There are many instances which have a parallel in time. This comparison is currently going on in India. The events include the Gujarat riots of 2002 and the Ant-Sikh violence of 1984. Both these events are a big threat today, because involve resentment under the surface, which can explode at any time. The issues are far from being forgotten, and it is only a matter of time before extremist elements create havoc in the present using that past.
Both the above mentioned pogroms have had a deep impact on the Indian social setup. The Godhra riots of 2002 still evoke passion among the majority, but the pogrom in Punjab following 'Operation Blue Star' is now being forgotten. Operation Blue Star was carried out by the Indian army to flush out Sikh militants at the Golden Temple in Punjab in 1984. Then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had ordered this operation, and within months she was shot dead by her bodyguards, who were Sikh. What followed in Delhi was one of the worst instances of violence ever since Partition.
The Anti-Sikh riots and the Godhra riots both show how demented the psyche of certain sections of the populace can be when Political parties whip up hatred. Both these instances have had political backing, and the main perpetrators have not been bought to Justice. These events have isolated a particular section of the population and questioned their 'Indianness'. Also, both these pogroms bought the ruling party back to power in the next election.
What does this tell you about power politics and dictatorshp? Power Politics and Dictatorship are both enforceable when the majority of the population become Apathic to reality. The dynamics of Power Politics are such that human life and thoughts are at a premium and it can be crushed. As with both events, both terms also have a common parallel in time.
Both these events teach the citizenry that 'ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS EVERYONE'. Power can be countered only by vigilance, and only if people oppose power using their strength in numbers. But, this will be problematic if people do not execute the strength in numbers. Punjab and Gujarat will continue to simmer, and there can be no solution, only reconciliation and Justice. If Justice is given, then the tensions will also cease.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Thursday, December 27, 2007
RIP Pakistan???????
This is not a Fundamentalist spouting out Propoganda. This is not a post of hatred, but rather of fear and tension. The assassination of fomer Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has brought these fears in the minds of people. The assassination of this personality brings forth this frightening scenario of Pakistan ceasing to be a state.
General Pervez Musharraf is now experiencing the troubles that a dictatorship brings upon a nation. Dictatorships have never worked, and due to its very nature, it does bring about reactionary elements. But, the problem with Pakistan is that the reactionary elements are more dreaded than the dictator. If Pervez Musharraf goes, then Pakistan will be consumed by a vacumm filled up with elements suited to the terrorists.
The assassination of Mrs. Bhutto raises furthur questions about short term and long term stability. This is the kind of lose-lose scenario which no nation wants to confront. If the elections are put off, then the aim of the terrorists are achieved and they can continue with weakening the state with attacks. The previous emergency did nothing to stop the attacks. If the elections are held, then there is no guarantee of restoration of Democracy as the main contender to the general is already out. Musharraf comes back to power and the status quo is not changed.
In the short-term, violence seems to be inevitable. Already, Pakistan was beset with problems in the North-west Frontier province and the worsening crisis in Balochistan. To add to the cauldron, there have been sporadic secterian clashes in some cities. Anybody who can get a peaceful solution to this mess must be considered for the next Peace Prize.
Many people are also contemplating about Pakistan's viability as a state. The Islamists in Pakistan have become resurgent ever since the Lal Masjid standoff in July. From that time, the problems have gotten severe, and the Taliban Al-Qaeda hideout in the North-west was intensifying. This resurgence has led to Mrs. Bhutto's assassination. The feebleness of the security forces to actively pursue the radicalists have led to them consolidating their base in Pakistan.
If the Power vacumm occurs, then the whole sub-continent is in big trouble. Pakistan is a nuclear state, and if those weapons fall into the wrong hands, then this will have grave implications for the majority of the world. Being such a strategic location, the repercussions will be far reaching. This angle is now not mere speculation, but an unfortunate possibility.
To usher in destruction, a catalyst is needed. In World War-1, the assassination of Serbian Archduke Franz Ferdinand led to the war. Now, it seems as if Mrs. Bhutto's assassination could be the start of a different kind of struggle, one seen unlike anywhere in the world. But, there is hope that a peaceful solution can come out of this. But, the last statement is quiet feeble, because the scenario is so overwhelmingly dangerous and distraughting.
