In a State of Riot…

While choosing to study in a college in Gujarat, not once did I realize that I was going to the state which had seen the most recent riots in the country. It was partly due to lack of awareness, but more so because while living in the capital, I had become a spectator to an episode unfurling in another part of the country; and by virtue of being a spectator, I was isolated from it. There was a sense of security- riots were what you read about in the newspapers- they didn’t (and couldn’t) happen around me. Godhra, Best Bakery, Teesta Setalvad, Nanavati Commission- all of these were ‘terms’ I had come to know because I had read them all so often in papers or seen them on TV. I knew the trivia, but trivia is devoid of human presence.

Even in my first year of college in Ahmedabad, the sense of isolation, security and of being a spectator persisted. I once calculated that my batch mates- many of them local residents- would have been between ten and twelve years old at the time of the riots- that made them old enough to remember living through the riots. But, not once in my eight months in college, had anyone mentioned it. I had heard friends talk about living through the Bhuj earthquakes, but not the riots. The riots were just another topic, amidst a lot of other topics about politics, latest songs, upcoming events, economic deals- basically a part of casual talk between friends. It seemed strange, they too were spectators and not participants- something that physical proximity to the epicenter of the incident would have warranted.
Just out of curiosity, I would occasionally ask- what it was to live through riots. I wasn’t inquiring about the riots as an event in history; I was just curious about what it felt like to have lived through the riots- there is a difference between the two.

This June, as a consequence of series of incidents, I realized two years after studying in Gujarat, that I knew awfully little about the why, the what and the impact of the riots. I began reading up on line, talking to people, watching videos and films about the riots. I knew the places mentioned in the reports, this time not just as trivia, but as places I had frequented. The gruesomeness, the brutality and the administrative efficiency of the execution of the riots was shocking and chilling. It struck me that I had known more about the Sikh riots of ’84 than about the Godhra riots. It was this sudden feeling of confusion- How could I have not known about this? The riots suddenly seemed more real and the sense of security was replaced by naked fear- my friends lived through this, it could happen to me. But all my friends are the fortunate ones- the riots had not penetrated the walls behind which they were safely locked. They all remember being locked in their houses; one remembers seeing from her balcony, black smoke rising in the distance. Only one knows of a friend who’s shop was burned down. Another recently told me that she remembers being scared- every man, including her father, with a beard or a mustache had it shaved off.
When I read the papers now, I realize that behind all these legal battles and the cases being passed off from one court to the next, are people who saw their loved ones being raped, slashed, burnt in the most horrific way possible, waiting for retribution- some form of closure.
It is impossible to talk about the riots without talking about Narendra Modi. The fact that the riots – to whatever degree- were state sponsored is a part of the horror of the incident. Lately every time I talk to my friends about Gujarat, development or the riots I ask them what they think of Modi. I clearly remember a conversation five years back, when I was in school in Delhi, when a friend stood in defense of Modi- stating that even if he was guilty, he was the guy Gujarat needed. I didn’t know enough then to argue. But the arguments haven’t changed much since. In my first year, a friend told me, that Modi had been maligned in the media outside Gujarat- that I being from Delhi was inherently biased. I shut up because I believed that there was a possibility of his statements being true- every resident of Gujarat I knew loved Modi. Something that one gets to hear often is that Gujarat hadn’t developed in thirty years as much as it has in the past ten years under Modi. And this is a fact obvious to me after living in Ahmadabad for just two years.

There are two wide defenses that I have heard in favour of Modi, and I don’t know which is the saner of the two. One states that Modi is a remarkable administrator, the guy responsible for making Gujarat what it is today, what happened was unfortunate and even if he is guilty, his qualities outweigh his guilt. The second one is a more blatant admission that the riots were necessary, that the riots led to a long lasting era of ‘peace’ and stability that has continued till date.
I can not buy either of these arguments. Its as if human lives became the currency traded for peace, development and stability. But what is the meaning of these ideals for all civilizations, if it comes at the cost of human lives? Or is it that some humans are more equal than other humans, and thus deserve to be the traders of this barter rather than the currency itself?
There are alternate paths to the same goals, and we often choose to be guided by what is convenient rather than by what is right. But these are alternate world views are endorsed even by people very dear to me. Sometimes, it gets very frustrating: How could you not see it my way? But I know that my friends too would want me to see things their way. Neither sides will agree to the other. And as strongly as I believe I am right, so do they. The only solution out of this dead lock as I see it, is time. We’ll all just continue living by our world views, fighting for what we believe is right. At some point maybe we’ll come up against each other, maybe one of us will change our minds, maybe all of us will change our minds. Who knows? I still think that people don’t know enough about the riots- that if they knew more, they would believe differently. I hope they would.

