The world is faced with pressing issues – climate change, economic growth, inequality, anti-establishment protests and violence. Even as the other issues are receiving some attention, not much is being done with respect to addressing the wave of violence sweeping across the world. It is in this context that it becomes critical to delve into the root cause of violence and strive for a peaceful world. &nbsp;

Violence is not only killing people, but it is also undermining the progress of nations and humane values. What prompts an individual to resort to harming others? &nbsp;As we say this, let us recount, more than 71 soldiers in Nigeria have been killed by 100 militants in the deadliest attack against Niger military, India recently saw some worst crime against women while London and Amsterdam, witnessed multiple stabbing incidents and so on. Amidst this vicious circle of suffering and ferocity is it wishful thinking to strive for a world free of violence? A world without violence might sound utopian or a line straight from the script of a feel-good feature film. But we need to understand that a world without violence is surely attainable, provided we all work towards it. Violence is an attitude, an approach that needs to be dealt skillfully. Crushing protests and dissenting views is not the solution. Violence and aggression as a tendency need to be addressed at an individual, structural and societal level.&nbsp;

If we delve deeper and try to analyse the reasons for violence, we would find that we all are stakeholders in this large-scale violence. Let us analyse the factors contributing to this violence. &nbsp;

Lack of belongingness and trust&nbsp;

It is the lack of belongingness and trust towards our fellow brethren which is giving rise to this cycle of hate and aloofness. The feeling of somebodies or the lack of belongingness has long been driving a wedge between us and others, be it during the era of capitalism, colonialism, or apartheid, where the weak were subjugated at the hands of the powerful. Unless we address the lack of belonging, violence will continue to spread as a wildfire and would be hard to curtail. &nbsp;

The violence could be as small as a quarrel or fight between a husband and wife or can take the form of large-scale violence. As we are growing into a so-called “better off society”, we are trusting each other less. The magnitude of violence being experienced in the 21st century is indeed heartening. Violence is not the nature of man. However, man is the only animal who kills his fellow beings. Other animals rarely kill animals of their fraternity, rather they stand for their protection. &nbsp;

Lack of trust is preventing nations from enjoying the fruits of development. This mistrust between nations is making them allocate billions of dollars in defence budget alone. This amount could very well have gone for nation-building or for providing a social safety net to people. While people living below the poverty line in India have fallen from 70 per cent in 1947 to 22 per cent in 2016, still the fruits of development are still to fully trickle down to all the sections of the society.&nbsp;

Several polls conducted worldwide demonstrate that millennials have far lesser inclination to trust the society, the Government, the judiciary than they used to earlier. Today’s policies, laws and social habits showcase a falling sense of interpersonal trust. Security checks are becoming more rigorous than before given the uncertain times we live in. This didn’t use to be the case earlier. One core reason behind the growing incidence of depression is the feeling of alienation and lack of confidence in our fellow beings. We seldom find an avenue to vent out our feelings or have someone to hear to us impartially while at the same time maintain our confidentiality. If not addressed at the individual level, this takes the form of fear psychosis and becomes social aggression at the societal level. Many of the culprits behind gun-shooting incidents or terror attacks have often been found to be anti-social in character. &nbsp;

Ideologies alienate us&nbsp;

Ideology is the root cause of all violence. Thousands of wars have been fought, still fighting not for any real thing, but just for mere ideologies. The rigid notion that only our ideology is supreme or ours is the only truth have left numerous scars the world over which are hard to heal. The violence during the World War II, the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Cold War era of the 1990s, the 9/11 attacks in the US and 26/11 in India are still fresh in the minds of the people. Sanatan tradition in its unadulterated form is not an ideology but the art of living. The Sanskrit aphorism Ahaṁ Brahmāsmi, meaning “I am the Infinite” has long been propounded by our holy Upanishads. The aphorism signifies that Brahman is the infinite reality, the all-encompassing existence in itself, and only when the ego (somebodies) dies can it be realised. Unless we see the same atman or soul in each of us as the basis of our being, irrespective of caste, creed, race and religion, we won’t be at peace. Our holy scriptures have also advocated that one should see one (God) in many while many in one. The moment one drops ideologies and refuses to be blinded by it, suddenly one becomes aware. And that heightened awareness is the source of peace in and around the world.&nbsp;

Freedom to ask questions&nbsp;

While many may not agree, but we need to encourage people to ask questions. All the greatest inventions of our times and mass political movements, all owe their success to raising pertinent questions. Not providing people an outlet to ask questions and seek a response often gives rise to frustration, pent-up emotions, a feeling of subjugation which then take the shape of violence. &nbsp;

The Indian civilisation right from its inception has encouraged people to ask questions. At a time when asking questions was forbidden in other religions and parts of the world, all major holy scriptures in India - be it the Narada Bhakti Sutra or the Bhagawad Gita have started with a question. India is also the land which gave rise to the Guru-Shishya parampara (Guru-Disciple tradition) where asking questions was encouraged. The prevailing chaos globally could be blamed in part to curbing the dissenting voices and forbidding people from asking relevant questions. Notwithstanding, India has a history of respect for all religions, which is unparalleled in the rest of the world. &nbsp;

Role of language in violence&nbsp;

