“If humanity is to progress, Gandhi is inescapable. He lived, thought, and acted, inspired by the vision of humanity evolving toward a world of peace and harmony. We may ignore him at our own risk.”

Gandhi was always more than what we know where his political contributions, way of life, words of wisdom, ideals of lifestyle; enlighten India, and the world even today after so many years. How Gandhi’s techniques have sometimes been invoked even in the land of his birth, especially in recent incidents, would appear to be a travesty of his principles. As the countries across the globe has been in the grip of a series of crises ranging from Korea to the Middle East with a never-ending trail of blood and bitterness; Gandhi’s ideals echo somewhere far behind.

Gandhi since the start deviated from the claim of calling himself a prophet or even a philosopher. “There is no such thing as Gandhism,” he explained, “and I do not want to leave any sect after me.” There was only one Gandhian; the one who believes to see a changed India that lives in his eyes, he said, an imperfect one at that: himself. According to him, the real significance of the Indian freedom movement lied in its promise to be waged nonviolently, on the ideals of truth and goodwill and to not succumb to the brutal measures the other side initiated with.

He objected to violence not only because unarmed people had little chance of success in an armed rebellion, but because he considered violence a vicious weapon that spurted more problems than it resolved, and left a trail of hatred and bitterness in which genuine reconciliation was almost a distant dream (Parida, 2019).

This emphasis on nonviolence jarred alike on Gandhi’s British and Indian critics, as this novel idea even back then was met with a wide array of responses. To the former, nonviolence was a camouflage; to the latter, it was sheer sentimentalism – as the whites tended to see the Indian struggle through the prism of European history undermined the remarkably peaceful nature of Gandhi’s campaigns. While on the flip side the radical Indian politicians, who had drawn inspiration from the history of the French and Russian revolutions were vehemently opposed to the “Gandhian way of ushering peace” and strongly held that it was foolish to miss opportunities and sacrifice tactical gains for reasons more relevant to ethics than to politics.

This total allegiance to nonviolence did end up creating a gulf between him and the educated elite in India which saw force as the uptight tool to yield their lost power and prestige and temporarily bridged only during periods of intense political excitement.

His ideological proposition of doctrine of nonviolence was followed in accordance to its logical conclusion even by his closest allies: ‘the adoption of unilateral disarmament in a world armed to the core, the scrapping of the loaded armed forces, and the decentralisation of administration to the point where the state would “wither away” were certain aspects that raised doubts about the principle’s vitality even long back.

Even with its fair share of lacunas, India did not question the superiority of the principle of nonviolence as enunciated by their leader, but they did believe it to not be fitting conjunction to every aspect of practical politics. The Indian Constituent Assembly include a majority of members owing allegiance to Gandhi, but the constitution which emerged in 1949 was based more on the Western parliamentary than on the Gandhian model alone.

After understanding how even before his ideas were not adopted unilaterally since the start it’s important to put today’s world into context. As the changing times that we exist in, we need to realise the validity of these ideals that once accorded us freedom and led one of the greatest independence movements across the globe. The question one often ends up asking is if after Gandhi’s assassination on January 30, 1948, does his ideals of truth and non-violence remain relevant in 21st century India?

On ethical and behavioural paradigm Gandhianism has much meaning today because society is witnessing the degradation of values where virtues of self-control and righteousness are much needed in a materialistic world driven by the desire to achieve and acquire more. As the headlines are coloured with harassment incidents, the subjugation of women’s need and other gruesome acts with this ascending level of vicious violence Gandhian dream of a safe country for all still looks like an unachievable objective (Srivastav, 2019).

The shadow of a thermo-nuclear war with its incalculable hazards continues to hang over mankind with evolving technological sector and ever-increasing military capability of countries -from this predicament, Gandhi’s ideas and techniques may suggest a way out.

Unfortunately, his motives and methods are often misunderstood, and this perspective of a judged vision completely resonates with what he battled with the British Raj. He advocated nonviolence not because it offered an easy way out, but because he considered “violence a crude ineffective weapon; thus it is to be stressed that rejection of violence stemmed from choice, not from necessity” as many mistakenly portray.

Horace Alexander, who held Gandhi in his highest regard and witnessed his speeches, graphically describes the attitude of the nonviolent resister to his armed opponent: “On your side, you have all the mighty forces of the modern State. On my side, I have nothing but my conviction of right and truth, the unquenchable spirit of man, who is prepared to die for his convictions than submit to your brute force. Here we stand; and here if need be, we fall.” Thus he highlights here how detached from being a craven retreat from danger, nonviolent resistance demands courage of a high order, the courage to resist; the courage to call out injustice without rancour, to unite all with the idea of peace, to invite suffering but not to inflict it, to die but not to kill.

Looking at India’s present state of affairs, one would probably surmise that Gandhism cannot have any relevance in this twenty-first century; wherein the age of social media and instant gratification, we accord a secondary place for ethics and honesty. Gandhi is rightly called the Father of the Nation because he single-handedly stood up against the mighty British Empire, filled the zeal of independence in millions and brought us freedom as we stand today as the world’s largest surviving democracy. However, today, Gandhi is mostly forgotten and his relevance questioned even by his ardent devotees.

Since independence, the country has witnessed many violent communal riots which run parallel to his most-followed ideology of ‘secularism’ while also neglecting the ideal of ‘Sarvodaya, a broad Gandhian term meaning ‘universal upliftment’ or ‘progress of all’. On the contrary, the irony in today’s India is a unique distinction of being the country where industrial giants and nominees of richest people in the world come from while at the same time more than 30 per cent of its population lives in dire poverty and 45 % is unaware of their rights (Baura, 2017).

What is required is a global non-violent awakening of principles Gandhi gave birth to, where his name should transcend the bounds of race, religion and nation-states, and emerges as the prophetic voice of the twenty-first century. Where his passionate adherence is resonated in every corner of the world and thus more than ever now is the time to make Gandhi relevant.

As all of us move towards an all-pervading materialistic, agnostic and consumerist culture, as we fight these big wars and grapple with crises; the common ordinary people in this modern age need Gandhism to hold on to.

SOURCES

-Baura, R { 2017 , June }. Relevance of Gandhi in Modern Times. mkgandhi.org. https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/relevance-of-gandhi-in-modern-times.html

-Srivastav, R { 2019, August 13}. Bapu’s way : the relevance of Gandhi in Modern India and the World. One travel. https://www.onetravel.com/going-places/the-relevance-of-gandhi-in-modern-india-and-the-world/

-Parida, O {2019, October 1 } . Relevance of Gandhianism in today’s world. The Times of India. https://timesofindia.com/blogs/the-rock-bottom/relevance-of-gandhianism-in-todays-world/

The post THE RELEVANCE OF GANDHI IN TODAY’S TIME appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The Communist government of West Bengal engaged in rape and murder to forcibly evict thousands of lower caste immigrants from Bangladesh, who got tired of living in rotten conditions in refugee camps and decided to move to an island and build a new life.

They did not want any government assistance but just wanted to be left alone to live their life. In a short time, they built a strong and vibrant community, till the Left Government led by Jyoti Basu decided to evict them. They poisoned their well, kids were murdered, women were raped and dead bodies dumped into the river. The same left government that once promised these refugees assistance if they were voted into power were the ones that destroyed them.

Why were they dealt with in such a way? Some survivors believe it was because of their caste because the upper caste Hindu refugees who have similarly occupied land elsewhere were not evicted. Some survivors think that it was because they refused to vote for the Left parties and were doing fine on their own without government help, the communist government could not stomach it.

Mamta Banerjee promised to start an investigation after she came to power, but as is common in India, it was an empty promise. Nothing has happened and nothing will.