- Tarunima Prabhakar

  • http://theabrain.wordpress.com Denny

    “…blatant admission that the riots were necessary” seems like a drab way of saying “They deserved it”. oh and yes. I talked to someone once who believed “they deserved it”. Its scary.

  • http://www.saakshitaprabhakar.com Saakshita

    Interesting topic to put to limelight. Riots one of the many other issues happen at backstage of society. The point of view of riots being the distress necessary for the peace to come could be true. Sounds and seems maddening but after all there is no good without bad, high without low. Definitions of these words differ and grow. Well expressed.

    • Tarunima

      I think the idea of the two duals sustaining each other isn’t valid here. To begin with not all forms of stability are necessarily good. One could muse if the status quo is the ‘good’ one would want to settle for. Personally, justice and lack of fear would be basics that I would want in a state.

  • Rahul Sharma

    Dear Tanu
    This is well written and quite honest.
    I think we miss one thing about the Riots. Gujarat may have been the 1st community sponsored riot. Trying to understand it from the standard lens of riots is not helpful. I think the majority community was fully coopted into the entire process and thus most of the times you will have Gujjus either ignoring the riots or defending the riots. I have also heard people say that the media was biased and only focussed on the riots and not on the issues which led to the riots and the reactions from the ‘other side’. At times I think the riots was nothing more than a way of venting anger by gujjus. In some ways, Modi has made a devil’s bargain with them. He allowed them to vent their anger and they in turn rewarded him with chief ministership 03 times.
    To be honest, Cong and the English media never helps the cause. While they take these issues as cause celebre, nobody talks about the systemic ethnic cleansing of the Pandits from J&K or the atrocities that Bindrawale and his ilk committed on Hindus in Punjab. That is all conveniently hidden. Partially because of vote bank politics. Partially because if brought to light, it has the potential to ignite significant damage.
    As long as the Cong continues to play identity politics and focus on vote banks, you will always have mascots like Modi. Cong needs Modi as much as he needs them. They feed off each other and prosper together.
    What we need to do is ask honest questions of each other. Which means that we neither excuse the Gujarat riots not the godhra train killings. We neither excuse the Sikh riots or the atrocities bindrawale committed on hindus in Punjab. Else we will always look at one half of the picture and never really understand the complete mosaic.
    Btw, if Rajiv Gandhi could be PM of India after justifying Genocide, why do we fault Modi. He has only followed the Cong playbook…..think about it.

    • Tarunima

      I absolutely agree with you, Modi needs congress as much as congress needs them. And all forms of injustice need to be addressed, which hasn’t happened with the Sikh riots or with the Gujarat riots. No political party is excused. Though I do feel that questions of justice are repeatedly muddled with politics and thus lost in the process. Its almost like we make it an excuse: the culprits in the past weren’t booked, so it is only understandable if the present ones aren’t booked either.
      And you’re right, it was a bargain. That’s what I mentioned in the end: a lot of people thought/think it was required. That is where we differ in our world views and outlooks on life.

  • Nirmal

    Most interesting part is latter one, where you say you don’t buy neither of two arguments you hear.

    But what I think is, what good it does even if we talk about this right now. This is the problem with everyone. It is not going to change anything. I say Modi is guilty. Then? Say court sends him to jail Someone else takes his place. So? We waste our time thinking about past, what Modi did was that he tried to forget it and that is why Gujarat is such beautiful place now.

    I am Modi fan. But that does not mean that if he’s guilty, I’ll say “No, he CAN’T do that.” My point is, people should stop talking about this and try to make ‘current’ world better. (Only if you could time travel, all this talks would have made sense.)

