Conversations with hate (Contd.)
Jayamohan
(Go here for Part 1 & Part 2)
The history of Geo-politics of the past hundred years is the destruction wrought by these movements. These movements are born usually as an idea with a few intellectuals and nurtured by the various power brokers of the world. They take a life of their own during the course of time and grow bigger through the struggles for power and the hate which begets more violence and the cycle continues.
Today we can identify at least fifteen countries destroyed by internal warfare in the African continent. Congo, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Rwanda and the list goes on. What caused these civil wars? The distrust between the ethnic or religious groups is the common answer. How did this distrust came into being? because of the weapons. And we go back to the countries which supply these weapons for the peace.
We are distraught that the world did not do anything when the Tamils were killed indiscriminately in Eelam. What we fail to understand is that a quarter of the world is mired in these kind of conflicts today. We do not discuss any of those conflicts. It is a sad state of affairs that the group that tries to instill that violent mindset in relation to these conflicts here with the people is considered to be the progressives here.
So does Africa to be torn away by these civil wars? Is there no way other than these ethnic groups killing each other in their quest for a country and power? If Europe can overcome and compromise and be together as a single entity, why is that not a possibility for the African nations?
There is an excellent example in front of us. It is not an example for Africa alone but for the whole world. If there is anyone who had an excellent reason for taking forward a violent struggle, it was Nelson Mandela. The oppressive apartheid regime was reason enough to push him toward a violent struggle. There was a constant stream of individuals parting from him over this direction of the movement.
However, Mandela learnt the path of the struggle from Gandhi. What he gave his people is to improve themselves during the course of that struggle. The biggest Gandhian struggle of the century was the imprisonment of Mandela for twenty seven years. That Satyagraha of him at the Robben Island prison brought his people into the political movement and started the dialogue process.
But the most important dialogue he had was with his captors. We know that the participation of the White-majority countries in this struggle during the course of his captivity. South Africa got its independence through this process of dialogues. That independence was not only for the Blacks of South Africa but also for the whites of that country. This freedom came non-violently and this is a history for which we were all witnesses during our generation.
The history of Mandela's life is an example of the compromises he made during the course of this struggle. He was constantly in dialogues with the government and with the various groups of the African National Congress. Historians hail him as the master of finding the common ground for everyone.
When there was blood on the streets of Eelam and the destruction of Congo was happening, a peaceful transition of power was happening in South Africa. We are too hesitant to learn the lessons of a non-violent struggle.
What if Mandela chose the violent path? South Africa would've become another Congo or Rwanda - only many times worse. I remember watching the inauguration ceremony of Mandela after those historic elections in South Africa. The Zulus were out in the streets in force fearing that they will become second-class citizens in the new, independant South Africa. I was watching it in television and was saddened that this may be the start of a new blood-shed in Africa.
But Mandela faced that moment with his Gandhian weapon. He was ready to compromise by sharing the power with the Zulus. He converted a tense moment into a historic one through his patient dialogue. That is why South Africa remains the only active democracy in that dark continent today.
This is the live example for the permanence of the Gandhian way and the importance of it in today's world. The failure of the violent movements in the history of the world is self-evident. But we keep facing the hate of these people. This hate is the one that make them chose those murderous weapons. But we have to keep conversing with this hatefulness. We will always extend our arms to them at all times.
May 26, 2009
Jayamohan
(Go here for Part 1 & Part 2)
The history of Geo-politics of the past hundred years is the destruction wrought by these movements. These movements are born usually as an idea with a few intellectuals and nurtured by the various power brokers of the world. They take a life of their own during the course of time and grow bigger through the struggles for power and the hate which begets more violence and the cycle continues.
Today we can identify at least fifteen countries destroyed by internal warfare in the African continent. Congo, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Rwanda and the list goes on. What caused these civil wars? The distrust between the ethnic or religious groups is the common answer. How did this distrust came into being? because of the weapons. And we go back to the countries which supply these weapons for the peace.
We are distraught that the world did not do anything when the Tamils were killed indiscriminately in Eelam. What we fail to understand is that a quarter of the world is mired in these kind of conflicts today. We do not discuss any of those conflicts. It is a sad state of affairs that the group that tries to instill that violent mindset in relation to these conflicts here with the people is considered to be the progressives here.
So does Africa to be torn away by these civil wars? Is there no way other than these ethnic groups killing each other in their quest for a country and power? If Europe can overcome and compromise and be together as a single entity, why is that not a possibility for the African nations?
There is an excellent example in front of us. It is not an example for Africa alone but for the whole world. If there is anyone who had an excellent reason for taking forward a violent struggle, it was Nelson Mandela. The oppressive apartheid regime was reason enough to push him toward a violent struggle. There was a constant stream of individuals parting from him over this direction of the movement.
 |
| Nelson Mandela by Richard Day |
However, Mandela learnt the path of the struggle from Gandhi. What he gave his people is to improve themselves during the course of that struggle. The biggest Gandhian struggle of the century was the imprisonment of Mandela for twenty seven years. That Satyagraha of him at the Robben Island prison brought his people into the political movement and started the dialogue process.
But the most important dialogue he had was with his captors. We know that the participation of the White-majority countries in this struggle during the course of his captivity. South Africa got its independence through this process of dialogues. That independence was not only for the Blacks of South Africa but also for the whites of that country. This freedom came non-violently and this is a history for which we were all witnesses during our generation.
The history of Mandela's life is an example of the compromises he made during the course of this struggle. He was constantly in dialogues with the government and with the various groups of the African National Congress. Historians hail him as the master of finding the common ground for everyone.
When there was blood on the streets of Eelam and the destruction of Congo was happening, a peaceful transition of power was happening in South Africa. We are too hesitant to learn the lessons of a non-violent struggle.
What if Mandela chose the violent path? South Africa would've become another Congo or Rwanda - only many times worse. I remember watching the inauguration ceremony of Mandela after those historic elections in South Africa. The Zulus were out in the streets in force fearing that they will become second-class citizens in the new, independant South Africa. I was watching it in television and was saddened that this may be the start of a new blood-shed in Africa.
But Mandela faced that moment with his Gandhian weapon. He was ready to compromise by sharing the power with the Zulus. He converted a tense moment into a historic one through his patient dialogue. That is why South Africa remains the only active democracy in that dark continent today.
This is the live example for the permanence of the Gandhian way and the importance of it in today's world. The failure of the violent movements in the history of the world is self-evident. But we keep facing the hate of these people. This hate is the one that make them chose those murderous weapons. But we have to keep conversing with this hatefulness. We will always extend our arms to them at all times.
May 26, 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment