June 2011

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

The Future of Civil Society in The Middle East” by Augustus R. Norton - Review Paper

In his article “The Future of Civil Society in the Middle East”, Augustus Norton argues that fast growing populations and limited resources together mean that the governments of the countries of the Middle East are in great trouble. People are demanding changes to their political systems and these demands have become more pressing with the global revolution in communications and the migration of labor within and -out the Middle East.
Most of these countries are facing legitimacy crises. The Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the Gulf War in 1991 increased the demands for democratization in the Middle East. As the demands for democratization have increased, some political leaders are willing to liberalize but they are not willing to democratize comprehensively. “Democratization means that there should be free and fair elections while liberalization is the freedom of expressions and permission of forming political associations” (Norton, 1993, 207). Allowing democratization would cause the regimes to lose power.
The impact of Islam on the political framework in the Middle East is decreasing as most of “the region’s Islamic movements are attempting to work within the existing systems” (Norton, 1993, 208). The author negates the view of some commentators that there is no civil society in the Middle East as he argues that there exist women`s organizations, businessmen’s groups and labor groups. The author further states that “the emergence of a civil society is a necessary, though not sufficient condition for the development of democracy” (Norton, 1993, 212). He defines civility as the ability of people in a society to accept diversity and disparate political views. The author considers civility an important factor in building effective civil society; he argues that most Middle Eastern countries lack this quality. The author ends by expressing his hopes for a better future for civil society in the Middle East, a future in which talk of the exceptionalism of the Middle East would be no longer appropriate.
This article gives a very good insight into Middle Eastern society. The author makes certain points about the form and structure of civil society. At the outset, he states: “Governments with limited resources are failing to meet the needs and demands of their fast growing population” (Norton, 1993, 205).the author`s point of view is quite valid because when people do have access to basic necessities, they feel satisfied with their existing political and economic systems. But when governments fail to fulfill their citizens’ basic needs, then people push for political or economic change. Often this desire for change in the system leads to change in the governing regime.
A growing population and limited resources in the Middle East are causing people especially the disenfranchised unemployed youth to rise up and demand new system which can give them what they need. As we have seen from the recent examples of Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen, “the civil society is protesting against the government for unemployment and a high inflation rate as oil reserves decline and water reserves are also depleted” (IBtimes). Rising prices and high youth unemployment together with entrenched monarchic system and systemic state terror have driven the street protests of Tunis, Cairo and Benghazi.
Another significant aspect that needs endorsement is that Islamic organizations are changing their behavior towards existing systems in the region. As the author says, “Islamist movements are attempting to work within the existing systems. Rather than toppling governments, the tactic is to push for reform from within” (Norton, 1993, 208). Since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, there is no example or event in the Middle East which could show that Islamist movements are against the existing system. Rather we see that most of the Islamist movements like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are now trying to achieve their goals within existing political structures. According to the author, this is a “wise approach” (Norton, 1993, 208). I think it would be difficult for these Islamist movements to implement their agendas in pure form as this would require drastic change in the regimes. The advantages of this approach are obvious from the electoral victories obtained by Islamist parties in Turkey, Iran and Gaza. For instance Justice and Development party in turkey which known as AK party is an Islamic party. AK party won elections in 2002 but it did not propose to introduce Islamic law as most of the people were expecting. Similarly Hamas and Hezbollah have also some electoral victories in the past several years but these parties did threaten the contemporary system. Especially Islamic militants Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian parliament in 2006 but it continued with the existing system rather to change. Similarly, Al-Qaida seems to be increasingly irrelevant even though, for instance, Ayman Al-Zawahiri rose up originally through the Muslim Brotherhood.
 The author negates the contention of those commentators who say that there is no civil society in the Middle East. He argues that civil society exists to the extent there are women’s movements, businessmen’s groups and labor groups (Norton, 1993, 209) which are advancing their demands through legitimate channels. This article was written in 1993 when these countries had stable economies. The author is right in his observation that civil society did exist in indigenous forms because people did not have as many demands to make from their governments. If we look at the experiences to date of Tunisia and Egypt we see strong civil societies. But at the other hand we do not see any revolt against the governments in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and United Arab Emirates because they have stable economies and hence their governments are able to fulfill their citizen`s demands. The existence of contemporary strong civil societies in the Middle East bears out the author’s prediction of strong civil society in the future.
What is happening now in Tunisia and Egypt disproves the concept of the Middle Eastern exceptionalism according to which there is a “failure of the Muslim Middle East to join in the global trend of democratization (Meforum). As “civil society is necessary for democracy” (Norton, 1993, 212), therefore the idea of the Middle East exeptionalism ultimately means that the Middle East does not have a civil society. So, the present day situation of the Middle East rejects the concept of the Middle East exceptionalism and bears out that civil society do exist. It is not true to assume that civil society always wants democratization. It is also possible that civil society may be conservative and thus might not necessarily seek democratization as is the case for religious movements in which elements of civil society struggle for the restoration of traditional systems and traditional political culture which may be autocratic, aristocratic or even totalitarian.
Norton argues that “civility is a quality which is missing in large parts of the Middle East” (Norton, 1993, 214). It would not be wrong to hypothesize that author is off-track as there are plenty of examples which show that these countries have become more tolerant over the years. It is possible to say that some Middle Eastern countries have fairly pluralistic societies. For example, in Lebanon, “70 percent of the total population is Muslim while 30 percent is Christian” (Mideastweb). There are also divisions as between Muslims: for instance in Kuwait “45 percent of the Muslims are Sunnis and 40 percent are Shia” (Mideastweb). There is diversity in ethnicity: in Qatar, “40 percent of the total population is Arab, 18 percent Pakistani, 18 percent Indian and 10 percent is Iranian” (Mideastweb). Looking at these figures, one can say that there is pluralism in Middle Eastern countries. Despite the great diversity found in Middle Eastern countries, there does not exist any significant conflict among different communities or sects. The author is wrong to state that tolerance is absent in these countries as it is tolerance which has enabled different sects and communities to live together without conflict. Without tolerance, such diversity might not have existed. 
The Future of Civil Society in the Middle East” provides a very good insight. The present situation of the Middle East provides evidence for the accuracy of the author’s views. But it is only to be expected that an article written nearly a decade ago does not altogether fit with the present scenario. As we see the revolution of Egypt and Tunisia and now the demonstrations of the Lebanese people against the government, these really bears out the  author prediction about a strong civil society in the Middle East.