Maybe, the death of the Bhutto dynasty, more importantly Mrs. Benazir, could also be the death of Pakistan. We really hope that this does not happen.
General Pervez Musharraf is now experiencing the troubles that a dictatorship brings upon a nation. Dictatorships have never worked, and due to its very nature, it does bring about reactionary elements. But, the problem with Pakistan is that the reactionary elements are more dreaded than the dictator. If Pervez Musharraf goes, then Pakistan will be consumed by a vacumm filled up with elements suited to the terrorists.
The assassination of Mrs. Bhutto raises furthur questions about short term and long term stability. This is the kind of lose-lose scenario which no nation wants to confront. If the elections are put off, then the aim of the terrorists are achieved and they can continue with weakening the state with attacks. The previous emergency did nothing to stop the attacks. If the elections are held, then there is no guarantee of restoration of Democracy as the main contender to the general is already out. Musharraf comes back to power and the status quo is not changed.
In the short-term, violence seems to be inevitable. Already, Pakistan was beset with problems in the North-west Frontier province and the worsening crisis in Balochistan. To add to the cauldron, there have been sporadic secterian clashes in some cities. Anybody who can get a peaceful solution to this mess must be considered for the next Peace Prize.
Many people are also contemplating about Pakistan's viability as a state. The Islamists in Pakistan have become resurgent ever since the Lal Masjid standoff in July. From that time, the problems have gotten severe, and the Taliban Al-Qaeda hideout in the North-west was intensifying. This resurgence has led to Mrs. Bhutto's assassination. The feebleness of the security forces to actively pursue the radicalists have led to them consolidating their base in Pakistan.
If the Power vacumm occurs, then the whole sub-continent is in big trouble. Pakistan is a nuclear state, and if those weapons fall into the wrong hands, then this will have grave implications for the majority of the world. Being such a strategic location, the repercussions will be far reaching. This angle is now not mere speculation, but an unfortunate possibility.
To usher in destruction, a catalyst is needed. In World War-1, the assassination of Serbian Archduke Franz Ferdinand led to the war. Now, it seems as if Mrs. Bhutto's assassination could be the start of a different kind of struggle, one seen unlike anywhere in the world. But, there is hope that a peaceful solution can come out of this. But, the last statement is quiet feeble, because the scenario is so overwhelmingly dangerous and distraughting.
Maybe, the death of the Bhutto dynasty, more importantly Mrs. Benazir, could also be the death of Pakistan. We really hope that this does not happen.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Moditva, Rethinking and Implication
The Post-Mortem has been done. The dust has settled, the verdict is out. Narendrabhai Modi has been re-elected for the second time as the Chief Minister of Gujarat. I would like to congratulate him for the result, and I do wish him luck. But, there are doubts still remaining, and I will try and highlight them as concisely as I can.
The first conclusion is that Development supercedes everything now. For the Capitalist world, power politics when oriented with development can yield rich results. The predominant theme of Modi's election campaign was development. The amount of progress Gujarat has made in the years of his administration was the peg on which he won.
The second conclusion is that Living in the Past will not benefit societal development. The riots of 2002 are being put on the back-burner, and any activist or media group which tried to revive the topic were branded as biased or simply a medium for propoganda. The English language Media was a particular target this time, being called Anti-Modi by several sections of the population and also by several analysts and politicians.
The third conclusion is that the Gujarat election might result in the growing divide among Indian society. The rich, urban english speaking populace are against Narendra Modi, but are often accused of not recognizing the trends occuring within the Indian mainland. The coast is out of touch with the mainland, and so when someone in the Mainland promises development, it will be embraced by people who are not urbanized.
The fourth and final conclusion could be that Religion and Terrorism creates a kind of Xenophobia by which people see no other alternative. Religious ambition, coupled with a strong drive to wipe out terrorism is what symbolizes Narendra Modi. All these above factorsworked for him, and now it is time that some rethinking be done.
In all my previous posts, i had argued that Narendra Modi was India's modern day Hitler or Nero. The events resembling Godhra 2002 was equivalent to the Nazi Kristallnacht of 1938. However, after this election victory, I have to wonder whether all these arguements have a bearing in today's time.