Not many know, but language too has a role in exacerbating violence. A physical wound may heal sooner, but it may take ages for a verbal scar to heal. Violence is almost always accompanied by language. Anthropologists are right when they say that aggression is biological while violence is social. More than often the accompanying language gives violence its social character. There have been several instances in India where influential public figures have been booked for hate speech and for instigating violence. One can’t also turn a blind eye to language-related violence as seen in Bangladesh, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Maharashtra. Many political parties owe their successes to the linguistic card played by them.&nbsp;

Technology: A boon or a bane&nbsp;

The increased usage of technology and gadgets is subtly contributing to violence. While technology has made it easier to communicate seamlessly, at the same time it has increased levels of alienation. Youth playing games on mobile which involve killing and maiming the enemy often induces a sense of aggression among the teens. The easy access of pornographic material on gadgets is unfortunate too. It has emerged that several pedophiles and sexual predators have been influenced by such material online in committing sexual crimes. The advent of messaging apps such as Whatsapp and Telegram has made it easier for militant outfits to radicalise the youth or recruit them. Many of the ISIS recruits claim to have got influenced by groups created by the outfit on Telegram.&nbsp;

Often, fake and unsubstantiated content is shared on such Messaging Apps, be it the alleged human rights violations in Kashmir or misconceptions regarding the intended purpose of policies as framed by the Government. India has been witnessing widespread protests pertaining to the objective of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizens exercise. Unless the policy formulators proactively educate the public correctly about the exact significance of their policies and check rumour-mongering, such chaos is bound to occur as the reality is far from what is projected in these viral posts. Any violence emanating out of the lack of trust for the government’s policies often gives rise to mob-mentality and ends in massive destruction of public property, while claiming lives too. The misuse of the internet by anti-social elements has been one of the key considerations making the Indian government tread with caution in fully restarting internet services in Kashmir post the revocation of Article 370 in August.&nbsp;

Gadgets in a way have become our companion. People tend to spend 14-16 hours with them, even keeping them besides them when sleeping. We get a high when we see our gadgets instantly obeying our commands. However, we become restless and aggressive when our friends and family refuse to respond or interact in the same vein. This needs to be addressed. Gadgets should be used for constructive purposes – learning a new skill, course, meditating, exploring new places or reading something positive.&nbsp;

Way forward 
 
Great things have been accomplished through non-violence. J. Krishnamurti, the enlightened author of Beyond Violence, once wrote: “Violence is like a stone dropped in a lake: the waves spread and spread; at the centre is the ‘me’. As long as the ‘me’ survives in any form, very subtly or grossly, there must be violence.”&nbsp;

There is a mystical incident -- Towards the end of the British Rule in India, when the independence movement was at its peak, some British soldiers captured a Hindu saint on the suspicion that he was a spy. This saint was passing through a military cantonment area, and he had been in silence – observing a Maun Vrat – for 30 years. The soldiers interrogated him, but he chose not to break his “Maun Vrat” (silence). This unusual behaviour strengthened their suspicion and the soldiers became so furious, they stuck a bayonet in his chest. In his last moment, the saint uttered one Sanskrit word: 'Tattvamasi', meaning ‘That Art Thou’. It implies that even the killer is divine even though he is not aware of his divinity.&nbsp;

Non-violence simply means you should be so powerful that nobody can undermine you by being violent towards you. It should not be out of weakness but out of power. Being powerful, you shouldn’t hurt or kill the latter, but rather protect them. You could even empower the other by educating him to shun the path of ignorance, of violence and come back into the mainstream. So, my idea of nonviolence is different from Mahavir, Buddha and Gandhi.&nbsp;

My idea is non-violence should be out of an abundance of power. Don’t use that power to kill, to destroy; but use that power to create, enlighten and protect. And if anybody tries to harm you or anybody else, do everything to prevent that harm.&nbsp;

Violence has to be completely removed from the world, but it can happen only if nonviolent people are powerful; otherwise, how can you manage? If violent people are powerful and non-violent people are powerless, then the violent people will overrule the non-violent. That has been our experience of two thousand years. I don’t support weakness. I support power; but power with compassion, love and creativity. &nbsp;

Given my more than two decades of experience of working in Kashmir, North-east, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Nepal, it is clear that people could be transformed and be made to shun violence by educating them about the constructive power of non-violence and by hearing to them non-judgmentally with compassion. &nbsp;

Furthermore, I feel that all the pressing issues in the world can only be solved through dialogue, and not war or bullets. Be it the decades of civil strife in Columbia or the centuries-long dispute pertaining to the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, both of which witnessed widespread bloodshed in the past, all have been resolved amicably through discussion and dialogue, thus setting a new precedence for our future generations. &nbsp;

Role of spirituality &nbsp;

In the prevailing times, the role of spirituality in addressing violence can’t be under-emphasized. Turning to holy scriptures irrespective of religion, their correct interpretation and education, yoga and meditation can go a long way in creating a society filled with tolerance and compassion. The United Nations recognising the significance of Yoga and declaring 21 June as the International Day of Yoga is laudable in this context. Yoga and meditation is also being taught across prisons the world over and has found a large number of takers. Many convicts feel their life would have been different had they been introduced to it earlier. &nbsp;

It needs to start from our families&nbsp;

Addressing the growing incidents of violence and preventing the societal fabric from deteriorating has become our moral responsibility. Spreading peace and compassion needs to start from our homes. By treating our loved ones with compassion, we can surely encourage them to do the same with others and hope this to have a spiral effect. At the same time, it becomes important to turn to our scriptures. The tenets of non-violence have been extensively propagated for long by them. The mention of non-violence comes before truth in the highly revered Patanjali Yoga Sutra. &nbsp;

