The Mediators, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1983.

Kriesberg, Lowis., International Conflict Resolution, New Haven, Yale University Press,
Connecticut, 1992.
Kurt, Lewin., Resolving Social Conflict, Harper Bros., New York, 1948.
Lanza del Vasto, J.J., Warriors of Peace: Writings on the Technique of Nonviolence,
Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1974.
Laszol, E. et al., Goals for Mankind, Dutton, New York, 1977.
Lewin, K., Resolving Social Conflicts, Souvenir Press, London, 1973.
Mahadevan, T.K., (ed), Truth and Nonviolence: A UNESCO Symposium on Gandhi,
Gandhi Peace Foundation, New Delhi, 1970.
McNeil, Elton B., (ed), The Nature of Human Conflict, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall,
New Jersey, 1965.
Merrills, J.G., International Dispute Settlement, Sweet and Maxwell, London, 1984.
Mitchell, C.R, and K. Webb., (ed.), New Approaches to International Mediation,
Greenwood Press, London, 1998.
Mitchell, Christopher R., Handbook of Conflict Resolution: An Analytical Problem Solving
Approach, London, 1996.
Murphy, G., Human Nature and Enduring Peace, Reynal and Hitchcock, New York,
1945.
Murthy, K. Satchidananda and A.C. Banquet, Studies in Problems of Peace, Asia
Publishing House, Bombay, 1960.
Naess, A., Gandhi and Group Conflict: An Exploration of Satyagraha, Universitetsforlaget,
Oslo.
Naess, A., Gandhi and the Nuclear Age, Bedminster Press, Totowa, New Jersey.
Nicholson, M., Conflict Analysis, English University Press, London, 1970.
Oberschall, Anthony., Social Conflict and Social Movements, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice
Hall, New Jersey, 1965.
Pauling, Linus., World Encyclopaedia of Peace, Pergamon Press, Oxford, London, 1986.
Pelton, L., The Psychology of Non- Violence, Pergamon Press, New York, 1974.
Power, Paul F., Gandhi on World Affairs, George Allen and Unwin, London, 1961.
Pradhan, Ram Chandra., “Peace Education and Human Rights” in Laszlo, Erwin and Yoo,
Jong Youl (eds.), World Encyclopaedia for Peace, Pergamon Press, Oxford, London,
1986.
Raj, Krishna., “Non- Violence, War and Peace”, Quest 42, July- September, 1964.
Suggested Readings 181
Rao, A.W., “Gandhi the Writer: A Prefatory Note”, Modern Review, Vol. 134, 1974, pp.
120-30.
Raymond, Aron., Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations, London Press,
London, 1966.
Rolland, Romain., Mahatma Gandhi: The Man Who Became One with the Universal
Being, Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of
India, New Delhi, 1990.
Sanders, P., International Arbitration, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1967.
Schelling, Thomas C., The Strategy of Conflict, Galaxy Books, New York, 1963.
Shakhnazarov, G., The Coming World Order, Progress, Moscow, 1984.
Sharp, Gene., The Politics of Non-Violent Action: The Dynamics of Non-Violent Action
Part III, Porter Sarget Publishers, Boston, 1973.
Shridharani, K., War Without Violence, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bombay, 1962.
Siegel, S, and Fouraker, L.E., Bargaining and Group Decision Making, McGraw Hill,
New York, 1960.
Sorokin, P. A., The Ways of Power and Love, Gateway, Chicago, 1967.
Swingle, P. G., The Structure of Conflict, Academic Press, New York, 1970.
Tomasic, R., “Mediation as an Alternative to Adjudication: Rhetoric and Reality in the
Neighbourhood Justice Movement”, Working Paper no. 2, Dispute Processing Research
Program, Monograph, University of Wisconsin Law School, 1980.
Touval, S, and I.W.Zartman., (eds), International Mediation in Theory and Practice,
Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1985, p.255.
Weber, Thomas., “Legal Ethics/Gandhian Ethics”, Gandhi Marg, Vol. 7, 1986, pp.692-
706.
Young, Oran R., The Intermediaries Third Parties in International Crises, Princeton
University Press, Princeton, 1967.
Zartman, I.Williams., (ed), Elusive Peace. Negotiating an End to Civil Wars, Brookings,
Washington D.C., 1995.
(Compiled by Ms.Mamta Tyagi, Research and Teaching Assistant, School of
Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies, Indira Gandhi National Open University,
New Delhi)

MGPE-008 Gandhian Approach To Peace and Conflict Resolution

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

MGPE-008 Gandhian Approach To Peace and Conflict Resolution

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MGPE-008 Gandhian Approach To Peace and Conflict Resolution

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIT 1 UNDERSTANDING PEACE

1.2 Understanding the Concept of Peace

1.3 State and Civil Society as Instruments of Peace

1.5 Peace Movements in the post- Second World War phase

 The role of state and civil society as instruments of peace

1.2 UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF PEACE

1.2.1 Peace Traditions

1.2.2 Peace Movements

1.2.4 Peace-building Approaches

1.2.5 Conflict Transformation

1.3 STATE AND CIVIL SOCIETY AS INSTRUMENTS OF

1.4 GANDHI AS AN AMBASSADOR OF PEACE

1.4.1 Gandhi’s twin-principles of Peace: Truth and Non-violence

1.5 PEACE MOVEMENTS IN THE POST-SECOND

1.6 UN’S RECOGNITION OF GANDHIAN PRINCIPLES

1.8 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

2.2 Understanding Tolerance and Harmony

2.3 Community and International Levels

2.4 Untouchability: An Obstacle to Harmonious Society

2.8 Forgiveness as an act of Non-violence

2.2 UNDERSTANDING TOLERANCE AND HARMONY

2.2.1 Importance of Tolerance and Harmony

2.2.2 Seeds of Intolerance

2.2.3 Dealing with Intolerance

2.2.4 Tolerance and Harmony at State Level

2.3 COMMUNITY AND INTERNATIONAL LEVELS

2.3.1 Role of Education in making Harmonious Society

2.3.2 Foundation of Democracy

2.3.3 Moral Virtue

2.3.4 Religious Tolerance

2.4 UNTOUCHABILITY: AN OBSTACLE IN

2.5 LIMITATION OF TOLERANCE

2.6 INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR TOLERANCE

2.7 COUNTERING INTOLERANCE

2.7.2 Access to Information

2.7.3 Individual Awareness

2.7.4 Local Solutions

2.8 FORGIVENESS AS AN ACT OF NON-VIOLENCE

2.10 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

3.2 Peace as Social Harmony

3.3 People’s Participation in Peace Process

3.4 Non-violent Army or Shanti Sena and Peace Committees

3.2 PEACE AS SOCIAL HARMONY

3.2.1 Basis of Community Peace

3.2.2 Gandhi’s Vision of Community Peace

3.2.4 Non-violence and Forgiveness

3.2.5 Focus on the Individual

3.3 PEOPLE’S PARTICIPATION IN PEACE PROCESS

3.3.1 Equal Opportunity for all

3.3.2 Role of Political Freedom

3.3.3 Reform Development Model

3.3.4 Settle Internal Differences

3.4 NON-VIOLENT ARMY OR SHANTI SENA AND

3.5 VALUE-BASED CULTURE AND MORAL SOLUTION

3.6 A CRITICAL ESTIMATE OF THE GANDHIAN

Indian Constitution incorporated as its main commitment the Chapter on Fundamental

3.8 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

4.2 International Peace Systems