The rationale that can be concluded as a result of Narendra Modi's victory is that Power Politics puts Human lives and thoughts at a Premium. The very nature of Power Politics is such that it makes one go back to that expression, "There is no place for emotion in Politics". The Activists and some Media outlets have argued for Narendra Modi to apologize to the victims of the Gujarat riots. Is that claim rational or is it asking too much?
Democracy calls for cheques and balances so that power is not misused. But, does democracy take into account the factor of Power Politics? Democracy is compromised once power politics is dished out. At that time, you can only find ways to avoid its trap or be vigilant and active to the changes that take place. The fact is that Fundamental rights of each and every citizen is a Utopia, because all individuals do not think on the same level.
Narendra Modi's victory is now being discussed for the implications at the National level. That will be commented on later. What I can conclude is that Narendra Modi is the man to head Gujarat for the next five years. History is now thrown out of the window, and the minority that have suffered under his tenure will have to be vigilant. The trend now will be why worry about the Microcosm. There are other larger and important issues to worry about. Human life is there today, and not there the other day.
The first conclusion is that Development supercedes everything now. For the Capitalist world, power politics when oriented with development can yield rich results. The predominant theme of Modi's election campaign was development. The amount of progress Gujarat has made in the years of his administration was the peg on which he won.
The second conclusion is that Living in the Past will not benefit societal development. The riots of 2002 are being put on the back-burner, and any activist or media group which tried to revive the topic were branded as biased or simply a medium for propoganda. The English language Media was a particular target this time, being called Anti-Modi by several sections of the population and also by several analysts and politicians.
The third conclusion is that the Gujarat election might result in the growing divide among Indian society. The rich, urban english speaking populace are against Narendra Modi, but are often accused of not recognizing the trends occuring within the Indian mainland. The coast is out of touch with the mainland, and so when someone in the Mainland promises development, it will be embraced by people who are not urbanized.
The fourth and final conclusion could be that Religion and Terrorism creates a kind of Xenophobia by which people see no other alternative. Religious ambition, coupled with a strong drive to wipe out terrorism is what symbolizes Narendra Modi. All these above factorsworked for him, and now it is time that some rethinking be done.
In all my previous posts, i had argued that Narendra Modi was India's modern day Hitler or Nero. The events resembling Godhra 2002 was equivalent to the Nazi Kristallnacht of 1938. However, after this election victory, I have to wonder whether all these arguements have a bearing in today's time.
The rationale that can be concluded as a result of Narendra Modi's victory is that Power Politics puts Human lives and thoughts at a Premium. The very nature of Power Politics is such that it makes one go back to that expression, "There is no place for emotion in Politics". The Activists and some Media outlets have argued for Narendra Modi to apologize to the victims of the Gujarat riots. Is that claim rational or is it asking too much?
Democracy calls for cheques and balances so that power is not misused. But, does democracy take into account the factor of Power Politics? Democracy is compromised once power politics is dished out. At that time, you can only find ways to avoid its trap or be vigilant and active to the changes that take place. The fact is that Fundamental rights of each and every citizen is a Utopia, because all individuals do not think on the same level.
Narendra Modi's victory is now being discussed for the implications at the National level. That will be commented on later. What I can conclude is that Narendra Modi is the man to head Gujarat for the next five years. History is now thrown out of the window, and the minority that have suffered under his tenure will have to be vigilant. The trend now will be why worry about the Microcosm. There are other larger and important issues to worry about. Human life is there today, and not there the other day.
Friday, December 14, 2007
The Progress: 6 years on
Yesterday was a fateful day for India six years ago. On 13th December, 2001, India's parliament was under attack from terrorists. The main mastermind is either in hiding or is presumed dead (To be checked). Several conspirators have been arrested, and some of their detention has been questioned by human rights activists and by the media.
It is also important to analyze what has happened on India's security front. Has the Parliament attack made us more aware of the threats that exist? Has the government become more pro-active on combatting terrorism?
The answer to both those questions is a NO. There have been continued attacks against the Indian population ever since. The Mumbai Car Bomb attacks in 2003, the Train bombs in the city on 7/11, attacks in Hyderabad, Ajmer, the Samjhautha express blast and recently incidences in Uttar Pradesh all reinforce the fact that India is still on the terror radar and that intelligence agencies, along with the government, have been a failure.
