The Hidden British Hand in the Vietnam War’s Origins

It appears that we are collaborating with Japanese and French forces against the nationalist forces of Viet Minh. For what purpose is this collaboration?

by Kit Klarenberg

 

On September 2nd 1945, within hours of Imperial Japan’s Emperor Hirohito formally signing an instrument of surrender and ending World War II in the Pacific, Ho Chi Minh, leader of the Viet Minh, proclaimed the Democratic Republic of Vietnam’s foundation. Liberally citing passages from the 1776 U.S. Declaration of Independence, Ho pledged that his newly-created state would never again be subject to foreign domination or exploitation, and evermore remain independent, governed solely by and for its people.

On January 27, 1973, representatives of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, the Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Vietnam (which included the Viet Cong), and the United States signed the Paris Peace Accords, leading to the end of the United States’ active military engagement in the Vietnam War. [Photo Credit: Vietnamtheartofwar.com]

Vietnam’s radical post-war euphoria was palpably captured by French photographer Germaine Krull, a French photographer who visited the country mere days later. In her diary, she observed how in Saigon, “all the streets were hung with large banners and all the walls and official buildings” bore revolutionary inscriptions. They declared; “down with French imperialism; down with the colonials; the era of colonization is over; down with slavery.” The Communist-dominated Viet-Minh’s “big red [flag] with the yellow star” could also be seen in profusion.

This was quite some contrast from the scenes that greeted Krull at Saigon airport. There, “an unusual situation prevailed”:

It was being serviced entirely by the Japanese. They were doing everything: driving trucks and cars, standing guard, carrying luggage and refuelling. The British were in command of them and kept order… The Japanese performed their duties faultlessly and were perfectly disciplined.

Krull had flown in on one of several “transport planes carrying British troops,” among them a sizeable detachment of “handsome, impeccable” Gurkhas, along with “their Scotch commanding officer.” Unstated by the photographer, their mission was to comprehensively crush the country’s dreams of independence, and re-establish France’s control over her colonial holding. Under its auspices, the “unusual situation” of Vietnam’s recently vanquished Japanese occupiers taking orders from and working alongside the British, until mere days earlier their sworn adversaries, was not restricted to Saigon airport.

Many decades later, Britain’s immediate post-war intervention in Vietnam remains virtually unknown. Yet, despite lasting just six months, the bitter conflict cost many lives, and effectively ignited the three-decade-long Vietnam War, which ended in embarrassing defeat for invading Western powers. The impact on the region, and wider world, endures for untold numbers of people today. It is a sordid, secret chapter in London’s recent history, urgently demanding re-evaluation.

That the British meant grave business in Vietnam is amply underscored by their Indian Army’s entire 20th Division’s deployment to the country. As journalist George Rosie reported in 1970, this force had “been at the very heart of the fighting” against Japan over Burma, and in turn control over the whole subcontinent. Across countless brutal battles, its units fought off “ferocious” attacks, “inflicting terrible casualties” on the enemy.

The 20th Division was particularly central to these efforts. By the end of World War II, Rosie recorded, “there was no more skilful, experienced and battle-hardened” unit in Burma. The Division was “probably the best division in one of the best armies in Asia.” Now, its soldiers were to target their well-honed proficiency in the art of killing against the Vietnamese. In all, 26,000 British soldiers along with 2,500 military vehicles were airdropped into Saigon for the purpose.

Three artillery regiments also arrived, while the Royal Air Force was on hand with 14 spitfires and 34 Mosquito fighter bombers in support. Backing this vast invading army were Vichy French and Japanese troops, who were provided with new weapons by their British counterparts. The official objective was to “maintain law and order and ensure internal security” in Vietnam. Still, the British and their conquered underlings were given explicit orders to savagely crush any and all local resistance, even if innocent civilians were killed:

There is no front in these operations: we would be dealing with bands of guerillas… We may find it difficult to distinguish friend from foe… Also beware of ‘nibbling’ at opposition. Always use the maximum force available to ensure wiping out any hostile we may meet. If one uses too much no harm is done. If one uses too small a force and it has to be extricated [sic] we will suffer casualties and encourage the enemy.

Quickly, the Vietnamese began dying in vast numbers. However, this bloodsoaked incursion initially went entirely unremarked upon in the British media, and parliament, for several months. As such, the public at home remained completely in the dark about their Army waging another grand foreign entanglement, let alone in tandem with its World War II enemies. This conspiracy of silence continued until December 1945, when a joint letter authored by British soldiers in Vietnam, sent to then-Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, was published by The Guardian:

It appears that we are collaborating with Japanese and French forces against the nationalist forces of Viet Minh. For what purpose is this collaboration? Why are we not disarming the Japanese? We desire the definition of government policy regarding the presence of British troops in Indo-China.

These bombshell disclosures attracted little interest, and were promptly forgotten. The signatories received a stern talking to from a senior military official, and no further revelations about Britain’s covert war in Vietnam subsequently emerged. In the meantime, slaughter of innocent civilians continued apace. Much later, one of the signatories to the joint letter recalled of his time in the country:

We saw homes being burned and hundreds of the local population being kept in compounds. We saw many ambulances, open at the back, carrying mainly—actually, totally—women and children, who were in bandages. I remember it very vividly. All the women and children who lived there would stand outside their homes, all dressed in black, and just grimly stare at us, really with… hatred.

Come mid-January next year, the Viet Minh had learned lessons from launching large-scale attacks on British-led forces, which frequently ended with significant casualties due to their opponents’ superior firepower, and extensive use of machine guns. Hanoi’s freedom fighters thereafter adopted a raft of guerrilla tactics, including ambushes, assassinations, and hit-and-run raids on enemy patrols. It was the world’s first modern unconventional war. These strategies were devastatingly employed against French and U.S. invaders for three decades thereafter.

Control of the mission was formally signed over by London to French generals at the end of March 1946, and most of her forces duly left Hanoi. France was emboldened by the perceived success of Britain’s intervention, believing Ho Chi Minh’s forces couldn’t withstand further onslaught from a “civilised”, professional army. This delusion led Paris to launch  all-out war against Hanoi again in December of that year, and Washington to;

For its part, in the post-World War II period, Britain waged a number of covert wars in every corner of the world, as its financial and military clout rapidly withered. In many cases, Washington subsequently stepped in to fill London’s shoes, taking over management of far-flung crises and emergencies, and in the process Britain’s fallen empire. The past 80 years has been a neverending story of American struggle to master the dual legacies of colonialism and partition, bequeathed by its own former imperial overlord.

Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist and MintPress News contributor exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. His work has previously appeared in The Cradle, Declassified UK, and Grayzone.

Read More

Kissinger Misled Ford, Concealed CIA Plot in Chile

Henry Kissinger Misled Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr , Cabinet, and Reporters on CIA's Chilean Covert Operations, NSA Documents Reveal

Newly declassified documents from the National Security Archive reveal that Henry Kissinger, then National Security Advisor, deliberately misled President Gerald Ford, his Cabinet, and journalists regarding the CIA’s covert operations in Chile. These revelations shed light on the extent of deception and misinformation surrounding the U.S. government’s attempts to undermine the elected government of Salvador Allende.

Ford and Kissinger conversing, on grounds of White House, 16 Aug 1974

Fifty years ago, as the New York Times prepared to publish its groundbreaking exposé on September 8, 1974, Henry Kissinger assured President Ford that there was no significant fallout from the story and denied any CIA involvement in a coup attempt. According to newly released records, Kissinger briefed Ford in the Oval Office, dismissing concerns by stating, “I don’t see why we have to sit around and let a country go Communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people.”

This reassured stance contrasted sharply with the details exposed by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, whose article revealed a secret $8 million CIA campaign aimed at destabilizing Allende’s government. Hersh’s September 8 article, “C.I.A. Chief Tells House Of $8 Million Campaign Against Allende in ‘70-’73,” ignited a firestorm that led to the formation of a special Senate committee under Senator Frank Church to investigate CIA covert actions.

In the wake of Hersh’s revelations, President Ford was compelled to publicly address the scandal. During a press conference on September 16, 1974, Ford became the first sitting president to acknowledge and defend CIA operations in Chile. He characterized the operations as efforts to protect Chilean democratic institutions, although his White House lawyer later advised that Ford’s statements were inconsistent with the full scope of facts.

Kissinger’s misleading assurances and the ensuing scandal had significant political repercussions. The Senate and House investigations unveiled not only the CIA’s efforts in Chile but also assassination plots against foreign leaders. These revelations led to legislative changes aimed at enhancing oversight of the CIA and limiting the scope of presidential deniability regarding covert actions.

The Times article and Hersh’s subsequent reports, as Kissinger admitted later in his memoirs, had a profound impact, likening their effect to “a burning match in a gasoline depot.” The article prompted urgent reactions from both the White House and the CIA, including the need to reassure and manage the fallout among its Chilean assets.

The leak that fueled the scandal originated from a summary of secret testimony by CIA director William Colby and agency official David Atlee Phillips. This summary, prepared by Congressman Michael J. Harrington, revealed that between 1962 and 1973, the CIA had authorized $11 million in covert operations in Chile, including $8 million aimed at destabilizing Allende’s government. The summary’s disclosure was a catalyst for Hersh’s exposé.

Despite the historical significance of these documents, key records, including Colby’s original testimony and the Church Committee’s comprehensive investigative archives, remain classified. Last year, the Chilean government requested that the Biden administration declassify these records in the spirit of “declassification diplomacy” for the 50th anniversary of the Chilean coup. However, the CIA has been uncooperative in releasing these documents.

Peter Kornbluh, director of the Archive’s Chile Documentation Project, emphasized the importance of transparency: “For the sake of historical accountability, it is imperative that the CIA declassify Colby’s testimony on Chile, as well as other relevant documentation.” As the 50th anniversary of the Church Committee’s formation approaches in January 2025, Kornbluh and the Archive call on Senate leaders to push for the release of these crucial records.

“A half century of secrecy surrounding these records,” Kornbluh asserted, “must come to an end.”

Read More

Connecting with History: Building Bridges to the Past

Human technologies have continued to evolve exponentially since the end of the Paleolithic: today we are using them to learn more about the past.

by Deborah Barsky

 Scientific breakthroughs about human origins have captured the curiosity of audiences eager to learn more about the past. We are entering a new phase, thanks to the accumulation of evidence and new research technologies, in which experts and audiences are increasingly asking bigger questions about who we are and where we came from—and are teasing out some valuable answers.

U Bein Bridge [Billow/Unsplash]

This development has come at a time when there is a growing sense that linking the past with the present can support the attempt to build a more sustainable future.

Groundbreaking technologies are being applied to archeology. Modern archeologists are taking advantage of digital tools to share knowledge about human origins on a widening spectrum of platforms, including museum exhibits, virtual settings, and on-site experiences.

There is, however, a choke point in this process. The academic findings are described in a highly technical language that requires familiarity with the jargon of many research disciplines and testing methods, making the wider public adoption of research from human evolutionary  science and archeology difficult. And most experts from these fields are not sufficiently trained to translate their findings to the array of audiences that can use them. But a growing number of initiatives are providing new ways to bridge the gap separating academia from global public awareness, emerging often from leading research institutions in Australia, East Africa, Western Europe, and the U.S. These centers and the educational efforts emerging from them nurture the evolutionary consciousness people need to appreciate what it means to be human.

Fostering knowledge about chains of events that affected the human evolutionary pathway thousands and even millions of years ago allows us to fit them into a coherent, multilevel chronological, and cultural framework. We can train our minds to reflect over long periods and find useful ways to compare chapters of human history. This fundamental viewpoint will permit the kind of planning necessary for solving long-term human challenges, from social to environmental.

A fuller spatial and temporal sense of human history produces logic that chimes with the best of our humanitarian impulses—by applying what we have learned, human history can be understood as a single global dataset—providing an authentic framework of connection to a universal evolutionary lineage.

We know that territorialism in other mammals and primates is a standard behavior, but there is a unique human overlay underwriting the inequalities of today.

I have pointed out that inventing and nurturing symbolic differences is an adaptive strategy that emerged hundreds of thousands of years ago, during the Acheulian cultural period, and that evolved intoas a cultural mechanism to create and maintain unequal access to rights and resources.

Conventional descriptions associated with archeology often evoke portrayals of adventurous treasure hunters seeking fame and fortune in faraway countries. In the collective mindset, “archeology” conjures idealized visions of the great civilizations of classical antiquity and the first urbanized societies that flourished only a few thousand years ago. However great they were, the rise and fall of these cultural entities marks the commencement of a perpetual war-faring sequence that continues to be the hallmark of modern civilization.

But the human story extends much further back in time and no matter how prodigious they were, these societies were consolidated by modern humans who had already fully integrated the keystones of contemporary civilization.

Thanks to a new impulse launched by the digital revolution that our civilization is undergoing, prehistory invites us to gaze further back in time: deep into the Paleolithic—to discover and understand the foundations upon which organized urban societies were constructed. Compared with classical archeology, ancient Paleolithic records rely on a relatively sparse repertory, consisting mainly of fossilized bones and stone tools shaped by humans who were physically and cognitively very different from us.

While at first glance such objects may appear unremarkable, understanding their significance is essential to complete the picture of the human evolutionary trajectory. In fact, by limiting our inquiry to the sub-modern civilizations that emerged only over the last 5,000 years or so, we are ignoring 98 percent of human evolution that began in Africa at least 2.8 million years ago, when our genus joined other hominins already thriving in Africa to systematically create the first complex technologies made from stone.

The emergence and evolution of these early techno-systems would alter the course of human evolution so significantly that we are still speculating where they will lead us in the future.

In that sense, these early stages of the hominization process that led our genus to adapt culturally, rather than biologically, by creating extrasomatic solutions to evolutionary challenges, are arguably the most important influences that shaped human origins. These solutions were initially made by transforming available materials into tools using specific sets of acquired skills that were systematized into culture.

Through this cumulative process, our ancestors increased the assortment of objects that were to become essential to their survival. OverThrough time, the know-how required to obtain the skills to manufacture these tools also increased exponentially, eventually requiring composite modes of communication to transmit the knowledge from generation to generation.

By incorporating an ever-increasing array of disciplines, both classical and new, archeologists continue to learn more about the different phases of the fascinating journey that led our species to unprecedented techno-dependence. The unfolding of humanity can only be ascertained by unearthing and interpreting the fragmentary remnants left behind in the archeological record by the thousands of generations preceding the 8 billion souls presently living on Earth.

Today, the keys to understanding human origins are becoming more accessible thanks to technologies used to share the exciting discoveries that form the totality of human prehistory and offer scientifically viable reconstructions to inspire even the most reticent of audiences.

Applying advanced  scientific methodologies enables specialists to progressively build theories and attitudes that develop into sensibilities based on current states of knowledge. As a first step, it is important to understand that  science is in a constant state of flux and premises must be constantly adjusted to keep pace with the latest discoveries. Meanwhile, the development of modern technologies continues to open doors to new ways to source information.

Modern technologies are not only creating new strategies to study the past but they are also transforming the methodologies traditionally used in prehistoric archeology. Some of the techniques are co-opted from other fields of science, like medicine, chemistry, ecology, and biotechnology, thus building up a mesh of collaboration among researchers working in vastly different fields of knowledge. This strategy further contributes to the exponential intellectual revolution underway in research on human origins.

Traditional disciplines, like paleontology and paleoanthropology, for example, are being reshaped by advances in genetic research that are filling in the gaps in the archeological record by shedding new light on interrelationships between different species through time at a lightning pace. Digital 3D reproductions of all kinds of archeological finds and even of the sites themselves provide astoundingly accurate imagery that can be analyzed and shared instantaneously. Non-invasive geoarchaeological methods are being used to locate and study all kinds of settings and the artifacts they yield, and drones equipped with digital cameras allow surveys of hard-to-access areas to locate new archeological sites. High-powered microscopes linked to image processing software serve to determine how stone tools were used for archeobotany, sedimentary analysis, and more. Meanwhile, radiometric and other dating methods are improving our capacity to obtain increasingly precise age evaluations for the archeological sites under study.

Progress is being achieved in sharing data from prehistory at a quickening pace in many high-income countries in Eurasia and North America, where broad-minded insights and international collaborations are stimulating public interest to take advantage of communication technologies to discover and explore universal patrimony relating to all periods of the Paleolithic.

In academia, scientific journals now often require scientists to share their data in online repositories with access to digital platforms that can be built upon by contemporaries and new generations who are encouraged to apply alternative technologies to glean new kinds of information from the same datasets. Online platforms sharing archeological information are easily available to those who wish to consult them. However, much remains to be done for many lower-income countries that still do not have access to the same technologies for exploiting their Paleolithic records on an equal footing, because they lack basic infrastructure and educational facilities, or they are struggling due to poverty, political turmoil, or even lengthy periods of warfare.

Today, the digital revolution has transformed how archeological data from all stages of human evolution can be transmitted to the public. Prehistorians have entered the arena of public awareness on all levels of social interplay, demonstrating the importance of applying long-term insights to tackle such pressing issues as ecological collapse, human migration, war, and gender inequality. By creating evolutionary awareness, Paleolithic archeology is helping society recognize the value of studying the distant past to overcome the myopia of our own historical moment.

Source: Human Bridges

Deborah Barsky is a researcher at the Catalan Institute of Human Paleoecology and Social Evolution and associate professor at the Rovira i Virgili University in Tarragona, Spain, with the Open University of Catalonia (UOC). She is the author of Human Prehistory: Exploring the Past to Understand the Future (Cambridge University Press, 2022).

Read More

Decades of Betrayal: Fate of Indian-Origin Tamils Under the Nehru-Kotelawala Pact

For decades, the plight of Indian-origin Tamils brought back under the Nehru-Kotelawala Pact has been marked by broken promises and neglect. This historical oversight underscores a betrayal that has left a lasting impact on their lives and aspirations.

by Ram Kumar

In the verdant hills of Kollam, Kerala, where the lush green landscape stretches as far as the eye can see, there lies a story of betrayal and neglect that spans over half a century. The tale of the “lion cabins” in Kuzhathupula village paints a vivid picture of a community stranded between two nations, abandoned by promises made and hopes that were never fulfilled. This narrative extends beyond the borders of Kerala and  Sri Lanka, touching on themes of statelessness, failed agreements, and the enduring struggle for justice and recognition.

Historic Moment: Shirma-Shathri Pact Signing Marks a New Era of Cooperation and Progress. [File Photo]

The roots of this story can be traced back to the mid-20th century when Sri Lanka, then known as Ceylon, enacted a series of legislative measures that had far-reaching implications for its Indian-origin Tamil population. The  Sri Lankan Citizenship Act of 1948 was a significant legislative shift that stripped approximately 975,000 individuals of their Sri Lankan citizenship. These were predominantly Tamils who had migrated to Sri Lanka to work in the burgeoning tea and rubber plantations, contributing immensely to the country’s economic development.

The enactment of the Sri Lankan Citizenship Act was a response to the prevailing political and ethnic tensions in Ceylon. The post-colonial government, led by the United National Party under Prime Minister D. S. Senanayake, aimed to address the complexities of citizenship and ethnicity in the newly independent nation. However, this legislation resulted in severe humanitarian consequences, leaving a large segment of the population stateless and disenfranchised. The individuals affected were now without a nation to call their own, struggling to find a place in a world that had suddenly rendered them invisible.

In the wake of this crisis, the Indian and Sri Lankan governments sought to negotiate a resolution. The most notable of these agreements was the Nehru-Kothalawala Agreement of 1954. This agreement was designed to address the issue of statelessness by localising the registration of individuals and facilitating their repatriation to India. While the agreement was a step in the right direction, its implementation was marred by numerous challenges. Bureaucratic hurdles, political instability, and logistical issues hindered the effective execution of the agreement, leaving many individuals still trapped in a state of limbo.

The death of Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1964 marked a significant disruption in the process of resolving the issue. His passing led to a shift in diplomatic dynamics, and Sri Lanka’s then Prime Minister, Sirima Bandaranaike, faced the challenge of navigating a new path to address the unresolved issue. This led to the signing of the Sirima–Shastri Agreement on October 30, 1964. This agreement was a comprehensive attempt to resolve the crisis by granting citizenship to 300,000 individuals while repatriating 525,000 others to India.

The Sirima–Shastri Agreement was hailed as a landmark resolution, receiving international acclaim for its ambitious approach to a complex problem. However, despite the positive intentions behind the agreement, its implementation fell short of fully addressing the needs and rights of those affected. The agreement, while significant, did not provide the complete resolution that many had hoped for.

The residents of Kuzhathupula village, located in the Kollam district of Kerala, have borne the brunt of these unresolved issues. The village, which became home to many displaced individuals from Sri Lanka, is marked by the so-called “lion cabins” – temporary shelters that have, over the decades, become enduring symbols of neglect and broken promises. These cabins, initially intended to be temporary solutions, have persisted for decades, housing individuals who were promised a new beginning but have instead faced continued hardship.

The cabins, measuring approximately ten by ten feet, were constructed in the 1970s as a short-term measure to provide relief to those displaced by the earlier agreements. However, these makeshift accommodations have become a symbol of the failure to address the underlying issues faced by the displaced individuals. The harsh reality of life in these cabins is a stark contrast to the promises made by the Indian and  Sri Lankan governments.

