Month: January 2025

Posted on

585: IMPERIAL OVERSTRESSING: A CRUCIAL ASPECT IN THE RISE AND FALL OF EMPIRES

 

Pics Courtesy Net

 

My Article published on the Life of  Soldier website on 24 Jan 25.

 

Imperialism—the extension of a nation’s power through military force, diplomacy, and economic means—has been a driving force behind much of world history. The sustainability of such power often hinges on how well an empire can manage its vast resources and territories. The idea that empires succumb to imperial overstretch stems from the concept first articulated by historian Paul Kennedy in his book The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. The idea of imperial overstressing refers to the point at which the burden of managing expansive territories, diverse populations, and economic interests becomes too great to bear. It posits that empires decline when their ambitions and commitments abroad exceed their economic and societal resources. The hypothesis is not outdated but is a relevant issue for current global powers like the United States and China.

 

Theories of Imperialism

 

Understanding imperial overstressing is not just a theoretical exercise but a crucial aspect of understanding historical and contemporary geopolitics. It requires a foundation in the different theories of imperialism that have shaped historical and modern geopolitics and their practical application in analysing the rise and fall of empires.

 

Economic Theory. A Key Driver of Imperialism. This theory, championed by thinkers like John Hobson and Vladimir Lenin, offers a unique perspective on the motivations behind imperialism. It posits that the search for new markets, investment opportunities, and surplus capital drives imperial expansion, with the need to find profitable avenues for surplus capital being a key factor. Lenin’s emphasis on imperialism as a monopoly stage of capitalism, where the economic elite seeks new outlets for their excess capital by exploiting weaker regions, further enriches our understanding of this phenomenon.

 

Strategic Theory. The Significance of Key Areas.  This approach focuses on the strategic importance of key areas such as naval routes, ports, and choke points. It underscores the significant advantages these areas provide in global power projection and how empires expanded to dominate these regions, securing trade routes and protecting vital interests. For instance, the British Empire’s control over the Suez Canal allowed it to maintain influence in the Indian Ocean and Asia, highlighting the strategic value of such key areas.

 

Cultural Theory. The cultural theory views imperialism as driven by a desire to spread dominant cultural, religious, or ideological values. It justified expansion as a form of “civilising mission,” presenting imperial control as beneficial for native populations. The British Empire’s justification for colonisation in Africa and Asia often emphasised the need to introduce Christianity and Western civilisation to supposedly “backward” societies.

 

Historical Context: Case Studies

 

The Roman Empire

 

Expansion and Limits. At its height, the Roman Empire spanned from the British Isles to the Middle East, encompassing diverse cultures, languages, and resources. The Roman system of governance needed to be equipped to handle the complexities of such a vast empire. Maintaining an enormous legionary force stretched the empire’s resources, especially when dealing with distant provinces needing protection and oversight.

 

Economic Strain.  The Roman Empire faced profound economic challenges. It relied heavily on slave labour, heavy taxes from provinces, and tributes from conquered peoples to fund its expenditures. The vast system of roads, military garrisons, and cities required a continuous flow of resources. The reliance on trade and the dependence on foreign resources, such as grain from Africa and olive oil from Spain, made the empire vulnerable to disruptions.

 

Military and Political Challenges.  The Roman military’s attempts to expand—through campaigns in Parthia, for example—often overstretched the system. Long supply lines, the need for vast garrisons, and the difficulty of integrating newly conquered peoples into the Roman system all contributed to inefficiencies. The Roman political system struggled to manage these challenges, with corruption, favouritism, and nepotism undermining administrative effectiveness.

 

Decline and Fall. The decline of the Western Roman Empire is often attributed to the failure to manage the economic, military, and administrative challenges of ruling such a vast territory. The Roman system could not adapt to the pressures of dealing with a constantly shrinking tax base, the costs of suppressing rebellions, and the necessity of defending its borders against ever-increasing barbarian invasions. The eventual collapse in 476 AD was a military defeat and a reflection of the empire’s inability to control its territories.

 

The British Empire

 

 

Global Reach and Maintenance. At its zenith, the British Empire controlled vast territories across Africa, Asia, the Americas, and the Pacific. The imperial model relied on leveraging colonies for economic gain—extracting resources and creating markets for British goods. However, maintaining global control required significant military presence and administrative oversight.

 

Financial Strain. Maintaining an empire was costly. The British government had to fund the Royal Navy, military expeditions, and administrative costs in distant colonies. The burden of protection, trade route security, and the suppression of rebellions greatly strained the British economy. The need to finance these efforts led to increased taxes at home, public discontent, and growing resistance in the colonies.

 

World Wars as Catalysts. The impact of World Wars I and II on the British Empire was pivotal. The financial costs of these wars were staggering—Britain’s debt ballooned, and the economic impact was felt domestically and internationally. The wars also disrupted global trade and the imperial system, with colonies demanding greater autonomy and independence post-war. The military strain of controlling distant regions was revealed as the British Army was spread thin across multiple fronts, significantly increasing the empire’s burden and contributing to its eventual downfall.

 

Decolonisation. The aftermath of World War II marked the beginning of the end for the British Empire. The pressure to rebuild post-war economies, combined with nationalist movements across the empire, forced Britain to reassess its imperial strategy. As students, scholars, and individuals interested in history, geopolitics, and imperialism, your understanding and analysis of these events can contribute to reassessing imperial strategies. Decolonisation was hastened by the realisation that the costs of maintaining control over colonies far outweighed the benefits. The granting of independence to India, Pakistan, and other African and Caribbean colonies marked the final phase of British imperial overstretch.