  • Demosthenes

    ” The fact that the riots – to whatever degree- were state sponsored”

    And how do you know this for a “fact”? I ask because I too would like to believe either the guilt, as you have done, or the innocence of the person.

    • Tarunima

      you could check out the case of R.B. Sreekumar- he’s the only one to have won a case against the government.
      Someone shared this recently:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Tr1hCidLw&feature=related
      There are other videos and documentaries as well. A good way to browse the net would be to play the devil’s advocate and search for information to prove your stand. After some time you will have enough information to sustain or falsify your position.

  • siddharth jain

    Before coming to Gujarat, even i had no clue about the happenings in Gujarat, but still I knew a family who shifted from Gujarat to my place because of the riots and the earthquake. At that time i was not able to understand how critical the situation was and the involvement of modi’s government. Even I saw modi as a person who developed gujarat, not as a person because of whom the riot situation went out of control and many innocents fell victim to it. Now when I read about such incidents where people are still fighting to get justice, are given least importance when the country is facing scams worth crores of rupees.

    “Very well written.”

  • Sandeep Mertia

    Very well written! :)

    I would admit that I ‘partly’ agree to both the arguments in favor of Modi.

    But I also am considerate of your views and concerns for the victims whom you rightly point out int the words “.. is it that some humans are more equal than other humans, and thus deserve to be the traders of this barter rather than the currency itself?” No. Absolutely not.

    The most important point I think which is missed in all the Modi and riot debates is … NOW WHAT?… shall we not move on? …I know you might be thinking that its easy for me to say this as I didn’t loose any near or dear one in those riots. But my concern is how for long can we crib about something which we all know practically is impossible or rather very very difficult to get justice for.

    I think we all are practical enough or politically intelligent enough to guess that Mr. Modi is going to be in power in Gujarat as long as he wishes to be. His popularity in the state is undeterred by the numerous Media (some biased as well) stories and court cases by activists. Plus is he the only Indian politician who has skeletons in his cupboard? No. But, yes he’s the most openly known to have them… we certainly don’t have enough material against the culprits of Sikh riots, Baghalpur riots, Bombay riots, etc.

    I may sound extremist/right winger but all I intend to be is a informed and practical citizen who judges his politician by the kind of positive change he has brought in the lives of the ‘majority’!

    Eg – I was yesterday in Banaskantha for a rural project and my auto driver Javed (25) told me when I asked him that does he feel safe, ‘Modi bhai ke raj mein sab shanti hein’!… I know he’s not fully aware of the facts, but then how many such Javeds can we go and shake and change their views…and why? Ultimately he’s happy from his CM…His life has also improved from the economic development around him…now he has got better prospects for his child’s education, parents’ health care,etc.

    Finally on the question of ethics…yes I can never justify or support Modi on grounds of ethics…but then I give higher priority to development (yes, inclusive economic development) as an criterion of judging a ‘politician’!

    Someday, when we have better ‘politicians’ and truly ‘secular’ citizens …my views might change!

  • sagar_sm

    A really well written piece. Especially the conclusion. Absolutely true.
    But on another note, there have been examples (not specific to Gujarat only) where currency has also “bought” peace, development and stability. I am not commenting whether its right or wrong. Just looking at both sides of the coin. :)

  • Aakash Solanki

    A very important question raised.

  • Prakhar Sharma

    Insightful writing . Even though we know the figures and have heard the stories its sad that most of them are motivated by myths or rather so many stories have been circulated and formed since then about the happenings of the riots that we may never know what really transpired. What happened should not have happened is obvious , because of whom it happened , will always be debated but the point remains that we dont know enough about what happened to make a straight judgement. The public lives on bread and water. They would rather stay behind a man who gives them that , even though there might be allegations against him of wrong-doings ; and if you come to think of it , not justifying or taking sides , but which big leader today has an absolute clean sheet against their name?

