Conflict in Multi-Ethnic Societies: Case Study of Sri Lanka
a. To what extent is citizenship rights responsible for the conflict between Sinhalese and Tamils?
The Sinhalese and the Tamils have been having conflict in Sri Lanka. Most of the issues revolve around the discriminatory policies against the Tamils practiced by the Sri Lankan government which prefers Sinhalese, the majority.
One of such policy is the citizenship rights. In 1948, when Sri Lanka gained independence, only those born in Sri Lanka or whose forefathers were born there were given Sri Lankan citizenship. This caused many Indian Tamils to be stateless, although they have contributed significantly to Sri Lankan economy. They resent the government and this was one of the sparks that ignite the conflict between the Tamils and the Sinhalese. Since 2003, though, this issue had been resolved, making this an irrelevant cause for the present conflict.
Another policy is the ‘Sinhala Only’ language policy. Sinhala was to be used as the only language in government officer. Tamils who work in the government offices are to learn Sinhala in three years or face retrenchment. This upset many Tamil civil servants as it was very hard for them to learn Sinhala. This policy seems to discriminate Tamils and thus aggravate the resentment between the Tamils and the Sinhalese.
University admission criteria is another unfair policy practised by the Sri Lankan government. Since the 1970s, Tamil students have to score higher than Sinhalese students in order to enter the same course in the universities. This system does not agree with the principle of meritocracy and upsets Tamil students who found it difficult to get into universities. Many youths thus, seeing no future, decided to join LTTE, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, to fight for their rights and to gain an independent Tamil state from Sri Lanka. The fuelled resentment between youths makes the conflict much worse since it now affects the younger generation, making the conflict continues to the next generations.
In conclusion, although there are many factors responsible for the conflict between the Sinhalese and Tamils, I think university admission criteria is the one which is most responsible for it.
Citizenship rights might have started the conflict, but since 2003, the Tamils have received their citizenship. The ‘Sinhala Only’ language policy is also not the one most responsible for the conflict since Tamil has since been adopted as an official language in Tamil-dominated areas. It did add to the resentment between both sides, but not anymore.
Besides, after one generation, it is possible to have Sinhala-speaking Tamils. University admission criteria is the one that has not yet been resolved until now, and this creates uneducated Tamil youths. One might say they do not necessarily turn to violence, but one must also understand that it is not easy for uneducated people to express their opinions and thoughts.
Moreover, having small number of Tamils entering the university and having a small number of degree-holders, less Tamils can get into government jobs, making it even harder for them to fight for their rights peacefully.
Thus I think citizenship rights come after university admission criteria as a cause of conflict in Sri Lanka, but before the ‘Sinhala Only’ language policy.
Well done. L6 12/12 Can any one tell me why?
b. “The most serious consequence of the Sinhalese-Tamil conflict is the economic devastation of the country.” How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
The conflict between the Sinhalese and the Tamils had brought devastation to the once modern country. Among those are political, economic and social consequences.
Economic consequences are unavoidable when a conflict strikes a country. In Sri Lanka’s case, the conflict had greatly reduced the number of tourists and caused great loss of foreign investments. Tourists do not dare to go to Sri Lanka since it is unsafe with LTTE’s attacking every part of the country. Foreign businessmen also do not dare to invest in Sri Lanka since their factories could be destroyed in a terrorist attack in the country anytime. The attacks and riots destroying factories and industries also cause unemployment. All these brought economic devastation to the country, leaving the whole Sri Lanka to suffer in poverty.
There are also social consequences brought about by this conflict. Tamils, fearing conflict and discrimination, are forced out of their homeland to somewhere else, for example India, to migrate for safety. The conflict has also left a scar between the Sinhalese and the Tamils. The hatred between them might stay for generations to come, creating a society divided by suspicion and distrust. Crime rates are also high since economic conditions are poor. Orphans and squatters are abundant due to terrorist bombings and economic problems. This shows how social consequences can further damage the country.
Political consequences are also a consequence of the conflict. There are armed conflict between Sinhalese and Tamils, causing high mortality rate in Sri Lanka. There had been numerous clashes between the Sinhalese and the Tamils, with Sri Lankan policemen and army not trying to remedy the situation but participate in attacks against Tamils. Armed conflict brought about not only deaths but also caused an increase in handicapped people, generated great loss of money and hinders development. Also, there is foreign intervention by India. India dropped supply at Jaffna for the Tamils and entered Sri Lankan airspace illegally by doing so. Political consequences suffered by Sri Lanka were heavy.
In conclusion, I disagree that economical consequences are the most serious consequence of the Sinhalese-Tamil conflict in Sri Lanka. In my opinion, political consequence is the most serious consequence, followed by economic consequence and social consequence.
Political consequences include armed conflict which causes instability in the country, causing economic problems as people dare not to go to Sri Lanka for holiday or investments. Afterwards, since there are economic problems, came social problems that arose mostly due to poverty and instability and the unsafeness of the region. Political consequence is the underlying cause of the other two consequences and thus I think s the most serious one.
Economic consequences follow behind as the second-most serious consequences, as it brought heavy damages to the country. In turn, economic consequences brought about by political consequences caused social consequences.
Thus social consequences were the least serious out of the three consequences.
In addition to political consequences as the underlying cause of the other two consequences, if India did not withdraw its troops in 1990 and keep violating Sri Lanka’s airspace, it is not improbable that India would have taken over Sri Lanka, it being weakened by so much devastation brought about by the conflict – this would have been disastrous for Sri Lanka’s sovereignty.
Vanessa/4A/23
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
“Only the Tamils suffered in the conflict in Sri Lanka.”
How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
Level 1
Describe the conflict in Sri Lanka with no reference to the suffering of the Tamils.
Award 1 mark for general description.
e.g. The conflict between the Tamil and Sinhalese occurred because the Tamil felt that they were treated unfairly and so decided to demand for the formation of a new state called Tamil Eelam.(1-2)
Level 2
Agree with the statement that the Tamil suffered and describe their suffering but with no link to the conflict AND/OR disagree with the statement and describe the suffering of the Sinhalese with no link to the conflict.
e.g. The Tamil suffered a lot as they lost their land, the Tamil civil servants lost their jobs if the could not speak Sinhalese and the youth could not go to the University for engineering and medical courses. They also lose their citizenship rights. So I agree that the Tamil suffered.
Or
The Sinhalese suffered as their economy declined. Economic growth did not take place as there was no foreign direct investment which lead to unemployment. Moreover the tourist find Sri Lanka less attractive so they do not come which lead to even more unemployment. In addition, many soldiers in the Sinhalese army and civilians died in the conflict. Thus I disagree with the statement as the Sinhalese suffered too. (3-4)
Level 3
Agree with the statement that the Tamil suffered and explain how the conflict brings about their suffering OR disagree with the statement and explain how the conflict lead to the suffering of the Sinhalese.
Award 5 marks for one explanation of the effect on either the Tamil or the Sinhalese, and an additional mark for further explanations, to a maximum of 7 marks.
Yes, I agree that the Tamil suffered during the conflict. Many Tamil lost their home land when the Sinhalese implemented the resettlement policy. The worst is when India intervene Sri Lanka. India’s intervention was a serious violation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty. For example, in 1987, the Sri Lankan government was forced by India to sign a peace accord with the LTTE. When the peace accord was broken because the LTTE did not surrender their arms, the Indian government ordered 2000 more Indian troops to fight ethnic Tamil Tigers in the Jaffina Peninsula. This move resulted in even more violence in the country and prolonged the armed conflict. Indian troops and police commandos faced intense combat to the east and northwest of Jaffna town, a stronghold of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, the main rebel group. When fighting broke out, the Tamil have to moved out of their home land and become refugees. This brought about suffering for the Tamil and so I agree with the statement that the Tamil suffered in the conflict in Sri Lanka.
OR
In the riots and armed struggles caused by the conflict, many people are killed. Many who are killed are likely to be the Sinhalese from the army or Sinhalese civilian who are killed by the bombs set by the Tamil Tiger. They are usually breadwinners of families, plunging them into poverty and starvation.
