What? Her head?
Mar Cheenath?
Yes. I did some research before I went to talk to him and realised that the struggle between the Kandas and the Panas is very old. And you have an element of the difference between a Scheduled Caste and a Scheduled Tribe, but you also have the difference between ethno-linguistic groups.
So the Kandas and the Panas have been in ethnic conflict since before the foundation of India. You had a subordinate group, the Panas, who benefited from British rule -- and that's the same that happened with the Muslims in north India. They got a leg-up that they would not have without the British.
But they (the British) always do that. Well, I'm a dual citizen with Ireland and see, they took a minority of the Protestants and they gave them power. But a minority that has power is yours. You own them. If you ever take away their power they are in deep trouble because they are a minority. So they gave the Panas authority, which really troubled the Kandas because they were of upper status. But the Panas got that power possibly because they converted to Christianity.
Here we are 60 years later, and it is suddenly been redefined not as an ethnic conflict, but as a religious conflict between the Hindus and the Christians.
I actually asked the archbishop, 'Look, this looks to me like a classic ethnic conflict, and it's been taken over by the Hindutva group to call it a religious conflict because it helps stir up passions and makes them the Hindutva group more prominent'.
But the archbishop also has an interest, because of his position in the church, to call it a religious conflict. That way he can depend on support from Rome. So he's kind of playing into the Hindutva group's game a bit. Anyway, it's that kind of conflict which is the biggest threat to Indian civic national identity.
But it is nowhere near as problematic as the same kind of issues in Pakistan.
http://specials.rediff.com/news/2009/feb/19slid3-pak-break-up-benefits-India-in-long-term.htm