Clashes of Civilization: Gandhi’s Silence and India’s Dilemma

Introduction

In 1926, Gandhi wrote to a Muslim leader from his quiet ashram, full of sorrow over the deepening divide between Hindus and Muslims¹. He wasn’t just being diplomatic; he was honest about feeling helpless, admitting, “I know very well that I have no influence whatsoever over the quarrelling elements… There is no other way for a person like me but to keep my peace.” The backdrop was alarming: thousands of riots had broken out in Bengal, and pressure mounted on Gandhi to take sides. Yet he refused, saying, “I cannot tolerate the killing of even a single Muslim or Hindu or any human being. Nor can I tolerate the destruction of a mosque or a temple or a church.”

Jump to today, and the problem feels just as overwhelming—but much bigger. Watching Prof. Vaidhiyanathan’s talk about Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” made it hit home for me³. Huntington’s central idea, which Vaidhiyanathan largely agrees with, is that most wars now happen because of deep-rooted cultural and religious differences—not just politics or money². It’s happening not only in India, but in Europe and the Middle East, too. In Paris and Brussels, there are “no-go zones” where even local police don’t dare enter because of cultural tension⁴. In America, while Muslim communities are growing rapidly and even Muslim mayors are being elected, these so-called “no-go zones” remain rare but the debate is heating up between traditional Christian “Bible Belt” towns and new Muslim neighborhoods⁵.

Everyday Life, Everyday Division

As a regular person, sometimes I wonder if peace is even possible anymore. Social media seems to pour petrol on the fire, amplifying every real or imagined incident, dividing people who’ve never met, and making the truth hard to find. Vaidhiyanathan’s idea that Jerusalem should be handed to someone like the Dalai Lama—outside the three Abrahamic faiths—sounds wild, but it’s a sign of how desperate people are for solutions.

What’s it really like at the ground level, in homes and neighborhoods? Sudhir Kakar’s writing opened my eyes to hidden layers within all communities, even among Muslims in India who sometimes divide themselves into “noble” descendants and “base” converts. Gandhi’s own childhood memory is revealing: he was taught that touching an untouchable was bad, but touching a Muslim was even worse. These beliefs, carried for generations, don’t just disappear; they shape how people view each other, even today⁶.

Kakar goes a step further. He explains that for many Hindus, what’s right or wrong isn’t always a fixed rule—it depends on time, place, and situation. During a riot, some might excuse violence they would never support in peacetime. Muslims, by contrast, often have clearer moral boundaries. This gap—flexible morals meeting strict ones—is exactly where Huntington predicted big conflicts would grow, and why unity so often fails.

India’s Choice—Step In or Stay Out?

All this explains why Vaidhiyanatha insists India should avoid joining the endless disputes between Abrahamic religions. History has shown that fighting other people’s wars—like in World War I and II—just leads to more pain and loss for Indians. “Let the West fight its own battles,” he argues. India’s strength comes from its history of finding ways to coexist, not from getting entangled in someone else’s centuries-old feud.

Conclusion

So what’s the answer for ordinary people today? Gandhi, Huntington, Vaidhiyanatha, and Kakar all seem to say this: full unity may be out of reach, but honest coexistence—rooted in self-restraint, open-mindedness, and staying out of foreign fights—is still possible. Instead of choosing sides, maybe it’s better to keep talking, keep respecting, and keep finding small ways to live together. That, as Gandhi hoped, is “the light of day” we should all try to see.

Ashram, November 20, 2025

Notes

1. Gandhi, Letter to a Muslim Leader, Sabarmati Ashram, June 4, 1926. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 30, pp. 531-32.
2. Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996).
3. Prof. Vaidhiyanatha, summary from YouTube talk (user-provided link).
4. See Appendix A for evidence of “no-go zones” in European cities.nypost+3​
5. Pew Research Center and US news sources on Muslim communities and political changes.cnn+3​
6. Sudhir Kakar & Katharina Kakar, Indians: Portrait of a People, Penguin Books, 2009, p. 28, 32, 190–192.

---

Appendix A: No-Go Zones and Muslim Population Growth in Europe

• European cities such as Paris (banlieues), Brussels (Molenbeek), Malmö, and certain UK districts have areas often called “no-go zones,” where police face persistent integration challenges and, at times, limited access.nationalpost+3​
• Pew Research Center projects continued rapid growth in Europe’s Muslim population, affecting demographic and policy landscapes.pewresearch​
• Reports on police and emergency worker attacks in these neighborhoods underscore the complexity of integration and social cohesion.abc7+1​

Appendix B: Muslims in America—Growth and Civic Integration

• The U.S. Muslim population is growing steadily and is projected to become the second-largest religious group by 2040.pewresearch+2​
• While some political rhetoric has claimed the existence of “no-go zones,” serious studies find no such phenomenon in the United States.wikipedia+1​
• Recent elections, such as the success of Muslim candidates in New York City government, illustrate increasing civic engagement and visibility for Muslim Americans.bbc​youtube​
• Law enforcement operates in all neighborhoods; incidents of parallel policing (such as Muslim Community Patrols) focus on cooperation rather than isolated authority.bbc+1​

This summary of Huntington’s book: The Clashes of Civilization….’ Was created by Perplexity on November 20, 2025

Appendix

Samuel Huntington’s “The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order” proposes that cultural and religious differences—not ideology or economics—will be the primary source of global conflict after the Cold War. Huntington divides the world into major civilizations (like Western, Islamic, Sinic/Chinese, Hindu, and others), arguing that future conflicts will emerge along these cultural “fault lines” rather than between nations or political blocs.beyondintractability+3​

He contends that as Western influence declines and other civilizations gain power, tensions will grow, particularly where the cultures and values of different civilizations meet. Huntington predicts that struggles over issues like identity, sovereignty, and religion—rather than purely economic or political disagreements—will dominate the international stage, with the West facing significant challenges from other rising civilizations such as Islam and China.wikipedia+4​

Appendix

Gandhi’s “Letter to a Muslim Leader” (June 4, 1926) expresses his sorrow over mounting Hindu-Muslim tensions and communal violence, especially in the wake of Calcutta riots. He declines to comment on specific events or individuals, stressing that he cannot side with any group or issue judgments based on unreliable reports or partisan demands. Gandhi laments the loss of mutual trust, the prejudice on both sides, and asserts his inability to influence those engaged in conflict. He condemns the killing or destruction of any religious place, emphasizes the unity of all faiths before God, and calls for repentance and reconciliation—declaring his hope to witness peace between Hindus and Muslims in his lifetime. Gandhi cautions that efforts for reconciliation must include all voices, even those deemed “enemies,” and insists that change must come from shared guilt and genuine remorse, not superficial discussion or forced statements.