The ensuing riots and terrorism also resulted in the destruction of factories and businesses, effectively causing even more employment in the city of Colombo. This vicious cycle of poverty is made worse by the loss of investments from other countries as in times of instability, investors from other countries may not have the confidence to invest in the country. Foreign investment dropped from US$66 million in 1982 to US$39 million in 1983, and a further decline to US$22 million in 1986.
Tourism, one of Sri Lanka’s major income earners, was also seriously damaged by the violent internal conflict. Tourist arrivals steadily decreased after the July 1983 riots. This resulted in a loss of jobs and a fall in foreign exchange earnings. This in turn, affected the economy adversely. There were also lesser funds to develop amenities and facilities for the people, such as transport and housing. As most of these jobs belong to the Sinhalese, I can conclude that the conflict has caused more suffering to the Sinhalese. (5-7)
Level 4
Both elements of L3
Award 8 marks for one explanation each of both the suffering of the Tamil and the Singhalese. Award additional marks for further explanations, to a maximum of 10 marks. 8 - 10
Level 5
L4+ shows how both the suffering of the Tamil and the Sinhalese are interrelated/interdependent.
Award 11 marks for one explanation to show how the two group of people suffered from the conflict. Award additional marks for further explanations to a maximum of 13 marks.
In the conflict in Sri Lanka both the Tamil and Sinhalese suffered especially with the lost of life to the armed conflict. Both sides have men who were killed as soldiers, as guerillas and as innocent civilians. Both could not enjoy peaceful lives as long as the conflict remains. Therefore both the Tamils and Sinhalese suffered in this conflict.
11 - 13
Read the website entitled Sri Lankan families count cost of war .
After reading the article who do you think suffer more?
How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer.
Level 1
Describe the conflict in Sri Lanka with no reference to the suffering of the Tamils.
Award 1 mark for general description.
e.g. The conflict between the Tamil and Sinhalese occurred because the Tamil felt that they were treated unfairly and so decided to demand for the formation of a new state called Tamil Eelam.(1-2)
Level 2
Agree with the statement that the Tamil suffered and describe their suffering but with no link to the conflict AND/OR disagree with the statement and describe the suffering of the Sinhalese with no link to the conflict.
e.g. The Tamil suffered a lot as they lost their land, the Tamil civil servants lost their jobs if the could not speak Sinhalese and the youth could not go to the University for engineering and medical courses. They also lose their citizenship rights. So I agree that the Tamil suffered.
Or
The Sinhalese suffered as their economy declined. Economic growth did not take place as there was no foreign direct investment which lead to unemployment. Moreover the tourist find Sri Lanka less attractive so they do not come which lead to even more unemployment. In addition, many soldiers in the Sinhalese army and civilians died in the conflict. Thus I disagree with the statement as the Sinhalese suffered too. (3-4)
Level 3
Agree with the statement that the Tamil suffered and explain how the conflict brings about their suffering OR disagree with the statement and explain how the conflict lead to the suffering of the Sinhalese.
Award 5 marks for one explanation of the effect on either the Tamil or the Sinhalese, and an additional mark for further explanations, to a maximum of 7 marks.
Yes, I agree that the Tamil suffered during the conflict. Many Tamil lost their home land when the Sinhalese implemented the resettlement policy. The worst is when India intervene Sri Lanka. India’s intervention was a serious violation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty. For example, in 1987, the Sri Lankan government was forced by India to sign a peace accord with the LTTE. When the peace accord was broken because the LTTE did not surrender their arms, the Indian government ordered 2000 more Indian troops to fight ethnic Tamil Tigers in the Jaffina Peninsula. This move resulted in even more violence in the country and prolonged the armed conflict. Indian troops and police commandos faced intense combat to the east and northwest of Jaffna town, a stronghold of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, the main rebel group. When fighting broke out, the Tamil have to moved out of their home land and become refugees. This brought about suffering for the Tamil and so I agree with the statement that the Tamil suffered in the conflict in Sri Lanka.
OR
In the riots and armed struggles caused by the conflict, many people are killed. Many who are killed are likely to be the Sinhalese from the army or Sinhalese civilian who are killed by the bombs set by the Tamil Tiger. They are usually breadwinners of families, plunging them into poverty and starvation.