Venthiya Sivanadi, a 58-year-old resident of Kuzhathupula, exemplifies the struggles faced by many. Sivanadi moved from Welimada in  Sri Lanka to Kerala in 1971, carrying with him the hope of a fresh start. However, over the years, that hope has been overshadowed by the harsh realities of his living conditions. Sivanadi recalls the initial optimism that accompanied their arrival in Kerala, but as the years passed, the reality of their situation became apparent. Despite the promises made to them, Sivanadi and his family have continued to live in cramped quarters, struggling to make ends meet on a meagre pension of Rs. 1000 per month. The inadequacy of this pension highlights the broader issue of systemic neglect faced by the residents of Kuzhathupula.

Kollam, Kerala: Indian-Origin Tamils' Ongoing Struggles Amidst Harsh Realities of Life in Their Ancestral Homeland. [ Photo: Ram Kumar]

Similarly, Meenakshi Amma, a 60-year-old resident who relocated in 1972, has faced her own set of challenges. Despite her tireless work in the rubber plantations, she has struggled to achieve economic stability. Living with her daughter and granddaughter in a cramped cabin, Amma faces constant difficulties due to inadequate income and limited access to medical care. Her story is a testament to the ongoing struggles of those who were promised a better life but have instead endured continued hardship.

The younger generation in Kuzhathupula also faces significant challenges. S. Mohan, a 30-year-old resident, represents the struggles of the younger demographic. Born in India and working in the plantations, Mohan faces discrimination and limited opportunities. His daily wage of Rs. 403 reflects the inadequate compensation for his work, and his efforts to provide a better future for his children are hindered by financial constraints. Mohan’s story highlights the generational impact of the unresolved issues faced by the community.

S. Sivanadi, another young resident, sheds light on the difficulties faced by the younger generation in Kuzhathupula. Despite their long-standing presence in India, they continue to face systemic issues such as limited job opportunities and inadequate wages. The challenges faced by the younger generation underscore the need for a more comprehensive approach to addressing the community’s issues, including providing better economic opportunities and improving living conditions.

The story of the “lion cabins” is not just about poor living conditions but also about the systemic failure to address historical injustices. Both the Indian and Sri Lankan governments, while making some efforts to resolve the issue, have fallen short of providing lasting solutions. The community’s ongoing struggle for dignity, basic rights, and a better life underscores the need for a more robust and empathetic approach to addressing their plight.

The issue of statelessness and displacement extends beyond the borders of Kuzhathupula village. It is part of a broader narrative of historical injustices and unresolved conflicts that affect millions of people worldwide. The failure to address these issues comprehensively not only perpetuates the suffering of those affected but also undermines the principles of justice and human dignity.

The story of the “lion cabins” in Kuzhathupula village highlights the lasting effects of political decisions and the urgent need for compassionate, equitable solutions to historical injustices. Decades of hardship and broken promises reveal the necessity of meaningful action to address these systemic issues, offering a path toward healing and a just future for all.

The story of the “lion cabins” is a powerful reminder of the long-lasting impacts of political decisions and the importance of addressing historical wrongs with compassion and commitment. The residents of Kuzhathupula village have endured decades of hardship and broken promises, and their continued struggle highlights the need for meaningful action to address their plight.

Addressing the issues faced by the residents of Kuzhathupula requires a multifaceted approach. It involves not only improving living conditions but also addressing the broader systemic issues that have contributed to their current situation. This includes providing better economic opportunities, ensuring access to education and healthcare, and addressing the historical injustices that have led to their current state.

The Indian and  Sri Lankan governments must take responsibility for addressing the unresolved issues and fulfilling the promises made to the displaced individuals. This involves not only honoring the agreements signed in the past but also taking proactive steps to address the ongoing challenges faced by the community. The promises made to the residents of Kuzhathupula must be honored, and their voices must be heard in the process of seeking justice and resolution.

In a broader context, the story of Kuzhathupula village serves as a microcosm of the struggles faced by many displaced and stateless communities around the world. It highlights the need for a more equitable approach to addressing issues of displacement and statelessness and underscores the importance of ensuring that promises made to affected individuals are fulfilled. The plight of the residents of Kuzhathupula village is a reminder of the enduring impact of historical injustices and the need for continued efforts to address these issues with empathy and commitment.

As we reflect on the future, it is crucial to recognise the lessons from this story and work towards creating a more just and inclusive world for all. The experiences of the residents of Kuzhathupula village are a testament to the need for a more compassionate and equitable approach to addressing historical wrongs and ensuring that promises made are fulfilled. By honouring the promises made and addressing the underlying issues faced by the community, we can begin to heal the wounds of the past and create a better future for all.

The story of the “lion cabins” is not just a local tale but a part of a larger narrative of struggle and resilience that spans across borders and generations. It serves as a powerful reminder of the need for justice and compassion in addressing historical injustices and ensuring that the rights and dignity of all individuals are upheld. As we move forward, it is essential to approach these issues with empathy and commitment, recognising the lessons of the past and working towards a more just and equitable future for all.

Ram Kumar is an award-winning journalist and the News Editor at Express Newspapers Ceylon Ltd, where he oversees the daily Tamil medium publication, Virakesari.

Read More

Power of Wives in Sri Lanka Politics

Sri Lanka has the opportunity to learn from its past and steer away from these troubling trends.

by Nandana Weeraratne

 The political involvement of wives and family members in Sri Lanka’s political history has long been a subject of public discourse, particularly during elections. Today, this phenomenon has resurfaced, as political leaders’ wives increasingly move into the spotlight, raising concerns about whether lessons have been learned from past missteps in politics.

One of the clearest examples of this issue emerges from the Bandaranaike family, whose political influence spans decades. However, before delving into the Bandaranaikes, we must first examine the precedent set by the wives in the Senanayake family.

Sirima Bandaranaike mourning the death of her husband, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, who was assassinated by a Sinhalese Buddhist monk in 1959.

Mollie Dunuwila, wife of the first Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake, stayed out of the political arena. However, her son Robert’s marriage to Swarna Neela, a member of the Senanayake family, changed this dynamic. Swarna Neela exerted considerable influence over key political figures, including the bachelor Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake, who, as accounts suggest, sought her approval for significant decisions. The political weight carried by wives behind the scenes is a long-standing tradition in Sri Lankan politics, where family loyalties and decisions often transcend formal political titles.

Solomon Dias Bandaranaike, one of Sri Lanka’s most notable political figures, married Sirima Ratwatte, a woman who remained out of the public eye until after his assassination. However, it was not Sirima who initially benefited from Bandaranaike’s political clout but Wimala Wijewardena, the politically ambitious leader of the Bhikshu Peramuna. Her close connection to the controversial figure Mapitigama Buddharakkhita, implicated in Bandaranaike’s assassination, added a dark layer to the political climate of the time. This event serves as a reminder of the dangers that arise when politics and personal ambitions intertwine, especially when backed by unsavoury associations.