 

The Soviet Union

 

 

Expansion and Control. The Soviet Union extended its influence over Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and parts of the Middle East and Africa. The need to maintain control over these regions placed significant strain on Soviet resources. The empire’s reliance on military force to maintain its influence was economically and politically costly.

 

Economic Costs. The Soviet Union’s economic model was centred on heavy industry and military spending. The costs of the Cold War arms race with the United States required vast resources. The Soviet leadership prioritised military expenditure over consumer goods and economic diversification, resulting in stagnant living standards and economic growth. The command economy, characterised by state ownership of the means of production and centralised planning, could not allocate resources efficiently, exacerbating the strain on the Soviet system.

 

Afghan War and Dissolution. The Soviet intervention in Afghanistan exposed the limits of Soviet military power. The conflict drained economic resources, led to a protracted war effort, and showed the logistical difficulties of fighting a guerrilla war in a foreign country. The Soviet military, despite its size and capabilities, was overstretched, unable to sustain the conflict or effectively pacify the Afghan population. The economic burden of the war, combined with the impact on public morale and Soviet legitimacy, contributed to the eventual dissolution of the USSR in 1991.

 

End of the Soviet Empire. Economic stagnation, the inability to adapt to internal and external pressures, and the need for rapid reform precipitated the collapse of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev’s glasnost and perestroika policies accelerated the fragmentation and collapse process. The Soviet system could not control its expansive borders and diverse populations.

 

Analysis of the Present Situation

 

Understanding the impact of imperial overstressing is crucial for contemporary global powers—particularly the United States and China. They face unique challenges in expanding and maintaining influence while avoiding the pitfalls of past empires.

 

United States: Policy of Sharing the Burden

 

Many scholars and commentators argue that the U.S. is experiencing symptoms of overstretch, especially in the 21st century.

 

Global Presence. The U.S. maintains a vast network of over 750 military bases across over 80 countries and regions, spending nearly $900 billion annually on defence (as of 2023).  However, the costs—both financial and political—are high. While this ensures global influence and deterrence, the financial burden of maintaining this military dominance has grown unsustainable.

 

Military Commitments.  It engages in conflicts from the Middle East to East Asia and supports NATO’s collective defence. The prolonged wars in Afghanistan and Iraq cost the U.S. trillions of dollars while yielding questionable strategic benefits. These wars drained resources and contributed to domestic political fatigue regarding foreign interventions.

 

Rising Competition. American hegemony faces challenges as the unipolar world established after the Cold War transitions to a multipolar order. The emergence of peer competitors like China and Russia, combined with regional challenges from powers like Iran and North Korea, strains U.S. resources further. China’s Belt and Road Initiative, technological advancements, and growing military assertiveness directly challenge U.S. supremacy in Asia and beyond. Long-standing allies like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and even parts of Europe are exploring partnerships with non-Western powers, reflecting diminishing U.S. influence. Efforts by BRICS nations and others to establish alternative financial systems weaken the U.S. dollar’s hegemony, reducing America’s economic leverage.

 

Domestic issues. Imperial overstretch often involves prioritising external ambitions over internal needs. Internal dysfunction amplifies the effects of overstretching. The U.S. national debt surpassed $33 trillion in 2023, with significant portions of government revenue devoted to servicing debt rather than addressing domestic priorities. Growing public resistance to foreign interventions is challenging the traditional support for expansive global engagement. Deep political polarisation and frequent gridlock in Congress undermine the ability to formulate coherent foreign and domestic policies and the nation’s capacity to adapt to changing global realities.

 

Economic Costs and Political Dilemmas. The U.S. faces a strategic dilemma—maintaining influence without overcommitting resources. The domestic debate over defence spending, the impact on social services, and the need for economic diversification reflect a broader concern about imperial overstretch. The U.S. must find ways to project power through strategic partnerships, financial ties, and multilateral engagements.

 

Unique Advantages. While the risks of overstretch are accurate, the U.S. retains unique advantages. America’s technological innovation remains unparalleled, especially in AI, biotechnology, and defence. Unlike many competitors, the U.S. benefits from a relatively youthful and diverse population due to immigration. While strained, the U.S.’s network of allies and partners remains formidable compared to competitors like China.

 

Possible Way Out. To avoid imperial overstretch, the U.S. must prioritise strategic restraint, focus on domestic revitalisation, and foster multilateral approaches to global challenges.  The U.S. can learn from past empires’ decline by focusing on flexibility, adaptability, and the strategic use of alliances. The creation of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and Quad partnership illustrates an attempt to share the burden of regional security with like-minded partners in the Indo-Pacific, avoiding the direct military engagement that could lead to overstretch. Whether it can effectively recalibrate its ambitions remains the key question for its future.

 

China: Influence through Revival of Trade Routes

 

While China is often viewed as a rising power, some argue it is also at risk of imperial overstretch. As Beijing pursues ambitious global and regional objectives, its expanding commitments could exceed its economic, political, and military capacity, creating vulnerabilities.