Written By: Masood Khan

Monday, June 27, 2011

The East Pakistan crises: 1971

Pakistan came into being on 14 August 1947. It had two parts; called East Pakistan or Bengal and West Pakistan apart by about 1,000 kilometers from each other. Like their geographical separateness both of these parts were much different from each other in cultural, political and social aspects. Bengal remained under-developed because of the social, cultural, political and economical grievances.  From the very inception of Pakistan, west Pakistanis dominated political, social, cultural and economic field of life. Most of the earlier leaders were from West Pakistan: the founder and the first governor general of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah was from Karachi (A West Pakistan’s city). Similarly, Bengalis were under-represented in the Pakistan armed forces and bureaucracy, as these areas were dominated by the West Pakistanis. For instance, in the total of 3 lakhs of armed forces in 1970 only 40,000 army personnel were from the West Pakistan, while in the Civil services numbers of Bengalis were much less as compare to their proportion of population: in 1947 there was only one ICS (Indian Civil Services) officer from Bengal (Tajammul 1996: 22). From the socio-cultural perspective too Bengalis were kept deprived. Despite the fact that 55 percent of the population of East Pakistan at the time was speaking Bengali, Urdu was declared the national language of Pakistan which was hardly spoken by 5 percent of the total population (Choudhury 1972: 247). These grievances led to sense of deprivation in the people of East Pakistan and they started to make demands for a separate independent state. People started rebellion against the government and the authorities responded forcibly to the demands of separation of East Pakistan. In March 1971, the government carried out a military operation against the rebels known as the Operation Searchlight. This operation is considered to be the worst operation that any country had ever carried against its own people. During the course of this operation, more than three million people were killed, at least 200,000 women were raped and more than nine million refugees fled to India (Brownmiller 1977: 79). Bengalis succeeded in obtaining a separate home land and Bangladesh emerged a new state at world map with the surrender of Pakistan armed forces on 16 December 1971.

