INDIA'S ROLE IN THE NON-ALIGNMENT MOVEMENT

The concept of non-alignment emerged during the Cold War. After the Second World War, the world was divided into two power blocs – USA and Soviet Union. 

The origin of the Non-Alignment Movement can be traced back to the Asian Relations Conference held in New Delhi in March 1947. At this conference, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru highlighted the dangers posed by the hostility between the two power blocs. He also stressed the need for the Asian countries to work for maintaining world peace.

India had adopted the policy of non-alignment as it did not want to lose its freedom of decision making and because India’s primary concern, soon after independence, was economic development. Besides, India felt that it had a positive role to play in reducing international tension, promoting peace and serving as a bridge between the two power blocs. It meant that India wanted freedom to decide every issue on its merit. 

Essentially, non- alignment is an anti-imperialist and anti racist movement. Nehru frequently referred to the importance of India’s location and size as a determinant of the policy of non alignment. By virtue of location, he argued, India not only occupied a pivotal position in Asia, but also a king of meeting ground between the east and the west. He was also aware of the geopolitical significance of Kashmir, Nepal and the northern frontier in general.

Nehru said that ‘India did not belong to any of the power blocs. India’s policy of non-alignment is a positive or dynamic neutralism, in which a country acts independently, and decides its position on each international issue on the merit of the case’.

The policy of non alignment, which has constituted the very foundation of India foreign policy to this day, is probably Nehru’s greatest contribution to international relations.

SINO INDIAN WAR 1962

India adopted a policy of friendship towards China from the very beginning. The Congress had been sympathetic to China’s struggle against imperialism and had sent a medical mission to China in the thirties as well as given a call for boycott of Japanese goods in protest against Japanese occupation of China. India was the first to recognize the new People’s Republic of China on January 1, 1950.  

Nehru had great hopes that the two countries with their common experience of suffering at the hands of colonial powers and common problems of poverty and underdevelopment would join hands to give Asia its due place in the world. Nehru pressed for representation of Communist China in the UN Security Council, did not support the US position in the Korean War, and tried his best to bring about a settlement in Korea. 

In 1950 when China occupied Tibet, India was unhappy that it had not been taken into confidence, but did not question China’s rights over Tibet since at many times in Chinese history Tibet had been subjugated by China. 

In 1954, India and China signed a treaty in which India recognized China’s rights over Tibet and the two countries agreed to be governed in their mutual relations by the principles of Panch Sheel. Differences over border delineation were discussed at the time but China maintained that it had not yet studied the old Kuomintang maps and these could be sorted out later.

Relations continued to be close and Nehru went to great lengths to project China and Chou-en-Lai at the Bandung Conference. 

In 1959, however, there was a big revolt in Tibet and the Dalai Lama fled Tibet along with thousands of refugees. He was given asylum in India but not allowed to set up a government in exile and dissuaded from carrying on political activities. Nevertheless, the Chinese were unhappy. Soon after, in October 1959, Chinese opened fire on an Indian patrol near the Kongka Pass in Ladakh, killing five Indian policemen and capturing a dozen others. Letters were exchanged between the two governments, but a common ground did not emerge. Then Chou-en-Lai was invited for talks to Delhi in April 1960, but not much headway could be made and it was decided to let officials sort out the details first.

On September 8, 1962, Chinese forces attacked the Thagla ridge and dislodged Indian troops, but this was taken as a minor incident. Nehru went off to London for a conference and after returning home once again left for Colombo on October 12. 

A week later, the Chinese army launched a massive attack and over ran Indian posts in the eastern sector in NEFA or what was later Arunachal Pradesh. The Indian army commander in NEFA fled without any effort at resistance leaving the door wide open for China to walk in. In the western sector, on October 20, thirteen forward posts were captured by the Chinese in the Galwan Valley and the Chushul airstrip threatened. There was a great outcry in the country and a feeling of panic about Chinese intentions. It was thought that the Chinese would come rushing in to the plains and occupy Assam and perhaps other parts as well. Nehru wrote two letters to President Kennedy on November 9, describing the situation as ‘really desperate’ and asking for wide-ranging military help. He also sought Britain’s assistance. 

Twenty-four hours later, the Chinese declared a unilateral withdrawal and as unpredictably as it had appeared, the Chinese dragon disappeared from sight, leaving behind a heart-broken friend and a confused and disoriented people.

Despite the strong memories of the short border war in 1962, India has sought, largely successfully in recent years, to develop relations with China on a friendly and pragmatic basis. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to Beijing in 1986 brought about the first thaw in the cold relations between the two countries for over two decades. 