The author collects and narrates stories from the survivors who even till date are traumatized by the memories of what happened. The perpetrators of these crimes are probably still alive, and so are many of the victims, but there will be no justice because according to the government, nothing of consequence happened…

Maybe this incident doesn’t get much attention, because it was perpetrated by a ‘left government’ and doesn’t fit the narrative of the Marxists and Communist sympathizers who have infested Indian intellectual circles and are purely interested in historical revisionism and framing every incident to fit their ideological narrative. Or maybe because it happened to a marginalized community that the rest of the country doesn’t care for…

Whatever the reasons, Blood Island is a book you must read, and a story you must tell your friends and family, till this piece of history and the year 1979 is etched into the collective consciousness of our society, just like 1984 or 2002.

About the Author : Deep Halder has been a journalist for almost twenty years, writing on issues of development at the intersection of religion, caste and politics. Currently, he is executive editor at India Today Group.

The post BLOOD ISLAND: AN ORAL HISTORY OF THE MARICHJHAPI MASSACRE — Book Review appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Rise of Genghis Khan — Invasions and Conquests

His conquests included the Western Xia Dynasty, Jin Dynasty, Qara Khitai, Khwarazmid Empire, Georgia, Kievan Rus, Volga, Bulgaria and other territories spanning many, many more kingdoms and all of this took him only 21 years. The Mongol Empire by the time of his death in 1227, spanned over 12 million square kilometers, effectively more than twice the size of Alexander’s empire.

At its height in 1279, it spanned to over 23 million square kilometers, more than four times the size of Alexander’s empire. It stretched all the way from the Gulf of Finland in the far west, the Arabian Gulf in the far south to the East China Sea in the far east. The routes and trails of his conquests are a matter of debate but he probably went from Mongolia to Manchuria, Korea, Xinjiang, Kazakhstan, the Aral Sea, the Caspian Sea and then to northern Iran in those 21 years.

It is particularly interesting to estimate how many kilometers of traveling would those conquests be per year, on an average. Considering the fact that he managed to conquer around 571,428 square kilometers of land on an average per year, during his entire 21 years of conquest, it roughly amounts to around 1,565 square kilometers on an average per day and 65 square kilometers on an average per hour.

Of course, he didn’t acquire new territories every day throughout that time but when he did, he vanquished an unbelievable number of kingdoms in record time. In doing so, Khan is estimated to have killed around 40 million people or roughly 10% of the world’s population at that time. Being an adherent of a nomadic Mongolian faith called Tengrism, he spared no one and massacred Muslims, Christians, Buddhists and Jews alike. In fact, he is said to have reduced two-thirds of Iran’s population, all by himself.

In contrast, Alexander conquered roughly 530,000 square kilometers of land on an average per year during his 10 years of conquest. That amounts to around 60 square kilometers of territory gained per hour. The numbers are surprisingly pretty close for both of them.

But then, Genghis Khan was probably a greater victor overall because his life was much harder than Alexander’s and he was able to become the ruler of all the Mongols despite very humble origins, and he ultimately became the founder of the world’s largest contiguous empire, which, unlike the British Empire, only took 21 years to create in that day and age.

An interesting fact about Ghengis Khan

An interesting fact about Ghengis Khan discovered in recent times is that, according to a historical genetics paper published in 2003, one in every two hundred men are direct descendants of him. So believe it or not, you and me both could very well be a descendant of this great conqueror and astonishing figure of human history.

I am the flail of god. Had you not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.

Genghis Khan

Featured Image: Artstation/@Thahn Tuan

The post THE BRUTAL BRILLIANT MONGOL LEADER: GENGHIS KHAN appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Understanding of colonial origins and ethnic violence in India

The author takes the examples of Jaipur & Ajmer and Malabar & Travancore to show the contrast in ethnic violence and religious violence between both. The British did not rule all of India directly, their rule was direct in the form of British administered provinces or native ruled princely States. This was largely a result of the 1857 riots which scared the British and put their expansion on hold as they figured out a better model to control the Indian territory.

According to Verghese, local rulers were more progressive towards caste issues and friendlier to tribals as opposed to those of the opposite religion. For example, the Nizam of Hyderabad was hostile to Hindus, the ruler of Kashmir was hostile to Muslims. He gives examples of Jaipur vs Ajmer and Malabar vs Travancore. Jaipur was ruled by a Hindu king while Ajmer was a British province. He claims that Jaipur till date has a strong polarization/conflict over religion while Ajmer is relatively peaceful while it is the opposite in the case of caste-related conflict.

He makes a similar case Malabar which was ruled directly by the British while Travancore was under a Hindu ruler. He also claims the Malabar rebellion was largely based on caste-based fault lines due to the lower castes who converted to Islam fighting against the landlords who oppressed them. He goes on to cite evidence of arrests of a large number of Hindu bandits during the time where the disturbances started as well as the fact that during the early stages of the revolt, there were Hindu lower castes as well who fought against the British administration as well as the landed class who were mostly Hindu upper castes.

He explains how Hindu rulers while being antagonistic towards Muslims and Christians were pretty progressive in recognizing tribal property rights and even tried to empower them. The British who were spooked by the 1857 riots and worried about religious fanaticism, tried to secularize their administration and were more worried about religious conflict. Their actions such as giving a greater representation of Muslims in their administration helped reduce religious conflict. On the contrary their policies such as declaring criminal tribes, a census that identified and listed the castes that were considered ‘untouchables’, declaring some tribes as criminal tribes and prosecuting them created more barriers against social mobility for the lower castes and also increased the stigma against them.

The British interest in exploiting forests led them to deprive the property rights of tribals, ones which no ruler in India, including the Mughals, ever imagined or tried. Rulers in India largely recognized the rights of tribals over forests and were even given recognition/appointment in the royal courts/administration.

He uses this theory and uses statistics to calculate the chances for religious/ethnic violence in many districts and he finds that statistically his theory holds good.

While his theory holds well for the cases he lists, he also mentions Bastar which is the hub for caste-based violence/conflict. This would disprove his theory since Bastar was not administered by the British and had a ruler. he explains this conundrum that while it was true on paper, the rulers of Bastar were mere puppets and the British had a huge history of interference even replacing the rulers and changing their own rules to maintain their control. and by proxy, they implemented the same policies against the tribals as they did in British administered territory.

Personal Views on The Colonial Origins of Ethnic Violence in India

Personally, I’m not totally sold on this theory as a general explanation or an overarching theory of ethnic conflict in India. But for the cases he specifically mentions, it does seem that he might have a point. Since there are many complex variables that are hard to quantify such as the amount of British interference in the administration of princely states/territories (almost none in the case of Travancore versus high in the case of Bastar), it would seem that it would be hasty to use statistics to jump to a conclusion since these variables cannot be properly quantified.

Also, some of his data is based on surveys of various govt officials, academics and maybe that’s an acceptable methodology to gauge sentiments, I think there is no substitute for hard empirical data since it is prone to biases. It was an interesting read for sure, but this theory doesn’t seem watertight.

Also while he states that the data shows a lesser amount of religious conflict today in the Malabar region than compared to Travancore. when I asked a bunch of people who reside in Kerala, all of them felt the opposite(i understand that’s not a reliable indicator) but some of the most violent riots like the Marad massacre seem to have occurred in the Malabar region.

Also personally I think that sometimes you can’t just use the number of incidents of religious conflict as a proxy for how strong the religious conflict animosity in an area is. one big large scale riot that is extremely violent is not the same as 10 smaller ones with an equivalent injury/kill count spread over a few years. Also, his data doesn’t capture the number of people who participate in a riot, which can also be a good indicator. If 5000 people take to the streets it definitely means a lot more than smaller groups causing equivalent damage to life and property.

About the author

Ajay Verghese is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Riverside. Verghese was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University from 2012 to 2013.

The post THE COLONIAL ORIGINS OF ETHNIC VIOLENCE IN INDIA — Book Review appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Background of Bhopal Gas Tragedy

Any accident related to development gives lessons to mankind. Thus, the development activities should always be conducted by a responsible and disciplined administration. The horrific accident that took place on December 2 1984, in Bhopal still shakes the consciousness of the whole world.