Feeling of belongingness and treating others with respect has been one of the key pillars of India’s tradition. It was among the first countries in the world to propagate the message of ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’, a Sanskrit phrase found in the Maha Upanishad, meaning "the world is one family". It is these ideals which made India to welcome thinkers, scholars and visitors from all over the world. &nbsp;

India never attacked any country on its own in the known history and never tried to colonise any part of the world. It neither advocated that our truth is the only truth nor projected others as non-believers and sinners. India was and will continue to remain a melting pot of the peaceful co-existence of several religions, languages, dialects and cultures. Even as greed, materialism and religious dogma dominate the world, India, despite its shortcomings, still holds the torch that can light a new flame of awakening. The country is well-equipped to deal with any differences of opinion in a peaceful manner&nbsp;

If we all – individuals, society, governments, world leaders, NGOs, civil society, spiritual organisations work in unison for fostering brotherhood and peace, a world without violence is surely attainable.&nbsp; 
 
(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The world is faced with pressing issues – climate change, economic growth, inequality, anti-establishment protests and violence. Even as the other issues are receiving some attention, not much is being done with respect to addressing the wave of violence sweeping across the world.

The world is faced with pressing issues – climate change, economic growth, inequality, anti-establishment protests and violence. Even as the other issues are receiving some attention, not much is being done with respect to addressing the wave of violence sweeping across the world. It is in this context that it becomes critical to delve into the root cause of violence and strive for a peaceful world. Violence is not only killing people, but it is also undermining the progress of nations and humane values. What prompts an individual to resort to harming others? As we say this, let us recount, more than 71 soldiers in Nigeria have been killed by 100 militants in the deadliest attack against Niger military, India recently saw some worst crime against women while London and Amsterdam, witnessed multiple stabbing incidents and so on. Amidst this vicious circle of suffering and ferocity is it wishful thinking to strive for a world free of violence? A world without violence might sound utopian or a line straight from the script of a feel-good feature film. But we need to understand that a world without violence is surely attainable, provided we all work towards it. Violence is an attitude, an approach that needs to be dealt skillfully. Crushing protests and dissenting views is not the solution. Violence and aggression as a tendency need to be addressed at an individual, structural and societal level. If we delve deeper and try to analyse the reasons for violence, we would find that we all are stakeholders in this large-scale violence. Let us analyse the factors contributing to this violence. Lack of belongingness and trust It is the lack of belongingness and trust towards our fellow brethren which is giving rise to this cycle of hate and aloofness. The feeling of somebodies or the lack of belongingness has long been driving a wedge between us and others, be it during the era of capitalism, colonialism, or apartheid, where the weak were subjugated at the hands of the powerful. Unless we address the lack of belonging, violence will continue to spread as a wildfire and would be hard to curtail. The violence could be as small as a quarrel or fight between a husband and wife or can take the form of large-scale violence. As we are growing into a so-called “better off society”, we are trusting each other less. The magnitude of violence being experienced in the 21st century is indeed heartening. Violence is not the nature of man. However, man is the only animal who kills his fellow beings. Other animals rarely kill animals of their fraternity, rather they stand for their protection. Lack of trust is preventing nations from enjoying the fruits of development. This mistrust between nations is making them allocate billions of dollars in defence budget alone. This amount could very well have gone for nation-building or for providing a social safety net to people. While people living below the poverty line in India have fallen from 70 per cent in 1947 to 22 per cent in 2016, still the fruits of development are still to fully trickle down to all the sections of the society. Several polls conducted worldwide demonstrate that millennials have far lesser inclination to trust the society, the Government, the judiciary than they used to earlier. Today’s policies, laws and social habits showcase a falling sense of interpersonal trust. Security checks are becoming more rigorous than before given the uncertain times we live in. This didn’t use to be the case earlier. One core reason behind the growing incidence of depression is the feeling of alienation and lack of confidence in our fellow beings. We seldom find an avenue to vent out our feelings or have someone to hear to us impartially while at the same time maintain our confidentiality. If not addressed at the individual level, this takes the form of fear psychosis and becomes social aggression at the societal level. Many of the culprits behind gun-shooting incidents or terror attacks have often been found to be anti-social in character. Ideologies alienate us Ideology is the root cause of all violence. Thousands of wars have been fought, still fighting not for any real thing, but just for mere ideologies. The rigid notion that only our ideology is supreme or ours is the only truth have left numerous scars the world over which are hard to heal. The violence during the World War II, the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Cold War era of the 1990s, the 9/11 attacks in the US and 26/11 in India are still fresh in the minds of the people. Sanatan tradition in its unadulterated form is not an ideology but the art of living. The Sanskrit aphorism Ahaṁ Brahmāsmi, meaning “I am the Infinite” has long been propounded by our holy Upanishads. The aphorism signifies that Brahman is the infinite reality, the all-encompassing existence in itself, and only when the ego (somebodies) dies can it be realised. Unless we see the same atman or soul in each of us as the basis of our being, irrespective of caste, creed, race and religion, we won’t be at peace. Our holy scriptures have also advocated that one should see one (God) in many while many in one. The moment one drops ideologies and refuses to be blinded by it, suddenly one becomes aware. And that heightened awareness is the source of peace in and around the world. Freedom to ask questions While many may not agree, but we need to encourage people to ask questions. All the greatest inventions of our times and mass political movements, all owe their success to raising pertinent questions. Not providing people an outlet to ask questions and seek a response often gives rise to frustration, pent-up emotions, a feeling of subjugation which then take the shape of violence. The Indian civilisation right from its inception has encouraged people to ask questions. At a time when asking questions was forbidden in other religions and parts of the world, all major holy scriptures in India - be it the Narada Bhakti Sutra or the Bhagawad Gita have started with a question. India is also the land which gave rise to the Guru-Shishya parampara (Guru-Disciple tradition) where asking questions was encouraged. The prevailing chaos globally could be blamed in part to curbing the dissenting voices and forbidding people from asking relevant questions. Notwithstanding, India has a history of respect for all religions, which is unparalleled in the rest of the world. Role of language in violence Not many know, but language too has a role in exacerbating violence. A physical wound may heal sooner, but it may take ages for a verbal scar to heal. Violence is almost always accompanied by language. Anthropologists are right when they say that aggression is biological while violence is social. More