 A lot books have been written on pre-secession grievances, and on violence during the Operation Searchlight in East Bengal. Charles Peter in his book Bangladesh: Biography of a Muslim Nation written in 1984 describes different pre-secession grievances of East Bengal which led to the secession of Bangladesh in 1971. Talking about economic disparities peter says “Although both the wings (East and West Pakistan) produced about the same quantities of food grains, coPublish Postmparative nutritional levels of the Bengalis were lower. . . .East Pakistan received only 25 percent of the economic portion of the aid and hardly any of military monies” (Peter 1984: 69). Similarly, he talks about the political under-representation of Bengalis, he gives useful figures about Bengalis presentation in Civil services and army: “by 1955 there were only 55 Bengalis among 741 civil services officers….Of all army officers only 5 percent came from East Pakistan” (Peter 1984: 70). Another book The East Pakistan tragedy written in 1972 by Rushbrook Williams, describes the blame game of both the parties (West Pakistani elites and East Bengali secessionists), Williams takes the stance that the secession of East Bengal was a result of the ill-treatment of Bengalis by the hands of west Pakistani elites. The pre-secession grievances and violence during the Operation Searchlight faced by the Bengalis left many questions to be answered. The violence which took placed since 1947 to 1971, drastically affected the lives of Bengalis. Knowing the affects of pre-secession grievances and of violence during Operation searchlight provides a better understanding of the shift in the lives of those people. Discussing separately the pre-secession grievances and different forms of violence during Operation searchlight would be much better to know the get the right sense of those events.
            The pre-secession grievances of Bengalis can much appropriately be described as the structural violence against Bengalis. The term structure was coined by Johan Galtung in 1960s, according to Galtung “it describe social structure; economic, political, legal, religious, and cultural that stop individuals groups and societies form reaching their full potential” (Galtung 1969: 167-191). Usually, violence is considered to be a physical phenomenon, which is related to the body of individual, however; from the Galtung`s definition of structural violence it is obvious that violence can be inflicted through any means. Galting gives further explanation for structural violence: “it is avoidable impairment of fundamental human needs or…the impairment of human life, which lowers the actual degree to which someone is able to meet their needs below that which would otherwise be possible” (Galtung 1969: 167-191). Kathleen Weigert includes Institutional racism, disease-ridden environments, stigmatizing social norms, and barriers preventing underserved populations from getting adequate health care in the definition of structural violence (Weigert 1999: 03).The disasters which come with the structural violence are difficult to measure, because it’s much difficult to get the data about people who are affected by structural violence, in the same way it is difficult to know the exact number of people who died because of the structural violence. This peculiar characteristic of structural violence makes it much difficult to cope with such violence; also it is usually invisible because of its embedment in the society, and this helps the perpetrators of the structure violence to get away with it.  Structural violence is related with the social injustice, when people in the society are treated unequally and are deprived of their due rights. Social injustice is caused by some key behaviors, which include repression of a group, racism (considering a race inferior), classism, ageism and sexism. Another issue with the structural violence is that usually its victims do not conceive it as violence and they legitimize it. Victims of the structural violence often consider themselves deserving of such violence because of the de-humanization of the victims by perpetrators. Nick Haslam provides the definition of de-humanization as “the denial to others of two distinct senses of humanness: characteristics that are uniquely human and those that constitute human nature. Denying uniquely human attributes to others represents them as animal-like, and denying human nature to others represents them as objects or automata” (Haslam 2006: 01).In the case of East Bengal the pre-secession grievances were carried out by West Pakistani elites considering the Bengalis worth of nothing and inferior to East Pakistanis. West Pakistanis would consider Bengalis un-educated and not worth of getting any official post in the government. The overwhelming representation of west Pakistanis in the bureaucracy, army and other civil services provided them a sense of superiority over Bengalis, which made them to ignore the rights of Bengalis. Pakistani elites would perceived Bengalis as animal like, as noted by Hasan “Ayub Khan considered the Bengalis as a lower class race, unfit to enjoy any kind of freedom… he would said that Pakistanis [West Pakistanis] had every right to rule over the defeated nation-Bengalese …. General Niazi said that it (Bengal) is a low lying land of low lying people “(Hasan 2001, 01). This attitude of west Pakistani elites sowed the seeds of hatred in the hearts of Bengalis.  From the time of British rule, the British authorities had considered Bengalis to be a non-martial race (Choudhury 1972: 243). The myth of the non-martial race of Bengalis continued after the partition of India in 1947 and Bengalis were kept out of army by the West Pakistani elites. Instead of rectifying the disparities of Bengalis, the West Pakistani elites continued to exploit Bengalis. West Pakistani elites ignited the idea of de-humanization by implementing anti-Bengali policies, which led to the sense of deprivation in Bengalis. Economically Bengal was kept underdeveloped as noted by G.W Choudhury “ a  much larger share of development expenditure as well as foreign aid and loans went to West [Pakistan], most of foreign exchange by exporting jute from Bengal was spent on the industrialization of West Pakistan” (Choudhury 1972: 246). Spending much more on the development of West of Pakistan means that the West Pakistani elites kept Bengal underdeveloped, which ultimately caused lack of facilities to Bengal. As most of budget would went to defence (dominated by West Pakistanis), very little would have left for spending on education, health and welfare of people. M. Niaz Asadullah in his paper Educational Disparity in Pakistan, 1947-71 provides data on number of schools in West and East Pakistan. According to this data, during 1948-1971 number of secondary schools in West Pakistan increased by 127% while, in the East Pakistan this increase was only 77%. Similarly, in 1971 the Student-teacher ratio in West Pakistan was 36% while this ratio was 61% in East Pakistan (Asadullah 2004: 04). It is obvious from this data that Bengal was kept much underdeveloped in the field of education, despite the fact that most of the population of Pakistan was living in Bengal. The lack of educational facilities in Bengal led to lower literacy rate and in one way the government kept the Bengalis deprived of education which is basic right of every individual. In order to keep an ethnic group or a community under their rule or to create a sense of inferiority in an ethnic group or a community governments use different tactics. They don’t give much attention to their basic needs and rights, and try to create a hegemony on people who can abide by the rules and regulations of the government. Giving much less educational facilities to Bengalis and keeping them uneducated, West Pakistani elites wanted to create their own dominancy. West Pakistani elites thought that being uneducated or less educated, the Bengalis would be unabled to demand for their rights and they would always be under the rule of west Pakistani elites.  Government wanted to create uniformity all over Pakistan by making Urdu as the national language which was hardly spoken by 5% of the total population while, ignoring Bengali which was spoken by 20% of the population. Bengalis demanded for declaring Bengali as the national language along with Urdu but the authorities did not respond to the demands. On February 21, 1952 three students of Dhaka University were killed in a riot over issue of language (Choudhury 1972: 247). This shows that government was repressing freedom of speech by implementing biased laws, which were only representing West Pakistan and ignoring demands of the Bengalis. Implementing the laws by force governments usually ignore the demands of those ethnic groups or communities which they considered to be inferior or not worth of including in the decisions making. Similarly; in the field of health very less attention was given to East Bengal, which led to a greater mortality (especially infant mortality rate) rate in Bengal. As noted by Peter “Infant mortality, said to have been 237 per thousand in 1961, was at that time among the highest in the world” (Peter 1984: 21). The lack of health facilities for Bengalis was a result of biased health policy by the government. Despite the fact that Bengal was a tropical region and was more prone to different diseases, also despite the fact that most of the total population was living in Bengal, they got very less. The health problems became more sever during the war of 1971, when most of the doctors and other medical facilities were targeted during the war (peter 1984: 21). The government tried to keep the health facilities at minimal so that, people could not have access to the same health facilities enjoyed by the West Pakistan. This was a biased policy of the government against the Bengalis which shows the hatred of West Pakistani elites to Bengalis. The idea of structural violence is much more related with the ethnic character of the ruling elite, for instance; does the ruling class belong to minority or majority. Looking into the issue of Bengal, it becomes evident that despite the fact that Bengalis were in majority but still the West Pakistani minority elites had much influence to deprive Bengalis of their rights. The reason why minority of West Pakistanis elites succeeded in keeping Bengalis under their control has a strong connection with the type of government. During 24 years from 1947 to 1971, Pakistan had 12 years of military rule (from 1958 to 1970).
As mentioned earlier most of the army personnel were from West Pakistan, this resulted in biased policies of the military government, most of the policies were carried out in the favor of West Pakistan. In the military government there is either very less or no participation of certain ethnic groups or communities, thus; it is most likely the military government in which people are treated biased. Military government can easily repress any uprising and implement any policy or law which might be biased against certain ethnic group. So, this was structural violence which was carried out by the minority of West Pakistani elites to deprive the Bengalis of their basic needs and rights. Depriving people of education, health and, freedom of expression clearly shows that all the government policies were biased and were used to create a sense of inferiority in Bengalis.  
            Talking about the genocide which was carried out in the Operation Searchlight in 1971, killing about three million people. Article 2 of 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide provided the definition of genocide as “Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of an ethnic, national, or religious group and/or inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or, in part. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group and forcibly transferring of the group members to another group” (U.N.T.S. 1951: 277). Article 3 of this convention provides definition for the perpetrators of genocide and includes certain acts which would be punishable; it says
“These acts are punishable:
(a)   Genocide
(b)   Conspiracy to commit genocide
(c)    Direct and private incitement to commit genocide
(d)   Attempt to commit genocide
Complicity in genocide” (U.N.T.S. 1951): 277). Under this definition any act which can help in committing genocide is punishable in the same way as genocide. Genocide can be carried out by any ethnic group or government against other ethnic group or community. There can be many reasons for carrying genocide against any ethnic group or community. Usually the perpetrators of genocide want ethnic cleansing of an ethnic group and for this reason they carry massacres of an ethnic group. The concept of ethnic cleansing can be defined as “a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas. To a large extent, it is carried out in the name of misguided nationalism, historic grievances and a powerful driving sense of revenge. This purpose appears to be the occupation of territory to the exclusion of the purged group or groups. (United Nations Commission 1994: 27). Many tactics can be used for the purpose of ethnic cleansing, United Nations Commission on Bosnian genocide mentions many means which can be used for the elimination of an ethnic group, these include mass murder , torture, rape, sexual assault, sever physical injury to civilians, mistreatment of prisoners of war, use of civilians as human shields; destruction of personal, public and cultural property; looting, theft and robbery of personal property; forced expropriation of real property; forceful displacement of civilian population; and attacks on hospitals, medical personnel and locations marked with the Red Cross/Red Crescent emblem (United Nations commission 1994: 27) . In 1971, Pakistani armed forces and the Bengali Razakars (Volunteers) carried out a large scale of genocide in nine months of the Operation Searchlight.  The estimated number of murders from March to December is 1 to 3 million Bengalis. Rudolph Rummel in his book Death by Government provides data of the killings for five districts of Bangladesh, according to this data “Pakistani army killed 100,000 Bengalis in Dacca, 150,000 in Khulna, 75,000 in Jessore, 95,000 in Comilla, and 100,000 in Chittagong. For eighteen districts the total is 1,247,000 killed” (Rummel 1994: 331). This data is just of those people who were reported to be killed. Rummel in his book further says that Pakistani army and Razakars killed about one out of every sixty-one people in overall Pakistan; one out of every twenty-five Bengalis, Hindus, and others in East Pakistan. If the rate of killing for all of Pakistan is annualized over the years, the Yahya Khan martial law regime was in power, then this one regime was more lethal than that of the Soviet Union, China under the communists, or Japan under the military (Rummel 1994:332).