In the 1960s, the year of green revolution advanced agricultural technology was used mainly to increase crop production with high-quality seeds, chemical, fertilizers and pesticides. In 1966, the production of pesticides in India was only 14,000 metric tons, which is significantly less than the requirement. Due to the sudden increase in demand for chemical pesticides and fertilizers UCC, a US-based company decided to set up a new agricultural division UCIL to capture the Indian market. Adopting the guidelines of the Indian Companies Act of 1956, UCC reduced its share of ownership from 100 % to 60% and registered the company UCIL in 1966. In 1968, the Indian government approved UCIL to build a fertilizer and pesticide plant in Bhopal, the capital of Madhya Pradesh and leased several hectares of land “Kali Parade”. The plant began in 1969 to produce raw fertilizers and concentrated chemical pesticides of American origin to make usable energy.

How Did This Happen?

In 1978, the UCC and UCN decided to produce SEVIN, a carbaryl pesticide used on cotton and other crops.  Resulting in methylamine reacting with phosgene to produce intermediate Methyl Isocyanate, which on reaction with 1-naphthol produces 1-carbaryl.

In 1975, the Government of India permitted UCIL to produce 5000 tons of carbaryl pesticides per year in the Bhopal project.

There were several accidents at UCIL plant before December 2 1984, mainly due to the leakage of gases like phosgene, MIC, hydrochloric acid, chloroform. But most of them caused minor damage to workers. Many animals died by drinking water from a stream just outside the plant polluted by the fluid runoff from the plant. From 7 to 22 October 1984, the available phosgene and methylamine at the Bhopal plant were used for the final batch of MIC production. The 40-ton and 20-ton MICs are kept in two separate tanks. MIC production is subsequently stopped for maintenance. According to the report, on 2nd December 1984, the safety component gas scrubber, flare, refrigeration was in standby or non-operative condition due to the shutdown of MIC production. It is important to note that the vent gas scrubber uses caustic soda to neutralize toxic gas exhaust from MIC plant and storage tanks.

It is not yet clear what actually happened on December 2, 1984. Various studies have shown that MIC was stored in two-layered steel tanks having code numbers E610, E611, and E619. During the shift change from 10:45 PM to 11 PM an employee noticed that the pressure in the E610 tank had increased to 10psi, which was fivefold higher than the pressure previously recorded. Around 11:30 a.m. some of the workers noticed burning sensation and tears in their eyes, some of them noticed liquid droplets along with yellowish white gas coming out of the MIC tank, the pressure of E610 was indicating its maximum reading of 55 psi. There was even no sign of caustic soda floor and a cloud of gas was seen from the scrubbers stack. Toxic gas is emitted around 12:40 AM. The fire water sprayers were used but in the water could not reach the gas cloud, which was formed on the top of the scrubber stack. Due to the refrigeration system being off, attempts to cool the tank E6410 also failed. As a result emission of MIC gas could not be stopped and this continued for 2 hours.

Around 1 AM the residence of the surrounding area suffered from suffocation and odour due to gas leakage. At around 3 AM the retired army brigadier requested a team of army engineers to evacuate the workers and people near UCIL plant because the incident occurred in the late-night hours and there were no professional disaster management team to deal with the accident which happened in a peaceful town. There were corpses of people and animals on the ground the victims were shifted to the city’s government hospital Hamidia Hospital and its adjoining Gandhi Medical College. But thousands of people lay on the ground of inside and outside of the hospital people could be seen shouting, crying and praying.

 There are other possible reasons behind this man made catastrophe-

• On the evening of 2nd December, the supervisor on duty transferred from different unit to MIC plant with which he was not acquainted. The supervisor instructed a group of untrained workers to connect the hose to the pipeline system and keep it running for several hours but forgot to instruct them to add slip binds. At midnight, a group of workers noticed MIC presence in the air and they thought this leakage is common, so no necessary action is required.
• Researchers from Chauhan Delhi Science Forum, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research and Disaster Management Institute said that, MICs design deficiencies that played a significant role in Bhopal plant accident. At the Bhopal plant, a dangerous but cost-effective method of manufacturing of SEVIN was chosen. Instead of storing MIC in many small barrels, like the UCC plant in Virginia, it was stored long-term in two large tanks.

Nevertheless, UCC admitted in their own investigation report that most of the systems were not functioning on the night of the accident-

• Tank temperature was not logged.
• The vent gas scrubber was not in use.
• The cooling system was not in use.
• The concentration of chloroform in the production tank was too high.
• The tanks high-temperature alarm was not working.

Both the plant design and safety management were of lower quality than the UCC operated other plants in the US and Europe.

Consequences of the Bhopal Disaster

Short Term Effects:

Residents of the surroundings were suffering from coughing, vomiting and burning sensation in the respiratory organs and a feeling of suffocation those who arrived at the hospital had shortness of breath with water in their lungs and were suffering from convulsions. Women and neo-natal mortality rates increased by 200%. While the unofficial death figure in 1991 was stated as 3928, more probable that at least 8000 died within the first days.

Long Term Effects:

According to survivor’s organization and activists, thousands of people have become permanently disabled due to the toxic gas. In 1986 R. Krishnamurthy, chairman of the commission of inquiry into accident said that between 30,000- 40,000 people were found to be permanently disabled.

Socio-Economic Effects

The economic situation of the hardest affected part of the Bhopal population in 1994 can be categorized as dependence on physical and casual work for cattle for income and male offspring for support in old age. From a survey conducted in late December 1984 found that 75% of the workforce was incapable of work mainly due to breathlessness. Many families had lost their stock of cattle. 25000 families suffered from total or substantial loss of income.

Government’s Reactions Towards Bhopal Gas Tragedy

The survivors of the Bhopal gas tragedy are still fighting for compensation. This worst industrial disaster demonstrates what can happen when safety measures are overlooked. The government of India enacted the Bhopal gas leak act in March 1985 which enabled the government to act as legal representative to the victims.

The company in the government set aside $470 m in 1989 after the Bhopal court issued an arrest warrant against the chairman and chief executive of Union Carbide, Warren Anderson. The government of India has left a very small portion of the settlement amount to victims. Even today, the government has embezzled $370 million and the victims and their family are constantly campaigning for compensation.

Instead of helping the people of Bhopal, the Indian government has stepped up its efforts to look at the disaster lightly and insignificantly. Top officials in the state government asked truck drivers to carry a large number of dead buddies and dump them in the river and inside the forest.

The government had set up a number of hospitals but failed to take adequate measures such as lack of proper doctors, medicines, equipment to provide safe and appropriate treatment. Today in 2011, people are thoughtlessly given antibiotics, steroids, psychotropic and other potentially harmful medicines.

The government was ordered by the Supreme Court to provide safe water to areas adjacent to the Union Carbide factory but still some people there are being forced to drink contaminated water from hand pumps. The main reason that the ruling government, irrespective of political parties has been negligent towards the people of Bhopal that most of the victims are poor people who have no way to avail government benefits.

Warren Anderson, company’s chairman was arrested in the capital of Madhya Pradesh for four days after the disaster. But after few hours of house arrest, Anderson was released on bail and left the country. Several reports have suggested that PM Rajiv Gandhi’s government was pressured by the US to release Anderson. Human Rights activists have blamed successive governments for failing to secure the extradition of the man who was held responsible for the death of around 15,000 people.

36 Years of Bhopal Gas Tragedy: A Continuing Disaster

Immediately after the disaster, UCC began to try to absolve itself of the responsibility for the accident. Its principal tactic was to convict UCL, which was created and operated by an Indian subsidiary. On 7th December the toxic plume had barely cleared at the time of the filing of the multimillion-dollar lawsuit by the American attorney in the US court and its effect on Bhopal’s people was largely ignored.

In March 1985, the Government of India made provision for compensation under the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act, but the UCC suppressed the number of victims. According to the Gas Strategy Relief and Rehabilitation Department, at the end of the October 2003, 554895 injured and 15,310 killed were compensated.