Positive progress was made in Sino-Indian relations in resolving the decades-old boundary disputes between the two nations. China and India tacitly recognized each other’s respective sovereignty over Tibet and Sikkim and appointed representative to explore solutions to their border dispute. 

The opening of the Nathu-La pass in 2007, for direct trade between India and China was a positive step in this direction. 

MAO'S GREAT LEAP FORWARD

The Great Leap Forward was the name given to China's Second Five Year Plan.

Launched in 1958, the Great Leap Forward was a campaign to accelerate China's economic development. It was based on Mao's firm belief that human will power and effort could overcome all obstacles.

Thus, the government tried to speed development by greatly increasing the number of workers an their hours while ignoring China's lack of capital and modern technology.

The government combined the agricultural cooperatives into huge communes to improve the efficiency of the farm workers.

In industry, labourers worked extra shifts. Machinery was operated continuously, without being stopped even for maintenance.

The Great Leap Forward shattered China's economy. From 1959 to 1961, China experienced economic depression, food shortages and a decline in industrial output.

By 1962, the economy began to recover. However, the Chinese had not solved the problem of achieving economic growth while maintaining revolutionary values. Disagreement over this issue began to produce a major split within the Communist Party between the Radicals and the Moderates.

The Radicals called for China to strive for a classless society in which everyone would work selflessly for the common good.

The Moderates stressed the importance of economic development. They believed that the policies of the Radicals were unrealistic and hampered the modernization of China.

THE PARTITION OF INDIA - REFUGEE PROBLEM

The negotiations between the Congress and the Muslim League, stumbled over the issue of the partition.

Jinnah proclaimed 16 August 1946, Direct Action Day, with the stated goal of highlighting, peacefully, the demand for a Muslim homeland in British India.  

However, on the morning of the 16th armed Muslim gangs gathered in Calcutta and attacked Hindus with the demand for Pakistan, This was later called the "Great Calcutta Killing of August 1946". 

The next day, Hindus struck back and the violence continued for three days in which approximately 4,000 people died (according to official accounts), Hindus and Muslims in equal numbers. 

Although India had had outbreaks of religious violence between Hindus and Muslims before, the Calcutta killings was the first to display elements of "ethnic cleansing," in modern times. 

Violence was not confined to the public sphere, but homes were entered, destroyed, and women and children attacked. Although the Government of India and the Congress were both shaken by the course of events, in September, a Congress-led interim government was installed, with Jawaharlal Nehru as united India's prime minister.

The communal violence spread to Bihar (where Muslims were attacked by Hindus), to Noakhali in Bengal (where Hindus were targeted by Muslims), and other parts of the country.

Late in 1946, the Labour government in Britain, bankrupt due to the recently concluded World War II, decided to end British rule of India, and in early 1947 Britain announced its intention of transferring power no later than June 1948.

However, with the British army unprepared for the potential of increased violence, the new viceroy, Louis Mountbatten, advanced the date for the transfer of power, allowing less than six months for a mutually agreed plan for independence.

In June 1947, the nationalist leaders, including Nehru and Abul Kalam Azad on behalf of the Congress, Jinnah representing the Muslim League, B. R. Ambedkar representing the  Untouchable  community, and Master Tara Singh representing the Sikhs, agreed to a partition of the country along religious lines in total opposition to Gandhi's views.

The predominantly Hindu and Sikh areas were assigned to the new India and predominantly Muslim areas to the new nation of Pakistan; the plan included a partition of the Muslim-majority provinces of Punjab and Bengal. The communal violence that accompanied the announcement of the Radcliffe Line, the line of partition, was even more horrific.

On 14 August 1947, the new Dominion of Pakistan came into being, with Muhammad Ali Jinnah sworn in as its first Governor General in Karachi. 

The following day, 15 August 1947, India became an independent country with Jawaharlal Nehru assuming the office of the Prime Minister.

Massive population exchanges occurred between the two newly formed states in the months immediately following Partition. Once the lines were established, about 14.5 million people crossed the borders to what they hoped was the relative safety of religious majority.

Resettlement of refugees in India: 1947–1957

Many Sikhs and Hindu Punjabis fled Western Punjab and settled in the Indian parts of Punjab and Delhi. Hindus fleeing from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) settled across Eastern and Northeastern India, many ending up in neighboring Indian states such as West Bengal , Assam, and Tripura. Some migrants were sent to the Andaman Islands where Bengalis today form the largest linguistic group.

Delhi received the largest number of refugees for a single city – the population of Delhi grew rapidly in 1947.  The refugees were housed in various historical and military locations. The camp sites were later converted into permanent housing through extensive building projects undertaken by the Government of India from 1948 onwards. A number of housing colonies in Delhi came up around this period. A number of schemes such as  the provision of education, employment opportunities, and easy loans to start businesses were provided for the refugees at the all-India level.