The killings of the people were carried out in order to repress the uprisings of the people who were demanding for their rights. Government used its extensive force to repress any type of rebellion against the state. The killings were carried out brutally, and mostly young people were targeted who were considered as most likely to join the rebellion against the government. As noted by Rummel:
"The Pakistan army [sought] out those especially likely to join the resistance -- young boys…. Bodies of youths would be found in fields, floating down rivers, or near army camps. As can be imagined, this terrorized all young men and their families within reach of the army. Most between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five began to flee from one village to another and toward India. Many of those reluctant to leave their homes were forced to flee by mothers and sisters concerned for their safety" (Rummel 1994: 329).
Killing the young people shows that the government wanted to eliminate specially those people who could potentially stand against the government. These targeted killings of the Bengalis were carried out in order to oppress the rest of the population, which could not to dare to stand against the government. Eliminating the young population of an ethnic group or a community might cause the families to stop their male folk and specially; the young ones not to join the rebel groups. The genocide was not only carried out by the Pakistan army, but also Razakars (volunteers) took part in the mass killings. These Razakars were Bengalis who joined the Operation Searchlight of Pakistani army and were fighting against their own Bengalis people. This made the perpetration of genocide much complex as the local people were also the perpetrators and it became difficult for the Bengalis to distinguish between the perpetrators and their own people. The killings were carried out in very barbaric ways, as Hassan in his paper Intensity of Physical & Mental Pain describes different ways in which people were victimized.  Some of the tortures mentioned by Hasan, which were carried out by the Pakistan army soldiers are as follows:
“They (Pakistani army) were used to
1- Line up people and brushfire
2. To kill in presence of relatives by butchering and cut into pieces.
3. To severe various limbs in front of the relatives of victims.
4. To gauze the eyes.
5. To hang naked, keep them reverse by hanging and then skin off from head to toe.
6. To smash heads with the help of blunt weapons.
7. To put the captives into sacks and beat them to death or put them in sacks tying tight and throw them into rivers.
8. To kill by throwing into rivers or flames and boiler.
9. Burn with lit up cigarettes.
10. To push hot rods and ice cubes into rectum.
11. Push needles into fingers.     
12. Removing nails by force” (Hasan 2001: 475-479)
The above list summarizes the long list of tortures which were carried out during the 1971 War. Carrying such type of violence certainly creates the sense of great hatred in the victims of violence. The victimized people certainly want to take the revenge of their torture and that’s why they often form anti-government force which fights against the perpetrators. In the same way, the Bengalis made a guerilla force called Mukti Bahini which literally means Freedom Fighters. Mukti Bahini was a force of Bengalis which was meant to fight against the Pakistan army and Razakaars. This force contained about 5,000 men, and it has the back of the Awami league, a major political party of East Pakistan. Mukti Bahini had two main branches, one was the guerilla branch called Niyomito bahini (regular force); which consisted of paramilitary and police force, and second the branch known as Gonobahini (people`s force); which consisted of people from non-military background (Jamal 2008: 06). Mukti Bahini also carried out massacres; they were targeting those people who they suspected to be pro-Pakistani. A lot of people were killed by Mukti Bahini during their actions against the Pakistan army. Despite the fact that Mukti Bahini was fighting against the army, often it were the common people who suffered the most from their activities. Mukti bahini not only carried out large scale killings but also other forms of violence, which include looting, sexual assaults, beating, and kidnapping. Qutubddin Aziz in his book Blood and Tears gives accounts of those who suffered from the activities of Mukti Bahini.  Some of the accounts mentioned by Aziz in his book are give below:
My only daughter has been insane since she was forced by her
savage tormentors to watch the brutal murder of her husband”, said
Mukhtar Ahmed Khan, 43” (Aziz 1974: 32)
Similarly, Aziz gives some other accounts for the brutalities carried out by Mukhti Bahini which shows the violence affecting daily life of women.
“On December 17, 1971, the Mukti Bahini cut off the water supply to our homes. We used to get water from a nearby pond; it was polluted and had a bad odour. I was nine months pregnant. On December 23, 1971, I gave birth to a baby girl. No midwife was available and my husband helped me at child birth. Late at night, a gang of armed Bengalis raided our house, grabbed my husband and trucked him away. I begged them in the name of God to spare him as I could not even walk and my children were too small. The killers were heartless and I learnt that they murdered my husband. After five days, they returned and ordered me and my children to vacate the house as they claimed that it was now their property, said shamim akhtar, 28” (Aziz 1974: 35). Many other accounts of the victims are mentioned by Aziz in his book, which clearly shows that the lives of common people were trapped between the local perpetrators and the Pakistan army and Razakaars. This made the life of ordinary people miserable, as common people had no way to escape from such an extreme violence. However, the tricky part about the genocide is that often the perpetrators deny of their brutalities and they blame other groups for the violence. Same was the case in Bangladesh, where both the Pakistan army and the Mukti Bahini denied of any killings or violence, and blamed each other for the violence. Pakistani government declared Mukti Bahini as Indian force, and a conspiracy of the rebels and the Indian government (Jamal 2008: 10). However, after the secession of Bangladesh in 1971, the government of Pakistan constituted Hamoodur Rehman Commisson to investigate the Bangladesh atrocities of 1971. After three years of investigations and looking into the evidences, the commission completed its report in 1974. The report of this commission rejected the allegations of the East Pakistanis that army was responsible for killing three million Bengalis. This commission says “the latest statement supplied to us by the GHQ (General Head Quarters) shows approximately 26,000 persons killed during actions by the Pakistan army….. in the absence of any other reliable data, the Commission is of the view that the latest figure supplied  by the GHQ should be accepted ” (Rehman  1974: 513). Although, the Commission rejected the allegations of mass killings by the army, but still it did accept that violence was carried out in 1971. The commission also blamed Mukti Bahini for atrocities, as it says “members of the Mukti Bahini sponsored by the Awami League continued to indulge in killings, rape and arson during their raids on peaceful villages in the East Pakistan….to punish those East Pakistanis who were not willing to go along with them” (Rehman 1974: 513). The findings of the report were appreciated by the Pakistani government, as it showed that the allegations were not true. However, many Bangladeshi and foreign scholars still blame Pakistan army for the genocide and mass rape.
            It’s a common fact that the perpetrators of violence never accept the blames, they always deny of the atrocities, and blame others for their atrocities. However, it’s not important that who carried out the atrocities, rather to know why atrocities were carried out and why certain ethnic group or communities were inflicted to those atrocities. 
            Women are most vulnerable during wars, as they are often targeted, and specially; gender based violence is inflicted on them. The perpetrators carry different forms of violence against women, which include rap, sexual assault, and other kinds of physical or mental damage. Mass rape is more likely to take place in those conflicts in which partition of a territory is going to occur (Hayden 2000: 27). The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda defines sexual violence as: “a physical invasion of a sexual nature, committed on a person under circumstances which are coercive. Any act is to be considered sexual violence, which includes rape, as any act of a sexual nature which is committed on a person under circumstances which are coercive. Sexual violence is not limited to physical invasion of the human body and may include acts which do not involve penetration or even physical contact” (ICTR 1998). Rapes are much likely to occur during conflicts, as women are easy and soft targets for the perpetrators. Rape is an intelligent military tactic than murder, because it is difficult to prove, and unlikely corpse there is no evidence left. Moreover, often the women who have been raped do not admit because of the stigma related with it (Sharlach 2000: 90). All the mentioned reasons make it easy for the perpetrators to carry on with it, as they are less likely to be caught for it. Perpetrators use the tactic of rape, especially against those ethnic groups which stigmatize rape survivors rather than rapists. In those communities women are considered as the honor of the ethnic group, and when they are degraded, the whole ethnic group is said to be dishonored. It became very difficult for the rape victims to face the society, they feel the shame, and often societies too dishonored them and look down on them. This behavior of the society with the victims of rapes leads to different psychological problems in the victims, as mentioned by Lisa Sharlach:
Rape leaves lasting, perhaps irreversible, psychological trauma upon a girl or a woman. Mass rape during ethnic conflict results in mass trauma and as such is a form of destruction of an ethnic group. The symptoms and the extent of post-rape trauma vary among individuals and among cultures” (Sharlach 2000: 91).
            In the case of Bangladesh mass rape was carried out by the Pakistani army, and it is said that about 200,000 women were raped during 1971. Rape was used as a tactic, in Bangladesh where women are considered as the honor of their society, Pakistani army carried out mass rape in order to dishonor the Bengali women. Susan Brownmiller in her book Against Our Will describes the mass rape of the Bengali women. She gives many accounts of the rape victims, for instance she describes a story of a girl who was raped in front of his father:
“Two (soldiers) went into the room that had been built for the bridal…and the other stayed behind covering with the guns…. Bridegroom`s voice protesting. Then there was silence until the bride screamed….all the six had raped the belle of the village. The father found his daughter lying on the string cot unconscious and bleeding” (Brownmiller 1975: 81).
It is worth noting here that the Razakars and the Mukti Bahini also carried out mass rape of Bengali women as noted by Brownmiller, “Razakars were most enthusiastic rapists…Mukti Bahini themselves committed rape” (Brownmiller 1975: 81).
However; the notion that raped women are often stigmatized in their societies, this did not happen in Bangladesh, as after the independence of Bangladesh; government gave the raped victims the name of biranganas (war heroines). As mentioned by Sharlach:
“After independence, Sheikh Muhibur Rahman tried to lessen the stigma associated with rape. He valorized the rape survivors as biranganas, or war heroines, set up rehabilitation centers for them, and offered rewards to men who would marry the girls” (Sharlach 2000: 95).
            In short; different tactics were used by Pakistani army to eliminate the Bengalis. However; it was not only the Pakistan army who carried these atrocities but Razakars and Mukti Bahini were also responsible for the atrocities of 1971. Along with this government was equally responsible, as it was because of the government that Bengalis were deprived of their rights, and they rose against the state. The pre-secession grievances, genocide, and the mass rape of 1971 clearly show the hatred of one ethnic group (West Pakistanis) to other ethnic group (east Pakistanis). This hatred led the army and other organizations like Mukti Bahini and Razakaars to carry out an extreme violence against the innocent people.     