After Bandaranaike’s assassination Sirima[vo] Bandaranaike entered the political sphere, not only stepping into her late husband’s shoes but also creating a political dynasty involving her children and extended family. The Ratwatte-Bandaranaike connection dominated Sri Lankan politics, sparking accusations of nepotism and corruption. The United National Party (UNP) even published a booklet titled Family Tree to expose the extent of this family’s political entanglement. This trend of power consolidation through familial ties is a pattern that continues to echo through contemporary Sri Lankan politics, as the election stage becomes a platform not only for candidates but for their families as well.

In contrast to the Bandaranaikes, Elina Jayawardene, wife of President J.R. Jayawardene, was far more discreet in her political involvement. Publicly, she appeared only at official state events. However, according to Indian High Commissioner J.N. Dixit’s book Assignment Colombo, Elina played a pivotal role behind the scenes, influencing many of her husband’s political decisions. The quiet power wielded by political wives like Elina is a recurring theme in Sri Lanka’s political narrative, where the boundaries between personal and political life blur, often to the detriment of democratic transparency.

Hema Premadasa, wife of President Ranasinghe Premadasa, represents a more troubling chapter in Sri Lanka’s political history. Following her husband’s assassination, Hema’s bid for power was strongly supported by powerful religious figures like Galaboda Gnanissara. However, this attempt was ultimately thwarted by the foresight of senior UNP leaders. During her husband’s presidency, Hema was allegedly connected to casino owners and ethanol producers, leading to accusations of corrupt dealings. Even after her husband’s death, when she left the Presidential Palace, allegations of theft emerged, with claims that valuable items had disappeared under her watch.

Chandrika Kumaratunga, who assumed the presidency as a widow, formed a strong alliance with actor Sanath Gunathilake. This relationship, viewed with scepticism by many, saw Sanath play a role in Kumaratunga’s inner political circle, much like Hema Premadasa had during her husband’s tenure. Gunathilake’s close involvement with Kumaratunga raised questions about the intersection of personal relationships and political power, reflecting the broader trend of familial or intimate associations exerting undue influence over state affairs.

In today’s political landscape, we see echoes of the past with figures like Jalani Premadasa, wife of Sajith Premadasa, playing a visible role in politics. Jalani, formerly involved in the beauty industry, now actively participates in political events, with her influence over property deals and other ventures being called into question. Similarly, Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s wife maintains a low profile and is not involved in politics. Her personal history is notable; she was married to one of Anura Kumara’s brothers, who died in the Eelam War. After his death, Anura Kumara chose to marry her and take responsibility for her two children from her previous marriage. This act of personal support contrasts sharply with the more controversial political entanglements of other political spouses.

The rise of wives, girlfriends, and family members into the political arena is a trend that has caused concern among those who wish to see a cleaner, more meritocratic political system in Sri Lanka. The involvement of individuals with dubious backgrounds, ties to casinos, and connections to the ethanol trade only deepens the mistrust that many Sri Lankans feel towards their leaders. The examples of the Bandaranaike, Senanayake, Premadasa, and Jayawardene families show us how deeply ingrained the influence of political wives and relatives has become.

Today, this issue is more critical than ever. As voters contemplate the future leadership of the country, they must ask themselves: will the next wave of political wives follow the same path of corruption, nepotism, and behind-the-scenes influence? Or will we see a break from the past, where political spouses remain in the background, allowing those truly qualified to lead the country forward?

Sri Lanka has the opportunity to learn from its past and steer away from these troubling trends. If it fails, the nation risks becoming trapped in a vicious cycle where political power is passed down through family ties rather than earned through merit and the will of the people.

Nandana Weeraratne is a distinguished journalist, writer, and filmmaker, formerly associated with the BBC Sinhala Service.

Read More

Settler Colonialism: Ideology and Justice

The ideology of settler colonialism is founded on a similar sense that history is evil and deserves to be repealed.

by Adam Kirsch

Following excerpts adapted from the author’s book, On Settler Colonialism: Ideology, Violence, and Justice, published by W. W. Norton & Company, Inc

“For many who are tuned in to what Walter Benjamin called ‘the tradition of the oppressed,’ ” writes John Collins of St. Lawrence University, “the centrality of Palestine is almost axiomatic.” But an axiom is not a truth; it is a statement that must be accepted as true in order for a system of thought to function. For the ideology of settler colonialism, Palestine is axiomatic in just this sense: it is a premise from which many conclusions are drawn, and not just about Israel. The fact that many of these conclusions are false and harmful should lead us to question whether the axiom is sound. Is there a better way to think about the tradition of the oppressed, and what can be done to redeem it?

A watercolor from 1837, possibly by Jean-Louis Gaspard of the 31st Regiment, shows French forces advancing on the fortified city of Constantine, Algeria. From the Anne S.K. Brown Military Collection, Brown University Library/Library of Congress.

Walter Benjamin, the German Jewish philosopher and critic, coined the phrase “the tradition of the oppressed” in his last major essay, “On the Concept of History,” written in early 1940. At the time, he was living in Paris as a refugee from Nazism. A few months later Germany conquered France, forcing Jewish exiles like Benjamin to flee for their lives. In September he was one of a group of refugees who attempted to cross the border into Spain, hoping eventually to make it to the United States. But the party was intercepted by border guards, and Benjamin, in despair, killed himself with an overdose of morphine.

Despair in the face of historical evil is the subject of “On the Concept of History.” In a series of short reflections, Benjamin argues that in the twentieth century it is no longer possible to believe in the idea of progress, which lay at the heart of nineteenth-century social thought. At a moment when Nazism appeared triumphant, Benjamin came to believe that the injustice and barbarity around him were humanity’s essential condition. “The tradition of the oppressed teaches us that the ‘state of emergency’ in which we live is not the exception but the rule,” he writes. Rather than trying to accelerate the course of history, then, our duty is to resist it—“to brush history against the grain.”

In the twenty-first century, Benjamin’s heretical way of thinking about history and progress has become the common conviction of many people in the West. When we look at the past, we see it through the eyes of the figure Benjamin called, in the same essay, “the angel of history,” whose eyes are fixed on the past while a storm “irresistibly propels him into the future.” “Where we perceive a chain of events,” Benjamin writes, “he sees one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet.”

Just so, when we look at historical episodes that our ancestors saw as glorious and righteous, our eyes are drawn to the wreckage they neglected. Where they saw Christopher Columbus as a champion of progress, we see the people he killed, enslaved, and infected. Where they saw the American Revolution as a new birth of freedom for humanity, we see how George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were sustained by slavery. And where many Americans, not only Jews, once understood the founding of the State of Israel as the miraculous rebirth of a destroyed people, today many Americans, including many Jews, see it as a crime against the Palestinians.

The ideology of settler colonialism is founded on this shift in moral perspective. For liberals who acknowledge the moral claim of the tradition of the oppressed, this makes it difficult to criticize, just as with earlier ideologies of the left like Jacobinism or Communism. For many Jews, in particular, it is intolerable to feel that they have moved from the status of victim to that of victor, since they feel like Benjamin that it is a duty to “call in question every victory, past and present, of the rulers.”

Yet Benjamin’s essay is ambivalent about what, if anything, can be done to rectify the catastrophe of history. In some sections, he suggests that fascism can be stopped by a working-class revolution, and he blames the leaders of German socialism for misdirecting the movement. But in others, like the “angel of history” section, he seems to suggest that it would take a divine intervention to wrench history out of its evil course. In these moments Benjamin sounds less like a Marxist than a mystic awaiting the coming of the Messiah. For Judaism, he writes at the end of the essay, “every second of time was the strait gate through which Messiah might enter.”

