Babri Masjid in Ayodhya

[Timbuk2]

Ayodhya verdict: Indian security forces braced for court decision

the guardian

Hundreds of thousands of police and paramilitaries have been deployed across India to prevent violence following a long-awaited legal decision on the disputed holy site at Ayodhya, in the north of the country, due today.

The judgment will determine whether Hindus or Muslims have the right to worship on the ruins of a 16th-century mosque in the city. In 1992 the mosque, known as the Babri Masjid, was torn down by Hindu extremists, sparking some of India's worst religious violence since independence. The reaction to today's decision is being seen as a crucial test of India's commitment to secularism and the rule of law.

"The way the country handles this, the aftermath, will have a profound impact on the evolution of our country," Manmohan Singh, the prime minister, said this month.

With only three days before the Commonwealth Games open in Delhi, today's decision poses a new security threat to the athletes and dignitaries already in India. More, including Prince Charles, are due to arrive before the opening ceremony this weekend. About 10,000 tourists are also expected, despite recent bad publicity over hygiene, disease and terrorist threats.

The legal dispute over the site of the Babri Masjid in Ayodha, 350 miles east of the capital, has run for 60 years. Hindu community representatives in India have argued they should be allowed to build a huge temple to the god Ram where the mosque once stood. Local Muslim bodies want permission to rebuild the demolished 16th-century mosque. Repeated attempts at mediation have failed.

Nearly 2,000 people died in the rioting that followed the demolition of the mosque in 1992. A decade later, Ayodhya was linked to renewed violence in which more than 1,000 people were killed.

Authorities say they are ready to deal with any trouble. Mass text messaging in India has been stopped to prevent organisation of mobs and the circulation of inflammatory rumours. In some states, schools have been shut. Huge numbers of security personnel have been mobilised, co-ordinated by a special cell in the home ministry in Delhi.

In the southern state of Karnataka alone 50,000 police are being deployed. In north-western Rajasthan, more than 20,000 will be assigned to potential troublespots. Others are being kept as an airborne reserve.

Political leaders from all factions have appealed for calm, raising hopes that a repeat of previous violence can be avoided. Sonia Gandhi, president of the centre-left Congress party, which heads the coalition government, yesterday asked Indians to accept the judgment, to be delivered by the Allahabad high court. "I request you keep faith in the Indian judiciary and maintain peace, mutual respect and brotherhood at any cost. Emotional unity is the greatest strength of India," Gandhi said.

Analysts in Indian newspapers have stressed that no political party in India – at either state nor national level – stands to gain from violence.

The original demolition of the mosque and subsequent violence has been blamed on senior politicians from the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party (BJP). However leaders of the BJP, now in opposition, have recently called for the legal process to be respected.

More hardline elements among the Hindu nationalist movement have also pledged to remain within the law. "All Indians should pray for peace. Peace is very necessary for humans," Swami Chakrapani, president of the All India Hindu Mahasabha organisation, said.

Mohan Bhagwat, leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh, a Hindu paramilitary organisation, said its members would "be striving to see that there will be a grand Ram temple on that site" but their response would "be within the limits of law and constitution".

Key members of India's 150 million Muslim minority also pledged to remain calm. Zafaryab Jilani, of the Sunni Central Waqf Board, said Muslims would react "in a very cool manner". He added: "We will try not to be provoked. There may be some small incidents but we don't expect large scale disturbances."

An appeal to the Indian supreme court after today's decision is almost certain.

Hindus first protested that the Ayodhya mosque, built in 1528 by the Mughal emperor Babur, had been erected at the birthplace of Rama more than 150 years ago. The conflict was aggravated in 1949 when idols of Rama appeared in the mosque. Hindu extremist groups and the BJP then exploited the issue to build mass popular support in the 1980s.

The passions roused by the issue have threatened India's multi-ethnic, secular democracy, many have claimed. Analysts say however that India has now changed enormously since the early 1990s with new economic aspirations stronger than ever before and religious identities weaker. "The whole mood has changed," said Mahesh Rangarajan, a political analyst at Delhi University.

P Chidambaram, the home minister, said India had moved on. "Especially people who were born after 1992.They have a very different world view," he said.

Hadn't heard that this verdict was happening today until I was speaking to my development staff in Pune and Hyderabad this morning.

They have all been given the afternoon off to get home and safe before the expected trouble and rioting.

Hundreds of thousands of police and paramilitaries? Scary stuff.

~

Seems like the site needs to be shared.

Temple Mount in Old Jerusalem is considered a holy site to both Islam and Judaism, and is shared to a greater or lesser extent by followers of both, is it not.

Though I guess using that as an example of peaceful religious cooperation isn't suitable, but I can't think of any other examples of holy sites shared between different major religions?

Religion of one persuasion or another is a way of life to almost all in India. This verdict will have horrible repercussions whichever way it goes I fear.

[Loki]

Many of the sites in Bethlehem are shared between numerous Christian denominations (most of whom don't particularly get along).

Interestingly enough, I've been reading about "Institutionalized Riot Networks" in India for one of my classes, and it seems that at least the Hindu nationalists intentionally keep tensions at a certain level, occasionally allowing them to spill over, to maintain communal violence on the agenda and therefore to get popular support.

[Dreadnaught]

...which is pretty terrifying.

[Wraith]

After a 60-year debate, the disputed land around the Babri mosque in Ayodhya, India, will be divided into three parts, following a decision by the high court of India.

In the 16th century, the Babri mosque was erected at the site, named for Babar, the first Mughal emperor of India. Babar, a Muslim, supposedly ordered the construction of the mosque.
Many Hindu worshipers believe the mosque was built at the site of the birthplace of the Hindu god Ram.

In the 20th century, there were a number of clashes between Hindu and Muslim worshipers at the site. In 1949, Hindus allegedly brought statues of their deities into the mosque in the middle of the night and in the following days, a huge number of Hindus tried to worship there. The High Court ruled to lock the mosque, closing it to both Muslims and Hindus.

In 1986, the locks were removed and Hindus began to worship there. They set up a temporary temple inside the mosque.

Amid a rising tide of anti-Muslim sentiment, in 1992 huge crowds gathered and demolished the mosque. A wave of violence swept over India as Muslims and Hindus rioted. Thousands were killed in one of the largest clashes between Muslims and Hindus since India's independence from Britain in 1947.

An investigation into the riots began in 1992. Eighteen years later, India has a verdict.

A three-judge panel ruled the land should be divided among three groups. Ram Lalla, a Hindu group that worships Ram and tends to the idol of the god at the center of the site, will control one third of the area, including the center. Its statue of Ram will be allowed to remain where it is.

The other two thirds of the land will go, respectively, to the Sunni Waqf Board, the Muslim group that petitioned for control of the site, and to Nirmohi Akhara, another Hindu group.

The Archaeological Survey of India said there was a Hindu temple at the site before the mosque was built. Two judges said the Hindu temple was demolished to build the mosque. One judge ruled that the temple was not destroyed.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the lawyer for the Sunni Waqf Board, Zafaryab Jilani, said it is not a loss for the Muslim community, but they would pursue an appeal of the ruling.

Source

I don't think is the most fair decision they could have made, but other news articles are saying that muslim groups are staying calm despite unhappiness about the verdict.

[Dreadnaught]

Well, they didn't lose anything and they are a minority surrounded by hostile rabble-rousers on this issue so they're kinda cornered I suppose.

Beyond the whole violence-is-a-waste-here issue.