Written By: Masood Khan ( LUMS )

Ethnic Conflicts and Democracy as a Solution

 The scope of studies, arguments and debates regarding ethnic groups and ethnic conflicts has been increasing since a very long time. Most of the world`s countries have heterogeneous societies:  out of 180 states only 20 are ethnically homogeneous (Brown 1993: 45). These heterogeneous societies comprise of different ethnic groups, which are divided on the basis of culture, history, religion, sect, race, and geographical identities. The term ‘ethnicity’ refers to relationships between groups whose members consider themselves distinct on the basis of their unique identities, which include culture, history, religion, sect, dress, and any other identity which they think is distinctive and unique. (Eriksen 1993: 06). This definition provides a range of factors which defines the term ethnicity; people who have the same culture, religion, language, sect, race or any other character which can bind them together constitute an ethnic group. The members of a certain ethnic group have strong identities, and they conceive themselves different from other groups. These strong identities of the group members often lead to conflict among different ethnic groups. Ethnic conflict can be defined as [Conflict] in which the goals of at least one conflict party are defined in (exclusively) ethnic terms, and in which the primary fault line of confrontation is one of ethnic distinctions” (Wolff 2006: 05). Ethnic conflicts adversely affect the law and order situation and become hurdle in the way of development, and may also pose a serious threat to the stability of a state. Therefore, countries with ethnic conflicts provide a deep cause of concern for their governments, who are facing serious problems to cope with them. It is important for a better and peaceful society that all the groups live peacefully and with harmony. Hence, in order to create such a society it is necessary to know the root causes of ethnic conflicts and, how to deal with multi-ethnic society and resolve these conflicts. The structure of government has a major role to play in both creating inter-ethnic harmony and in resolving ethnic conflicts. Every form of government has different policies to cope with ethnic problems, and hence; it is pertinent to know which form of government will be better for this purpose. Looking in to different forms of governments, democracy is a better form which suits to create inter-ethnic harmony and resolve ethnic conflicts. Democracy has many definitions but I’ll provide here the one that suits my area of discussion: “A form of government in which every citizen has equal rights and says in the decisions. Participation of people is the basic tool of it, which enables the people to influence any legislation or policy according to their interests” (Philips 1993: 27). This definition clearly indicates that in a democratic system every group of society gets equal rights and share in the decision making process. Hence, ethnic conflict is less likely to arise amongst two groups, as everyone is satisfied with their rights which serves as a downward force against conflict eruption. In this essay I will be focusing on the root causes of ethnic conflicts and will explain how democracy is better for creating inter-ethnicities peace and for resolving ethnic conflicts. I will be using Pakistan and India as two comparative studies for this purpose.
 