A local charity, Sambhavna Trust had released a report in 2015 after three years of research which indicated that many children still suffer from congenital defects whose parents were exposed to toxic gases and subsequently exposed to prolonged exposure to contaminated drinking water. It basically surveyed 100 thousand people from 20,000 households living in Blue Moon Colony, Shriram Nagar and Annu Nagar adjacent to the Union Carbide Factory. But the government has refused to accept the NGO’s claim that birth defects and other medical problems in children are caused by contaminated soil and water. The affected children also did not get any help from the state for their treatment and rehabilitation.

Like Mohammad Zaid, who is 17, but looks like a small child. His body and mind have not developed with his age. his father was one of the victim of Bhopal gas tragedy , who inhaled the deadly Methyl Isocyanate gas in 1984. The Chingari Trust provides psychological support to all these children so that they can lead a normal life.

According to the international environmental organization Green Peace, more than 20,000 people still live around the plant and are exposed to deadly chemicals through groundwater and soil contamination.

Conclusion

The two most important reasons for the Bhopal gas tragedy are the company’s policy regarding plant design and cost consolidation. Negligence of agency and government authorities after the accident had a detrimental effect on public life. The incident shows that the ethical analysis of industrial accidents does not focus on the individual but on the responsibilities of the company, including the national and local authorities. Continuously and increasingly when a society breaks the rules of ethics, it can be considered as an unethical society and the company follows these as correct. 36 years after the catastrophic Bhopal gas tragedy, the government still fails to do justice to the victims, according to organizations fighting for the rights of the victims. Several rights organizations have been, for decades, demanding harsh and exemplary punishment to those responsible for the tragedy, adequate compensation to the victims, a proper rehabilitation plan and adequate medical facilities for survivors and removal of toxic chemicals lying on the plant premises among other things. The government should provide adequate employment and medical care to the survivors of this catastrophe. In addition, the current administration needs to do justice to Anderson’s escape from the country without having to face justice in the past.

Featured Image: AP Photo/Prakash Hatvalne

The post BHOPAL GAS TRAGEDY: 36 YEARS OF UNDELIVERED JUSTICE appeared first on WISER WORLD.

HISTORY AND MEANING

Niccolo Machiavelli was a 15th-century Italian political scientist who was a minister of the king. His most celebrated work is The Prince, in which he identified how a prince should gain and maintain power. He gives a hardcore realistic standpoint, in which he professes to conquer new land to strengthen the kingdom. Further, he states that one needs to be vigilant to rising minority revolts. Also, in case of any threat to power, the leader should wipe it off in a single stroke. The last key teaching that he gives is that a leader should rather be feared than loved.

This basic understanding of what Machiavelli teaches will helps us work out what role Machiavellianism play today in our society where the ‘American Dream’ has surpassed the boundaries of American and everyone is trying to get the biggest share of the pie. This dream has surpassed the corporate world and has become more evident in politics, even though politics and Machiavellianism go hand in hand; today we are seeing that at an unprecedented level.

COPORATE WORLD AND MACHIAVELLI

The private world has become the bloodline of the world economy and to say that it is the most important economic aspect would be an understatement. Private entities have existed for a long time in human history but it is in the last century that it has become a major phenomenon. Today, Machiavellianism has seeped into the corporate world. There have been numerous books and scholarly articles depicting how the corporate world has become a vicious cycle in which those at the top remain there along with those at the bottom subjugated to lower positions. There have been rising cases of money laundering to preserve the money and consequently power. Today the ‘American Dream’ has become synonymous to doing anything and everything to attain success. It is a world with the main incentive profit and greed. There have been cynical depictions in movies and books about how the common man is screwed just to gain profit. All this added with the corporate rivalries.

The rivalry between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs is one of the most brutal ones even though most of the new generation doesn’t even know about it. Further, the controversy surrounding the founding of Facebook was another instance where greed trumped morality. Usually, we do not identify the corporate world with what we usually refer to as Machiavellian, maybe because it seems more sophisticated than politics and more importantly, we are a part of it, even unknowingly at times. The power that the corporate world possesses is something that few can dream of, but this blanket that the private world is given is what makes it scarier. All it takes is one huge blunder and the whole economy will collapse. The 2008 Crisis was the prime example, where the American banks gave house loans and mortgages at a rate which was basically non-returnable and then we saw the markets crashing; the ripple effect of which was felt across the globe. This corporate espionage of the ‘American Dream’ puts all of us in morally ambiguous situations and this is what Machiavelli feared.

POLITICS AND MACHIAVELLI

One possibly cannot write down the whole dynamic between politics and Machiavelli. The very foundation of Machiavellianism was based on politics. What we see today is that the politicians are implementing what Machiavelli taught in a near-perfect manner. All of his tenets of greed, conquering more, restricting minority revolts are being implemented in a way that maybe even Machiavelli wouldn’t have thought. It was during the European Wars of Religion when both sides had consensus on only one thing, i.e. Machiavelli is responsible for such wars and distrust. And that has continued for centuries that followed. Coming to the current century, the Arab Spring is the biggest example of this theory. There was a string of leaders who had forced their rule for decades were finally being thrown over after years of repression. Further, examples go beyond one can think of.

Within India, BJP’s recent strategy of turning Congress MLAs on their side can also be seen as a similar tactic. In India, it is Kautilya who provides similar teachings and has come to be rightly known as the ‘Machiavelli of India’. Now, from this, it established that politics cannot survive without the theories of Machiavelli. Even if one person is strictly against it, he/she will simply not be able to sustain power in a world where 99 others are staunch disciples. This has put even politics a morally questionable vocation. It is also true that such political thought and tactics existed long before Machiavelli was even born, but it is to his credit that he was able to understand all of it and present it to the people.

POPULAR CULTURE AND MACHIAVELLI

It is impossible for a human trait, which has sustained itself for nearly 600 years does not get affected by pop culture. Ever since his book The Prince came out, scholars worried about the impact that this book will have. The first time that we saw such a character was when Shakespeare wrote Macbeth and was able to include the word Machiavellian in his text. The play was applauded by thousands and that’s when Machiavellian became a part of the folklore.

After that, we have seen books, movies, TV series and even journalism including the term and creating a representation which presents the character. The book along with its US and UK series adaptation of House of Cards is one of the prime examples. The main character keeps breaking the fourth wall, clarifying to the reader and viewers, how devious his plans were. TV shows like Game of Thrones feature a prominent character with Machiavellian traits. A few of these characters are referred to as anti-heroes because, at the end of the day, we can relate to these characters and their lust for power. We understand why that particular character is doing what he/she is doing even if we don’t align with their moral leanings.

One of the prime examples is Breaking Bad lead character, Walter White, who is a normal Chemistry high school teacher at the very start, is diagnosed with cancer, and eventually by the end of the series, and becomes a mastermind drug lord, who will backstab his own family and closest ally, just to earn money. The former teacher even goes to the length of killing just to maintain his power at the very top of the drug ring. In many polls, Walter White has been chosen as the favourite TV character of millions. The depiction is Machiavellian in its purest form, since he is feared and loathed by all the characters in the show, and still loved by the viewers.

This sort of dynamic is visible in most of the movies that we watch today but rarely understand. Such characters have been so deeply embedded in our pop culture that we see them as just another character. Maybe the problem is not as deep as some of Machiavelli’s critics would like to be viewed as and it is just a natural inclination towards watching and reading characters that are as complex as the viewers and readers themselves. Nonetheless, whether positive or negative, one can never deny the role and influence of Machiavelli and his teachings in pop culture today.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I will be stating two things. First, understanding Machiavelli is not just important for political scientists, but also economists, philosophers, practitioners of psychology and sociology and all of us. Because, whether we like it or not, Machiavelli and his teachings exist in every part of our life, in one form or the other. Secondly, Machiavelli and his teachings are not as cynical as they sound and they can easily be used for the benefit of those who it is meant to repress. Back in his days, Machiavelli was eventually banished when a change in power happened. The king he had his loyalty to, was dethroned and the new one didn’t fancy having him around. It is at that time that he wrote The Prince and some scholars say the purpose of his book wasn’t to help the king or the leader but rather the people. He wanted people to know how the leader could unlawfully dominate them and lead them to their ruin. He wanted the people to know this so that they could identify the signs and fight such a leader in whatever capacity they could. He provided them with the material that was needed to save them from their ruin. As Machiavelli himself used to say –

“In order to escape from hell, give the people the way to it so that they could run away from it.”