 

Strategic Expansion. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), launched in 2013, is a cornerstone of its global strategy. It aims to connect Asia, Africa, and Europe through infrastructure projects. The initiative extends China’s influence through economic investment in infrastructure, trade agreements, and soft power initiatives. It includes projects in Asia, Africa, and Europe, linking China’s markets with new consumers and supply chains.

 

Challenges. Many BRI recipient countries, such as Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Zambia, struggle to repay Chinese loans. This has led to debt crises and project defaults, reducing China’s investment returns. The “debt-trap diplomacy” narrative has damaged China’s reputation, forcing it to restructure or forgive loans, adding financial strain. Resistance to the BRI has grown, with countries like Malaysia renegotiating or cancelling projects. Anti-Chinese sentiment in Africa and Southeast Asia complicates China’s efforts to maintain influence. Further, securing Chinese investments in politically unstable regions, such as Central Asia or the Middle East, increases China’s overseas military and diplomatic commitments.

 

Taiwan and Regional Ambitions: Risk of Overreach. China’s ambitions to assert dominance in its neighbourhood, particularly over Taiwan, risk provoking military and economic overstretch. A military invasion of Taiwan would likely trigger U.S. and allied intervention. This scenario could escalate into a costly conflict, depleting China’s resources and potentially destabilising the Communist Party’s rule.

 

South China Sea and Border Conflicts. China’s militarisation of the South China Sea has alienated neighbouring countries, such as Vietnam and the Philippines, driving them closer to the U.S. This increases the cost of managing regional security while undermining Beijing’s goals. Persistent tensions with India along the Himalayan border require significant military deployments, distracting resources from other priorities.

 

Economic Challenges. China’s economic engine, long its greatest strength, is now showing signs of strain, which could undermine its ability to sustain global ambitions. Post-pandemic recovery has been sluggish, with growth rates declining to their lowest in decades. Youth unemployment and a slowing property market exacerbate internal vulnerabilities. The transition from export-driven to domestic consumption-driven growth has proven difficult, limiting China’s ability to finance overseas commitments. The U.S.-led “decoupling” of supply chains and restrictions on technology exports, such as advanced semiconductors, threatens China’s technological ambitions and long-term competitiveness.

 

Domestic Difficulties. China’s authoritarian model under Xi Jinping centralises power but creates systemic risks that could exacerbate overstretch. Xi’s consolidation of power reduces flexibility in decision-making and increases the risk of policy mistakes. For instance, China’s zero-COVID policy severely disrupted its economy and global supply chains. China faces a demographic decline due to decades of the one-child policy. Fewer workers and a rapidly ageing population reduce economic productivity and increase social welfare costs. Economic inequality, ethnic tensions in regions like Xinjiang and Tibet, and crackdowns on freedoms create internal unrest, diverting attention and resources from external ambitions. While China has invested heavily in modernising its military, sustaining this pace of spending strains its economy, particularly during a period of slower growth.

 

Global Backlash: Resistance to Chinese Influence. China’s assertive foreign policy has sparked resistance across various regions, straining its resources and soft power. Western democracies, led by the U.S., have formed coalitions to counter China’s rise, such as AUKUS, the Quad, and NATO’s increased focus on Asia. China must expend significant diplomatic and economic resources to manage these challenges. While China has made inroads in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, its investments often face criticism for being extractive and environmentally damaging. Local resistance to Chinese influence, such as protests against Chinese companies in Africa, adds to the cost of maintaining its foothold.

 

Recalibration to Avoid Overstretch. China’s rise is remarkable, but its ambition to reshape the global order comes with significant risks of overreach. Whether it can sustain its ascent without succumbing to imperial overstretch will depend on its ability to balance global ambitions with domestic stability and strategic restraint. To avoid imperial overstretch, China must recalibrate its strategies. It should focus on high-value, strategically important BRI projects rather than overextending into low-return or high-risk regions. Domestic economic stability and technological innovation must be prioritised to support long-term ambitions. Shifting from coercive tactics to building genuine partnerships and addressing local grievances in host countries would pay higher dividends. It should avoid entanglements that could escalate into costly conflicts, particularly with the U.S. or regional neighbours.

 

Conclusion. The historical examples of empires that succumbed to imperial overstretch—such as the Roman Empire, the British Empire, and the Soviet Union—reveal common patterns in the relationship between expansion, resource management, and sustainability. The present-day geopolitical landscape, marked by the U.S. and China, requires these nations to carefully navigate the challenges of imperial overstretch. The United States must balance its global responsibilities with economic constraints, while China’s BRI presents a new form of strategic expansion that relies heavily on economic diplomacy and investment. By learning from the past, contemporary powers can avoid the pitfalls that led to the decline of previous empires. The focus should be on maintaining strategic flexibility, using economic partnerships to share the burden of influence, and avoiding overcommitment in military and economic terms. The future will likely shift from direct imperial control to networks of influence, economic leverage, and strategic alliances—less visible than traditional empires but no less potent in shaping global geopolitics.

 

Your valuable comments are most welcome.

