Though British India gained independence with the partition of 1947 and the Indian subcontinent has undergone many political changes, various fundamental issues in its political culture have remained, leading to concerns. Political violence and hostilities are common in politics in the countries of the former Indian subcontinent. They are present in different countries, including Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan.
Non-violent politics is often emphasized. Among the promoters of non-violent politics, Mahatma Gandhi is a prominent one, who was killed for promoting his non-violence agenda in a political context. Gandhi led the strategy of non-violent resistance to achieve political transformation. His political philosophy was built on the core principle of Ahimsa (absolute non-violence), which explicitly rejects physical, verbal, or emotional hostility. He carried out a non-violent movement against the then British rulers, who employed a divide-and-rule policy over colonized India, and who later left India in haste and with a fractured subcontinent.
After the partition in 1947, the region has experienced numerous political shifts, political violence, regime changes, and armed conflicts. Since the partition, several major wars have been observed, including the Indo-Pak war of 1965, the Bangladesh independence war of 1971, and the 1999 Kargil war. In addition to hostilities between nations, there are hostilities and violent politics within nations that mark the political culture in the countries of the region.
Within countries, there are extreme hostilities between political parties such as the government and opposition parties and political violence in India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. The 1984 Sikh riots, the 1992 anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat related to the Babri Mosque issue, the 2007 Karachi Riots, the 2007 riots in Pakistan, the 2006-07 political riots Dhaka, and the 2014 post-election violence in Bangladesh are some notable examples of violent politics in the region. Political violence and hostilities are often created by rival ideologies, a lack of tolerance, and revenge-taking politics.
Additionally, there are killings of political leaders, an extreme form of political hostility, in the Indian subcontinent. The assassinations of Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi are prominent political killings in India. In Bangladesh, the killings of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and former president Ziaur Rahman are two prominent examples of political killings. Among others, the killings of Liaquat Ali Khan and Benazir Bhutto are two such examples in Pakistan.
Sometimes, hostilities within the nation are infiltrated or actively encouraged by external forces within and beyond the region. In the context of Bangladesh, for instance, India’s intelligence agency, RAW, has long held a negative reputation for intervening in the internal affairs of the Bangladeshi people to this day. It is true that the RAW and the Indian Military’s contribution played a significant role during 1971 in making the independence of Bangladesh possible faster against West Pakistan. But is today’s constant conflict with Bangladesh truly necessary to serve geopolitical interests that often lack genuine substance?
Many civilians died during the July 2024 movement in Bangladesh. The RAW is blamed for directly intervening in the internal political affairs of Bangladesh and the movement. But it is not entirely RAW’s fault; the Bangladesh Awami League was to blame for this type of strategy by letting in a foreign intelligence agency. Youths stepped into politics in Bangladesh knowing that there was no security of life, and the violent movement overthrew the BAL government.
Such political violence and hostility directly contradict Gandhi’s political philosophy. Moreover, it creates long-term political trouble, encourages political revenge, deprives many of their rights, and hinders the improvement of political culture. In Gandhi’s autobiography, despite experiencing personal humiliation by white supremacy, he consistently demonstrated benevolence and a steadfast commitment to humanity. He valued everyone. A pertinent question can be raised: is it possible for politics to be conducted selflessly for the greater good of humanity?
It is not possible now to entirely reject hostilities and violent politics or adopt non-violent politics, as was done by Gandhi, in the countries of the former Indian subcontinent. This is due to several causes such as the indifference of the government to opposition demands, a high possibility of the success of violence in realizing demands, the extent of violent politics, the intention to go to power with electoral manipulation and, as noted previously, the lack of tolerance. Opposition demands are often realized by the government when violence is carried out.
Yet, Gandhi’s politics has relevance, and the extent of political hostilities and violence can be reduced in the countries of the former Indian subcontinent much. But for this, the responsible roles of the government and opposition parties need to be ensured. The government needs to address reasonable concerns, the absence of which often leads to large-scale violent movements in the region. But political parties, including the ruling party, need to respect each other.
Political leaders need to make sure the party members maintain a non-violent strategy against other political parties and leaders. Freedom of expression should be a priority for all the citizens within the nation. The ruling and opposing parties should nurture members who will develop an accepting mentality related to constructive criticism instead of a revenge mentality.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Magazine and its editorial team. The views published are the sole responsibility of the author(s).