Research Methodology:
      I will be looking at some secondary sources to build my research on; these sources include books, magazines and articles. Secondary sources will enable me to base my arguments on and gain sufficient information regarding cases of ethnic violence, for the study of ethnic conflict is a wide field because of the sheer number of ethnic groups that exist, and hence would serve as a good way to provide me with a wide range of data on ethnic conflicts, which in other ways would not have been possible. The only problem that I see with secondary sources is that most of the articles and books themselves are written on the basis of others works, hence decreasing the credibility of the material as it changes further hands. My research is mostly based on qualitative research methods regarding different ethnic conflicts within Pakistan and India.
      Literature review:
             A lot of literature has been written about ethnicity, ethnic conflicts and strategies for resolving ethnic conflicts. According to Brown (1993), ethnic conflict is not a problem that will disappear but one that will continue to occur because ethnicity is something which is strongly related with one`s identity. Ethnic conflicts might not be vanished completely but it is most likely to minimize these conflicts to a certain optimal level. Ethnic conflicts mostly occur over resources, identity, patronage, political deprivation, economic disparities and other discriminative policies which tend to marginalize certain ethnic groups (Azam 1981, Brown 1993, Kennedy 1986, Majeed 2009, and Varshney 2001). When different groups in society are deprived of their due political, social and economic rights; ethnic groups switch to violence to seize their own rights. Political scholars have provided many different strategies which can help in either creating inter-ethnic harmony or ones that resolve ethnic conflicts more efficiently. According to Varshney (2001), ethnic conflicts can be decrease by promoting communication between members of different ethnic groups. Increasing contact amongst different ethnic groups leads to increased chances of peaceful negotiations between them. However; there is no clear agreement among the scholars upon a single strategy which can be devised and would enable the governments to create a better society with heterogeneous groups. Some scholars (Brown 1993 and Mann 1998) say that democracy is not better for resolving ethnic conflicts, rather it further promotes ethnic differences. According to Mann (1998), democracy is responsible for the ethnic conflicts because it has created “We” and “They”, the upper class which is ruling and the lower class which is ruled. Similarly; Brown (1993) says that in democratic government the scope of ethnic politics is dramatically increased because previously dominated ethnic groups may have resented their domination. The arguments of Mann and Brown are not convincing because as compared to democracy, other forms of government (authoritarian, military dictatorship) are much prone in creating the upper and lower class distinction on the basis of political power. Authoritarian governments reject the demands of the ethnic groups which leads to an expansion of ethnic cleavages. The presence or absence of ethnic crises in previous authoritarian regimes will affect the likelihood of serious ethnic problems faced by the new democratic government that replaced those authoritarian regimes (Isreal 1993). However, some scholars (Kennedy 1986, Majeed 2009, Tahir 1996, and Young 1998) emphasize on democratic form of government for resolving ethnic conflicts. As noted by Tahir (1996), there are two solutions for ethnic conflicts: economic prosperity and a democratic system which has the representation of all ethnic groups, which is why so far India has been good in managing because of its political system and its stable democratic credentials. Brown (1993) says that democracy is the best form of government for ethnic harmony if ethnicity is territorial based. Based on Brown’s arguments, democracy would be the best form of government for a country like Pakistan, where ethnic differences are largely territorial (Majeed 2009). Similarly,   Glazor (1976) emphasizes on coalition government as he says “an important explanation of the Indian system stability is its coalition of congress party which includes people from diverse groups of people” (Glazor 1976: 477). But, if one looks into the previous governments of Pakistan this argument seems to be not valid, as most of the time Pakistan had coalition governments, which did little to help in solving ethnic conflicts.  However; Ali (1987) is of the view that a single party with a majority is more likely to solve ethnic problems: A strong single party hold in a region is better in resolving ethnic conflicts” (Ali 1987: 78). One can argue that if a single party government has the majority of a certain ethnic group then it is most likely to discriminate against other ethnic groups, which would consequently lead to conflict between the ruling and the subordinate groups. Structurally ethnic groups are different in Pakistan and India; ethnic groups in Pakistan are mostly territorial, such as Punjabis, Pathans, Sindhis, Baluchis and Mujahirs (Kennedy 1986), while in India these groups are mainly religion based, like Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs (Eriksen 1993). The role of religion in ethnic differences is very important to know. Azam in his book ‘Political Aspects of National Integration’ (1981) says that group differences within Indian ethnic groups are based on secular aspects of social life and have nothing to do with religion. Azam`s idea of secularity clearly deviates from the fact because it`s religion which is playing an important role in ethnic conflicts and almost all of the ethnic conflicts in India are religion based conflicts, for instance; among Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs. Ethnic groups have been differently defined in the constitutions of Pakistan and India. As noted by Azam (1981), the Indian constitution provides full protection to different groups that are based on race, religion, geographical location, history or culture. The most important point in the Indian constitution is the accommodation of ethno-linguistic and cultural communities, which have an important role to play in the national politics (Chadda 2002). Whereas in the case of Pakistan, the 1973 constitution does not mention ethnicity in the context of Pakistan`s political problems (Tahir 1996). Pakistan is an Islamic state and Islamic ideology stands for universal brotherhood, therefore the political elites did not consider pertinent to address ethnicities in the constitution (Tahir 1996). The mistaken idea of the Pakistani politicians that religion would bind different groups together led to serious problems of ethnic identities and conflicts, as noted by Jalalzai “religion could not prove a binding force amongst different ethnic groups” (Jalalzai 1993: 164). From the Shiia and Sunni sect conflict it becomes evident that religion has failed to keep heterogeneous groups in harmony. In summary, ethnic conflict is a complex phenomenon and one that needs to be addressed with proper attention, as there might be different solutions to it. However, democratic form of government is the best platform through which ethnic problems can be largely dealt with. In the following paragraph I will be discussing the root causes of ethnic conflicts in India and Pakistan and will try to figure out which type of democracy is good for resolving ethnic conflicts. 
    Relationship amongst different ethnic groups is the main factor in staging a conflict: a cooperation based relationship will lead to a better society, whereas a relationship based on inequality leads to conflict. In order to have peace between ethnic groups it is very important that they have cooperation with each other and one way to do that is to promote links between ethnicities. Ashutosh Varshney gives a general formula for inter-ethnicities links: K = N (N–1)/2 (Varshney 2001: page). In this formula “N” is for the number of people in a society and “K” is the number of links which are needed if everyone in the society has to connect. According to this formula the number of links increases more rapidly as compared to the increase in the number of people; this means that as the population increase more links between ethnic groups are needed to keep the cooperation. Ethnic groups will live peacefully as far as there is equality among the groups and each group has the same rights: equal political, social and economic rights. As noted by Ashutosh Varshney there are likely to be conflicts over resources, identity, patronage, and policies(Varshney 2001: 366). The peaceful relationship between ethnic groups can change into a conflict if one of the ethnic groups does not get its due rights. Deprived groups in the society feel alienated hence, these groups go into conflict with the exploiter group.     
Like many other countries, Pakistan and India too have been experiencing ethnic conflicts since long. The nature of ethnic conflicts is different in both of these two countries. Indian ethnic groups are mostly divided on the basis of religious identity” (Eriksen 1993: 83). Religiously, India is a very heterogeneous country, in the total of 1028 million population 80 percent are Hindus, 13.4 percent are Muslims, 2.3 percent are Christians, 1.9 percent are Sikhs and 2 percent are other religious groups (2011 Indian census) . The constitution of India clearly provides concessions to minority groups: article 29(1) of the constitution says “any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India…having a distinct language, script, or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same” (Tahir 1996: 211). This indicates that India has provided a distinct status to all ethnic groups. Ethnic conflicts in India are restricted to some certain regions as noted by Varshney ethnic violence tends to be highly concentrated locally or regionally, not spread evenly geographically across the length and breadth of the country” (Varshney 2001: 392). Therefore, in the case of India Punjab, Assam, Bihar, Mumbai, Uthar pardesh, and Gujrat are largely the regions of ethnic conflicts amongst Hindus and Muslims or Sikhs (Tahir 1996: 211). The Khalistan movement started by the Sikhs to have Punjab as a separate state for the Sikhs was very well handled by the Indian government. In the Khalistan movement, Sikhs asserted to get economic prosperity and political autonomy of their religious community (Tahir 1996: 134). The Khalistan movement was started despite the fact that in 1966 Indian government created Punjab as a separate state with Punjabi as the state language (Tahir 1996: 135). The Indian government had to response to those demands of the Sikhs and hence, the government started economic welfare projects which led to the economic prosperity of the whole Punjab: “the average per capita GDP for the Indian states was Rs.1334; that of Punjab was nearly twice as great’ (Tahir 1996: 135).  The Khalistan movement lost much of its momentum as the government efficiently reacted to the demands of the people. The Indian National Congress, which is the biggest political party in India, supported cultural pluralism, which is the main source of its success in India (Young 1998: 45). The notion that India has been better in resolving in ethnic conflicts has the basis on the fact that India has the democratic political system, which is as I mentioned earlier A form of government in which every citizen has equal rights and says in the decisions. Participation of people is the basic tool of it, which enables the people to influence any legislation or policy according to their interests (Philips 1993: 27). In democracy governments are bound to respond to the demands of every group of people as all the people have a say in democratic government. India has followed a good democracy since its birth in 1947 and it has aimed its policies at helping the socially, politically and economically disadvantaged (Young 1998: 199). Some scholars termed India as the best democratic country which is good at  solving marginalized groups problems, as noted by Rita Jalali “probably nowhere else in the world was so large lower-class minority granted so much favorable treatment by a government as were the depressed classes of India” (Jalali 1993: 113). Indian carried out many pro-minorities policies which aimed at improving social, political and economic status of those groups. According to Dunn “A danger in group based politics is that status differences within the group may not be addressed but in the case of India the government designed such policies which were directly helping the minority group; like, land transfers, scholarships for the students of minority groups and providing hosing, loans and grants” (Dunn 1993: 64).
Pakistan too is composed of several ethnic groups which are language and territorial based: Punjabis 54%, sindhis 23%, Baluchis 5%, and Pashtoons 13%. All of these groups are divided on the basis of language and geographical settlement (Pakistan Ministry of Population). A fifth group, which is called Muhajir (migrant), is made up of those people who migrated to Pakistan after the partition in 1947. From the very beginning, Pakistan has failed to address the issues of its ethnic groups, which was one reason for the separation of East Pakistan after 24 years of its birth. The constitution of Pakistan did not address the problems of different ethnic groups, as noted by Tahir “the constitutions of 1956 and 1962 did not reflect the desires of all the regions while the constitution of 1973 failed to ensure provincial autonomy and national integration” (Tahir 1996: 213). In the case of Pakistan most of the ethnic conflicts are regional based: between Punjabis, Pathans, Sindhis, Muhajirs, and Baluchis. The main issue factors of these ethnic conflicts are the disparities of ethnic groups: political, economic and social disparities. As noted by Hamza Alvi “the bureaucracy and military in Pakistan historically have been disproportionately dominated by Punjabis” (Alvi 1987: 23). The under-representation of Sindhis, Balochis, and Pashtoons in military and bureaucracy is creating a sense of alienation in those groups; this in turn is a providing ground for conflict between these groups. Along with this, another important factor for the widening gap between ethnic groups is the military dictatorships which further worsen the ethnic cleavages. The military dictators press the demands of ethnic groups, which might cause problems for their government. As noted by Majeed “The era of Ayub Khan (1958-1969) especially harbored an ethnic bias. In this era twenty two families controlled two-third of Pakistan’s industries assets, 80% of banking and 70% of insurance companies, majority of them were from West Pakistan” (Majeed 2009: 56 ). Ethnic cleavages reached to further height in Zia`s regime, who perceived such policies which made the ethnic conflict situation worsen. Islamization of Zia gave birth to sectorial violence between Shias and Sunnis, as noted by Zahab “Zia`s implementation of Islamic law greatly changed relations between Sunni and Shia, Zia used religion to acquire domestic legitimacy and counter Shia dissent which implied economic and political patronage to Sunni extremists” (Zahab, 1997: 01). Implementing policies which widen the gap between ethnic groups adversely affected Pakistani society. According Waseem “Zia`s quest for legitimacy through a vehement program of Islamizing laws, institutions, economic politics, moral and manners, as well as education, led to sunnification, disturbing every minority” (Waseem 2010: 24 ). Hence; it was mostly because of military dictator that gap between ethnic groups became wider over the years.
      In conclusion, ethnic groups are based on strong identities of culture, history, religion or sect. Conflicts between ethnic groups are more likely to emerge if there is an imbalance in status and rights. Most of the countries are heterogeneous and have more than one ethnic group. In the same way India and Pakistan are also heterogeneous countries and both the countries have been facing ethnic conflicts since their birth. However, after comparing the strategies of both countries for creating inter-ethnicities harmony or resolving ethnic conflicts, it becomes evident that as compared to Pakistan, India has been much better in handling different ethnic groups. An obvious reason for this is the democratic system of India which has been prevailed since 1947. In democracy every group is permitted to foster their culture, religion and territorial identities. A negotiation is an important element in democracy and one that can be used to resolve ethnic conflicts. Also, democratic government provides equal rights to everyone which ultimately leads to ethnic groups’ harmony. Similarly; in the case of Pakistan, democracy has never been flourished, rather it had more than two decades military rule which led to the worsening of the relationship amongst various ethnic groups. A military government rejects changes and demands of people which leads to an expansion of ethnic cleavages. Hence, it is safe to say that inter-ethnic harmony and conflict resolution is most likely to occur in a democratic form of government.