It is important to know that there is no clear method to fight terrorism. In India, the attacks are carried out by Sleeper cells. These cells are operated within the country, remain inactive for some time and then attack when least expected. To trace the sleeper cells is virtually impossible, as they blend with the population. It thus sounds unfair to critique the government on not being pro-active. But, this is not to suggest that they should sit back to let another attack happen.
India has not made any progress in the fight on terrorism, but at the same time, no nation around the world has. If Terrorism has to be liquidated, then methods employed by Stalin or Hitler may have to be implemented. But, nowadays, this results in multiple blowbacks and bitterness, thus implementing it is not only irrational but also counter-productive.
Terrorism being a vague entity, this approach cannot be implemented. The fact might be that Terrorism is a battle within the mind. If reforms in society and mainstreaming is achieved, then the influence can be curbed. But, this is easier said than done, because even reforms are vague.
I have said in previous posts that the burden to combat terrorism unfairly falls on the common man. But, when terrorism and reforms are two vague items, only man stands out as a concrete entity. The vigilance begins with him, and to cleanse the mind of fanaticism also begins with him.
It is also important to analyze what has happened on India's security front. Has the Parliament attack made us more aware of the threats that exist? Has the government become more pro-active on combatting terrorism?
The answer to both those questions is a NO. There have been continued attacks against the Indian population ever since. The Mumbai Car Bomb attacks in 2003, the Train bombs in the city on 7/11, attacks in Hyderabad, Ajmer, the Samjhautha express blast and recently incidences in Uttar Pradesh all reinforce the fact that India is still on the terror radar and that intelligence agencies, along with the government, have been a failure.
It is important to know that there is no clear method to fight terrorism. In India, the attacks are carried out by Sleeper cells. These cells are operated within the country, remain inactive for some time and then attack when least expected. To trace the sleeper cells is virtually impossible, as they blend with the population. It thus sounds unfair to critique the government on not being pro-active. But, this is not to suggest that they should sit back to let another attack happen.
India has not made any progress in the fight on terrorism, but at the same time, no nation around the world has. If Terrorism has to be liquidated, then methods employed by Stalin or Hitler may have to be implemented. But, nowadays, this results in multiple blowbacks and bitterness, thus implementing it is not only irrational but also counter-productive.
Terrorism being a vague entity, this approach cannot be implemented. The fact might be that Terrorism is a battle within the mind. If reforms in society and mainstreaming is achieved, then the influence can be curbed. But, this is easier said than done, because even reforms are vague.
I have said in previous posts that the burden to combat terrorism unfairly falls on the common man. But, when terrorism and reforms are two vague items, only man stands out as a concrete entity. The vigilance begins with him, and to cleanse the mind of fanaticism also begins with him.
Making a Mountain of a Molehill or Divine Retribution?
This regards a particular incident that occured in the ongoing test match series between India and Pakistan. Former India Captain, Saurav Ganguly, hit a double century against Pakistan. This is indeed time to celebrate, but this being India, it has to come with a backdrop. The backdrop being the standoff between Saurav Ganguly and Australian Greg Chappell, during Mr. Chappell's reign as Indian national coach.
The period from 2004 to 2007 was a turbulent period in Indian Cricket. Ganguly was apparently not in form, and Greg Chappell ultimately decided to strip him of the captaincy and drop him from the team. Protests by people in Ganguly's state of West Bengal protested, so much so that they decided to cheer for South Africa when they toured India. Any slip up by the team led to shouts from the public to bring back Ganguly.
Following the first round exit in the 2007 world cup, Chappell promptly resigned. Saurav Ganguly now enjoys the best form in more than a decade. Fans now are vindicated, and are now openly saying that Greg Chappell was responsible for destroying Ganguly's career. His comeback has labelled "The Return of the Emperor". Some online communities have called for openly humiliating Greg Chappell when possible.
What should it be interpted as? Two things are clearly evident. Many people are still stuck in the past. The another thing is that Ganguly's current form could be attributed to Greg Chappell!
The last point may evoke an outcry from Indians. The reasoning for the statement is quiet simple. Greg Chappell made him aware that he cannot take his place for granted. If performances are not coming, then it is about time that a break is needed. Ganguly prior to this had not been performing well for close to a year and a half.
