Thursday, December 9, 2021

Say No to Terrorism; We are for democracy

spot_imgspot_img

India lost two of its prime ministers (in addition to many others) due to terrorism. We may have disagreements with government on number of issues; but that does not stop us to say loudly that we are against terrorism. We are living in a time where states rather directly support (or to be precisely sponsor) terrorist activities in order to gain in bargaining. There is a wide spread but efficiently knitted social, political, cultural or other multiple supporting mechanisms in order to (at least) weaken those efforts against terrorism; hence nothing but eternal vigilance of public should make a decisive move in this direction.

But we must agree that this area is grey as well as flippery. Those referred as Kashmiri terrorists by Indian officials are independent activists for Pakisthan. When Pakisthan refer those movements in Baluchisthan as terrorism, India Government address it as independence movement. We saw the same in Tamil Elam movements in Sri Lanka. We can see this contradictory arguments world over historically. It is better that no governments financially or strategically interfere in other country’s issues. Every nation has much to do for their own people. Taking sides in such matters are only going to cost much beyond any calculations in the long run. Remember that those who are approaching you as the ENEMY of their ENEMY for their OWN AGENDA will definitely SEEK SUPPORT of YOUR ENEMY against you tomorrow. Any independence movements should be people’s movements and not group’s isolated initiatives; and people’s movements will be funded by common people themselves. It is better to consider Indian independence movement led by Gandhiji as a model for such efforts.

It is important to remember that those who are sponsoring you not for genuine reasons are simply going to loot you in the future. All nations have calculations and it is not political but economic reasons drive nation’s interests in other nations issues. History has sufficient examples to support this.

But it is not only about transborder terrorism. Including India, many nations are facing internal armed struggles. We condemn them too. Democracy has many limitations; it is weak in several conditions. We must agree but that should not stop us from improvising its potential to address contemporary issues. It is the suitable structure, developed so far, in order to address common people’s collective issues. Armed struggle is neither an alternative not a viable option to democracy.

But state can’t terrorise its own people too. The concept of federal states, without individual regions consent, is nothing but farce. A nation becomes big not when its size enlarges but only when its people wholeheartedly get united; not when armed forces become most efficient but when its common people command peace and harmony to everyone else; not when its borders get fortified but when it opens its universities, play grounds and valleys open for people world over and when others care for your nation. Wars and armed struggles are realities of past; they can’t become the guiding principle of present and vision of the future. People of the world must come together now to raise their brains against terrorism and to strengthen democracy. 

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

*

Spotlight

spot_imgspot_img

Revisiting Ambedkar’s Vision of ‘United States of India’: Can It Stand as Modern India’s Viable Alternative?

In April 2020, Thiruvananthapuram MP Shashi Tharoor waded into the debate, arguing that a Presidential system would prevent the “one-man show” that the Indian system has evolved into. The proponents of this line of thought also cite the United States' (relative) political stability as one of the key reasons to support their argument. The proposal challenges the Indian Constitution’s “Basic structure doctrine” decided by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharathi case. However, this requires further examination: a Presidential form of government might fix some of India’s political gridlock, but it may also open Pandora’s Box, releasing a whole wake of issues in its place. This includes a politically biased Supreme Court and horse-trading of MPs on a scale unheard in Indian politics.

Reconstructing our solidarity with the farmers’ protest

The controversial farm laws brought by the union government are essentially about the agricultural market. As the domains (Agriculture and the...

Sharapova: Victim of Fate or of False Regulatory Mechanism?- Dr. Razeena Kuzhimandapathil, Kerala

Maria Yuryevna Sharapova definitely had a controversial career both inside and outside tennis courts. She has the talent that...

Must read

Reviewing ‘Obsession and Wild Pigeon’ by Ismat Chughtai

My interest in Ismat Chughtai developed when I first...
- Advertisement -spot_img

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you