 

Link to the article on the website:-

Imperial Overstressing: A Crucial Aspect in the Rise and Fall of Empires

 

1009
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References:-

  1. Hobson, John. Imperialism: A Study. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1902.
  1. Lenin, Vladimir I. Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1917.
  1. Ferguson, Niall. Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power. New York: Basic Books, 2003.
  1. Kotkin, Stephen. Armageddon Averted: The Soviet Collapse, 1970-2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
  1. Ikenberry, G. John. “The Future of American Power.” Foreign Affairs 89, no. 6 (2010): 56-68.
  1. Trevithick, Richard, “China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Assessing Its Scope, Scale, and Impact.” The Diplomat, September 25, 2023. https://thediplomat.com/2023/09/chinas-belt-and-road-initiative-assessing-its-scope-scale-and-impact/
  1. Chatham House: “The Belt and Road Initiative: Implications for Europe,” June 2023. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/06/belt-and-road-initiative-implications-europe
  1. Council on Foreign Relations: “U.S. Global Strategy in an Era of Competitive Great Power Politics,” November 2022. https://www.cfr.org/2022/11/us-global-strategy-era-competitive-great-power-politics

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

Posted on

584: CONTEMPORARY WARS THROUGH THE LENS OF GALTUNG’S THEORY

 

Pics Courtesy Net

 

My Article published on the Life of Soldier website on 17 Jan 25

 

In the 21st century, war and conflict have evolved significantly. From interstate wars to protracted civil conflicts, the causes and consequences of contemporary violence are deeply complex. Johan Galtung, a peace and conflict studies pioneer, provides a theoretical framework uniquely suited to analyse these modern wars. His conflict theory, encompassing the conflict triangle, structural and cultural violence, and distinctions between negative and positive peace, offers hope for a comprehensive understanding of conflicts and pathways to resolution. This article explores how Galtung’s theory can be applied to analyse and address contemporary wars, focusing on cases such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas conflict.

 

Galtung’s Conflict Theory

 

Johan Galtung’s Conflict Theory is foundational peace and conflict studies framework. Galtung, a Norwegian sociologist and the discipline’s founder, developed theories to understand conflict dynamics and pathways to sustainable peace. His most influential contributions include the conflict triangle, the concepts of structural violence, and distinctions between negative peace and positive peace.

 

 

Galtung’s Conflict Triangle. Galtung describes conflict as having three interrelated components, often visualised as a triangle. The first component, the Attitudes (A), includes the perceptions, emotions, and assumptions that parties hold about each other, usually shaped by prejudice, fear, or hatred. The second Behaviour (B) is the actions taken by parties, such as violence, protests, or negotiations. The third segment is the Contradictions (C), i.e. the underlying incompatibilities or structural issues, such as resource disputes or unequal power distributions. For sustainable peace, all three corners of the triangle must be addressed. Resolving the structural root causes (contradictions) without addressing hostile attitudes or violent behaviour might lead to a fragile and temporary resolution.

 

Types of Violence. Galtung expanded the concept of violence beyond direct physical harm. He categorised violence as direct, structural, and cultural. Direct violence is observable physical or verbal aggression, such as war, assault, or terrorism. Structural violence is indirect harm embedded in societal structures, such as poverty, discrimination, and inequality, which systematically disadvantage certain groups. Lastly, cultural violence is the result of cultural norms and values that justify or legitimise violence, such as ideologies, religions, or traditions that perpetuate oppression. Structural and cultural violence often underpin direct violence. Addressing these forms of violence is essential for creating lasting peace.

 

Negative Peace vis-a-vis Positive Peace. Negative peace is the absence of direct violence (e.g., a ceasefire or truce). While it stops immediate harm, underlying issues may remain unresolved. On the other hand, positive peace is a holistic state where structural and cultural violence is also eliminated, leading to a just and equitable society. Peace-building efforts should aim for positive peace by transforming societal systems and relationships rather than ending immediate hostilities. Achieving positive peace not only stops violence but also addresses the root causes of conflict, creating a more stable and just society.

 

Conflict Transformation. Unlike conflict resolution (which seeks to end conflict) or conflict management (which seeks to control it), Galtung emphasises conflict transformation, which involves addressing the root causes and creating conditions for long-term peace and harmony. At the heart of Galtung’s theory, this approach is crucial for understanding and resolving contemporary wars, enlightening us about the importance of addressing the underlying issues and keeping us informed about the complexities of peace and conflict studies.

 

Multilateral organisations like the UN can use Galtung’s theory to design peace processes and post-conflict rebuilding efforts. Analysing Inequalities can help identify systemic injustices that contribute to conflicts. Education and advocacy can provide a lens to critique cultural norms and challenge violent structures.

 

Understanding Russia-Ukraine War through Galton’s Conflict Theory

 

Analysing the Russia-Ukraine war through Johan Galtung’s Conflict Theory offers a structured way to understand the root causes, dynamics, and potential pathways to resolution. We can dissect this complex conflict by using Galtung’s conflict triangle, concepts of violence, and distinctions between negative and positive peace.

 

Galtung’s Conflict Triangle. The three components—contradictions, attitudes, and behaviour—highlight the interplay between the conflict’s structural roots and immediate manifestations.

 

    • Contradictions (Structural Causes). Historically and geopolitically, Ukraine’s position as a buffer zone between Russia and the West (NATO/EU) has created long-standing tensions. Russia perceives NATO expansion as a threat to its security, particularly with Ukraine’s aspirations for NATO/EU membership. Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the conflict in Donbas (eastern Ukraine) reflect disputes over territorial sovereignty and self-determination. Control over natural resources, pipelines, and strategic ports, particularly in Crimea and the Black Sea, adds to the structural causes.