Written By: Masood Khan ( LUMS )

Impact of Globalization on Contemporary Social Movements

Social changes are now proceeding so rapidly thanks to the effects of globalization. Globalization has a major impact on social movements and has largely changed the patterns of their development. The impact of globalization has became greater with the passage of time. The impact of globalization since the industrialization revolution  has been felt in different areas including democratization, human rights, the changing role of women, the role of the media and the role of NGOs and multinational companies and this has played out largely because of more widely available technologies. Definitions of terms is needed in order to better understand the impact of globalization on social movements.
 There is no single definition for globalization; scholars from different fields of study have defined globalization differently. For instance, Malcolm explains, “Globalization as a concept refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole… both concrete global interdependence and consciousness of the global whole.” (2001, 04). Malcolm`s definition emphasizes increasing interdependency between people and states. On the other hand, Gidden defines globalization from a different perspective. He argues, “Globalization can be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.” (1990, 64). Giddens’ definition emphasizes the effects of social change in unrelated places upon each other.
Scholte gives five different perspectives of globalization: “Globalization as internationalization, Globalization as liberalization, Globalization as universalization, Globalization as westernization or modernization and Globalization as deterritorialisation.” (Scholte, 2000). 
Globalization has a wide range of meaning. All of these definitions can be synthesized in Malcolm’s words: “there will be no ‘there’ anymore. We will be here. ” (Malcolm, 182).