Featured Illustration: RYAN INZANA

The post ROLE OF MACHIAVELLI IN TODAY’S TIME appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The strategic importance of the Korean Peninsula has enacted as the bridge between Asia mainland and Japan. It was believed that dominance over the Korean Peninsula signified influence over East Asia. It was during 1876 that diplomatic ties between both the countries were established. The Sino- Japanese War fought during 1894- 1895 must be analyzed from the perspective of Japanese imperialism or ‘Empire of the East’ countering the notion of western imperialism. However, the latter is not the only form of imperialism. Clearly, the aim of the Japanese government was to exercise political and economic control. Public opinion supported this action and clearly believed that Japan should play a pivotal role in helping Korea to free itself from the clutches of China. On the other hand, Qing China during the 1880s espoused the necessity to dominate over Korea. It is indeed true that nationalism and the trajectory of civilization have an intimate relationship as can be clearly seen by the case of Japan. Both the countries emphasized on their narratives to point out the righteousness in their actions (Sook, 2011, p: 39-74). Clearly, the Japanese government had manipulated the public opinion towards its aggressive foreign policy. Japan engaged in the discourse of civilization or bunmei kaika to present itself as a progressive nation which saw the light of Westernization (Darua, 2001, p: 99- 130). This altering contour emerged during the reign of the Meiji Restoration (1868-1912).  However, Russia’s emergence as a threat to Japan pushed the latter to be protective about Korea which led to the Russo-Japan War in 1905. 

Colonization of Korea (1905- 1945): Etched in Korea’s Collective Memory

Russia’s defeat was the stepping stone for Japan as Korea was formally annexed and become a part of the Japanese empire in 1905. Korea remained colonized till 1945 after which she was freed from Japan’s clutches with the latter’s defeat in the Pacific War. It was in 1912 that the Japanese Governor-General propagated laws that allowed the Japanese people to have ownership of land in Korea. A resettlement program was introduced by the government wherein many Japanese families settled in Korea before the end of the First World War. A large scale displacement took place. Additionally, 724,777 Korean workers had been sent to mainland Japan and Sakhalin as labourers in industries for mining, shipbuilding and construction. The Koreans were treated as second-class citizens and the Japanese government attempted to erase their culture by drawing up policies that would lead them to speak in the language of the colonizers. It was believed that Korean history and geography books were burned down by a nationwide search as well as confiscation of books of its independence and biographies of its national heroes was conducted by the government.

Not only that, gender-based violence on the Korean women was emerging as a disturbing issue during the Second World War. 20,000 Korean and Asian women were trafficked in military brothels to serve as ‘comfort women’ to the Japanese soldiers during the Asia-Pacific war. Comfort stations had been established in Indonesia, Indochina, Thailand, Okinawa, Korea and Taiwan. The women were treated as forced sexual slaves and must be analyzed from the perspective of gender-based violence. On the other hand, Japan had been the signatory of the International Convention for the Suppression of Traffic in Women and Children of 1921, yet Korea and Taiwan did not come under its purview. (Min, 2003, p: 938-957) The terminology of jugun inafu or comfort women was coined by the Japanese Government officials to cloak the reality of sexual slavery. Women who rebelled were brutally beaten up, raped and tortured.  It took 20 years before the former Korean President, Park Chung- Hee had agreed to normalize ties with Japan as collective memory etched on to its horrifying history.

Changing Contour of Republic of Korea and Japan Ties

The relations between South Korea and Japan can be examined from the point of view of a former suzerain state and colonizer since the 19^th century. Japan had argued that by the treaty of 1965 with South Korea, the former has provided compensation of $9.5 million for its sexual slavery as well as apologized in 1993. It was in 1952 that the first territorial dispute emerged between South Korea and Japan. Although Tokyo came under the jurisdiction of Korea, it had been administered by the latter for 41 years.  Kim Young- Sum’s Government declared the construction of a wharf facility in 1996 which was protested by the Hashimoto Government of Japan. However, on the face of North- Korean Teapeo- Dong Missile Crisis, Republic of Korea, President Kim and Japanese Prime Minister, Obuchi in 1998 signed the Joint Declaration and Action for a New Korea- Japan partnership in the 21st century. It was in 2015 that the former Foreign Minister of Japan, Fumio Kishida offered a formal apology and the Japanese Government stated that it would establish a Reconciliation and Healing Center which would care for the victims of sexual violence.  As Korea was in the process of democratization, civic organizations such as the Association of War Victims and Bereaved Families of Korean’s and Citizens Coalition for Economic Justice insisted that their Government must bring out a resolution to the colonial problems faced in South Korea. However, it cannot be denied that Japan was heralded as an economic partner. The post- Cold War period witnessed shifts in Korea- Japan relationship as security cooperation between USSR, North Korea, China and on the other hand, Japan, Republic of Korea and the USA broke down. Nonetheless, it cannot be forgotten that Japan and South Korea have espoused an anti-community narrative which is significant in their alliance as constructivism argues. These countries distinguish themselves from the other or Communism in this regard which is rooted in the perception of the self and other. The alliance is established when North Korea emerges as a common threat that leads them to shift from friction. It is imperative that the norms or a common ground must be shared for cooperation to flourish. Adding to that, the alliance did not last very long when in 2010 South Korea recalled the ambassador to Tokyo to protest against the approval of the Japanese Government of middle school textbooks written by the Society for Making New History Books, a Right- Wing intellectual group that aimed to conceal the atrocities of Japan’s wartime history. (Cho, 2008, p: 2-117) It clearly glorified Japanese militarism and fueled anti- Japanese sentiment in Korean public opinion. South Korean domestic policies have the impact of post-colonial history. The General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) had been signed in 2016 which allowed Seoul and Japan to exchange information on North Korean missile which was supposed to expire in November. Ties experienced a downward spiral after the Supreme Court of South Korea in 2018 had ordered Japanese Firms to pay reparation for mobilizing Korean men and women as forced labours. Japan responded in July by removing South Korea from its list of trading partners as well as curbing exports namely fluorinated polyamides, photerists and hydrogen fluoride which are pivotal to the former’s semiconductor industry. The decision of not renewing the GSOMIA was upheld by Moon Jae’s government. The trade war that had been declared by both the countries has been perceived as a warning sign for USA and fear looms of the trilateral alliance breaking down.  

Portrayal of Japanese Media House Towards the Issue of Comfort Women

Journalism plays a pivotal role in bringing the truth to the public, yet this is determined by the coverage of the issue and if its portrayal is influenced by Government representation. ‘Sorrowful Homecoming’ was a Documentary which was released by the Korea Center of Investigative Journalism in 2016 that contained interviews of Korean women who were treated as sex slaves. This documentary had been created to raise awareness of the brutality done by the Japanese Imperial Army on Korean women and reconstruct the past human abuses. This has played an important role in building the collective memory of South Korea.  (Runquist, 2020, p: 2-17) On the other hand, Hirayasu Minzo, the Executive Editor of the Japan Times had criticized Reuters for not taking into account Japan’s viewpoint of colonization and refused to call comfort women as victims neither did he view Japan’s annexation of Korea as brutal.  Clearly, the Japan Times had refused to portray the horrifying Human Rights Violations that had occurred under the Meji regime in fear that it would be perceived as anti- Japanese by Shinzo Abe’s Government as it needed revenues from companies to survive and therefore had utilized the usage of such terminology. Although, Minzo had denied that his stance had altered due to external pressure, the fear of Abe’s Government ceasing the functioning of the paper could be viewed as one of the motives behind such an action. Indeed, the banner was, “All the news without fear or favor” has proved to be a farce as the truth has been denied. This has played a pivotal role in accentuating differences between the two countries. 