 

    • Attitudes (Perceptions and Narratives). The Russian perspective is a historical closeness to Ukraine influenced and shaped by shared cultural, linguistic, and religious ties. Its nationalist rhetoric frames Ukraine’s Western alignment as a betrayal and existential threat. The Ukrainian perspective points to a strong drive for independence and self-determination, with resistance to Russian domination. It sees growing alignment with Western values and institutions as a pathway to sovereignty and development.

 

    • Behaviour (Observable Actions). Observable actions include Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine and Ukraine’s resistance through armed defence. They also include international diplomacy, appeals for Western support, sanctions on Russia, military aid to Ukraine, and diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the conflict.

 

Types of Violence. Galtung’s framework identifies direct, structural, and cultural violence in the war.

 

    • Direct Violence. This includes military aggression, missile strikes, sieges, and combat operations resulting in civilian and military casualties. It resulted in the displacement of millions of Ukrainians due to attacks on civilian areas.

 

    • Structural Violence. Economic disparity between regions (e.g., eastern Ukraine vs. the rest of the country) exacerbates local grievances. Russian control of occupied areas imposes governance that marginalises Ukrainian identity and rights. Western sanctions against Russia, while aimed at reducing aggression, create hardships for ordinary Russians, particularly marginalised groups.

 

    • Cultural Violence. Both sides use propaganda and rhetoric in the form of nationalist narratives that justify violence or delegitimise the opponent’s position. Competing narratives about Ukraine’s identity and sovereignty deepen the divisions.

 

Negative Peace vs. Positive Peace. Negative Peace (Ceasefire/Absence of war), i.e. a cessation of direct violence, might be achieved through ceasefires or peace agreements, but without addressing underlying causes, hostilities could reignite (e.g., post-2015 Minsk Agreements). Positive peace (Structural Transformation) would be achieved by acknowledging Ukraine’s sovereignty while addressing security concerns for Russia. An inclusive framework would have to be created to address ethnic and linguistic diversity in Ukraine (e.g., the rights of Russian-speaking minorities). Trust must be rebuilt through cultural and educational exchanges to counter divisive narratives. Institutional reforms would ensure economic and political stability in Ukraine, reducing vulnerabilities to external manipulation.

 

Conflict Transformation Strategies. Galtung’s emphasis on conflict transformation rather than resolution suggests a need for holistic approaches.

 

    • Multi-Level Dialogue. Engaging Russia, Ukraine, NATO, and other stakeholders in genuine negotiations prioritising long-term stability over short-term gains. Including civil society and regional actors in peace-building efforts.

 

    • Rebuilding Trust and Cooperation. Addressing Russian fears of NATO expansion with security guarantees. Establishing international frameworks for shared governance of contested areas like Crimea or Donbas.

 

    • Economic and Social Reconstruction. International support is needed to rebuild Ukraine post-war and ensure equitable development. Addressing energy dependency and economic grievances that fuel tensions.

 

    • Countering Cultural Violence. Challenging nationalist and antagonistic narratives through media, education, and cultural initiatives. Promoting shared historical understanding and reconciliation efforts.

 

Through Galtung’s lens, the Russia-Ukraine war is not just about military aggression but a deep-rooted conflict shaped by structural inequalities, hostile attitudes, and geopolitical contradictions. Achieving sustainable peace requires moving beyond negative peace (ceasefire) to positive peace (addressing root causes). This would involve transforming systems of inequality, reframing narratives, and fostering cooperative international relations.

 

Understanding Israel-Hamas War through Galtung’s Conflict Theory

 

Understanding the Israel-Hamas conflict through Johan Galtung’s Conflict Theory allows one to analyse the underlying causes, ongoing dynamics, and potential paths toward resolution. This protracted and deeply rooted conflict can be delved into by applying Galtung’s conflict triangle, concepts of violence, and distinctions between negative and positive peace.

 

Galtung’s Conflict Triangle. Its three components—contradictions, attitudes, and behaviours—offer a framework for examining this conflict.

 

    • Contradictions (Structural Causes). The conflict over land, particularly Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories (West Bank, Gaza), is a core issue. The blockade on Gaza and disputes over East Jerusalem exacerbate tensions. Differing claims to the same land are based on historical, religious, and political narratives. Palestinians in Gaza face significant restrictions under the Israeli blockade, including limited access to resources, employment, and healthcare. Ongoing settlement expansions in the West Bank undermine the viability of a two-state solution. Divisions within Palestinian leadership (e.g., Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank) hinder cohesive representation in negotiations.

 

    • Attitudes (Perceptions and Narratives). Israeli perspective highlights the fear of existential threats, given Hamas’s stated aim of opposing Israel’s existence and history of attacks on civilians. A perception that security measures, including the blockade and military actions, are necessary for survival. Palestinian perspective includes resentment over dispossession, systemic inequality, and perceived denial of their national and human rights—narratives of resistance against occupation and framing Israeli actions as colonial and oppressive. Decades of violence, asymmetric power dynamics, and failed negotiations have entrenched mistrust and hostility on both sides.

 

    • Behaviour (Observable Actions). This includes Israeli military operations, airstrikes, and ground incursions in Gaza. Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli cities and other forms of armed resistance. Cycles of escalation and de-escalation are often influenced by external actors (e.g., the U.S., Egypt, and Iran).

 

Types of Violence. Galtung’s classification of violence highlights the multifaceted nature of the conflict.