In vacillating between extreme violence and extreme passivity—making the revolution or waiting for the Messiah—Benjamin testifies to the hopelessness of his historical moment. For him, as for tens of millions of others who were about to die in World War II, there was no possibility of being saved. The only way he could envision redemption was as the cancellation of history. The ideology of settler colonialism is founded on a similar sense that history is evil and deserves to be repealed.

Copyright © Adam Kirsch

Adam Kirsch is the author of several books of poetry and criticism. A 2016 Guggenheim Fellow, Kirsch is an editor at the Wall Street Journal’s Weekend Review section and has written for publications including The New Yorker and Tablet. He lives in New York.

Read More

55 Years Later: The Aftermath of Al-Aqsa’s Destruction

As long as the Muslim world remains in its silent slumber, the Zionists will continue to attempt harm to the Al Aqsa Mosque.

by S. Mohammed Bokreta

Glory be to Him who made His servant go on a night journey from the Sacred Mosque to the Remote Mosque, of which We have blessed the precincts, so that We may show him some of Our signs; surely He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” — Holy Quran 17:01.

On the morning of August 21, 1969, an Australian Jewish extremist, Michael Rohan, set fire to the Al Aqsa Mosque in  Jerusalem, burning Salah al-Din’s pulpit and destroying approximately one-third of the mosque. Without a shadow of doubt, this ill-fated Zionist attack was a premeditated act orchestrated by the Israeli government.

Al-Aqsa Mosque burning after Denis Michael attacked the mosque started a fire in 21 August, 1969 [Wikipedia]

The Zionist usurpers conspired with the arsonist and deliberately allowed the fire to spread by delaying the arrival of fire engines and cutting off the water supply to the site. The then-Prime Minister, Golda Meir, referred to the fire as both the “hardest” and “happiest” day in Israel’s history: the hardest because she feared the incident would provoke an attack from neighbouring Arab countries, and the happiest because such an attack never materialized.

In further detail: when the accursed Golda Meir was asked about the hardest days of her life, she responded, “The day the Al Aqsa Mosque was burned.” When asked about the happiest day, she answered, “The day the Al Aqsa Mosque was burned.” When asked how this could be, she explained, “On the day the Al Aqsa Mosque burned, I thought it marked the last day of the state of Israel. But when I saw the Muslim responses, I understood that ‘Israel’ is safe in the region of the Arab world.”

This is indeed a bitter truth and reflects the sad plight of this Ummah, which remains in a comatose state. Sadly, we must recall that on May 14, 1948 — a date fatidic in history — occurred one of the most tragic and bitter events of the 20th century. It can be considered the beginning of a great human tragedy in the modern world. Fifty-seven years ago, after the 30-year League of Nations mandate over Palestine, a conspiracy hatched by both the West and Zionism saw the illegitimate birth of Israel on Palestinian soil.

This entity of land usurpers has brought homelessness, death, and forced exile upon the oppressed nation of Palestine. It serves as the political and military arm of global imperialism, while Zionism serves the vested interests of the West in the Middle East. Following the occupation of Palestine, millions of Palestinians were driven from their homeland, and hundreds of thousands of Zionist immigrants from different parts of the world were gradually settled in the Arab-Muslim land of Palestine.

The once-green landscape of Palestine has, over the past 57 years, been stained red with the sacred blood of martyrs. Thousands of Palestinians have been killed, and the Judaization of the Holy City, its land, its population, its history, and its culture continues. This process of Judaization began with the emergence of the state of Israel in 1948, intensified after the 1967 war, and has persisted ever since.

It is essential to note that Jerusalem was divided into two distinct parts. The eastern part, occupied by Israel in the 1967 war, had no Jewish population before the conflict. The heart of East Jerusalem, apart from the “Jewish Quarter” rebuilt in 1967, and the presence of armed Israeli soldiers, remains exclusively Palestinian, with 180,000 Palestinians deeply rooted in their land.

The western part of the city was occupied in 1948. Palestinian areas such as El-Malha, Beit Safafa, El-Katamoun, Talbieh, Deir Yassin, Lifta, and Ma’man Allah belong to Palestinian owners who were forced from their homes after the Deir Yassin massacre in 1948. The United Nations has never recognised Israeli control over West  Jerusalem, let alone Arab East Jerusalem.

Arab East Jerusalem has been the subject of one of history’s most insidious conspiracies. Both its land and its people have witnessed significant changes. A population of zero Jews in 1967 has turned into a near-majority by 1995. Almost 100% Palestinian ownership of the land in 1967 has shrunk to a tiny percentage, with limited usage by 1995. Arab East Jerusalem, where Palestinians live, remains in a state of decay, frozen in time. Jewish planning aims to reduce Arab and Islamic presence in the city to the periphery.

As long as the Muslim world remains in its silent slumber, the Zionists will continue to attempt harm to the Al Aqsa Mosque. On the 14th of this month, had it not been for the vigilant readiness of the Arab Muslim “Murabitoun” of 1948, the events could have taken a more tragic turn. The Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, though a historic event following their retreat from South Lebanon on May 25, 2000, was forced upon the occupying army. Such a development is undoubtedly a victory for the Muslim Palestinians and a severe setback for the Zionist state, despite what fools may claim.

The Zionist regime acts devilishly as part of its plan to demolish the Al Aqsa Mosque and build a temple in its place. On one hand, it instructs Zionist extremists to take the issue to Israel’s Supreme Court; on the other, it orders the court to show a semblance of impartiality due to the situation’s sensitivity. For instance, in 1983, Israel’s Supreme Court permitted Jews to hold prayer gatherings at Bab El Maghariba, outside Al Aqsa, despite Palestinian protests.

Sixteen years later, the court allowed Zionists to hold prayers in the mosque’s outer courtyard. Finally, in 2001, the Supreme Court issued a sacrilegious verdict, angering Muslims worldwide by ruling that Zionists could lay the foundation stone of a temple attributed to Prophet Suleiman (AS) at Bab El Maghariba. The Zionist plan is to gradually annex vast parts of the Al Aqsa Mosque for this temple’s construction.

Work on the temple has already begun, dangerously close to Al Aqsa, parallel to what Zionists call the Wailing Wall, but known as the Al-Buraq Wall — the site where Archangel Gabriel escorted Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to the heavens on the celestial, faster-than-light mount called Al-Buraq.

Recently, the Zionist regime’s president, Moshe Katsav, called on the Vatican to hand over what he claimed were relics required to begin building the temple. The Zionists assert that after Solomon’s temple was destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans, the relics were taken to Rome and are now in the Vatican. However, the Pope, who until recently did not officially recognise the illegal Zionist entity of Israel, has refused to comment.

Despite this tragic scenario, praise be to Almighty Allah for granting the Ummah rare and God-fearing individuals, such as Imam Khomeini (may his soul rest in peace), who wisely established International Qods Day on the last Friday of each Ramadan to awaken Muslim consciousness worldwide to this grave issue.