than often the accompanying language gives violence its social character. There have been several instances in India where influential public figures have been booked for hate speech and for instigating violence. One can’t also turn a blind eye to language-related violence as seen in Bangladesh, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Maharashtra. Many political parties owe their successes to the linguistic card played by them. Technology: A boon or a bane The increased usage of technology and gadgets is subtly contributing to violence. While technology has made it easier to communicate seamlessly, at the same time it has increased levels of alienation. Youth playing games on mobile which involve killing and maiming the enemy often induces a sense of aggression among the teens. The easy access of pornographic material on gadgets is unfortunate too. It has emerged that several pedophiles and sexual predators have been influenced by such material online in committing sexual crimes. The advent of messaging apps such as Whatsapp and Telegram has made it easier for militant outfits to radicalise the youth or recruit them. Many of the ISIS recruits claim to have got influenced by groups created by the outfit on Telegram. Often, fake and unsubstantiated content is shared on such Messaging Apps, be it the alleged human rights violations in Kashmir or misconceptions regarding the intended purpose of policies as framed by the Government. India has been witnessing widespread protests pertaining to the objective of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizens exercise. Unless the policy formulators proactively educate the public correctly about the exact significance of their policies and check rumour-mongering, such chaos is bound to occur as the reality is far from what is projected in these viral posts. Any violence emanating out of the lack of trust for the government’s policies often gives rise to mob-mentality and ends in massive destruction of public property, while claiming lives too. The misuse of the internet by anti-social elements has been one of the key considerations making the Indian government tread with caution in fully restarting internet services in Kashmir post the revocation of Article 370 in August. Gadgets in a way have become our companion. People tend to spend 14-16 hours with them, even keeping them besides them when sleeping. We get a high when we see our gadgets instantly obeying our commands. However, we become restless and aggressive when our friends and family refuse to respond or interact in the same vein. This needs to be addressed. Gadgets should be used for constructive purposes – learning a new skill, course, meditating, exploring new places or reading something positive. Way forward Great things have been accomplished through non-violence. J. Krishnamurti, the enlightened author of Beyond Violence, once wrote: “Violence is like a stone dropped in a lake: the waves spread and spread; at the centre is the ‘me’. As long as the ‘me’ survives in any form, very subtly or grossly, there must be violence.” There is a mystical incident -- Towards the end of the British Rule in India, when the independence movement was at its peak, some British soldiers captured a Hindu saint on the suspicion that he was a spy. This saint was passing through a military cantonment area, and he had been in silence – observing a Maun Vrat – for 30 years. The soldiers interrogated him, but he chose not to break his “Maun Vrat” (silence). This unusual behaviour strengthened their suspicion and the soldiers became so furious, they stuck a bayonet in his chest. In his last moment, the saint uttered one Sanskrit word: 'Tattvamasi', meaning ‘That Art Thou’. It implies that even the killer is divine even though he is not aware of his divinity. Non-violence simply means you should be so powerful that nobody can undermine you by being violent towards you. It should not be out of weakness but out of power. Being powerful, you shouldn’t hurt or kill the latter, but rather protect them. You could even empower the other by educating him to shun the path of ignorance, of violence and come back into the mainstream. So, my idea of nonviolence is different from Mahavir, Buddha and Gandhi. My idea is non-violence should be out of an abundance of power. Don’t use that power to kill, to destroy; but use that power to create, enlighten and protect. And if anybody tries to harm you or anybody else, do everything to prevent that harm. Violence has to be completely removed from the world, but it can happen only if nonviolent people are powerful; otherwise, how can you manage? If violent people are powerful and non-violent people are powerless, then the violent people will overrule the non-violent. That has been our experience of two thousand years. I don’t support weakness. I support power; but power with compassion, love and creativity. Given my more than two decades of experience of working in Kashmir, North-east, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Nepal, it is clear that people could be transformed and be made to shun violence by educating them about the constructive power of non-violence and by hearing to them non-judgmentally with compassion. Furthermore, I feel that all the pressing issues in the world can only be solved through dialogue, and not war or bullets. Be it the decades of civil strife in Columbia or the centuries-long dispute pertaining to the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, both of which witnessed widespread bloodshed in the past, all have been resolved amicably through discussion and dialogue, thus setting a new precedence for our future generations. Role of spirituality In the prevailing times, the role of spirituality in addressing violence can’t be under-emphasized. Turning to holy scriptures irrespective of religion, their correct interpretation and education, yoga and meditation can go a long way in creating a society filled with tolerance and compassion. The United Nations recognising the significance of Yoga and declaring 21 June as the International Day of Yoga is laudable in this context. Yoga and meditation is also being taught across prisons the world over and has found a large number of takers. Many convicts feel their life would have been different had they been introduced to it earlier. It needs to start from our families Addressing the growing incidents of violence and preventing the societal fabric from deteriorating has become our moral responsibility. Spreading peace and compassion needs to start from our homes. By treating our loved ones with compassion, we can surely encourage them to do the same with others and hope this to have a spiral effect. At the same time, it becomes important to turn to our scriptures. The tenets of non-violence have been extensively propagated for long by them. The mention of non-violence comes before truth in the highly revered Patanjali Yoga Sutra. Feeling of belongingness and treating others with respect has been one of the key pillars of India’s tradition. It was among the first countries in the world to propagate the message of ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’, a Sanskrit phrase found in the Maha Upanishad, meaning "the world is one family". It is these ideals which made India to welcome thinkers, scholars and visitors from all over the world. India never attacked any country on its own in the known history and never tried to colonise any part of the world. It neither advocated that our truth is the only truth nor projected others as non-believers and sinners. India was and will continue to remain a melting pot of the peaceful co-existence of several religions, languages, dialects and cultures. Even as greed, materialism and religious dogma dominate the world, India, despite its shortcomings, still holds the torch that can light a new flame of awakening. The country is well-equipped to deal with any differences of opinion in a peaceful manner If we all – individuals, society, governments, world leaders, NGOs, civil society, spiritual organisations work in unison for fostering brotherhood and peace, a world without violence is surely attainable. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Power of non-violence: Issues must be resolved through dialogue, and not violence