Since globalization breaks down traditional national constructs, an agreed definition of social movements is needed. In Tarrow’s words, “Contentious politics occurs when ordinary people, often in league with more influential citizens, join forces in confrontation with elites, authorities and opponents… When backed by dense social networks and galvanized by culturally resonant, action-oriented symbols, contentious politics leads to sustained interaction with opponents. The result is a social movement.” (Tarrow, 1998: 2). According to Tarrow`s definition, a social movement is the uprising of an oppressed section of society against the elites and authorities who exploit its rights. For a social movement to be successful, the oppressed people who are fighting for their rights must have the back-up of influential actors of the society.  
Nick Crossley gives Della Porta and Diani definition of  social movements as “informal networks, based on shared beliefs and solidarity, which mobilize about conflictual issues, through the frequent use of various forms of protest.” (2002: 16) According to this definition, social movements are staged by people of similar identity struggling for a common interest.
In order to measure the impact of globalization on contemporary social movements, it is useful to look at two specific examples, the Feminist movement and the Jasmine movement in the Middle East. The impact of globalization can be analysed in the light of two schools of thought, Resource Mobilization and Political Opportunity Structure theory.
Resource Mobilization:
The theory of Resource Mobilization was put forward by McCarthy and Zald: it emerged in the United States of America as a response to collective behavior theory in the 1960s. This can be defined as “the availability of resources, both material and non-material, that fostered the emergence and success of social movements.  (McCarthy and Zald, 1977).The theory of Resource Mobilization is concerned with the functioning and structure of movements and of movement organizations in particular.This theory argues that state agencies facilitate mobilization by providing resources for organizations. Movements are the result of rational, purposeful and organized action taken in response to existing cleavages in society (Tilly, 1978).
It is because of globalization that contemporary social movements are having a wide range of resources available. These resources include improved and advanced technologies and increasing interconnected networks of communication. Similarly, the increasingly powerful role of the media is helping social movements to get their message across. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and multinational corporations (MNCs) are also helping the social movements financially. As noted by William Engdahl, “Washington-based NGO with a long history of involvement in US-sponsored regime change from Serbia to Georgia to Ukraine and other Color Revolutions.” (Sovereign independent). Globalization has made it easy to access academic and political resources through the internet: this causes people to be more aware of their rights which in turn trigger a struggle to secure those rights. It is also now much easier to mobilize people through the internet and via Twitter and mobile phone.    
Globalization shaped the Jasmine social movement of the Middle East. The resources used – notably the Facebook social network – are the outcome of globalization. The influence of social networks is reflected in the fact that Facebook is banned in China and Iran.  Similarly, media is another factor which has greatly influenced the social movements. For instance, in Egypt after the protests in Tahrir Square began, it was the media – especially television -which spread the news all around. As a result, many more people joined the protest and pressure on the government was raised, leading to the overthrow of the Hosni Mubarak government. Globalization has diminished the importance of territorial boundaries between states so that events in one country can swiftly affect other countries. Anti-government demonstrations started in Tunisia, and then spread to Egypt, Algeria, Bahrain and then Libya. The effects of globalization meant that this movement gained momentum and attracted the immediate attention of the people.
Globalization has also greatly impacted on the Feminist movement. It is now much easier to organize women from all over the world. Women now actively and visibly take part in social movements, as was obvious from the footage from Tahrir Square. As noted by the Al Jazeera news channel, “They were front and centre, in news clips and on Facebook forums, and even in the leadership. In Egypt's Tahrir Square, women volunteers, some accompanied by children, worked steadily to support the protests – helping with security, communications, and shelter.”(Aljazeera). It remains to be seen whether women’s participation is recognized in social and legislative changes in the future. Local women rights movements are now much interconnected with their counterpart beyond the boundaries of countries. Also many Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are working for the betterment of women`s conditions across the world which is enabling women to be aware of their rights and struggle for them more actively.
Political Opportunity Structure:
The theory of Political Opportunity Structure can be defined as “the availability and strategic posture of potential allies and also political conflicts between and within allies” (Tarrow, 1989). According to this definition, a social movement is likely to arise in those states where there is political conflict and people are deprived of their rights. Globalization has also influenced social movements in the perspective of Political Opportunity Structure theory. Some authors define globalization in terms of political liberalization, equal human rights and democratization and these characteristics are the key factors in contemporary social movements. For instance, the Jasmine movement of the Middle East was spurred by popular discontent with autocratic governments in the face of economic deprivation. People demanded change in stagnating economic systems prey to widespread corruption and called for democratization to end their disenfranchisement.
Similarly, globalization has played an important role in the Feminist movement. Traditional societies make it difficult for women to take part in social activism but the possibility of equal rights for all has politicized women, especially those from the younger, more educated and politically aware generation. Education has been a major factor. Commenting on Egypt, Al Jazeera stated, “the greatest shift is educational. Two generations ago, only a small minority of the daughters of the elite received a university education. Today, women account for more than half of the students at Egyptian universities. They are being trained to use power in ways that their grandmothers could scarcely have imagined” (Al Jazeera). Contemporary social movements are greatly influenced by globalization which has increased the ability of citizens to organize between themselves. It remains to be seen whether activism on the street translates into changed realities for the participants. It may be that while there have been transformations on the surface, vested interests and the force of inertia combines to produce a result which fails to respond to the demands made by the social movements in question. For instance, Egyptian military apparatus are still in charge. Democracy has made it easy for the women to participate in the political process and therefore many women have got important positions in the governments which are helping the Feminist movement.
In sum, it can safely be said that globalization has greatly shifted the patterns of contemporary social movements. Thanks to the resources and the political structure that is provided by globalization, now social movements are having many advantages in many factors which were not available to them earlier. Additionally the repertoire of human advancement is strongly correlated with the innovation of traditional mood of representing self identity.

Written By: Masood Khan