Resettlement of refugees in Pakistan: 1947–1957

In the aftermath of partition, a huge population exchange occurred between the two newly formed states. Most of those migrants who settled in Punjab, Pakistan came from the neighbouring Indian regions ofPunjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh  while others were from Jammu and Kashmir and Rajasthan. On the other hand, most of those migrants who arrived in Sindh were primarily of Urdu-speaking background and came from the northern and central urban centres of India, such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Rajasthan via the Wahgah and Munabao borders.

Later in 1950s, the majority of Urdu speaking refugees who migrated after the independence were settled in the port city of Karachi in southern Sindh and in the metropolitan cities of Hyderabad, Sukkur, Nawabshah and Mirpurkhas. In addition, some Urdu-speakers settled in the cities of Punjab, mainly in Lahore, Multan, Bahawalpur and Rawalpindi.

.

Rehabilitation of women

Both sides promised each other that they would try to restore women abducted during the riots. The Indian government claimed that 33,000 Hindu and Sikh women were abducted, and the Pakistani government claimed that 50,000 Muslim women were abducted during riots. By 1949, there were governmental claims that 12,000 women had been recovered in India and 6,000 in Pakistan. (By 1954 there were 20,728 recovered Muslim women and 9,032 Hindu and Sikh women recovered from Pakistan.) Most of the Hindu and Sikh women refused to go back to India fearing that they would never be accepted by their family; similarly, the families of some Muslim women refused to take back their relatives.

Perspectives

The Partition was a highly controversial arrangement, and remains a cause of much tension on the Indian subcontinent today. The two nations were granted their independence even before there was a defined boundary between them. There was a complete breakdown of law and order; many died in riots, massacre, or just from the hardships of their flight to safety. What ensued was one of the largest population movements in recorded history.

A cross border student initiative, ‘The History Project’ was launched in 2014 in order to explore the differences in perception of the events during the British era which lead to the partition. The project resulted in a book that explains both interpretations of the shared history in Pakistan and India.

Artistic depictions of the Partition

The partition of India and the associated bloody riots inspired many creative minds in India and Pakistan to create literary/cinematic depictions of this event. While some creations depicted the massacres during the refugee migration, others concentrated on the aftermath of the partition in terms of difficulties faced by the refugees in both side of the border.

Even now, works of fiction and films are made that relate to the events of partition.

Literature described the human cost of independence and partition. For e.g.

-          Bal K. Gupta's memoirs ‘Forgotten Atrocities(2012)’

-           Khushwant Singh's ‘Train to Pakistan’ (1956),

-          several short stories such as ‘Toba Tek Singh’ (1955) by Saadat Hassan Manto, 

-          Urdu poems such as ‘Subh-e-Azadi’ (Freedom's Dawn, 1947) by Faiz Ahmad Faiz, 

-          Bhisham Sahni's ‘Tamas’ (1974)

-          Salman Rushdie's novel ‘Midnight's Children’ (1980), which won the Booker Prize and the Booker of Bookers, weaved its narrative based on the children born with magical abilities on midnight of 14 August 1947.

-          ‘Freedom at Midnight’ (1975) is a non-fiction work by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre 

Films:

-          Nemai Ghosh's ‘Chinnamul’ (Bengali) (1950)

-           Dharmputra (1961,

-            Lahore (1948)

-          Komal Gandhar (Bengali) (1961)

-           Tamas (1987).  

-           Train to Pakistan (1998) (based on the book), 

-          Hey Ram (2000), 

-          Gadar: Ek Prem  Katha  (2001),  

-          Pinjar (2003),  

-          Partition (2007)

 The biographical films Gandhi (1982), Jinnah (1998) and Sardar (1993) also feature independence and partition as significant events in their screenplay.

A Pakistani drama ‘Daastan’, based on the novel Bano, also tells the tale of young Muslim girl during partition.

The 2013 Google India advertisement ‘Reunion’ (about the Partition of India) has had a strong impact in both India and Pakistan, leading to hope for the easing of travel restrictions between the two countries. It went viral and was viewed more than 1.6 million times before officially debuting on television on 15 November 2013. 

INDO PAK WAR 1971 AND THE FORMATION OF BANGLADESH

Indo-Pak War, 1971: Almost immediately after the 1971 general elections in India a major political-military crisis broke out in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). India was inevitably drawn into the fray, leading to a bloody war between India and Pakistan.