Like 2019, the new year and perhaps the new decade is likely to be pockmarked by popular protest, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa.

The question is what the protests that last year toppled the leaders of Sudan, Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq but only led to a genuine transition process in Sudan will produce.

The protests’ outcome so far suggests that there may not be a clear-cut answer.

What is clear is that protesters have learnt not to surrender the street when a leader agrees to resign but to maintain the pressure until a process of transition to a more transparent, accountable and open political system has been agreed.

Protesters in Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq, demanding appointment of a leader untainted by association with the old regime, have stood their ground as governments and vested interests have sought to salvage what they can by attempting to replace one leader by another with close ties to ruling elites.

Equally clear is the fact that repression at best buys embattled regimes time and more often than not reinforces protesters’ resolve.

Harsh repression enabled the government of Egyptian general-turned-president Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, one of the Middle East and North Africa’s most brutal leaders, to squash last year’s protests. The question is for how long.

The question is all the more relevant given that by and large protesters in the Middle East and North Africa, like in Hong Kong, are driven by a sense of now or never, a sense of having nothing more to lose.

The killing of more than 100 protesters in Sudan did not stop them from sticking to their guns until a transition process was put in place. The death of hundreds of protesters in Iraq and injuring of thousands more has failed to weaken their resolve.

The resilience suggests a more fundamental shift in attitudes that goes beyond the sense of desperation associated with having nothing more to lose.

It reflects the evolution of a new assertiveness, sense of empowerment, and rejection of submissive adherence to authority that first emerged in the 2011 popular Arab uprisings that toppled the leaders of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen.

Vested interests backed by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates rolled back the achievements of those revolts, with the exception of Tunisia, leading to the rise of Al-Sisi and brutal civil wars in Libya and Yemen.

In some ways, the counterrevolution has backfired. The war in Yemen has severely tarnished Saudi Arabia’s image, focused attention on the dark side of UAE rulers, and fuelled the resolve of the 2019 protesters.

The last decade’s change in attitudes is also evident in Lebanon and Iraq where protesters are demanding political and social structures that emphasise national rather than ethnic or sectarian religious identities in a world in which civilizational leaders advocate some form of racial, ethnic or religious supremacy.

This weekend’s US military strikes targetting Iraqi militias associated with Iran suggest that world leaders ignore the protests at their peril.

If protesters focussed their demand for a withdrawal of foreign forces primarily on Iranian influence prior to the strikes, it now focuses equally on the presence of US forces.

The strikes also put at risk a stalling effort by Saudi Arabia to dial down tension with Iran in the wake of attacks in September on two key Saudi oil facilities and US reluctance to respond.

Reduced Saudi-Iranian tension, coupled with changing youth attitudes towards religion, facilitates moves away from debilitating sectarian politics that have long served to keep autocratic leaders and ruling elites in power.

Even so, fragile protest outcomes are likely to co-shape the Middle East and North Africa in the coming decade.

Both successful uprisings like in Sudan and stalemated ones as in Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq run a continuous risk of being thwarted by power grabs by militaries and other vested interests that produce harsh repression and potentially civil wars.

“While protesters have the power to force a change of prime minister and can remain in the streets, they do not seem to have the means to realise their broader goals. The country’s politicians and parties have grown rich off the current system and will do everything to defend it, but they do not have an answer for the protests,” said political analyst Stephen A, Cook.