The ensuing riots and terrorism also resulted in the destruction of factories and businesses, effectively causing even more employment in the city of Colombo. This vicious cycle of poverty is made worse by the loss of investments from other countries as in times of instability, investors from other countries may not have the confidence to invest in the country. Foreign investment dropped from US$66 million in 1982 to US$39 million in 1983, and a further decline to US$22 million in 1986.
Tourism, one of Sri Lanka’s major income earners, was also seriously damaged by the violent internal conflict. Tourist arrivals steadily decreased after the July 1983 riots. This resulted in a loss of jobs and a fall in foreign exchange earnings. This in turn, affected the economy adversely. There were also lesser funds to develop amenities and facilities for the people, such as transport and housing. As most of these jobs belong to the Sinhalese, I can conclude that the conflict has caused more suffering to the Sinhalese. (5-7)
Level 4
Both elements of L3
Award 8 marks for one explanation each of both the suffering of the Tamil and the Singhalese. Award additional marks for further explanations, to a maximum of 10 marks. 8 - 10
Level 5
L4+ shows how both the suffering of the Tamil and the Sinhalese are interrelated/interdependent.
Award 11 marks for one explanation to show how the two group of people suffered from the conflict. Award additional marks for further explanations to a maximum of 13 marks.
In the conflict in Sri Lanka both the Tamil and Sinhalese suffered especially with the lost of life to the armed conflict. Both sides have men who were killed as soldiers, as guerillas and as innocent civilians. Both could not enjoy peaceful lives as long as the conflict remains. Therefore both the Tamils and Sinhalese suffered in this conflict.
11 - 13
Read the website entitled Sri Lankan families count cost of war .
After reading the article who do you think suffer more?
Saturday, September 20, 2008
What Is Globalization?
This is an interesting essay on globalisation. Not for the faint hearted. But of you can understand this essay you are on your way to an A1 for English and of course Combined Humanities
What Is Globalization?
Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology.
This process has effects on the environment, on culture, on political systems, on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in societies around the world.
Globalization is not new, though. For thousands of years, people—and, later, corporations—have been buying from and selling to each other in lands at great distances, such as through the famed Silk Road across Central Asia that connected China and Europe during the Middle Ages.
Likewise, for centuries, people and corporations have invested in enterprises in other countries. In fact, many of the features of the current wave of globalization are similar to those prevailing before the outbreak of the First World War in 1914.
But policy and technological developments of the past few decades have spurred increases in cross-border trade, investment, and migration so large that many observers believe the world has entered a qualitatively new phase in its economic development.
Since 1950, for example, the volume of world trade has increased by 20 times, and from just 1997 to 1999 flows of foreign investment nearly doubled, from $468 billion to $827 billion.
Distinguishing this current wave of globalization from earlier ones, author Thomas Friedman has said that today globalization is “farther, faster, cheaper, and deeper.”
This current wave of globalization has been driven by policies that have opened economies domestically and internationally. In the years since the Second World War, and especially during the past two decades, many governments have adopted free-market economic systems, vastly increasing their own productive potential and creating myriad new opportunities for international trade and investment.
Governments also have negotiated dramatic reductions in barriers to commerce and have established international agreements to promote trade in goods, services, and investment. Taking advantage of new opportunities in foreign markets, corporations have built foreign factories and established production and marketing arrangements with foreign partners. A defining feature of globalization, therefore, is an international industrial and financial business structure.
Technology has been the other principal driver of globalization. Advances in information technology, in particular, have dramatically transformed economic life. Information technologies have given all sorts of individual economic actors—consumers, investors, businesses—valuable new tools for identifying and pursuing economic opportunities, including faster and more informed analyses of economic trends around the world, easy transfers of assets, and collaboration with far-flung partners.
Globalization is deeply controversial, however.
Proponents of globalization argue that it allows poor countries and their citizens to develop economically and raise their standards of living, while opponents of globalization claim that the creation of an unfettered international free market has benefited multinational corporations in the Western world at the expense of local enterprises, local cultures, and common people.
Resistance to globalization has therefore taken shape both at a popular and at a governmental level as people and governments try to manage the flow of capital, labor, goods, and ideas that constitute the current wave of globalization.