Pakistan had been created around the ideological assumption that because of their faith the Muslims of India constituted a separate nation. But religion was not enough to weld together the Punjabi speaking part of West Pakistan with the Bengali speaking East Pakistan. 

The West Pakistan political and economic elite soon acquired a dominant position in Pakistan’s army, bureaucracy, economy and polity resulting in economic and political discrimination against East Pakistan. Moreover, in the absence of political democracy, the Bengalis had no mechanism through which to remedy the situation. 

Consequently, over time, the people of East Pakistan developed a powerful movement for democracy in Pakistan and greater autonomy for East Pakistan. Instead of coming to terms with this movement, the ruling elite of Pakistan decided to suppress it and which ultimately transformed it into a movement for independence from Pakistan.

In December 1970, General Yahya Khan, the military dictator of Pakistan, held free elections in which Bengal’s Awami party under the popular leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman won more than 99 percent of seats in east Bengal and an overall majority in Pakistan’s National Assembly. 

But the army and Yahya Khan, backed by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the leading politician of West Pakistan, refused to let the Awami party form the government. 

When the Awami party started a civil disobedience movement to enforce the constitutional provision, in a sudden move on March 25, 1971, Yahya khan ordered a military crackdown on East Pakistan. Mujibur Rehman was arrested and taken to an unknown destination in West Pakistan. 

The West Pakistan army initiated a reign of terror, killing innocent citizens, burning villages and crops. Thousands of intellectuals and Bengali members of the police and army were indiscriminately but systematically eliminated in order to deprive the people of any leadership for over six months, the army committed rape, torture, arson, brutal killings and other heinous crimes. 

The Awami League leaders, who succeeded in escaping to Calcutta, formed a government of Bangladesh in exile, organized the Mukti Bahini (Liberation Army) and launched a fierce underground movement and guerrilla warfare.

The brutality of the Pakistan army was specially directed against the Hindus remaining in East Pakistan who were faced with virtual genocide. They, but also a large number of Muslims, Christians and Buddhists, were forced to migrate to and seek shelter in West Bengal, Assam and Meghalaya in India. 

By November 1971, the number of refugees from East Bengal had reached ten million.

In India there was a wave of sympathy for the people of East Bengal and a strong demand for swift action against Pakistan. But, Indira Gandhi, though convinced that war with Pakistan was likely, opposed hasty action. Throughout the crisis, she acted with immense courage but also with abundant caution and careful and cool calculation. She did not want to strengthen Pakistan propaganda that the entire movement for autonomy in East Pakistan and the consequent revolt was not a popular uprising but an Indian conspiracy. She did not want to do anything which would lead to India being accused of violating international law and norms.

In following a policy of restraint, Indira Gandhi had to other major considerations in view. First, if it was to be war, it should come at a time of India’s choosing as careful planning and preparations were necessary. Military operations in East Pakistan could not be undertaken during the monsoon when the large number of rivers and rivulets there would be in flood and the marshes impossible. The Himalayan passes would get snowbound only in winter making it impossible for China to intervene and send troops to aid Pakistan. The Mukti Bahini also needed time to gain enough strength to confront the Pakistani army in regular warfare.

Secondly, Indira Gandhi realized that international opinion had to be educated and won over to the cause of Bangladesh and made aware of India’s predicament in regard to the refugees and how they were placing an unbearable burden on India, endangering its economic and political stability. This she hoped would make other countries sympathetic to India.

For the next eight months, Indira Gandhi followed a four-pronged policy. India not only gave sanctuary to the Bangladesh government in exile, but the Indian army gave military training on Indian soil and material aid in money and military equipment to the Mukti Bahini. The Indian government was also generous in providing food, clothing, shelter and medical aid to the refugees in spite of being a tremendous strain on India’s resources.

 In April 1971, Indian armed forces began to prepare for swift military action, though in utmost secrecy, in case a peaceful solution of the refugee problem could not be found. Moreover, the military operation had to be swift and finished before the big powers succeeded in halting the conflict and imposing a ceasefire.

India’s campaign received a very positive response from the media, the intelligentsia and the students in the west and ultimately from the East European Communist countries. But the governments of the United States and China adopted a hostile attitude towards India. Ignoring Indian protest, the US continued to supply arms to Pakistan. It also tried to pose the problem of Bangladesh primarily as an issue between India and Pakistan rather than one of Bangladesh’s independence. China was fully supportive of Pakistan as it had become virtually its ally. In July-August 1971 Pakistan had helped to bring about a US-China Détente.

On December 3, Pakistan’s air force launched a surprise attack on light military airfields in western India, hoping to inflict serious damage on the Indian air force and also to internationalize the Bangladesh issue and secure UN intervention. 