The lesson of the last decade for the coming one is that waves of protest are not a matter of days, months or even a year. They are long drawn out processes that often play out over decades.

2011 ushered in a global era of defiance and dissent with the Arab uprisings as its most dramatic centrepiece.

The decade of the 2020s is likely to be one in which protests may produce at best uncertain and fragile outcomes, irrespective of whether protesters or vested interests gain an immediate upper hand.

Fragility at best, instability at worst, is likely to be the norm. To change that protesters and governments would have to agree on economic, political and social systems that are truly inclusive and ensure that all have a stake. No doubt, that is a tall order.

(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

Like 2019, the new year and perhaps the new decade is likely to be pockmarked by popular protest, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa. The question is what the protests that last year toppled the leaders of Sudan, Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq but only led to a genuine transition process in Sudan will produce.

Like 2019, the new year and perhaps the new decade is likely to be pockmarked by popular protest, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa. The question is what the protests that last year toppled the leaders of Sudan, Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq but only led to a genuine transition process in Sudan will produce. The protests’ outcome so far suggests that there may not be a clear-cut answer. What is clear is that protesters have learnt not to surrender the street when a leader agrees to resign but to maintain the pressure until a process of transition to a more transparent, accountable and open political system has been agreed. Protesters in Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq, demanding appointment of a leader untainted by association with the old regime, have stood their ground as governments and vested interests have sought to salvage what they can by attempting to replace one leader by another with close ties to ruling elites. Equally clear is the fact that repression at best buys embattled regimes time and more often than not reinforces protesters’ resolve. Harsh repression enabled the government of Egyptian general-turned-president Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, one of the Middle East and North Africa’s most brutal leaders, to squash last year’s protests. The question is for how long. The question is all the more relevant given that by and large protesters in the Middle East and North Africa, like in Hong Kong, are driven by a sense of now or never, a sense of having nothing more to lose. The killing of more than 100 protesters in Sudan did not stop them from sticking to their guns until a transition process was put in place. The death of hundreds of protesters in Iraq and injuring of thousands more has failed to weaken their resolve. The resilience suggests a more fundamental shift in attitudes that goes beyond the sense of desperation associated with having nothing more to lose. It reflects the evolution of a new assertiveness, sense of empowerment, and rejection of submissive adherence to authority that first emerged in the 2011 popular Arab uprisings that toppled the leaders of Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen. Vested interests backed by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates rolled back the achievements of those revolts, with the exception of Tunisia, leading to the rise of Al-Sisi and brutal civil wars in Libya and Yemen. In some ways, the counterrevolution has backfired. The war in Yemen has severely tarnished Saudi Arabia’s image, focused attention on the dark side of UAE rulers, and fuelled the resolve of the 2019 protesters. The last decade’s change in attitudes is also evident in Lebanon and Iraq where protesters are demanding political and social structures that emphasise national rather than ethnic or sectarian religious identities in a world in which civilizational leaders advocate some form of racial, ethnic or religious supremacy. This weekend’s US military strikes targetting Iraqi militias associated with Iran suggest that world leaders ignore the protests at their peril. If protesters focussed their demand for a withdrawal of foreign forces primarily on Iranian influence prior to the strikes, it now focuses equally on the presence of US forces. The strikes also put at risk a stalling effort by Saudi Arabia to dial down tension with Iran in the wake of attacks in September on two key Saudi oil facilities and US reluctance to respond. Reduced Saudi-Iranian tension, coupled with changing youth attitudes towards religion, facilitates moves away from debilitating sectarian politics that have long served to keep autocratic leaders and ruling elites in power. Even so, fragile protest outcomes are likely to co-shape the Middle East and North Africa in the coming decade. Both successful uprisings like in Sudan and stalemated ones as in Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq run a continuous risk of being thwarted by power grabs by militaries and other vested interests that produce harsh repression and potentially civil wars. “While protesters have the power to force a change of prime minister and can remain in the streets, they do not seem to have the means to realise their broader goals. The country’s politicians and parties have grown rich off the current system and will do everything to defend it, but they do not have an answer for the protests,” said political analyst Stephen A, Cook. The lesson of the last decade for the coming one is that waves of protest are not a matter of days, months or even a year. They are long drawn out processes that often play out over decades. 2011 ushered in a global era of defiance and dissent with the Arab uprisings as its most dramatic centrepiece. The decade of the 2020s is likely to be one in which protests may produce at best uncertain and fragile outcomes, irrespective of whether protesters or vested interests gain an immediate upper hand. Fragility at best, instability at worst, is likely to be the norm. To change that protesters and governments would have to agree on economic, political and social systems that are truly inclusive and ensure that all have a stake. No doubt, that is a tall order. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Last year was marked by defiance & dissent, 2020 is likely to be no different

By Feyzi Ismail

The first two decades of the 21st century saw the return of mass movements to streets around the world. Partly a product of sinking confidence in mainstream politics, mass mobilisation has had a huge impact on both official politics and wider society, and protest has become the form of political expression to which millions of people turn.

2019 has ended with protests on a global scale, most notably in Latin America, the Middle East and North Africa, Hong Kong and across India, which has recently flared up against Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Citizenship Amendment Act. In some cases, protests are explicitly against neoliberal reforms, or against legal changes that threaten civil liberties. In others, they are against inaction over the climate crisis, now driven by a generation of young people new to politics in dozens of countries.