Since its inception in 1979, following the triumph of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Qods International Day has gained grand proportions, marked by massive rallies in Iran, Lebanon, and other Muslim countries. Even in Europe and the Americas, gatherings are held despite reluctance from pro-Western rulers in certain Arab countries. These events urge Muslims to unite and coordinate the struggle for the liberation of Bayt al-Maqdis from the illegal Zionist entity of Israel.

With optimism and faith in Allah, the blessed Intifada in Palestine continues as a reality, with clear objectives for materialising the Palestinian nation’s birthrights. Over the past five years, the Intifada and its great sacrifices — thanks to the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Saraya al-Quds Brigades, and Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades — have achieved significant milestones that no Arab nation has accomplished so far. It has embroiled the Zionist entity in economic and political problems, shattering the myth of Israel’s invincibility.

The Intifada has lifted Palestinian spirits, forcing even Arab states that were rapidly normalising ties with the Zionist regime to reconsider. It has made Palestinian leaders deal with Israel from a position of strength, thanks to the martyrdom-seeking spirit of Palestinian youth, which has become a nightmare for the Zionist regime. Neither its sophisticated weapons nor its atomic bombs can withstand this spirit.

Views expressed are personal

S. Mohammed Bokreta is a Freelance Writer and Cultural Consultant based in Algiers, Algeria. Specializing in Islamic values, political issues, historical events, and tourism topics, his work has been featured in international newspapers and magazines for over 36 years. Fluent in Arabic, French, and English, Bokreta also translates significant Islamic manuscripts. With a background as a Bank and Shipping Manager, his extensive experience and communication skills aim to educate and inspire future generations.

Read More

Philosophies of Labour Divergence

They asked for God’s blessings much before the written books came into existence when they were ridden with fear, anxiety, disease and so on.

by Kancha Ilaiah

Historically there were two streams of philosophical discourses in the world, more particularly in India: The first one was the philosophy of people, who involved in production—agrarian, artisanal, animal economy and so on. The second one was the philosophy of saints, sadhus and sanyasis, who always remained outside production and lived for their own self- salvation. The idea of self -salvation was related to the post-life imagination of the well-being of a person in heaven. This heavenly life was/is totally imaginary. To continue to live here on this earth one has to eat on a daily basis. For that human beings have to labour. Both hunting and producing food from the earth involved labour. The saints, sadhus and sanyasis always remained away from labour, but continued to eat food that was a byproduct of labour. When both, while hunting and producing food, human beings had to create new ideas on a daily basis as well. The human philosophy of life took shape at this stage itself.

[ Image courtesy: adna.mcmaster.ca]

In India the idea of self- salvation has taken such a route that it moulded a self-salvational social group that has become a caste in itself. This is where the idea of Brahmin evolved. It also had an idea of re-birth in caste and family where they get good food without working on the land. They negated land and labour relationships as negative. This mode of thinking constructed a second mode of philosophical thinking. Unlike in the rest of the world anti-production and anti-labour philosophy took a deeper root in what they call the Vedic period.

The first type of philosophical idea of life remained mostly unwritten and carried through oral transmission from generation to generation. This we shall call the philosophy of production and reproduction. Unlike among animals among human beings production and reproduction of humans themselves were/are inter-related. The human factor of labour was/is an inherent process in production and reproduction. The first school always recognized how production is a source of life and how labour enhances human reproduction abilities so that life continues to exist.

Without the existence of the first school, there is no life in the second school. The people who lived in the realm of the second school of thought were/are parasites, totally dependent on the first school for improved food and housing. But unfortunately the second school had written and codified ideas and treated the philosophy of production as mean. Because of the life of leisure, anti-labour and anti-production the second school could construct a book based philosophy and started controlling the food producers. That thought was transferred through written texts, at least for a period of three thousand years or so, from one generation to another within their small community and treated the production force as unworthy of respect. This destroyed the country’s potential to advance by using its full potential of labour and knowledge. There is a total disconnect between the two schools now.

The food and goods producers were philosophically engaged with nature as a source of ideas, imagination and concepts. But the saints and sadhus were self-centered and their knowledge was purely perceptual without connecting itself to creative experiments. They never engaged with nature as a multiplier of resources. Nature constantly reproduces itself. As parts of it keep dying and its rebirth takes place at the same place. Those who are constantly engaged with nature understand birth, death and rebirth is a constant process in nature. They observed nature for millennia while living as part of it, without the ability to connect between nature and an unseen force, what later was called God. Abstraction of an idea from the material process was happening around human beings and this was a much later development.

The earliest philosophical imagination of God was formulated in the production fields only after domesticated plant and seed production—what was called agriculture- developed.

Understanding God and depending on the belief that God was with them here in this life and after life came into human belief in the process of struggle for food. After all, the basic human life sustains with food. A child needs food to survive and grow before the child thinks about the environment around it. The idea of God among children is a social construct but not an individual imagination. Child does not start its life praying to God but it starts life by drinking mother’s milk. Baby animals also start living in the same way that human babies start by drinking milk from their mother’s udder. A thinker who believes in an idea that God is first and the idea of food is later, would say that God created that early impulse among all babies to go to mother’s udder or breast and drink milk both among animals and humans. But the idea of God does not exist in the child’s mind in the same way that it does not exist in any animal, baby or adult. The idea of God came into human life when human consciousness had grown and became complicated.

Not only human beings, but animals also need food during their whole living period, which do not have the idea of God. The idea of God was/is a philosophical one, which also goes along with the idea of creation of the entire universe. Before any written text—Bible, Quran or Rig Veda about God —human beings who were engaged with nature encountered dangers, uncertainties, fear and anxiety. However, the fear of death, which was/is common to both humans and animals, was taking away many fellow beings living and working with others who were still alive. Such a complex idea of death forced them to believe that there was/is unknown and unseen power, which they thought, was responsible for the death. This search for an unknown power began a second major revolution in human existence after the first major revolution of producing food under their control from the land and seed relationship.

The living people talked about God as cause for all those things happening. The search for causation of happenings, when visible answer was not found, they concluded that there was an invisible force, operating to create all such conditions. Let us remember that the whole search for things started with their search for food in the beginning. Then they searched for causation of human death and sorrows as they began to grow more and more conscious about their being. They discovered the God who could not be seen and touched. All this happened before the Aryans arrived in this land, India.

They asked for God’s blessings much before the written books came into existence when they were ridden with fear, anxiety, disease and so on. They must have thought that support was needed for having a safe living, for living better and for continuing their labour as a source of life. If they cannot go to work with diseases because of fear or of hunger, not just one adult who fell sick, but the children around the working person—man or woman—would die. The strength to labour was far more important to procure or produce food. Fear of the future and the source of energy to labour in a powerful nature made them think and rethink for solace. To some extent such solace came from the idea of God.

That invisible support would give better results in the fields, at home (after humans built a house) and in the fields of production and food gathering. The idea of God is a civil societal idea, not an individual idea. Gradually that idea took the shape of religion. But religion was not the source of philosophy. Religion used philosophy for its hegemonic role in later years. In India the Vedic religion used the idea of God by those who never were willing to work in the fields of production for mobilization of food and life resources to constantly control and exploit people who worked and produced food. In other words it was labour that discovered God not the anti-labour saint or saadhu. Once the idea of God took root, philosophy grew around it in a much more complicated way. Religion is a by-product of this complication.