Chappell's aggressiveness rubbed the wrong way for the Indian team and the public, who are by nature not aggressive in Sports. Chappell tried to get in aggressive mindset, and it backfired. This resulted in India being in constant scrutiny and ultimate exit in the first round. He came back stronger after the break. By the way, if one looks for partiality, no one highlighted the plight of Rahul Dravid and Ranadeb Bose. Dravid was dropped after performing badly in one series, while Ranadeb Bose has not even being considered inspite of good performances.
Dravid has taken it like a man, while Bose is naturally frustrated. Now, it will be interesting if Ganguly can perform the same way in Australia. Pitches in Australia are much more challenging than dead Subcontinent pitches. Nothing should be taken away from Ganguly though. He did perform, but I do wish that people stop remaining the past and give Greg Chappell some due.
The period from 2004 to 2007 was a turbulent period in Indian Cricket. Ganguly was apparently not in form, and Greg Chappell ultimately decided to strip him of the captaincy and drop him from the team. Protests by people in Ganguly's state of West Bengal protested, so much so that they decided to cheer for South Africa when they toured India. Any slip up by the team led to shouts from the public to bring back Ganguly.
Following the first round exit in the 2007 world cup, Chappell promptly resigned. Saurav Ganguly now enjoys the best form in more than a decade. Fans now are vindicated, and are now openly saying that Greg Chappell was responsible for destroying Ganguly's career. His comeback has labelled "The Return of the Emperor". Some online communities have called for openly humiliating Greg Chappell when possible.
What should it be interpted as? Two things are clearly evident. Many people are still stuck in the past. The another thing is that Ganguly's current form could be attributed to Greg Chappell!
The last point may evoke an outcry from Indians. The reasoning for the statement is quiet simple. Greg Chappell made him aware that he cannot take his place for granted. If performances are not coming, then it is about time that a break is needed. Ganguly prior to this had not been performing well for close to a year and a half.
Chappell's aggressiveness rubbed the wrong way for the Indian team and the public, who are by nature not aggressive in Sports. Chappell tried to get in aggressive mindset, and it backfired. This resulted in India being in constant scrutiny and ultimate exit in the first round. He came back stronger after the break. By the way, if one looks for partiality, no one highlighted the plight of Rahul Dravid and Ranadeb Bose. Dravid was dropped after performing badly in one series, while Ranadeb Bose has not even being considered inspite of good performances.
Dravid has taken it like a man, while Bose is naturally frustrated. Now, it will be interesting if Ganguly can perform the same way in Australia. Pitches in Australia are much more challenging than dead Subcontinent pitches. Nothing should be taken away from Ganguly though. He did perform, but I do wish that people stop remaining the past and give Greg Chappell some due.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
What a small world we live in
The world might never be known in Totality. Diversity and discrepencies are on such extreme levels that one does not even know where to begin. On the one hand, you see wealthy western nations, with all the wealth and technology, developing third world which aspire to be like that and then you have poverty stricken nations or continents which make up a large chunk.
Watching a child living in Poverty and his ambitions, one is stunned at the convinience in which we have built our world. It can be easily said that this is another case of Administration corruption and that the rest of the world should not interfere. But, the point is that this can happen to us also, if we are not ignorant.
It is quiet easy to talk about the evils of Poverty and Apathy when Technology and wealth is within our reach. But, either bad decision making or taking wealth for granted can reduce us to that level. Ambition is curtailed if money is not presented, and no one is so charitable nowadays. The child wants to have money, to be famous, but his plight will be highlighted for only one day.
There are millions of him in the world, and all the technology will not be enough to put the spotlight on each of them. The problem with wealth is that people loose interest in the problems of life, and create their own world where problems are impenetrable. The rich will be occupied with themselves, while the poor people will continue to wait for someone to highlight their plight.
The Media is also strange. Rich people and celebrities need and at the same time dont need the media. The poor need the media but cannot access it. Also, people in the developed world are put off by these images and will not do anything about it. People will set up charities and shout from rooftops that we should care. But, ordinary civilians will say How and Why should we care.
Globalization is indeed a strange phenomenon. People all over have built their own small worlds, and are unwilling to do anything. Only a few have privilages, but the majority still lag behind. This trend will continue, as it seems too much of an ideal scenario that the wealth will trickle down to all people. That is a perfect world, and Perfection is NOT possible in this time.