As we end a turbulent two decades of protest – the subject of much of my own teaching and ongoing research – what will be the shape of protest in the 2020s?

What’s changed in the 21st century

Following moments of open class warfare in the late 1960s and early 1970s, battles against the political and economic order became fragmented, trade unions were attacked, the legacy of the anti-colonial struggles was eroded and the history of the period was recast by the establishment to undermine its potency. In the post-Cold War era, a new phase of protest finally began to overcome these defeats.

This revival of protest exploded onto the political scene most visibly in Seattle outside the World Trade Organization summit in 1999. If 1968 was one of the high points of radical struggle in the 20th century, protest in the early 2000s once again began to reflect a general critique of the capitalist system, with solidarity forged across different sections of society.

The birth of the anti-globalisation movement in Seattle was followed by extraordinary mobilisations outside gatherings of the global economic elite. Alternative spaces were also created for the global justice movement to connect, most notably the World Social Forums (WSFs), starting with Porto Alegre, Brazil in 2001. It was here that questions over what position the anti-globalisation movement should take over the Iraq War, for example, were discussed and debated. Though the WSFs provided an important rallying point for a time, they ultimately evaded politics.

The global anti-war movement led to the biggest co-ordinated demonstrations in the history of protest on February 15 2003, in which millions of people demonstrated in over 800 cities, creating a crisis of democracy around the US and UK-led intervention in Iraq.

In the years leading up to and following the banking crisis of 2008, food riots and anti-austerity protests escalated around the world. In parts of the Middle East and North Africa, protests achieved insurrectionary proportions, with the overthrow of one dictator after another. After the Arab Spring was thwarted by counter-revolution, the Occupy movement and then Black Lives Matter gained global attention. While the public, urban square became a central focus for protest, social media became an important – but by no means exclusive – organising tool.

To varying degrees, these movements sharply raised the question of political transformation but didn’t find new ways of institutionalising popular power. The result was that in a number of situations, protest movements fell back on widely distrusted parliamentary processes to try and pursue their political aims. The results of this parliamentary turn have not been impressive.

Crisis of representation 
​​​​​​​ 
On the one hand, the first two decades of the 21st century have seen soaring inequality, accompanied by debt and the neglect of working people. On the other, there have been poor results from purely parliamentary attempts to challenge it. There is, in other words, a deep crisis of representation.

The inability of modern capitalism to deliver more than survival for many has combined with a general critique of neoliberal capitalism to create a situation in which wider and wider sections of society are being drawn into protest. More than a million people have poured onto the streets of Lebanon since mid-October and protests continue despite a violent crackdown by security forces.

At the same time, people are less and less willing to accept unrepresentative politicians – and this is likely to continue in the future. From Lebanon and Iraq to Chile and Hong Kong, mass mobilisations continue despite resignations and concessions.

In Britain, the Labour Party’s defeat in the recent general election is attributed largely to its failure to accept the 2016 referendum result over EU membership. Decades of loyalty to the Labour Party for many and a socialist leader in Jeremy Corbyn calling for an end to austerity couldn’t cut through to enough of the millions who voted for Brexit.

In France, a general strike in December 2019 over President Emmanuel Macron’s proposed pension reforms has revealed the extent of opposition that people feel towards his government. This comes barely a year after the start of the Yellow Vest movement, in which people have protested against fuel price hikes and the precariousness of their lives.

The tendency towards street protest will be encouraged too by the climate crisis, whose effects mean that the most heavily exploited, including along race and gender lines, have the most to lose. When the protests in Lebanon broke out, they were taking place alongside rampant wildfires.

Thinking strategically

As protesters gain experience, they consciously bring to the fore questions of leadership and organisation. In Lebanon and Iraq there has already been a conscious effort to overcome traditional sectarian divides. Debates are also raging in protest movements from Algeria to Chile about how to fuse economic and political demands in a more strategic manner. The goal is to make political and economic demands inseparable, such that it’s impossible for a government to make political concessions without making economic ones too.

As the 2020s begin, it’s clear we’re living in an unprecedented moment: a climate emergency and ecological breakdown, a brewing global financial crisis, deepening inequality, trade wars, and growing threats of more imperialist wars and militarisation.

There has also been a resurgence of the far right in many countries, emboldened most visibly by parties and politicians in the US, Brazil, India and many parts of Europe. This resurgence, however, has not gone unchallenged.

The convergence of crisis on these multiple fronts will reach breaking point, creating conditions that will become intolerable for most people. This will galvanise more protest and more polarisation. As governments respond with reforms, such measures on their own will be unlikely to meet the combination of political and economic demands. The question of how to create new vehicles of representation to assert popular control over the economy will keep emerging. The fortunes of popular protest may well depend on whether the collective leadership of the movements can provide answers to it.

(Feyzi Ismail is Senior Teaching Fellow, SOAS, University of London)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the<a href="https://theconversation.com/protest-has-helped-define-the-first-two-decades-of-the-21st-century-heres-whats-next-128745"> original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

By Feyzi Ismail The first two decades of the 21st century saw the return of mass movements to streets around the world. Partly a product of sinking confidence in mainstream politics, mass mobilisation has had a huge impact on both official politics and wider society, and protest has become the form of political expression to which millions of people turn.