Kancha Ilaiah, from the Kuruma Golla caste in Telangana, holds an M.A., M.Phil., and Ph.D. in political science. He authored significant works like "God as Political Philosopher" and "Why I Am Not a Hindu?". After 38 years at Osmania University, he now serves as Director of the Centre for Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy at MANUU, Hyderabad.

Read More

Bulge vs. Kursk: A Comparative Analysis

If the US and UK negotiated with Hitler, the Russians would have been left on their own. The Germans could have shifted their forces on the western front to defend Berlin.

by Stephen Bryen

Some of my readers say that there is a strong resemblance between the current Kursk battle and the Battle of Bulge that raged in December, 1944 to January, 1945.  It is a topic worth exploring. 

The Battle of the Bulge was an attempt by the Nazi forces to break the Allied advance into Germany.  Hitler was facing two main allied forces, namely the British and Canadians in the north and the Americans in the south.  The Nazi war plan was to split the Allied armies and drive westward, hoping to capture Antwerp.  Antwerp port was the main supply line for the Allied armies.  Had the gamble been successful, the Allies would have been in a serious predicament and probably would have been open to making a deal with Hitler.

Bernard Silver (bottom left) and his tank destroyer crew in France before the Bulge. He was my wife’s father.

If the US and UK negotiated with Hitler, the Russians would have been left on their own.  The Germans could have shifted their forces on the western front to defend Berlin.  

Hitler was counting on splitting the US and UK from Russia not only on the battlefield, but ideologically.  Hitler actually was right.  After Yalta in February, 1945 and Potsdam, July 1945, it was clear that the US (Roosevelt at Yalta, Truman at Potsdam) and the UK (Churchill at Yalta and Churchill and Clement Atlee at Potsdam) had to yield to Stalin, agreeing to Russia’s territorial ambitions in eastern Europe. 

A year after, at Fulton Missouri, US President Harry Truman hosted Winston Churchill, then out of power, at Westminster College. In that speech, popularly known as the Iron Curtain speech, Churchill said “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia, all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and, in many cases, increasing measure of control from Moscow. Athens alone — Greece with its immortal glories — is free to decide its future at an election under British, American and French observation.”

Had the Nazis been successful, Churchill would never have given his speech and the Cold War, as we understand it today, may have happened anyway, but the dynamics and territories involved could well have been different.  The US was already an atomic power, and the Russians, despite their huge losses and the devastation to Russian territory, might have been compelled to rethink the territorial strategy Stalin pursued at Yalta and Potsdam.

The Bulge involved very large forces.  At the start of the battle, Nazi forces outnumbered the Allies (500,000 versus 229,000) and in hardware (557 tanks versus 488). By the end of the battle the ratios shifted as the Allies brought up more forces and equipment, so that allies forces numbered 700,000 and the Wehrmacht was down to 383,000.  The Allies had 2,428 tanks in the field (not counting tank destroyers); the Nazis only 216 (and were short on fuel). 

At the start of the Battle of the Bulge, Allied forces in the field were mainly second-echelon troops that were not as experienced as the well-trained troops that the US would throw into the battle as it progressed. (And an Allied “secret weapon” was the audacious George Patton.) German forces, on the other hand, were well trained, highly disciplined, and resolute and tough fighters. 

There is a similarity here between the current Kursk battle and the Bulge.  Russia did not have its regular army at Kursk.  The area was defended by inexperienced territorial forces.  The Ukrainian brigades, on the other hand, were among the best troops in Ukraine.  The rapid advance into Russia around Kursk and the capture of hamlets and villages is clear evidence of the lack of preparedness on the Russian side and its exploitation by the Ukrainian armed forces.

In the case of the Bulge, the Germans were aided by bad weather that made aerial reconnaissance impossible for some time.  It also aided the Nazis because the Allies could not use their airpower against clustered enemy forces.  That, of course, changed when the weather cleared and it made a difference, especially in the relief of Bastogne and the destruction of German supply lines.

The weather in Kursk appears to be fine.  The Ukrainians have used it to launch countless drones and to pursue missile and long range artillery attacks.  The Russians were late in using their drones and artillery, mainly because regular Russian forces were not at the front.  It is also noteworthy that Russian surveillance of Ukraine missed Ukrainian preparations for the assault (as did the Allies before the Bulge attack started).  How this happened is not yet clear in the case of Kursk.  It is, however, perfectly clear that the Allies did not grasp German preparations for the Bulge.  In both cases, whatever they may or may not have seen, clashed with their preconceptions of enemy capabilities and intentions.  The Allies never expected the Germans to do much more than to try and defend their homeland which meant the Allies never expected an offensive, and certainly not one as bold as the Germans launched.  Nor did the Allies think that the Germans would ever drive toward Antwerp.

The Russians, likewise, were well along on their systematic program to reduce the size and fighting ability of Ukraine’s army.  Steady advances in Donetsk, albeit slow, were starting to break the back of Ukraine’s resistance, or so the Russians believed.  They were half right and half wrong.

The Russians were correct that they were extracting huge costs on Ukraine’s army.  In parallel the Russians were wrecking Ukraine’s critical infrastructure, including electrical power, sending a political message to Ukraine’s leadership and populace.  But the Russians missed that Ukraine still had some of its toughest brigades it could use in special operations, and the Ukrainians chose to use them in Kursk rather than watch them get slaughtered in Chasov Yar or Niu York. (In fact a key Russian mistake was not to focus on destroying Ukraine’s elite brigades. Instead the Russians fixated on territorial gains and let the Ukrainians decide on what units would fight where.)

The Kursk offensive is quite tiny when compared to the massed armies in the Battle of the Bulge.  At the start of Kursk the Ukrainians committed perhaps 1,000 troops and a modest complement of armor and artillery.  Ukraine also used air defenses, including mobile patriot batteries, electronic warfare assets, and a large number of drones.  Likewise on the Russian side there were only territorial units that did not have armor and lacked modern anti-tank weapons.  At this is written the Russians have brought up Chechens and Wagnerites (now part of the regular Russian army).  There are reports larger forces are also on their way to Kursk, drawn from reserves and not from units fighting elsewhere in Ukraine.  As of August 11, most of the incursion has been “stabilized” meaning that, for the most part, Ukrainian assaults are being countered successfully.  

The current battle scene in Kursk does not resemble the Bulge.  The Nazi aim was to break the US and British armies, to split them, and drive to the sea.  The Ukrainian aim is to hold Russian territory for as long as possible.  In both cases the aim was negotiations, but the Nazis hoped to defeat the Allies while the Ukrainians have no such hope.

We do not yet know if Ukraine will be able to sustain the Kursk attack.  If they throw in more forces they will not have the advantage they enjoyed in the first phase of the battle. So the Ukrainian gamble is just that and carries strategic and political risk.  In that sense, the Battle of the Bulge and Kursk share a common theme.

Stephen Bryen is a former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense and is a leading expert in security strategy and technology. Bryen writes for Asia Times, American Thinker, Epoch Times, Newsweek, Washington Times, the Jewish Policy Center and others.

Read More