The Indian air force was relatively unharmed; anticipating a Pakistani attack, the Indian air force had withdrawn beforehand to interior airfields.

India immediately recognized Bangladesh and gave a strong military reply. The Indian strategy was to hold the Pakistani forces in the western sector through strong defensive action, while waging a short, swift and decisive war in the east, forcing the Pakistan army there to surrender before the US, China or the UN could intervene.

Brilliantly led by General J. S. Arora, the Indian army, joined by the Mukti Bahini, virtually ran through East Bengal and reached Dacca, its capital, within eleven days, and surrounded the Pakistani garrison there. 

Indira Gandhi asked General Manekshaw, India’s Army Chief, to hurry the completion of India’s military plan. The Indian armed forces, having surrounded Dacca on 13 December, forced the defeated and demoralized 93,000 strong Pakistan army in Bangladesh to surrender on December 16.

Following the surrender in Dacca, on December 17, the Indian government announced a unilateral ceasefire on the Western front.

Pakistan readily accepted the ceasefire and released Mujibur Rahman, who came to power in Bangladesh on January 12, 1972.

India had several gains to show from the Bangladesh war. 

- The balance of power in South Asia had been altered with India emerging as the per-eminent power. 

- The grave refugee problem had been solved with the ten million refugees promptly and smoothly sent back to their homes in Bangladesh. 

- The humiliating memory of the defeat in 1962 was wiped out and India’s lost pride and self-respect restored. 

- India had not only defeated a troublesome neighbor but had asserted its independence in foreign affairs and in defense of her national interest. It had been shown that India was not a weak political entity on the world stage even if it was not yet a world power.

- The war had also demonstrated the strength of Indian secularism. Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, all had stood together as civilians or soldiers at this moment of crisis.

The Simla Agreement 1972: 

The war had ended; the ceasefire had come but peace had not. 

India still held over 90,000 prisoners of war and was in occupation of nearly 9,000 square kilometers of Pakistani territory. Pakistan was yet to recognize Bangladesh. Indira Gandhi realized that a mutually arrived at Indo-Pak settlement was necessary for a durable peace. A hostile Pakistan would not only force India to maintain a high level of defence expenditure but also enable outside powers to interfere in sub-continental affairs. 

A summit conference between Indira Gandhi and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the newly-elected Prime Minister of Pakistan, was held in Simla in June 1972; a great deal of hard bargaining took place and the two signed an agreement which came to be known as the Simla Declaration. India agreed to return the Pakistan territory it had occupied except some strategic points in Kashmir mainly in the Kargil sector, which were necessary to safeguard the strategic road link between Srinagar and Leh in Ladakh. 

In return, Pakistan agreed to respect the existing Line of control (LOC) in Kashmir and undertook not to alter it unilaterally by force or threat of force. 

The two countries also agreed to settle all disputes though bilateral negotiations without any outside mediation by the UN or any other power. 

India also agreed to return the prisoners of war to Pakistan but this was to be contingent upon a Bangladesh-Pakistan agreement. This occurred the next year when Pakistan recognized Bangladesh in August 1973.

CROSS BORDER TERRORISM - KARGIL

The Kargil War, 1999 

India’s conduct of nuclear tests (Second tests after 1974 at Pokhran) on May 11, 1998 and declaring itself a nuclear weapon state proved to be a turning point in India’s relations with the west and its neighbours China, Japan and Pakistan. The immediate fall out of Pokhran II was imposition of sanctions on India by the West and Japan on one hand and the conduct of nuclear tests by Pakistan a few months later as a knee-jerk reaction, on the other.

After Pokhran II, Pakistan carried out its own nuclear tests and there was much sabre-rattling on both sides. In early 1999, when the atmosphere appeared more congenial, Vajpayee initiated the ‘bus diplomacy’ (riding the first bus service between India and Pakistan), aimed at making a major breakthrough in improving relations with Pakistan. However, as later events revealed, from long before the much-hyped bus ride to Lahore, soldiers of the Pakistan Army and Pakistan-backed Mujahedeen or religious militants and mercenaries, were busy infiltration into Indian Territory. In fact, by May when the whole crisis blew up it was discovered that Pakistani armed forces had intruded deep across the line of control in Kashmir and had occupied key strategic peaks in the Kargil area. India had to mount a massive and extremely difficult counter-offensive from a disadvantageous military position, which was extremely costly particularly in terms of human lives, in order to evict the intruders. Pictures of body-bags of hundreds of Indian soldiers and officers killed in the Kargil operations began to appear regularly in the Indian newspapers in a manner not witnessed before.