Watching a child living in Poverty and his ambitions, one is stunned at the convinience in which we have built our world. It can be easily said that this is another case of Administration corruption and that the rest of the world should not interfere. But, the point is that this can happen to us also, if we are not ignorant.
It is quiet easy to talk about the evils of Poverty and Apathy when Technology and wealth is within our reach. But, either bad decision making or taking wealth for granted can reduce us to that level. Ambition is curtailed if money is not presented, and no one is so charitable nowadays. The child wants to have money, to be famous, but his plight will be highlighted for only one day.
There are millions of him in the world, and all the technology will not be enough to put the spotlight on each of them. The problem with wealth is that people loose interest in the problems of life, and create their own world where problems are impenetrable. The rich will be occupied with themselves, while the poor people will continue to wait for someone to highlight their plight.
The Media is also strange. Rich people and celebrities need and at the same time dont need the media. The poor need the media but cannot access it. Also, people in the developed world are put off by these images and will not do anything about it. People will set up charities and shout from rooftops that we should care. But, ordinary civilians will say How and Why should we care.
Globalization is indeed a strange phenomenon. People all over have built their own small worlds, and are unwilling to do anything. Only a few have privilages, but the majority still lag behind. This trend will continue, as it seems too much of an ideal scenario that the wealth will trickle down to all people. That is a perfect world, and Perfection is NOT possible in this time.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Possibility of International Peace
People want to get to the bottom of things. Problems should be solved so that life can function smoothly. Touchy situations have to be negotiated so that they do not harm anybody in the process. People often determine whose fault it was and get down to dealing with him. On some occasions, this may work in case of personal differences, but what about International or even National problems?
The dynamic and volatile nature of International conflict is the focus. Instituitions have been created to monitor peace in the world. World Instituitions have been created to monitor Justice in a conflict. But, the question is raised as to the need for such instituitions, in the wake of the new US Hegemonic world order.
The US has made the UN completely ineffective, as the Iraq war of 2003 proved. The stalemate in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where the US has vetoed several United Nations resolutions. During the Cold war, the permanent members were on opposite sides of the Iron curtain, and so the organization was compromised.
Similar criticism can be labelled out for peacekeeping. The UN has often being associated with Jeopardizing and lack of understanding of the various conflict zones. There are several cases of such incidences, the disastrous being Somalia in 1993 and now Darfur. The UN has achieved mild success also. Kosovo is the case, but it has being torn apart by lack of followup and commitment.
Many people might say that the attack on the UN is unnecessary. It is also the fault of the "Superpowers", who for the benefits of economic and technological might, puts the fate of other "Third World" Nations at risk. These powers use the other nations as a laboratory to expand their might, just like Germany and Italy used Spain as a laboratory during the Spanish civil war.
The combination of UN stalemate and the subversion of laws by the Superpowers make International peace very difficult. With economics dominating the foreign policy outlook of many nations, this trend will likely to continue in the coming decades. Hope lingers, but it burns low with each passing year and decade. As generations change, this hope may turn from possibility to futility, if something bold and courageous is done.
The dynamic and volatile nature of International conflict is the focus. Instituitions have been created to monitor peace in the world. World Instituitions have been created to monitor Justice in a conflict. But, the question is raised as to the need for such instituitions, in the wake of the new US Hegemonic world order.
The US has made the UN completely ineffective, as the Iraq war of 2003 proved. The stalemate in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where the US has vetoed several United Nations resolutions. During the Cold war, the permanent members were on opposite sides of the Iron curtain, and so the organization was compromised.
Similar criticism can be labelled out for peacekeeping. The UN has often being associated with Jeopardizing and lack of understanding of the various conflict zones. There are several cases of such incidences, the disastrous being Somalia in 1993 and now Darfur. The UN has achieved mild success also. Kosovo is the case, but it has being torn apart by lack of followup and commitment.
Many people might say that the attack on the UN is unnecessary. It is also the fault of the "Superpowers", who for the benefits of economic and technological might, puts the fate of other "Third World" Nations at risk. These powers use the other nations as a laboratory to expand their might, just like Germany and Italy used Spain as a laboratory during the Spanish civil war.
