RELATIONS between religious sects, as between races, ethnic groups and religions, are potentially divisive. One irresponsible move against a particular group can easily ignite emotions and shatter relative peace and harmony.

Incidents like the gory massacre of 10 Shia worshippers at a mosque in Rawalpindi last Monday, together with the emotional burial ceremony the next day of those who died in the attack, and then a few days later the gun attack on a prominent Shia scholar in Sialkot, all have the potential of creating distrust, paranoia and eventually enmity between the Shia and Sunni communities. It is unfortunate that occasional episodes like these subject Shia- Sunni relations to considerable stress tests.

Such trials and ripple effects can easily spiral out of control and lead to worst case scenarios and anarchical conditions. Fortunately, however, sectarian violence here so far has been relatively contained. It has never deteriorated to the level of mob frenzy and tit-for-tat attacks that can rip the social fabric of the country.

In this, the role of the government is crucial. The communal riots in India are precisely a reflection of the failure of governments in New Delhi, past and present, to handle communal relations with the utmost care and sensitivity. It was no surprise that the flagrant destruction in 1992 of the 16th century Babri mosque in Ayodhya by Hindu extremists should trigger nationwide communal riots that killed some 3,000 people.

This time round, the Hindu extremists’ plan to start construction of a temple on the site of the demolished mosque on March 15 was clearly an open invitation for more communal violence. Sure enough, tit-for-tat attacks have killed nearly 500 people in India so far, mostly Muslims and including the Hindu extremists who were torched in the train.

In contrast, in one multi-racial society in Southeast Asia where deliberate policy interventions over a span of three decades have achieved a considerable degree of community and national integration, a 127-year-old Hindu temple rebuilding project received donations from many non-Hindus, including Muslims, Christians and Buddhists. Even then, race relations are still pretty much a dicey affair there. The government pays constant attention to promoting racial harmony and in nipping any potentially explosive situation in the bud.

In Pakistan, it is heartening to note that a survey of last year’s local government elections by an NGO showed that both the candidates and the voters generally rejected the divisions along sectarian and ethnic lines. The study found that in the union councils surveyed there was not a single panel of candidates formed on sectarian/ethnic grounds. On the contrary, there were a number of cases where Shias and Sunnis formed joint panels, especially in D. I. Khan, D. G. Khan and Sargodha. Even in cities known for sectarian and ethnic violence like Jhang, Multan, Khanewal and Karachi, the study found that people formed election panels across primordial loyalties.

But this is no reason for complacency in sectarian or ethnic relations, as last week’s violence in Rawalpindi shows. Beyond arresting the perpetrators of last week’s attack, as well as those responsible for other such sectarian violence in the past, what is even more important is for the government, and the people, to make a special effort to strengthen ties, cohesion and trust between the different sects. Especially so if the country is not to play into the hands of those who stand to benefit from sectarian disharmony and disunity. The need is for mutual give- and-take and understanding through processes of reconciliation and integration. The emphasis should be on accommodation and tolerance.

In this, the role and actions of the government, the authorities at the local level and, particularly important, local community leaders of the different religious sects are important in preventing incidents such as that which took place last week in Rawalpindi from taking a momentum of their own and spinning out of control. In schools and colleges, students must learn how to get along with one another, and in communities we must make friends with neighbours across sectarian boundaries. Ties between the community leaders in the different groups should especially be strengthened, so that should anything else ever happen next time, they will be prepared.

The newly-elected local governments at all three levels, i.e. district, tehsil and union councils, can play a crucial role. They could, for instance, help to establish inter-sectarian confidence circles, composed of leaders from different sectarian / ethnic groups to promote such integration and bonding, and allay fears and mistrust. Similar inter-sectarian / ethnic harmony circles can also be set up at schools, colleges, workplaces and in villages.

At the end of the day, we are all Muslims and we are all Pakistanis. Whether we are Shia or Sunni, Punjabi or Sindhi, we have a common destiny. All of us need, therefore, to work together to enhance sectarian and ethnic harmony and focus on development of the nation.

AS expected, the Sindhi press has, with one voice and in the strongest possible terms, criticized the approval of the highly controversial greater Thal canal project at a recent meeting of the Executive Committee of National Economic Council. On the other hand, it has deplored that the representatives of the Sindh government had failed to strongly pursue the interests of the water-starved province at the crucial meeting.

Kawish has gone a step further by suggesting that the Sindh government’s opposition was a mere eyewash aimed at saving its credibility among the people of the province (if it has any). The daily says that an interview of the provincial finance adviser, Hafeez Shaikh, has exposed the way in which Karachi has put its case at the Ecnec meeting. He has maintained that they are not opposed to Thal Canal because it has been assured that after its construction Sindh’s water share will not be reduced and this canal is being built in accordance with the water accord.

This point of view is not only against the requirements and feelings of Sindh’s masses but also contrary to the provincial government’s official stand. The 19 objections raised by the Sindh team at the meeting are conflicting with the adviser’s stance. According to these objections, technical aspects of the project, which is against the 1991 Water Accord, were being ignored. However, Sindh’s representatives failed to establish these objections which led to the approval of the canal plan.

Mr Shaikh’s interview has caused an uproar in Sindh and its people want to know about the actual stand of the provincial government on the canal: whether it is the objections presented in written form at the Ecnec meeting or the perspective revealed by the provincial adviser. This interview has produced doubts that in fact the Sindh government’s posture is the same as disclosed by the adviser and that the written objections were presented only to satisfy (or misguide) the public opinion. This view is also supported by the fact that the Sindh representatives, who do not hail from this land of deprivation, did not bother to defend the province’s case as was due.

Amid this confusion, Sindh’s populace wants that the Sindh government should clearly spell out its real stand on this sensitive matter. It should also be explained that if the opinion Mr Shaikh expressed in his interview and the Ecnec meeting is not that of Sindh government, then whose point of view it is anyway. The financial adviser and others concerned should be asked as to why they did not defend Sindh’s interests at the Ecnec meeting.

Ibrat writes that despite acute water shortage Punjab has announced that it would continue taking more water from the Tarbela Dam till March 10 and, due to this practice, it is a matter of days that the once-mighty River Indus would not have a single drop of water below Sukkur. Even now Sindh has been gripped with the acute scarcity of drinking water let alone that for irrigation purpose. Yet the federal government has ignored the rights of smaller provinces to appease Punjab by approving the construction Thal Canal, which has been opposed by all and sundry in Sindh. For the sake of national solidarity, the government should review not only this decision but also the ongoing Sindh-Punjab dispute on water sharing, keeping in view the looming famine, devastation of crops, scarcity of drinking water and danger of extinction for marine life due to the crisis of river water in the province.

Awami Awaz points out that Punjab has considerable reservoirs of underground water which Sindh does not have. Even then after recent rains in upcountry, water is being stored in Tarbela and Mangla dams for the consumption of Punjab. On the other hand, nobody is paying any heed to the collapse of Sindh’s agricultural based economy and the subsequent poverty and other problems. The government should consider Sindh’s plight as that of Pakistan and evolve a strategy to avert economic catastrophe in the province.

March 4 which is celebrated as the students day in the province to commemorate the democratic struggle of the students of Sindh University during Ayub Khan’s martial law. Tameer-i-Sindh calls for observing this occasion as the accountability day by local student politics. The student organizations should review their performance and see if they are, contrary to the enviable past traditions, promoting negative tendencies like copy culture and factional fighting and thus earning dislike of the society instead of sympathy.

Commenting on the latest communal carnage in India, Sindhu deplores that the Indian police are watching massacre of the Muslims as a silent spectator. It also laments that New Delhi has failed to take any concrete