The international reaction to the Kargil crisis was, almost unanimous, in favor of India. Even the US, Britain and China – long time allies of Pakistan – put pressure on Pakistan to withdraw from Indian Territory. Pakistan’s claim that it had no regular army men on the Indian side of the border but only provided moral support to militants was not taken seriously by anybody.

Since the Kargil war, the Indo-Pak relations have seen many ups and downs. Despite the efforts made by leaders and governments of both sides in diffusing tensions in order to normalize ties through composite dialogue and several confidence-building measures, the two countries still face the most intractable problems in their relations – conflict over Kashmir, support for separatists and cross-border terrorism by Pakistan and nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. 

The attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001 by the separatists-terrorists heightened the tension and created a war-like situation between the two countries. The growing acts of terrorism perpetrated by the separatist-terrorist outfits backed by the Pakistan army and intelligence service ISI, like the attack on Akshardham temple, the bomb blasts in Mumbai local trains and the more recent terror attack on Mumbai (November 26, 2008) as well as the attack on Uri in 2016 have again derailed the peace-process and vitiated the relations between India and Pakistan. 

PEACE TIME MEDIA INTERVENTION

Mass media has been used over the years for the propagation and promotion of war. However, there have been positive instances where the media has played a vital role in promoting peace.

STAR RADIO (1997-2000) 
Building on the experience of Radio Agatashya, the Fondation Hirondelle created a peace and reconciliation radio for Liberia. Star Radio went on the air on 15 July 1997, shortly before the first democratic elections were held. It shared the facilities with Radio Monrovia.

Radio Monrovia used the frequency 104 MHz for much of the day, while Star Radio provided three hours of programmes in the morning and in the evening. In addition to English, Liberian English and French news reports were prepared and broadcast in fourteen local languages. The news bulletins were also made available throughout the world on the internet. The time sharing agreement was to become a point of controversy as was the internet service. 

The FM service covered about 40 percent of Liberia´s population. From 16 September 1997 to October 1998, Star also broadcast on short wave to achieve nationwide coverage and also reach Liberian refugees in neighbouring countries. Star Radio's short wave broadcasts were on the air six hours per day, at the originally scheduled times in the morning and evening. At times, they were also audible in Europe. 

Although the station was started and funded with foreign help, the station had an almost completely Liberian staff. Beginning in January 1999, the management and running of the station was handed over to Star Radio's Liberian board of directors. It was planned that the station would become self-supporting in 2004 with local and international funding sources. Regular donors of the station were the development agencies of the United States, Sweden and the Netherlands. 

Throughout its existence, Star Radio was subject to government pressure. On 7 January 1998, it closed Star Radio citing illegal use of frequencies as reason although Star Radio and Radio Monrovia had a time sharing contract. After pressure from foreign governments, Star Radio was able to regain the air waves. In October 1998, the Liberian government withdrew the short wave licenses of Star Radio and Roman Catholic Radio Veritas. Nonetheless, based on a 1999 survey, there were approximately 400,000 people listening to Star Radio FM because of its independent reporting. On 15 March 2000, the government closed down both Star Radio and Radio Veritas. President Taylor cited "outside influence" and "outside money" as reasons and attacked Star Radio´s internet news service as being biased against Liberian interests. It is said that Taylor was not only dissatisfied with the existence of independent media but even more dissatisfied with the poor performance of his own media in the ratings. In protest three independent newspapers and independent radio station DC 101.1 suspended operations for a day on 20 March 2000. While Radio Veritas was able to return to the air, in statements heard on Taylor's short wave service, Radio Liberia International, he re-iterated his commitment to keep Star Radio closed.

TALKING DRUM STUDIO, LIBERIA

In 1997, Search for Common Ground (SFCG) in Liberia, in association with European Centre for Common Ground (EEG) and Common Ground Productions (CGP), opened a radio production facility in Monrovia, Liberia. Initially focused on election education and polling procedures, Talking Drum Studio - Liberia (TDS-L) produces original programming in an effort to help reduce conflict in West Africa. TDS-L aims to reduce political and ethnic violence - stressing themes of peace, reconciliation, and democratisation. The Community Services Unit, a community outreach programme working in partnership with the studio, works on the local level.

Communication Strategies: Programming includes a regular 1/2-hour news programme, roundtable forums, and dramatisations that are also performed as street theatre. Broadcast materials receive more than 30 hours per week of airplay on 17 Liberian and international radio stations. The BBC plays TDS news features on its Africa Service programme, Network Africa. Staff associated with the Community Services Unit recognise problems on the local level and intervene with a variety of tools, ranging from mediation to training to soccer tournaments. In 2000, SFCG opened a second Talking Drum Studio, in Sierra Leone.