To find the right balance between benefits and costs associated with globalization, citizens of all nations need to understand how globalization works and the policy choices facing them and their societies.
Globalization101.org tries to provide an accurate analysis of the issues and controversies regarding globalization, especially to high-school and college students, without the slogans or ideological biases generally found in discussions of the topics. We welcome you to our website.
http://www.globalization101.org/What_is_Globalization.html
After reading this article, and refering to chapter 2 book four of your text book, how far do you agree that the main force that has made globalization possible has been imporvement in the transportation ? Explain your answer.
Hint on how to write the essay.
Three factors for globalisation.
Explain how improvement in transportation lead to globalization.
Explain how TNC (trade, government policy)lead to globalization.
Explain how technology lead to globalization.
Explain why you agree or disagree with the given statement.
If you agree, then you must say why transportation is the main force and the other two are not.
If you disagree, then you must explain why transportation is not the main force of globalization and why the other two are.
Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology.
This process has effects on the environment, on culture, on political systems, on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in societies around the world.
Globalization is not new, though. For thousands of years, people—and, later, corporations—have been buying from and selling to each other in lands at great distances, such as through the famed Silk Road across Central Asia that connected China and Europe during the Middle Ages.
Likewise, for centuries, people and corporations have invested in enterprises in other countries. In fact, many of the features of the current wave of globalization are similar to those prevailing before the outbreak of the First World War in 1914.
But policy and technological developments of the past few decades have spurred increases in cross-border trade, investment, and migration so large that many observers believe the world has entered a qualitatively new phase in its economic development.
Since 1950, for example, the volume of world trade has increased by 20 times, and from just 1997 to 1999 flows of foreign investment nearly doubled, from $468 billion to $827 billion.
Distinguishing this current wave of globalization from earlier ones, author Thomas Friedman has said that today globalization is “farther, faster, cheaper, and deeper.”
This current wave of globalization has been driven by policies that have opened economies domestically and internationally. In the years since the Second World War, and especially during the past two decades, many governments have adopted free-market economic systems, vastly increasing their own productive potential and creating myriad new opportunities for international trade and investment.
Governments also have negotiated dramatic reductions in barriers to commerce and have established international agreements to promote trade in goods, services, and investment. Taking advantage of new opportunities in foreign markets, corporations have built foreign factories and established production and marketing arrangements with foreign partners. A defining feature of globalization, therefore, is an international industrial and financial business structure.
Technology has been the other principal driver of globalization. Advances in information technology, in particular, have dramatically transformed economic life. Information technologies have given all sorts of individual economic actors—consumers, investors, businesses—valuable new tools for identifying and pursuing economic opportunities, including faster and more informed analyses of economic trends around the world, easy transfers of assets, and collaboration with far-flung partners.
Globalization is deeply controversial, however.
Proponents of globalization argue that it allows poor countries and their citizens to develop economically and raise their standards of living, while opponents of globalization claim that the creation of an unfettered international free market has benefited multinational corporations in the Western world at the expense of local enterprises, local cultures, and common people.
Resistance to globalization has therefore taken shape both at a popular and at a governmental level as people and governments try to manage the flow of capital, labor, goods, and ideas that constitute the current wave of globalization.
To find the right balance between benefits and costs associated with globalization, citizens of all nations need to understand how globalization works and the policy choices facing them and their societies.
Globalization101.org tries to provide an accurate analysis of the issues and controversies regarding globalization, especially to high-school and college students, without the slogans or ideological biases generally found in discussions of the topics. We welcome you to our website.
http://www.globalization101.org/What_is_Globalization.html
After reading this article, and refering to chapter 2 book four of your text book, how far do you agree that the main force that has made globalization possible has been imporvement in the transportation ? Explain your answer.
Hint on how to write the essay.
Three factors for globalisation.
Explain how improvement in transportation lead to globalization.
Explain how TNC (trade, government policy)lead to globalization.
Explain how technology lead to globalization.
Explain why you agree or disagree with the given statement.
If you agree, then you must say why transportation is the main force and the other two are not.
If you disagree, then you must explain why transportation is not the main force of globalization and why the other two are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)