Mr. Chandra Shekhar, in his sincere eagerness to settle the bitter controversy in a spirit of consensus, may well cause irreparable damage to the fabric of the Indian state. The stakes in the dispute must not be lost sight of. These relate, first and foremost, to the state's constitutional duty to uphold the law. There is no indication so far that the VHP has budged an inch from its stated position on this score: it has gone on record again and again to argue that the dispute cannot be settled by any court since this is a matter which concerns faith and belief and not the due process of law.

To accept this position would be to undermine the very basis of our secular democracy. For, once the argument that in the public domain 'faith' has a higher claim to acceptance than the Constitution and the laws of the land is deemed to be valid, its natural corollary is to admit that those who do not share that 'faith' will for all times be relegated to the rank of second-grade citizens. This plain fact appears to have escaped the attention of those currently trying to resolve the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babari Masjid dispute. Indeed, instead of speeding up the judicial process to determine the proprietary rights in the disputed area, the Chandra Shekhar government has let it be known that it will accept any decision reached in common by the contending parties. However, it should know that any solution arrived at outside the courts and the democratic institutions would be bereft of legitimacy. Indeed, the government has further compounded the problem by asking the two sides to adduce archaeological and historical evidence to buttress their case...

Any attempt to give critical importance to archaeological evidence to settle contentious issues of 'faith' would swiftly expose the country to the risk of relentless strife.

It is in this light that the VHP's eagerness to 'prove' that a Ram temple once stood in the place of the Babari Masjid can be understood all too readily. In large parts of the country one does not have to dig deep to discover 'proof' of vandalism, greed and destruction. No state built on secular foundations can afford to tread this path. As it is the VHP has drawn up a list of some 3,000 mosques which it claims were built on the ruins of Hindu temples. It has left no one in doubt that its campaign in Ayodhya is but a first step to 'recover' these sites. In its eyes no court, parliament and indeed no democracy can adjudicate in the matter. It will not allow any institution, rule or procedure which draws its sustenance from the secular Constitution stand in its way.

This is why the mass movement unleashed by the VHP and the BJP needs to be understood for what it is: a deliberate and determined effort to whip up religious sentiments to ensure in the short term electoral gain for parties wedded to Hindutva and, in the long term, the establishment of a Hindu rashtra. What is to be done? The current efforts to arrive at a consensus can continue provided it is clearly understood that there can be no legitimate solution unless the courts pronounce the verdict on the original dispute. The issue also needs to be debated at length in Parliament if only to compel political parties to take a principled stand. And should all this fail the basic question whether or not matter of 'faith' should be settled within the parameters of the country's secular Constitution and laws should be raised and settled in the final analysis in the elections. It is for the electorate to say whether it favours a 'hard' or 'soft' Hinduism, 'majoritarianism' or 'minorityism', an India consumed by atavistic passion or an India where the state defends citizens' fundamental rights regardless of their creed.