One area of particular focus is children's programming. Liberian children produce Golden Kids News and Children's World for children; adult TDS-L staff serve as trainers and mentors.

TDS-L also promotes AIDS prevention in Liberia and then mentors TDS-SL to do the same in Sierra Leone. After staff attended trainings in Washington, DC (United States), TDS-L teamed up with the National AIDS Control Program to design a campaign that has, to date, included billboards with HIV/AIDS messages in three locations in Monrovia and nine public service announcements. The Community Services Unit staff distributed t-shirts and over 6,000 condoms at various events.

Finally, TDS-L inspired local broadcasters and newspapers in Liberia to form Media Against Conflict (MAC), a collaborative project to use the media to help resolve conflicts and address challenging national issues.

Talking Drum Studio aims to reduce political and ethnic violence, stressing themes of peace, reconciliation, and democratisation. Radio is used to promote dialogue among polarised groups. One way this is achieved is by ensuring that the production facility employs journalists of different ethnic backgrounds. According to its founder, CGP, TDS-L has a 90% listenership among Liberians.

In 2001, the Independent News newspaper recognised TDS-L's contribution to building peace in Liberia by awarding the programme its "Media Institution of the Year" honour.

VOICE OF HOPE

Radio Voice of Hope went on air in Sudan in November 2000. Programmes were researched and put together in East Africa, in combination with several religious and humanitarian organisations. Approximately 2000 radio sets were distributed among churches ad tribal leaders in the refugee camps to receive the programmes.

The Sudanese Government saw the service as a backing to the SPLA - rebels and in October 2004 the name was changed to Radio Nile. As the programmes were still using material prepared before the name change, both the old and new names were used for some time. In the summer of 2006, Radio Nile was forced to close down on account of financial difficulties. 

FORMATION OF ISRAEL

‘Great revolutions which strike the eye at a glance must have been preceded by a quiet and secret revolution in the spirit of the age… It is a lack of acquaintance with this spiritual revolution which makes the resulting changes astonishing’ - Hegel

The Jewish Diaspora – The migration of Jewish tribes to Egypt and their return to the ‘Promised Land’ somewhere between 1400-1200 BC was the beginning of a period that was far from peaceful. For two millennia Palestine’s history was one of bondage or over lordship of one sort or another. Thus under troubled oppression from the Romans the Jews left Palestine to take refuge from their oppressors. It remained under different hands for a very long period of time.

During the long centuries of their sojourn in different parts of the world, the Jews never gave up the idea of returning back to Palestine.

An active movement for Jewish return to Palestine does not appear until the second half of the 19^th century. This movement aimed at the establishment of a national Jewish state in Palestine, the ancient Jewish homeland. This movement radically changed the course of Jewish history and the nature of the bond between the Jews and the land of Israel.

The European Jews in 1815 were a community who still lived in the land of European society and rural districts like Hesse and Alsace. The great cities of Europe – Paris, Vienna, Berlin, London, Moscow and St. Petersburg were still predominantly Judarian.

Beginnings of Anti Semitism – The Jews achieved important positions in journalism, literature, music, science, paintings and philosophy. The world of finance was run by a large number of Jewish magnates and revolutionary movements were also often led by the Jews.

One of the outstanding contributions to the field of political thought was that of Karl Marx, a German Jew who preached his doctrine of class war and naturalistic interpretation of history.

Disraeli and Einstein made a tremendous impact on world thought. Universities, academics and school drew a larger and larger number of Jews into their activities. Their predominance over political and industrial power, if not at the height of society was not taken well by the other advanced countries in Europe and thus brought about various nationalist movements against the Jews. This provoked hostility amongst the Europeans. The varying degrees of oppression and discrimination to which they subjected in their land of adoption naturally helped to intensify their nostalgia for Palestine.

Political persecutions were first witnessed in Russia and Russian Poland where the concentration of the Jewish population was the highest, thus resulting in an active Jewish immigration to the United States and the Palestine territories.

Herzol was a Hungarian Jew who called the first Zionist Congress at Bazel in Switzerland in 1897. Its aim was to create a new mother country for the Jews in Palestine. Herzol was elected as the president for this organization where various Zionists movements were encouraged in various parts in Europe.

By 1911 the Zionist movement had grown from Herzol’s visionary idea to a strong and organized worldwide philosophy.

Humiliations faced by the Jews worldwide:

In Germany, Prince Bismarck launched an anti Semitism camp against the Jews. He feared that Jewish domination over the industrial and other important affairs of the country would consequently weaken the strong German territory.