USA’s Role in South Korea-Japan Ties

The USA had perceived South Korea as its bulwark against Communism during the Cold War era. Yet, it cannot be denied that she built the foundation for democracy and it was the path that the Republic of Korea walked on. It was in 1953 that the Mutual Defense Treaty between the USA and the ROK was signed when Korean War had come to an end. The fervour to renew this alliance was pushed by George Bush’s Government during the 2000s. The USA, Japan and the Republic of Korea have been entangled in trilateral cooperation as North Korea’s advancement of nuclear missiles and China’s growing aggressiveness have led to the development of this alliance as these three countries share the standpoint of security. Nevertheless, this alliance has been embedded in the USA’s foreign policy. Nonetheless, an agreement between the Korean President, Park Geun- Hye and Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe was reached on 28^th December 2015 which could not have been possible without the pivotal role played by Obama’s administration which focused on the policy of “Rebalance to Asia”.

Conclusion

It is imperative for the Trump administration to sustain the trilateral cooperation as the ties between The ROK and Japan experience significant shifts due to the disturbing colonial past and atrocities embedded in the history of South Korea. As China’s aggressiveness becomes a warning sign for the USA as the ever so globalized world witnesses a re-emerging dawning Cold War era, the alliance can become the foundation for resistance if the economic partnership is facilitated. However, it must be kept in mind that the relationship of the Republic of Korea with Japan has been defined by the history of colonialism and collective memory.

The post DIPLOMATIC TIES BETWEEN REPUBLIC OF KOREA AND JAPAN: HOW JAPANESE COLONIALISM INFLUENCED THEIR POST COLONIAL RELATIONSHIP appeared first on WISER WORLD.

BACKGROUND

To better understand the Kosovo problem, first, let us delve into the background of the region. The region was previously together known as Yugoslavia and was internationally non aligned until the end of the cold war. In 1991, when the Soviet Union got dissolved, even Yugoslavia saw the rise of the nationalistic movement. The main actors were Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Albania. All the countries are now independent but the most violent revolutions were in Croatia and Bosnia. It is important to keep in mind that Serbia had been the major power of Yugoslavia and it didn’t want Yugoslavia to be disintegrated, to maintain its power in the region. Further, Serbia made attempts to gain territories in both Croatia and Bosnia but had been mostly unsuccessful. Croatia too had tried to gain ground by using its military over regions with mostly ethnic Croats but again had faced criticism from the international community. Same goes with Serbia. Now coming to Kosovo, it is a comparatively small tract of land in between Serbia and Albania. It had, historically, been a part of Yugoslavia but upon its breakdown, had been claimed to be a part of Serbia by the Serbian government. The residents of the region did not recognize themselves as part of Serbia. 95% of the residents in the region are native Muslim Albanians which is the other neighbour of Kosovo. This places Kosovo between two belligerent states and makes the whole situation much more complicated.

Ethnic composition of Kosovo

THE KOSOVAN WAR

The Kosovo conflict began in 1974, when Tito, the then head of the former Yugoslavia, officially integrated Kosovo within Yugoslavia, making it an autonomous region. However, this autonomy was only in the paper as most of the political and economic aspects of Kosovo were controlled by Yugoslavia. It was only Tito and his ideology of unification and integration which kept the region from breaking down but all that changed when Tito died in 1980. After nearly a decade and half of the political discrimination faced by the Albanians in Kosovo, resistance started. By the end of the millennium Yugoslavia was a shadow of itself. Kosovo, however, had gone through two years of atrocities and war crimes. By 1998, two factions were formed in Kosovo, both fighting for independence from Serbia, although by different means. The more famous was the Kosovo Liberation Army which used violent means and a militia to fight the Serbian army. The other faction led by Ibrahim Lugoba was Democratic League of Kosovo which preferred the rather peaceful approach. Eventually, the Serbian or Yugoslavian army had come into conflict with the KLA. The Serbian army had been humbled for the majority of 1998 and this led to a rise in war crimes against Albanians residing in Kosovo. An increase in rape, executions, killings of prisoners of war and even ethnic cleansing was visible. Thousands from the Kosovo side and nearly 1500 Serbians had died. More than 600,000 people had left the region, crying for their lives, creating one of the biggest European refugee crises since the Second World War. Initially, there was a very less foreign intervention, that too indirect, but in the next few months, such massacres happened that the international community could not remain silent.  The massacre in Prekaz, Klecka and Ljubenic had shocked the international community, but it was on 15th January 1999, in Racak province that 45 people including women and children were killed, which prompted NATO to join in.

All this time, the Kosovo region was formally under the Serbian government. Even though in name, Yugoslavia still existed, a lot of people think that the war in Kosovo was just an indirect fight between Serbia and Albania who, historically had been at loggerheads. Initially, NATO wanted Kosovo to remain a part of Yugoslavia, but eventually, after the prolonged fighting, NATO supported the claim of full independence by Kosovo. NATO gave an ultimatum to the Serbian/ Yugoslavian forces to leave the region or be bombed. Soon, the Serbian forces withdrew under military pressure from the west. Nonetheless, the Serb President Slobodan Milosevic refused to recognize Kosovo as a country and some reports claimed that the terror attacks by nongovernmental forces were given the green light by Milosevic himself. All this prompted further NATO bombings in Yugoslavia, mainly the key cities of Serbia. Eventually, on June 10, 1999, the UN Security Council passed UNSCR 1244 which made the Kosovo region as a UN governed until stability was reached. The UN forces were welcomed with open arms as for the first time in nearly two decades, hopes of stability and peace were visible. The Kosovo war had officially ended but there have been small escalations between the countries, especially in the north of Kosovo.

POST WAR KOSOVO

Kosovo People after declaration of independence | Credit: Andrew Testa for NYT

Soon after the war ended in Kosovo changes were visible. In 2001 the organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe supervised the first-ever elections for the Kosovo assembly. As a result, Ibrahima Rugova became the President and Bajram Rexhepi was elected the Prime Minister. It was in 2006 that for the first time since 1999 talks happened between ethnic Serbian and Kosovo leaders to decide the future of Kosovo. There was a lot of back and forth during and after these talks. Plans were proposed by the United Nations but were constantly rejected by the Serbs. An important step forward was the formation of European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo which reassured the region that in the future, Kosovo will be supported by the European Union. All this led to the declaration of independence by Kosovo on 17th February 2008 which was followed by recognition all over the globe including NATO, EU and OECD. It is to be noted that throughout these years, several clashes broke out between the Serbian and UN forces. Eventually, Kosovo was able to form its force, trained by NATO and the number stood at 2500. Another important development was the ruling of the International Court of Justice that the declaration of independence did not violate any international law. The biggest escalation since the end of the war was the North Kosovo Crisis which initially started after clashes in 2011 and ended in 2013. The escalation started after Kosovo police entered Serbian controlled territory without previous consultation. Even though the escalation ended, even today North Kosovo is a key area of conflict. Ever since then, the EU has been mediating talks between the two countries, with a minimal positive outcome. Serbia has maintained its stance of recognizing the Kosovo government but not the country. Debates have been going on whether Kosovo is a country in itself. In the UN, 97 countries already recognize Kosovo as a sovereign country but the Veto of Russia prevents the region from gaining UN membership.