The combination of UN stalemate and the subversion of laws by the Superpowers make International peace very difficult. With economics dominating the foreign policy outlook of many nations, this trend will likely to continue in the coming decades. Hope lingers, but it burns low with each passing year and decade. As generations change, this hope may turn from possibility to futility, if something bold and courageous is done.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Ignorance is Devastating
I have never heard of Mia Farrow. But, her interview on the BBC last night has made this headline. She was talking about the world's negligence of the suffering of the people of Darfur. The world is shying away from taking any concrete action in Darfur, and the UN is unable to put forward a cncrete plan.
The peacekeeping task in Darfur has suffered a setback, with the attack on the miniscule African Union peacekeeping force. If the soldiers in that region cannot defend themselves, then what must be the plight of the ordinary civilians, that was highlighted by Mrs. Farrow. She also talked of the situation getting worse, and that the world powers were not doing anything, and she had criticism for China.
Darfur has been on the News Radar for some time, ever since the event came into the eyes of the world. But, now, the world has completely closed its eyes on Darfur. Their mind reasons that this is only an addition into the powderkeg that is central Africa. From Sierra Leone till Somalia and from Sudan to Congo, the whole region is gripped in conflict and bloodshed.
Darfur forms the chain of events taking place across the Central part of Africa. Why is nobody doing anything on Darfur? when one British teacher got jailed in Sudan, the media focused intensively on her plight and she now stands a chance of being pardoned. Now, when the media is giving coverage, why is the world not responding?
The key to this could be ECONOCRACY. The term that I have used fitted Burma perfectly, now it can be tagged into Darfur as well. Mrs. Farrow highlighted that China is proving to be an Obstacle for any resolution on Darfur. It does not want to offend the Khartoum Regime because of its dependency on Oil. China is one of Sudan's prime trading partners, and any action which alienates the Khartoum government may result in adverse effects on their economy. So, to protect their economic interests, China has engaged in Econocracy over Darfur.
The other powers are too occupied with their own problems. The US will not act so much in Sudan because there is not much of Oil in that region. Britain always tags with America on foreign policy, and the African Union is simply too weak and divided to initiate concrete action. When there is so much of apathy, what must be done?
The signs are not encouraging. The hopes of the people are fast fading away. Africa has proven to be the test case of Ignorance being Devastating. Somalia, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and many more cases prove the point. However, when the world tries to explore options, they run into a brick wall of ambiguity or fear. This is a potent obstacle, one which may resign the people of Darfur and the few who care into disillusionment and bitterness
The peacekeeping task in Darfur has suffered a setback, with the attack on the miniscule African Union peacekeeping force. If the soldiers in that region cannot defend themselves, then what must be the plight of the ordinary civilians, that was highlighted by Mrs. Farrow. She also talked of the situation getting worse, and that the world powers were not doing anything, and she had criticism for China.
Darfur has been on the News Radar for some time, ever since the event came into the eyes of the world. But, now, the world has completely closed its eyes on Darfur. Their mind reasons that this is only an addition into the powderkeg that is central Africa. From Sierra Leone till Somalia and from Sudan to Congo, the whole region is gripped in conflict and bloodshed.
Darfur forms the chain of events taking place across the Central part of Africa. Why is nobody doing anything on Darfur? when one British teacher got jailed in Sudan, the media focused intensively on her plight and she now stands a chance of being pardoned. Now, when the media is giving coverage, why is the world not responding?
The key to this could be ECONOCRACY. The term that I have used fitted Burma perfectly, now it can be tagged into Darfur as well. Mrs. Farrow highlighted that China is proving to be an Obstacle for any resolution on Darfur. It does not want to offend the Khartoum Regime because of its dependency on Oil. China is one of Sudan's prime trading partners, and any action which alienates the Khartoum government may result in adverse effects on their economy. So, to protect their economic interests, China has engaged in Econocracy over Darfur.
The other powers are too occupied with their own problems. The US will not act so much in Sudan because there is not much of Oil in that region. Britain always tags with America on foreign policy, and the African Union is simply too weak and divided to initiate concrete action. When there is so much of apathy, what must be done?
The signs are not encouraging. The hopes of the people are fast fading away. Africa has proven to be the test case of Ignorance being Devastating. Somalia, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and many more cases prove the point. However, when the world tries to explore options, they run into a brick wall of ambiguity or fear. This is a potent obstacle, one which may resign the people of Darfur and the few who care into disillusionment and bitterness
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