 

    • Direct Violence. Examples of direct violence are physical attacks and bombings by both sides, resulting in civilian and combatant casualties. Indiscriminate rocket fire from Gaza targeting Israeli cities. Military operations destroyed in Gaza and loss of life.

 

    • Structural Violence. The blockade on Gaza restricts freedom of movement, trade, and access to essential services, contributing to widespread poverty and humanitarian crises. Settlement expansions in the West Bank create conditions of displacement and inequality—unequal access to legal rights, resources, and political representation for Palestinians.

 

    • Cultural Violence. Religious and nationalist narratives that justify actions on both sides. For example, it claims that divine rights grant exclusive control over the land—narratives framing the “other” as inherently violent or illegitimate. Educational materials and media perpetuate stereotypes and deepen divisions.

 

Negative Peace vs. Positive Peace.  Negative Peace (Absence of Direct Violence), i.e. temporary ceasefires or truces, has been achieved through external mediation but failed to address root causes. Examples include the 2021 ceasefire and previous agreements mediated by Egypt or Qatar.  Whereas Positive Peace (Structural and Cultural Transformation) would involve addressing underlying issues, such as Lifting the blockade on Gaza, enabling economic and social development, halting settlement expansion, ensuring equitable access to resources and establishing mechanisms for coexistence, justice, and reconciliation.

 

Conflict Transformation Strategies. Galtung’s emphasis on conflict transformation suggests a need for systemic and relational changes.

 

    • Addressing Structural Causes: Internationally mediated solutions to establish a fair and sustainable framework for coexistence, such as a two-state or one-state solution; economic initiatives to improve living conditions in Gaza and the West Bank.

 

    • Rebuilding Trust and Addressing Narratives. Promoting dialogue initiatives between Israeli and Palestinian communities. Countering hate speech and fostering narratives highlighting shared humanity and potential for coexistence.

 

    • Inclusive Negotiations. Engaging all stakeholders, including Hamas, despite its controversial designation as a terrorist organisation by many countries, to ensure meaningful representation. External Mediators: Leveraging the influence of regional powers (e.g., Egypt, Turkey) and international actors (e.g., the U.S., UN) to facilitate equitable negotiations.

 

Through Galtung’s lens, the Israel-Hamas conflict highlights a deeply rooted struggle involving structural inequalities, hostile attitudes, and cyclical violence. Sustainable peace requires addressing direct, structural, and cultural violence and transforming the systems and narratives perpetuating the conflict. Moving toward positive peace would involve creating conditions for justice, equity, and mutual recognition.

 

Conclusion

 

Johan Galtung’s conflict theory provides a valuable framework for analysing and addressing contemporary wars. By examining contradictions, attitudes, and behaviours and addressing direct, structural, and cultural violence, pathways to sustainable peace can be imagined. While challenges remain significant, a focus on positive peace can transform cycles of violence into opportunities for reconciliation and coexistence. These contemporary war studies illustrate the urgency and relevance of applying Galtung’s insights to modern conflicts, offering hope for a more peaceful future.

 

Please do Comment.

 

1009
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

Link to the article on the website:-

Contemporary Wars Through The Lens Of Galtung’s Theory

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References:-

  1. Galtung, Johan, and Dietrich Fischer. Constructive Conflict: From Escalation to Resolution. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2013.
  1. Galtung, Johan. Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. Oslo: PRIO, 1996.
  1. Barash, David P., and Charles P. Webel. Peace and Conflict Studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2018.
  1. Ramsbotham, Oliver, Tom Woodhouse, and Hugh Miall. Contemporary Conflict Resolution: The Prevention, Management and Transformation of Deadly Conflicts. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2016.
  1. Menon, Rajan. Conflict in Ukraine: The Unwinding of the Post-Cold War Order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015.
  1. International Crisis Group. Russia and Ukraine: Preventing Further Escalation. Crisis Group Europe Report No. 260, 2022.
  1. Khalidi, Rashid. The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917–2017. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2020.
  1. Human Rights Watch. Israel-Palestine: Events of 2022. Human Rights Watch Annual Report, 2023.
  1. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). Global Conflict Trends and Analysis. Accessed December 2024. https://www.sipri.org.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

Posted on

583:IMPORTANT BATTLES OF THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT: SIGNIFICANCE AND LESSONS

 

Pic Courtesy Internet

My Article published on the IIRF Website on 16 Jan 25.

 

The Indian subcontinent, a cradle of civilisations and a region of immense geopolitical importance has been shaped by monumental battles that have left an indelible mark on its history. These conflicts were driven by ambition, resistance, ideology, and external invasions, shaping the region’s political, cultural, and social landscape. Each war, from the ancient battles of the Mauryan Empire to the more modern confrontations during the colonial and post-independence periods, offers a unique lens through which to understand broader lessons on governance, diplomacy, strategy, and societal resilience.

 

Significant Battles

 

Battle of the Ten Kings (Rigvedic Period).  This was a significant event in the early history of the Indian subcontinent. Approximately in the 14th century BCE (speculative), between King Sudas of the Bharatas and a coalition of ten tribes. King Sudas was victorious and consolidated the Bharatas’ dominance. This battle, one of the earliest recorded in Indian history, highlights the tribal conflicts of the Rigvedic period, a time of significant cultural and social development. It marked the emergence of a powerful polity under the Bharatas, laying the groundwork for later Vedic civilisation. The battle highlighted the importance of leadership and strategy in uniting disparate groups and was early evidence of resource disputes and territorial expansion shaping societies.