The tsarist government imposed new restriction on the Russian Jews. Orthodox Jews, whose habits and external appearance differed from those of the majority culture, were victimized and attacked. The anti Jewish movements in Russia became so intense and violent in the 1880s that a number of Jews were forced to migrate to the US and the Western European countries.

The growing importance and the wealth of the Jews angered the other communities and they began anti Jewish campaigns.

Socially, the Jews were viewed with increasing mistrust and hostility and were not allowed in the participation of national life, were debarred from public affairs, to own land and excluded totally from social life. Many times they were expelled from the country without any adequate reason.

The Balfour Declaration (2^nd November 1917): As the convener of the first Zionist Congress at Basel in 1897 and the founder of the World Zionist Organization, Theodore Herzol felt that Zionism would never be achieved through silent labour at the edge of world politics. During the First World War the Zionist movement became extremely popular. At this time, Britain received this movement and readily agreed to support them and their cause.

After a formal meeting with their leader Chian Wiezman, the British government made a policy statement on 2^nd November 1917. This statement viewed

1. The establishment of Palestine as a permanent home for the Jews.
2. That the British crown would stand by the Jews in their object
3. Nothing would be done to prejudice the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish community in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by the Jews in other countries.

Britain purposely declared their cooperation through the Balfour declaration firstly to safeguard their future investments in the Middle East and secondly, the Jewish community in Palestine would serve as an immediate means for mobilizing the Jews for the allied war cause

In 1922, Churchill’s White Paper made it clear that Palestine would not be given completely to the Jews, but only a part of Palestine would be set aside for their home. The Jewish immigration into Palestine would be allowed to its economic capacity. The ‘Treaty of Lausanne’ (1922) conferred the British mandate in Palestine giving the Jews, the entire power of Legislation and administration.

This mandate permitted the Jewish immigration into Palestine. They were given permanent citizenship of the land. In the 1930s because of this treaty, the Arabs now frequently began to conflict with the Jews, thus leading to a full-scale clash in 1936.

Few wars have appeared so justified in the eyes of the participants, as to the Jews it was the fulfillment of a programme that they had cherished since the ‘Diaspora’ – the great dispersion from Palestine nearly 2000 years ago. To the Arabs it was a simple case of not becoming aliens in the country that they had known as their own for 12 centuries.

A royal commission was set up to investigate the real cause behind this rebellion and concluded that there was no common ground for a settlement between the Arabs and the Jews. Thus the portioning of Palestine would make separate provinces. In 1938, the Palestine portioning committee was set up to demarcate the areas of the two states but before any decision could be made the Second World War broke out. Thus, the conflict was shelved for the time being till the end of the war.

Jews in the Second World War – Not only because of the Balfour declaration but also out of no option, the Jews in Palestine volunteered in the British army. Hitler had already begun his intolerance towards the Jews and they were absolutely determined to wipe out the Semite race. On the other hand the Jews, witnesses to their massacre were determined to do the same.

Hitler’s liquidation of 6 million Jews in Germany horrified the world. Thus the US and the British government decided to give their unflinching support to the Zionist demand for a separate state. Due to this sympathy the Arabs once again renewed their conflict with the Jews. Since the matter could not be resolved through peaceful measures, it was referred to the UNO.

Emergence of Israel

A special session of the general assembly was called in April at the request of Britain to recommend a policy for Palestine. The Jews did their best to influence the commission. The Arab Higher committee representing the Palestine Arabs did not take it very seriously, thinking that to do so would mean recognizing Jewish rights.

Finally on May 14^th 1948, the state of Israel was declared. With the emergence of Israel the dream of the Zionists was fulfilled. The Jews acquired a homeland with an independent state of their own thus bringing an end to their trials and tribulations. They could now legitimately work for a better future.

NAZISM, FASCISM, COMMUNISM

NAZISM	FASCISM	COMMUNISM / STALINISM
Germany	Italy	Russia
Adolf Hitler	Benito Mussolini	Joseph Stalin
Hitler was anti-communist and nationalistic He wrote his autobiography Mein Kampf He used propaganda Took over all forms of communication	Nation is greater than the individual Individualism makes nations weak Used media and publicized public works. Economy prospered.	Positive outlook and pretended everything was okay. He used propaganda. He wanted to build Russia into an industrial giant and forced rapid modernisation.
1) he wanted unification for all Germans under one government 2) wanted all blond-haired, blue-eyed Germans belonged to the Aryan race (Master race) 3) wanted to expand Germany east into Poland and Russia 4) Blamed Jews for most of the world's problems and for Germany losing WWI	Fascism provided: 1) protection of private property 2) protection of middle class 3) keep working class fully employed 4) offered social security	Secret police appointed to imprison, kill, exile anyone who was anti Stalin