  • Ruchita

    You’ve put forward the spectator’s view in a very objective way, and tried to understand something that all of us knew happened, but do not know the inner workings of. Which is great :)

  • Hejang Misao

    My knowledge about riot in gujarat may not be objective but what I understand is it was a well orchestrated state sponsored riot against a particular community out of anger and frustration. The more shocking is laws failed to bring justice to the victim families when court acquitted chief minister Narendra Modi whose deliberated inaction let that mayhem happen. No doubt Narendra Modi is adjusted the best chief minister in India by some western org/company recently. However, acquitting him in spite of many witnesses (for example the IPS officer) of his (Modi) involvement in the riot makes the judiciary system a mockery: pro rich and anti poor or pro majority and anti minority.

  • Puneeta

    Its easy to sit back in the comfort of our homes and be objective about incidents that played out their horror on our Television screens, and therefore touched us in as far as we allowed them to.
    But what about Justice? They were real people, those men and women who were raped, butchered, pillaged with crowds jubilantly baying for more blood! And we call ourselves an “ancient civilization”?! The world’s “largest democracy”!!!
    We need to heal these wounds first and not whitewash the past, as we attempt to move on….lets begin by accepting the Truth first, however brutal it may be.

  • Guest

    The mistake the author does is (not surprising given its linked to tehelka) is that you reduce the entire delivery of justice to punishment to modi. Factually, you don’t care about justice – you care only about punishing modi – not your fault – that has been the entire campaign about 2002 riots been reduced to. The arrogance of media is unable to accept that they might be wrong – they feel insulted that even though they are so powerful, they feel powerless in front of Modi and his popularity. The campaign is derived entirely about it.

    If you want to be sincere, try asking about bringing to justice those perpetrated and not focusing on one individual ONLY (only is the key word). Also, try sincerely to find out, why Gujaratis held the grudge and feel justified about riots – the other side (as a community) has committed major errors which prompts Gujaratis to say they deserve it.

    • Tarunima

      I think you missed the point of this article- please notice as to how much word space was given to Modi’s role in the riots. I agree with you that this isn’t about one person, but that one person because of his position of authority will gain more attention. ‘Factually’ I do care about justice- I am not a media person and a rather insignificant observer; this article was about my experiences of living in the state. The media’s arrogance (which doesn’t seem very convincing anyway, given the various factions there are within the ‘media’) has nothing to do with this article.

      The last paragraph was about the differences in the opinion that my friends and I have about the riots- it is not that I have not sincerely tried to find out why a certain group of people think the riots were justified; it is just that I disagree with it. Call me a pacifist if you may, but I do believe that an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind and hatred has no caste, creed, religion- it is just an extension of one’s ego.

      The mistake that you made while reading the article, was to be biased against the forum of publication (that’s a link you made). You drew links, that the author didn’t intend to draw in this article. You saw a ‘campaign’ when this was just a sincere probe into differences of opinions and ideas of justice.

      But since you did talk about facts and justice, I should ask you to back your claims with facts. Sincerely, it would be nice if you could write about the your side of the case- why were the riots justified? I am sure the forum will have no issues with publishing the piece. there is no propaganda here- it’s just a place for constructive dialogue.

    • Tarunima

      I think you missed the point of this article- please notice as to how much word space was given to Modi’s role in the riots. I agree with you that this isn’t about one person, but that one person because of his position of authority will gain more attention.
      ‘Factually’ I do care about justice- I am not a media person; in fact a rather insignificant observer; this article was about my experiences of living in the state. The media’s arrogance (which doesn’t seem very convincing anyway, given the various factions there are within the ‘media’) has nothing to do with me or this article.

      The last paragraph was about the differences in the opinion that my friends and I have about the riots- it is not that I have not sincerely tried to find out why a certain group of people think the riots were justified; I just disagree with the reasons. Call me a pacifist if you may, but I do believe that an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind and hatred like love has no caste, creed, religion.

      The mistake that you made while reading the article, was to be biased against the forum of publication (that’s a link you made). You drew links, that the author didn’t intend to draw in this article. You saw a ‘campaign’ when this was just a sincere probe into differences in opinions and ideas of justice.

      But since you did talk about facts and justice, I should ask you to back your claims with facts. Sincerely, it would be nice if you could write about your side of the case- why were the riots justified? I am sure the forum will have no issues with publishing the piece. there is no propaganda here- it is just a place for constructive dialogue.