CONCLUSION AND WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS

The future of Kosovo has been subject to fierce debates and at this point, one can only guess. Serbia has always been vigilant of the fact that Kosovo might become a part of Albania which will only make it’s rival much stronger, economically as well as culturally. Most recently, discussions had been going on between Serbia and Kosovo regarding a land swap where the Serbian majority region in the north of Kosovo will be transferred to Serbia and a small Albanian Muslim majority region in the south of Serbia will go the other way. This land transfer is not concrete in any way and as things stand the transfer might not happen at all. Further, looking at the future of Kosovo, one can predict a few possibilities. The most likely of which is that UN forces remain in Kosovo for about 8-10 years so that Kosovo gets membership status in the UN, it becomes economically stable and can host a stronger armed force. Other than this, it is also likely that UN forces withdraw sooner than expected which might open up room for conflicts to escalate with Serbia. The last possibility in the foreseeable future is that Kosovo integrates itself within Albania. This is the least likely outcome as Kosovo has started to establish relations with other countries and hopes to be much more stable. Lastly, one point that needs to be raised is whether the idea of Kosovo being a country is sustainable in such a hostile region. Economically, Kosovo is not anywhere close to being stable even though it’s been more than a decade since its independence. Kosovo will be highly dependent on building foreign trade relations due to its lack of resources. Even in that case, Kosovo doesn’t have a port which can facilitate trade. Moving on, the armed force of Kosovo is nowhere near to that of Serbia. In case of a UN withdrawal, it is almost assured that Serbia will be able to swipe Kosovo and take back control. Lastly, a key to maintaining long term stability, Kosovo needs to build an impeccable political system. Before independence and even afterwards, there have been cases of large level corruption which have disrupted the workings of the region. The system needs to assure that there is no consolidation of power with one institution up to a level that the people have to fight another enemy within the country. On the ending note, Kosovo has been able to fight its way through to independence due to the sheer determination of its people and cultural integrity, and that itself should be the way ahead.                                        

The post BREAKING DOWN THE HISTORY OF THE KOSOVO CRISIS appeared first on WISER WORLD.

De-Facto Division

In the earlier 20^th century japan was a big imperial power, conquering all the territories surrounding its island. In 1910, japan deposed the king of Korea and occupied the kingdom of Korea. They ruled as a very oppressive regime for over 35 years and tried to eradicate the complete culture of Korea. In 1939, World War 2 began and japan was a very crucial part of the war. It continued for about 6 years when finally in 1945, USA bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, thus bringing it to an end, with Japan losing the war. Soon after this, the Korean peninsula was taken over by the USA and USSR troops. The USSR army entered from the north and USA troops from the south and decided that they will stop at 38^th degree parallel. This is the initial reason for the division of the Korean peninsula, known as de facto division. Both the armies divided the country into north and south but planned that they will reunite this area after 5 years. 

Contrasting Political Ideologies

The North part of Korea became a communist state under the communist influence of USSR whereas the South part of Korea was becoming a pro-western country, and though the people were against the USA yet the leaders were trying to instil a sense of pro-western culture in this area. Till 1948, both the areas of Korea were ruled by the occupying army of USSR and USA. After that elections took place in the south regime and though it was alleged that they weren’t fair and were ricked, a leader named Syngman Rhee came to power who was pro-USA. While in the north, no elections happened and the USSR made Kim II sung the president as he was a strong abider of the communist ideology.

Both these leaders came into power almost at the same time and were totally against each other as they didn’t believe in each other’s political ideologies. Syngman Rhee was an anti-communist whereas Kim Sung was against the pro – USA ideology. Both the leaders wanted the country to unite but with their own respective government as the leading government. This difference in the political ideologies of the two nations is considered to be the most important reason for the Korean conflicts. Till date, North Korea is a communist state whereas South Korea from 1987 is a democratic state.

The War of 1950-1953

From 1948 onwards Small border clashes and conflicts had begun in between both these countries resulting in fire and bombing at certain places. By 1950, North Korea with its strong military was ready for a war against the South. On June 25, 1950, they invaded the south so as to unify the Korean peninsula. As soon as this invasion began, the UN passed a resolution to help South Korea; this was the first time that United Nations (UN) intervened militarily anywhere in the world. The USSR though a permanent member of the Security Council could have used the veto to ensure that the resolution cannot be passed, but they didn’t as they were boycotting the UN at that time.

The northern army attacked the southern region and overran almost the entire peninsula up to Busan. Soon after this, in September 1950 there was an outflanking manoeuvre by the US troops which was led by Gen Douglas MacArthur, thus resulting in amphibious landings at Incheon and reoccupying Seoul. The UN forces even reached the Yalu River thus breaking the de facto division agreement of stopping of armies at 38^th degree parallel.      

Soon after this china entered the war on October 1950 and pushed the UN forces back and even captured back Seoul by January 7, 1951. Even USSR supported china by sending in air force armies and helping them gain a wider region. Now the fight wasn’t just between the south and north armies but between the Chinese army and the UN troops.                                    

In April 1951, the UN army once again pushed back the Chinese forces and recaptured Seoul. After this, for the next two years there was a stalemate around the 38^th degree parallel as neither the Chinese nor the UN forces had the resources to push back and start a war, and so the fight continued around this region only.                                                                                  

This war had a lot of war crimes from both the sides, thus causing the death of around 2.5 million civilians and 1 million military deaths.  Though this war was such a drastic war yet there were no major changes in the geographical, political and administrative areas of the states, hence it is often known as the forgotten war.

The Armistice 

On June 27, 1953 an armistice was signed between both the regions, thus ceasing all the violence and bloodshed. India played a very important role in these negotiations; general Thimayya of India played a crucial role in the repatriations of prisoners of war.

After this both the armies moved 2 kilometers back, thus creating a 4 km exclusion zone at the border known as the demilitarized zone (DMZ). Though both the armies cannot officially send their troops there yet the demilitarized zone has heavy military around it and the area is full of land mines and barbed wires. This wasn’t a peace treaty but was a temporary agreement for controlling the situation until any final decision was made. 

Sunshine Policy 

The end of the war brought an economic crisis in both the states, while South Korea was able to deal with the losses by taking proper actions, North Korea failed. In South Korea, an economic boom and democratic revolution happened in 1987 leading to a path towards a developing country. Whereas in North Korea, no such action was taken and till date, it is considered to be a very backward state with its economy in a dire state and almost no trade with other countries.                   

In December 1991, both the states made an agreement on reconciliation, pledging peace and cultural and economic exchanges. Soon after this in 1998, the South Korean president announced a sunshine policy towards North Korea. It basically had three principles:

1. No armed provocation by the North will be tolerated.
2. The South will not attempt to absorb the North in any way.
3. The South actively seeks cooperation and promotes reconciliation.

This policy was established in pursuit of more peaceful relationships with North Korea. It was actively supported by the other leaders too, but in 2010 it was formally abandoned thus creating a more hostile relationship between the two states. After this, both the states were at a cold war, which created a lot of tension at the border; at times it was escalated to such a high level that led to firing and even bombing in certain regions. This situation prevailed till 2018. 

2018: A year of Relief 

From 2017 onwards the relationship between both the nations started thriving, with the South Korean president promising the people that he will bring back the sunshine policy. In 2018, Kim Jong Un, the North Korean leader proposed to send in a delegation to the winter Olympics which were to be held in South Korea; both the states marched together in the opening ceremony of the winter Olympics. Soon after this on 1 April, the South Korean k-pop artists performed in North Korea for the first time after 2005, this event was attended by Kim Jong and his wife. Following this, on April 27 summit took place between Moon and Kim in the South Korean zone of the Joint Security Area. This summit ended with both the nations vowing to officially end the Korean War within a year. The two countries signed the Panmunjom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity and Unification of the Korean Peninsula, which was submitted to the United Nations general assembly on September 6, 2018.This declaration was to end the Korean conflicts and to begin a new era of national reconciliation, peace, reunification and prosperity and improvements to inter-Korean communication and relations. 

2019-20: A Period of Diplomacy 

On 30 June 2019, Kim and Moon met again in the DMZ, joined by US President Trump who initiated the meeting. Meanwhile, The US and South Korea took part in joint military drills in August, which was later criticized by the north. Despite all these small disagreements, Kim and Moon continued to have a close and respectful relationship.                            