 

The Battle of Hydaspes (326 BCE). The Battle between Alexander the Great and King Porus of the Punjab region. Alexander’s strategic brilliance and deception allowed him to cross the swollen Hydaspes River and defeat Porus despite the latter’s formidable forces. It marked the easternmost extent of Alexander’s conquests, showcasing the limits of even the most ambitious campaigns. Alexander showed respect for a valiant opponent by reinstating Porus as a regional ruler. It fostered long-term stability in the region and introduced the Indian subcontinent to Hellenistic culture, influencing art, architecture, and governance. The battle proved that adaptability and innovation in military strategy can overcome even the most daunting odds.

 

The Kalinga War. This war,/   dated 261 BCE, was one of the bloodiest conflicts in Indian history. It was fought between Mauryan Emperor Ashoka and the state of Kalinga. Ashoka won but with immense loss of life and suffering. The Kalinga War was not just a pivotal event in Indian history but a transformative one. The sheer scale of bloodshed led Ashoka to embrace Buddhism and propagate non-violence and dharma, influencing Indian and global history. The war transformed Indian history by ushering in an era of peace and governance based on moral principles. The conflict underscored the futility and human cost of war, the role of leadership in ideological transformation, and the potential for conflict to lead to moral and spiritual awakening.

 

The Battle of Tarain (1191 and 1192). These battles between Prithviraj Chauhan and Muhammad of Ghor were pivotal in shaping the political landscape of northern India. While the first battle was a victory for Prithviraj, the second saw Muhammad of Ghor prevail, leading to the establishment of Muslim rule in north India and the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate. It represented a shift in power dynamics and introduced new cultural and administrative practices. The lessons revealed the consequences of underestimating an adversary, the importance of unity among Indian kingdoms against foreign invasions, and military strategy and adaptation as keys to sustained success.

 

The Battles of Panipat (1526, 1556, 1761) are milestones in Indian history, each marking a significant power shift and a turning point in Indian history.  In the first battle (1526), Babur defeated Ibrahim Lodi, establishing the Mughal Empire under Babur. In the second battle (1556), Akbar’s regent, Bairam Khan, defeated Hemu, reaffirming Mughal dominance under Akbar. In the third Battle (1761), Ahmad Shah Durrani defeated the Marathas, marking their decline and the resurgence of regional kingdoms. These battles provide valuable lessons on the strategic importance of alliances, the role of technological superiority (e.g., Babur’s use of cannons), and the catastrophic impact of disunity among Indian powers. They also showcase the changing dynamics of warfare, including the use of gunpowder, artillery, and disciplined infantry.

 

The Battle of Plassey (1757). This battle marked the beginning of British colonial rule in India.  This war, fought between the British East India Company under Robert Clive and the Nawab of Bengal (Siraj-ud-Daulah), was a turning point in Indian history. The British victory, aided by Mir Jafar’s betrayal, established their dominance in Bengal and laid the foundation for their expansion across India.  The East India Company’s control over Bengal became the cornerstone of its expansion across India. The battle initiated a period of economic exploitation and political subjugation of India under British rule. It highlighted the dangers of internal betrayal and lack of loyalty, the significance of financial and military planning in modern warfare, and how colonial powers exploited local rivalries to establish dominance.

 

The Battle of Buxar (1764). British won this conflict between the British East India Company and Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II, Nawab of Awadh, and Nawab of Bengal. This battle consolidated British power in India, granting them the Diwani (revenue rights) of Bengal, Bihar, and Odisha. It marked the beginning of the systematic exploitation of Indian resources.  The battle revealed that unified resistance is essential against a common adversary, and control over resources and the economy is as crucial as military strength. Overdependence on external forces can weaken sovereignty.

 

Anglo-Mysore Wars (1767–1799). The four Anglo-Mysore Wars, which occurred between the Kingdom of Mysore under leaders like Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan and the British East India Company, were pivotal in the colonisation of India. Tipu Sultan’s resistance, modernisation efforts, and alliances with foreign powers are noteworthy. These included the Battle of Pollilur (1780) between Tipu Sultan’s defeated British forces and the siege of Srirangapatna (1799) when the British won with the death of Tipu Sultan. The Anglo-Mysore Wars were among the fiercest resistances to British expansion. Tipu Sultan, known as the “Tiger of Mysore,” became a symbol of defiance against colonial powers. Tipu’s defiance became a symbol of anti-colonial struggle, inspiring future generations. Tipu Sultan’s focus on economic reforms and military modernisation highlights the need for a strong domestic base to resist external aggression. The failure to secure lasting alliances with France and other European powers underscores the importance of reliable international partnerships in regional conflicts. The wars also underscored the value of technological innovation, such as the Mysorean rockets, and the challenges of sustaining resistance without broad-based alliances.

 

The First War of Indian Independence (1857). The Revolt of 1857. Often termed the First War of Independence, it was a widespread uprising against British rule sparked by grievances ranging from economic exploitation to cultural and religious insensitivity. It involved Indian soldiers and rebels against the British East India Company. The British suppressed the rebellion. Although it failed, it marked the beginning of the end for the East India Company and led to direct Crown rule over India. The revolt highlighted the potential strength of a united front across different regions, religions, and classes, even though lack of coordination undermined its success.

