INDIAN TERROR
LAST week four Sikh terrorists in Poona gunned down General Arun Vaidya, the retired Indian Chief of Army Staff. That terrorists should kill anyone is lamentable; that terrorism should infect one of the world's few surviving democracies is parti- cularly lamentable. To say that India is a democracy is not to say that the election results in that country accurately reflect the mood of the people, or even that the bulk of its citizens enjoy the civil liberties we Should wish them to enjoy. It is to say something much less obvious, but just as important. It is to recognise that in India politics is the preferred method of resolv- ing collective disputes. What the weak liberal stomach has never been able to accept is that an open political system is to some extent bound to be a market where Privilege and power are traded. The mira- cle of Indian democracy is that nearly 40 years on, most Indians actively support and participate in politics. In recent years, however, the Sikh terrorists have proved to be the one exception to this happy, if messy state of affairs. Unlike ordinary political hoodlums, the Sikh terrorists do not disrupt and kill in order to collect credit in the political bank, they are out- side the system. It is not our suggestion that the Government of India concede their principal demand, the creation of 'It's the 1986 edition.' Khalistan. But a way must be found to bring them back into the system. Unfortu- nately, almost every scheme that involves propping up moderates, upsets the terror- ists, because it rewards their immediate rivals. For the same reason, the moderates are unable to contain the terrorists; indeed terrorism escalates when the moderates are in government. Instead of backing yet another inept moderate faction — this time Mr Badal's — the government would do well to explore ways by which the terrorists could be bought back into politics. The government must show that violence does not pay, but it must also indicate to the terrorists that in a limited way, peaceful methods do. We do not mean to imply that the terrorists will be happy with limited progress, but that they must be offered a choice, limited progress or none, and be encouraged to choose the former. That is easily said. Mr Gandhi will need all his skill if he is to do it.
Previous page