But on 9 June 2020, North Korea began breaking of all of its communication lines with South Korea, which substantially diminished the agreements which were made in 2018. On June 16, the North Korean government threatened the South to send back the troops that had been withdrawn from the border. Later that day, the North Korean government bombed a joint office in Kaesong causing a lot of damage. On June 21, South Korea urged North Korea to not send propaganda leaflets across the border. The request followed the North’s statement that it was ready to send 12 million leaflets, which could potentially become the largest psychological campaign against South Korea. The reason behind this arbitrary whim is still not known, but it has once again wrecked the relationship of both the states.

Conclusion

The Korean conflict, which is said to be the longest-running conflict of the modern age, highlights the diplomatic and sensitive relationship that two nations of the Korean peninsula share. The conflict which began as disapproval of each other’s political ideology, with the main aim to unite the nation has somewhere lost its essence of uniting the nation. The never-ending cold wars between the two nations have impeded the peace process. The Panmunjom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity and Unification of the Korean Peninsula signed in 2018, was considered to be the end of the longest war but the diplomacy shown by North Korea in 2019-20 has tampered that agreement too. Both the nations have suffered a lot due to this internal conflict and it’s time that they ponder upon the importance of ending this war, and co-existing peacefully without harming each other. 

The post THE UNFORGETTABLE KOREAN WAR: NORTH KOREA V SOUTH KOREA appeared first on WISER WORLD.

Talking of political culture, people in Eastern Europe are still characterized as having less personal autonomy, less responsibility as citizens and members of a global community. In some cases, people also struggle with seriously disturbing national and social identities.

Source: PEW FORUM

As far as economic efficiency is concerned, east European countries have made remarkable progress in the past years, but this progress isn’t enough. The differences in per capita income, productivity and efficiency, output, capitalization, savings, investment, integration into global networks are still huge.

Trading and Colonisation

One historical factor in the development of west European nations is the influx of wealth associated with its sea trade and exploration. Their favourable locations on the Atlantic and Mediterranean gave them advantages in trade and exploration through the sea route with minimal cost. The colonization of lands in America, Africa, Asia and Oceania by several Western European countries brought a huge influx of wealth and resources, which stimulated the economies of these countries. These resources made them global superpowers as early as the 16th century. The effects of colonisation are still being felt in these countries.

Division of Germany

In the aftermath of World War II, defeated Germany was divided into four zones by the allied powers. The Soviet Union occupied the east, while the rest of Germany was divided amongst the United States, Britain and France. With hundreds of thousands of wealthy American soldiers posted in West Germany and spending their American currency, the area flourished. The Deutsche Mark was introduced in 1948 which added to the region’s growth. In the 1950s and 1960s, West Germany experienced industrial growth and low inflation contributing to their prosperity. The security of private property rights and reliance on the price mechanism also contributed to the success of these economies.

Much of the European side of the Second World War happened in Eastern Europe, in today’s Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic countries, the Balkans and Russia. These countries were utterly ravaged. Russia and Germany stole many assets. The Soviets literally dismantled many factories and took many industrial machines East. In addition to this, East Germany inherited highly specialised industrial districts, which were cut off from their major suppliers of inputs as well as their market which was in western Germany. This caused a departure of skilled labour and a number of small and medium-sized firms.

Communism

East Germany, under the authoritarian rule of the Soviets, saw much worse conditions than its Western counterpart. When the rest of the world experienced strong economic growth after World War II, the nations of eastern Europe suffered due to socialism which caused shortage of resources, a highly politicised system and a regressive attitude to progress. Soviets neglected the economy and focused on military power causing an economic crisis. Western Europe, not being the vassal state of the USSR for 40 years probably made a difference.

To start with, Eastern European nations weren’t that developed as they have mostly been the borderlands between various empires. Apart from some exceptions like Hungary, they were Russian hinterlands, not real centres of development, industrial or otherwise.

Communism was ultimately very inefficient. There was no incentive for work as individuals knew that the reward will be the same. Accumulating wealth was not really possible. It led to stagnation in economy, technology and culture. It was the mix of the intense poverty, injustice and the presence of absolute anarchy that crippled these economies.

Marshall Plan

America supported western European countries with aid to stop communism from spreading during the years of the cold war. Dollar aid enabled recipient nations to eliminate raw material shortages in exchange for trade liberalisation. The resource funds allowed governments to finance public projects without the need to cut back on welfare spending.

The U.S. provided $13.3 billion in assistance between 1948 and 1951 to 16 Western European countries through the Economic Cooperation Authority. The Marshall Plan helped in reviving the western economies by controlling inflation, reviving trade, restoring production and rebuilding infrastructure. The Soviet Union rejected the aid on behalf of eastern Germany.

When the Marshall Plan ended in 1951, industrial production, trade and exports had increased far above pre-war level. Employment and standard of living were rising. Politically, communist parties lost influence everywhere.

It encouraged the economic integration that led to the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community among six nations in 1950. It took a leap into a more integrated European Economic Community (EEC) after eight years. It finally became what is called the European Union today. This integration helped the nations to revive their economies through trade.

Demographic Dynamic

The population density in the 19th century was much more in Western Europe more than Eastern. In addition to that, across Western Europe, the casualties of war were offset by natural population growth and post-war mass migration. The impacts of the war and the post-war settlement were different for the eastern and western regions. The population growth was scanty in Eastern Europe which deprived it of flexible labour supply that has been recognised as an imperative factor in western reconstruction and development.

In the Eastern Front, millions fled west, running from the advancing Soviet troops. The effect of war casualties combined with the post-war settlement was devastating. The populations of Hungary, Romania, and Yugoslavia stagnated in the 1940s. Czechoslovakia, Poland, and the Soviet Union faced a population decline over the same period. The shortage of skilled labour proved to be detrimental. The province of Prussia was temporarily depopulated resulting in its industrial districts losing their pre-war labour force level.

The war left a distorted demographic structure with a shortage of able-bodied young men. Conventionally, they were the one who constituted the backbone of the industrial workforce. It all brought the region an excess of industrial and commercial enterprises without their original owners, the necessary skills and managerial know-how required to operate them.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall

The Berlin Wall was a concrete barrier that cut across and divided the city of Berlin from 1961 to 1989 and was constructed in the aftermath of World War 2. The fall of the Berlin Wall symbolised the fall of the ‘Iron Curtain’ that divided the Eastern countries from Western Europe during the Cold War.

East Germany was provided with aid of around €1.6 trillion by the government and private German businesses to bring it at par with the West. The dismantling of the wall had a profound impact on the neighbouring economies as well. Hungry and Czechoslovakia opened up their borders and allowed East Germans to take refuge in Austria. The influx of people meant the economies of neighbouring countries took a hit.

Shortly after the collapse of the Wall, the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the party which was in power in the East also came to an end. Unemployment escalated to extremely high level and the economy was thrown into uncertainty. Those who had government jobs found themselves suddenly out of work. The GDR economy also faced bankruptcy due to the change of currency. Before the reunification of the two regions, 1 Deutsche Mark was the equivalent of 4.5 GDR Marks.

When eastern countries joined the EU, it made it easier for the Western companies to buy up assets in the east. Some also took advantage of the cheap labour market and started companies. Eastern European companies found it challenging to compete with gigantic Western corporations who could afford to undercut prices. In certain industries, prices were set for a certain amount of time so that Eastern European companies could not undercut Western companies which took away their advantage and eventually many Eastern European companies went bankrupt.

Agrarian Economy and Raw Material Exporter

When Western Europe started on the path of capitalist development, the Eastern part of the continent was transformed into an exporter of raw material for the West and an importer of finished goods. The result was a never-ending loop that strengthened Western industries and system that promoted capitalism. Specifically, as the West became more urban, there was a growing demand for agricultural goods, animals and other raw goods. East European people satisfied this need by transforming their domains into farms that exported for the Western market. With the exception of what became the Czech Republic, most of Eastern Europe became more agrarian and therefore poorer than much of Western Europe.

The post EUROPE: EAST, WEST AND THE GULF BETWEEN appeared first on WISER WORLD.