I've been trying to think of anything that Gandhi could have done that would have stopped the violence and the breakup of INdia and Pakistan. Or anything he did that contributed to it. What he did do certainly reduced the number of deaths, and led to his own death, at the hands of a fellow Hindu.

There are situations where in practice violence is inevitable. Gandhi once said that if the only choice was between violent resistance to injustice and no resistance, violence was the better choice - but non-violent resistance was the best choice, and the only one that could achieve true justice in the long run.

Non-violent resistance in Northern Ireland over the years - and that includes a willingness to die if necessary, the same willingness shown by the hunger strikers - could, I believe have got us to a just peace settlement sooner and with more hope for the future than the 30 years of violent struggle. Maybe it wasn't possible, noone can ever know that. I think it could have been possible.

The trouble is people see non-violence as a way of avoiding suffering. It isn't, it's a way of channelling the inevitable suffering so that it builds rather than destroys.