History
The riots started as a result of communal tension prevailing in the city after the Babri Mosque demolition on 6 December 1992. It has been reported in the shrikrishna commission that the riots occurred in two phases. The first was mainly a Muslim backlash as a result of the Babri Masjid demolition in the week immediately succeeding 6 December 1992 led by political leaders representing hindutva in the city of Ayodhya.
The second phase was a Hindu backlash occurring as a result of the killings of Hindu Mathadi Kamgar (workers) by Muslim fanatics in Dongri (an area of South Bombay), stabbing of Hindus in Muslim majority areas and burning of six Hindus, including a physically handicapped girl in Radhabai Chawl. This phase occurred in January 1993, with most incidents reported between 6 January and 20 January.
The Report asserted that the communal passions of the Hindus were aroused to fever pitch by the inciting writings in print media, particularly Saamna and Navaakal which gave exaggerated accounts of the Mathadi murders and the Radhabai Chawl incident; rumours were floated that there were imminent attacks by Muslims using sophisticated arms, though the possibility of it happening was very imminent. From 8 January 1993, many riots occurred between Hindus led by the Shiv Sena and Shiv Sainiks and the Muslims funded by the Mumbai underworld at that time. The communal violence and rioting triggered off by the burning at Dongri and Radhabhai Chawl and then the retaliatory violence by Shiv Sena was hijacked by local criminal elements who saw in it an opportunity to make quick gains. By the time the Shiv Sena realized that enough had been done by way of "retaliation", the violence and rioting was beyond the control of its leaders who had to issue an appeal to put an end to it.
Read more about this topic: Bombay Riots
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“Literary works cannot be taken over like factories, or literary forms of expression like industrial methods. Realist writing, of which history offers many widely varying examples, is likewise conditioned by the question of how, when and for what class it is made use of.”
—Bertolt Brecht (1898–1956)
“I believe that history has shape, order, and meaning; that exceptional men, as much as economic forces, produce change; and that passé abstractions like beauty, nobility, and greatness have a shifting but continuing validity.”
—Camille Paglia (b. 1947)
“I believe that in the history of art and of thought there has always been at every living moment of culture a “will to renewal.” This is not the prerogative of the last decade only. All history is nothing but a succession of “crises”Mof rupture, repudiation and resistance.... When there is no “crisis,” there is stagnation, petrification and death. All thought, all art is aggressive.”
—Eugène Ionesco (b. 1912)