By Feyzi Ismail The first two decades of the 21st century saw the return of mass movements to streets around the world. Partly a product of sinking confidence in mainstream politics, mass mobilisation has had a huge impact on both official politics and wider society, and protest has become the form of political expression to which millions of people turn. 2019 has ended with protests on a global scale, most notably in Latin America, the Middle East and North Africa, Hong Kong and across India, which has recently flared up against Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Citizenship Amendment Act. In some cases, protests are explicitly against neoliberal reforms, or against legal changes that threaten civil liberties. In others, they are against inaction over the climate crisis, now driven by a generation of young people new to politics in dozens of countries. As we end a turbulent two decades of protest – the subject of much of my own teaching and ongoing research – what will be the shape of protest in the 2020s? What’s changed in the 21st century Following moments of open class warfare in the late 1960s and early 1970s, battles against the political and economic order became fragmented, trade unions were attacked, the legacy of the anti-colonial struggles was eroded and the history of the period was recast by the establishment to undermine its potency. In the post-Cold War era, a new phase of protest finally began to overcome these defeats. This revival of protest exploded onto the political scene most visibly in Seattle outside the World Trade Organization summit in 1999. If 1968 was one of the high points of radical struggle in the 20th century, protest in the early 2000s once again began to reflect a general critique of the capitalist system, with solidarity forged across different sections of society. The birth of the anti-globalisation movement in Seattle was followed by extraordinary mobilisations outside gatherings of the global economic elite. Alternative spaces were also created for the global justice movement to connect, most notably the World Social Forums (WSFs), starting with Porto Alegre, Brazil in 2001. It was here that questions over what position the anti-globalisation movement should take over the Iraq War, for example, were discussed and debated. Though the WSFs provided an important rallying point for a time, they ultimately evaded politics. The global anti-war movement led to the biggest co-ordinated demonstrations in the history of protest on February 15 2003, in which millions of people demonstrated in over 800 cities, creating a crisis of democracy around the US and UK-led intervention in Iraq. In the years leading up to and following the banking crisis of 2008, food riots and anti-austerity protests escalated around the world. In parts of the Middle East and North Africa, protests achieved insurrectionary proportions, with the overthrow of one dictator after another. After the Arab Spring was thwarted by counter-revolution, the Occupy movement and then Black Lives Matter gained global attention. While the public, urban square became a central focus for protest, social media became an important – but by no means exclusive – organising tool. To varying degrees, these movements sharply raised the question of political transformation but didn’t find new ways of institutionalising popular power. The result was that in a number of situations, protest movements fell back on widely distrusted parliamentary processes to try and pursue their political aims. The results of this parliamentary turn have not been impressive. Crisis of representation On the one hand, the first two decades of the 21st century have seen soaring inequality, accompanied by debt and the neglect of working people. On the other, there have been poor results from purely parliamentary attempts to challenge it. There is, in other words, a deep crisis of representation. The inability of modern capitalism to deliver more than survival for many has combined with a general critique of neoliberal capitalism to create a situation in which wider and wider sections of society are being drawn into protest. More than a million people have poured onto the streets of Lebanon since mid-October and protests continue despite a violent crackdown by security forces. At the same time, people are less and less willing to accept unrepresentative politicians – and this is likely to continue in the future. From Lebanon and Iraq to Chile and Hong Kong, mass mobilisations continue despite resignations and concessions. In Britain, the Labour Party’s defeat in the recent general election is attributed largely to its failure to accept the 2016 referendum result over EU membership. Decades of loyalty to the Labour Party for many and a socialist leader in Jeremy Corbyn calling for an end to austerity couldn’t cut through to enough of the millions who voted for Brexit. In France, a general strike in December 2019 over President Emmanuel Macron’s proposed pension reforms has revealed the extent of opposition that people feel towards his government. This comes barely a year after the start of the Yellow Vest movement, in which people have protested against fuel price hikes and the precariousness of their lives. The tendency towards street protest will be encouraged too by the climate crisis, whose effects mean that the most heavily exploited, including along race and gender lines, have the most to lose. When the protests in Lebanon broke out, they were taking place alongside rampant wildfires. Thinking strategically As protesters gain experience, they consciously bring to the fore questions of leadership and organisation. In Lebanon and Iraq there has already been a conscious effort to overcome traditional sectarian divides. Debates are also raging in protest movements from Algeria to Chile about how to fuse economic and political demands in a more strategic manner. The goal is to make political and economic demands inseparable, such that it’s impossible for a government to make political concessions without making economic ones too. As the 2020s begin, it’s clear we’re living in an unprecedented moment: a climate emergency and ecological breakdown, a brewing global financial crisis, deepening inequality, trade wars, and growing threats of more imperialist wars and militarisation. There has also been a resurgence of the far right in many countries, emboldened most visibly by parties and politicians in the US, Brazil, India and many parts of Europe. This resurgence, however, has not gone unchallenged. The convergence of crisis on these multiple fronts will reach breaking point, creating conditions that will become intolerable for most people. This will galvanise more protest and more polarisation. As governments respond with reforms, such measures on their own will be unlikely to meet the combination of political and economic demands. The question of how to create new vehicles of representation to assert popular control over the economy will keep emerging. The fortunes of popular protest may well depend on whether the collective leadership of the movements can provide answers to it. (Feyzi Ismail is Senior Teaching Fellow, SOAS, University of London) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Protests have helped define first two decades of 21st century – here’s what’s next

Not so merry! When Christmas festivities turn into 'protests'