Ayodhya issue: Sri Sri has a tremendous track record of conflict negotiation
Sri Sri has moved with alacrity in the past two months and has met many of the stakeholders and litigants.
The past few weeks have seen the building up of a momentum for an out-of-court settlement for the 500-year-old Ram Mandir - Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya.
Ayodhya in Sanskrit means a place where no war has happened. But if one looks closely at the last three decades of Indian politics, one would reckon that Ayodhya has become a battleground of India's most tricky political battles. Many elections have been fought wherein a grand temple in Ayodhya has been in contention. In a sense, the power battle has shifted to those who are for building a temple, and those who are against it.
In
the
center
of
the
current
round
of
negotiations
is
Sri
Sri
Ravishankar.
Sri
Sri
has
moved
with
alacrity
in
the
past
two
months
and
has
met
many
of
the
stakeholders
and
litigants.
Since
the
temple
the
movement
has
been
such
a
central
theme
in
virtually
all
general
elections
over
the
last
30
years,
it
is
no
wonder
that
the
mediation
move
has
met
with
mixed
reactions
by
political
parties
and
vested
interest
groups.
One needs to understand what is causing this immense rundown even before the various round of conversations have begun towards the resolution of Ayodhya dispute.
The
stakes
in
the
current
round
are
high.
If
there
is
a
mutual
resolution,
it
may
wrest
away
the
raison
d'être
of
many
far-right
Hindu
and
Muslim
bodies.
Let
us
assume
for
a
moment
that
Sri
Sri's
efforts
have
no
steam
in
them,
then
why
are
these
right-wing
bodies
vehemently
opposing
them?
Is
it
the
fear
that
if
there
is
a
resolution,
there
would
not
be
any
more
avenues
to
polarize
the
country
on
religious
lines?
These
groups
continue
to
be
seen
stuck
in
a
specific
era
by
younger
members
of
their
respective
communities,
and
that's
where
Sri
Sri
and
his
Art
of
Living
find
maximum
support.
Detractors, in the meantime, are trying to play down Sri Sri's tremendous track record of conflict negotiation and resolution across the globe. Be it the Gujjar agitation in Rajasthan, or working through the Bodo crisis in Assam or bringing peace to North Eastern states like Manipur, Arunachal, and Assam or getting militants from Kashmir Valley to surrender and join the mainstream. Above maybe just a few instances which the author is aware of.
Far
from
home,
we
have
the
example
of
the
Colombian
government's
peace
treaty
with
FARC
(the
rebel
guerrillas
who
waged
an
internal
war
in
Colombia
that
took
2
million
lives
and
left
7
million
homeless)
in
which
Sri
Sri
played
a
significant
role.
The
FARC
resolution
was
no
mean
feat
and
had
a
far-reaching
impact.
Just
a
few
months
into
the
peace
process
initiated
by
Sri
Sri,
FARC
has
decided
to
lay
down
arms
and
join
mainstream
politics
and
is
now
looking
forward
to
supporting
democracy
after
a
five-decade
armed
revolution
in
Colombia.
In
all
the
above
instances,
the
warring
groups
came
together
in
negotiation
knowing
fully
well
Sri
Sri's
reputation
as
an
impartial
negotiator,
and
that
the
agreement
reached
would
serve
both
sides.
In
the
current
round
of
Ayodhya
negotiations,
the
litigants
are
relying
on
the
same
fairness
and
impartiality
which
Sri
Sri
brings
to
the
table.
Earlier this year CJI Khehar, while hearing Ram temple dispute at Supreme court suggested an amicable out-of-court solution to the conflict based on negotiations. While the naysayers continue to hope that there is no resolution to the vexed issue, the Apex court's wisdom on this matter needs to be viewed with more seriousness.
The Apex court understands that the issue has created fissures in society and any judgment passed by any number of judges would not settle the discord at the emotional level in the two communities. And a decision which does not heal the wounds of any community is a seed for further unrest and conflict between communities. Sri Sri has said that we should stop looking at this problem in the time frame of a few years. If there is a court-mandated solution, first of all, it will create profound emotional grief to one of the communities, particularly at the grassroots level. Secondly, it will keep the option of future legal and legislative review open, if not now, in few decades from today.
The Supreme Court will soon start daily hearings of Ayodhya issue from December 2017. The whole hearing and the ruling process may take us up to 2019. The year of the election. Unfortunately, a court ruled decision would once again turn Ram temple into an election issue.
In the 21st century India, we must look at having development as an agenda for election rather than polarizing ones. In this context, Sri Sri's mediation is at the right time and place.
As for the silent majority, it is time for us to be vocal and lend a supporting hand to the voices of peace and reason. 2018 may be a new dawn for us if we can leave behind the Ayodhya temple issue with an amicable resolution.
(Vijay Dwivedi is an engineer by profession and writer by passion.He currently lives in Singapore and continues to keep a keen eye on Indian and regional political and foreign affairs.)
OneIndia News