 

Battles of the India-Pakistan Conflicts. The partition of India in 1947 led to a series of wars between India and Pakistan, primarily over the contested region of Kashmir. These included the first Kashmir war (1947–1948), the second Kashmir war (1965), and the 1971 liberation of Bangladesh. Among these, the 1971 war stands out for leading to the creation of Bangladesh. These battles fought in the modern era shaped the geopolitics of South Asia and influenced international relations. The enduring conflict over Kashmir and the frequent wars reveal the long-term difficulties of unresolved partitions. The 1971 war, triggered by the genocide in East Pakistan, underscores the ethical imperatives of intervention in the face of humanitarian crises. India’s coordination of military, diplomatic, and intelligence efforts in 1971 serves as a case study in comprehensive strategy.

 

Kargil War. The Kargil War fought between India and Pakistan in the challenging terrain of the Himalayas, showcased the importance of surveillance, intelligence, and the role of international diplomacy in modern conflicts. The use of air power and precision weaponry highlighted the evolving nature of warfare. The media extensively covered war in South Asia for the first time, shaping public opinion and international perceptions. India’s ability to garner international support by diplomatically isolating Pakistan was a significant factor in resolving the conflict.

 

Broader Lessons from Indian Battles

 

The battles of the Indian subcontinent are more than just historical events; they offer valuable lessons on unity, strategy, and the importance of learning from history to shape a better future. By understanding these conflicts, modern societies can strive to resolve disputes through dialogue and avoid repeating past mistakes.

 

Unity is Strength. A recurring theme in Indian history is the detrimental impact of internal divisions. The subcontinent’s history illustrates how unity can amplify strength while fragmentation often leads to vulnerability. From the Battle of Tarain to the British conquests, the lack of unity among Indian rulers frequently facilitated foreign domination.

 

The Cost of Betrayal. Many battles were lost due to betrayal, such as Mir Jafar’s role in the Battle of Plassey. Loyalty and trust within ranks are critical in any conflict.

 

Adaptability in Warfare. Introducing new technologies, from gunpowder to modern surveillance systems, has been decisive in many wars.  Using innovative strategies and technologies, such as Babur’s cannons or Tipu Sultan’s rockets, underscores the importance of adapting to evolving military techniques. The ability to adapt and innovate remains crucial.

 

Economic Control as a Tool of Power. Battles like Plassey and Buxar show how economic dominance can be as powerful as military victory. Controlling resources often dictates the outcome of conflicts.

 

Ethics and Leadership. From Ashoka’s remorse to Tipu Sultan’s resistance, leaders’ moral compass has often shaped the course and memory of wars.

 

Cultural Resilience. Despite numerous invasions and conflicts, the Indian subcontinent has retained its cultural identity, showcasing the resilience of its societies.

 

Conclusion

The wars of the Indian subcontinent are not just tales of conquests and defeats. They reflect the interplay of ambition, strategy, and cultural evolution. While they have often been sources of immense suffering, they also offer enduring lessons in leadership, unity, and the pursuit of peace. A key lesson from Indian battles is the importance of international diplomacy alongside military strategy. Forming alliances and negotiating effectively on the global stage can often be as crucial as battlefield tactics in determining the outcome of conflicts. The human cost of prolonged conflict is a sobering reality that cannot be overlooked. Beyond the strategic and political implications, wars inflict untold suffering on individuals and communities, underscoring the need for peaceful resolution of disputes. As India and its neighbours navigate the complexities of the 21st century, these historical lessons remain as relevant as ever, offering insights into building a future that values peace, cooperation, and sustainable development. By studying these historical conflicts, we can better understand the forces that have shaped the subcontinent and gain insights into how to address contemporary challenges.

 

Please do Comment.

 

1009
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

Link to the Article on the website:-

Important Battles Of The Indian Subcontinent: Significance And Lessons

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References:–

  1. Bose, Sugata. Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy. Routledge, 2022.
  1. Keay, John. India: A History. HarperCollins, 2010.
  1. Thapar, Romila. Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300. University of California Press, 2004.
  1. Roy, Kaushik. Military Manpower, Armies, and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge, 2015.
  1. Chandra, Satish. Medieval India: From Sultanat to the Mughals. Har-Anand Publications, 2007.
  1. Peers, Douglas M. “Gunpowder Empires and Mughal Military Technology.” Journal of Military History, vol. 64, no. 1, 2000, pp. 51-66.
  1. Roy, Kaushik. “The Classical Age of Warfare in South Asia.” Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 48, no. 3, 2013, pp. 56-65.
  1. Ludden, David. “India’s Historic Battles: A Spatial Perspective.” Journal of Historical Geography, vol. 20, no. 4, 2005, pp. 425-439.
  1. Metcalf, Barbara D., and Metcalf, Thomas R. A Concise History of Modern India. Cambridge University Press, 2012.
  1. Dupuy, R. Ernest, and Dupuy, Trevor N. The Encyclopedia of Military History from 3500 B.C. to the Present. HarperCollins, 1993.
  2. Indian Ministry of Culture – Chronology of Indian Battles and Wars (https://www.indiaculture.nic.in/).
  1. The British Library – South Asia Collections and Military History (https://www.bl.uk/).

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

English हिंदी