This is one of the facts of the world that no one can deny.
No matter how much someone adores the Romans; it is a fact that they attacked
and ravaged thousands of miles of Lands and killed millions of people just to
ensure ‘safe trade routes’. All praises can be offered to the Arab civilization
for their exceptional military gains and outstanding cultural achievements, yet
one can find out that the genuine Arab reason for taking control of other lands
vanished soon after the four caliphs, and demographic reasons along with
economic, military and sometimes ethnic priorities took over the mainstream hypothesis
of ‘spreading Islam’ as the main reason to press or take over other nations.
Similarly, the Ottoman control of Mediterranean for about three centuries was
not due to genuine Islamic preaching, but was enforced largely due to the
paradigm of naval deterrence for safe trade routes. From the start of the
world, up till today, economic factor has been the most vital in Nations
fortune, as it ensures the survivability of the people as well as the prowess
required to exert the hegemonic pressure on other sections who are deterred
into accepting the writ of a power. The wars between Carthage and Rome for
example were fought genuinely due to economic reasons which made virtually
impossible for two communities to co-exist while at the same time compete
economically. The war ended at nothing but gross destruction and consequent
annihilation of Carthage, and hundreds of thousands of men, women and children
paid the price of being in an economic competition.
The new world of today, too, presents something different if
we look at it from the naïve perspective mapped out and commented upon by media
persons. We find nations going to war for something different. But in reality,
the paradigms have not changed even if ways have somehow. It is regrettable to
see the economic deprivations of many countries and then finding out that
leading industrial countries were behind it. The exploitation of the
economically weak by those who have power is the side of coin internationally
ignored, because the ‘internationalism’ in itself is a concept best suited to
those who tend to engulf maximum natural resources of a country. The lucrative
economic leverage through oil was the major reason for Iraq war, which left no
less than seven hundred thousand people dead and millions wounded for the rest
of their lives. It leaves behind a country in shambles and a shattered economy
which will take decades to come to the point it was in 2003. The propaganda
machinery worked, blinded the people and everybody was suddenly thinking that
Iraq was the only demon to be stopped at all costs. It happens every time. The
great powers do not just attack by telling and yelling the actual reasons. They
always attack and desecrate under cover of some reason which most of the time
is falsely generated so as to convince that their aggression was ‘mandatory’ or
‘necessary’ somehow. Hitler attacked Poland after convincingly preaching to the
people of the Reich, that Polish soldiers were behind an attack on a German
outpost; which today has been established was orchestrated by German
establishment themselves. Even if someone looks closely, all of the patterns
followed by Nazis during their World Conquering stratagems were economically
driven and wealth oriented so as to provide for the people of the Reich, a
constant source of income as well as reason to keep giving the war their blood
and hard work.
The continuum of the megalomaniac and resource hungry nature
of powers has brought the world in an unexplainable yet worrisome state of
affairs. One country’s mothers send their sons to the battle field, thinking
they are going to lay down their lives for the sake of honour and greatness of their
land. These gentlemen on the other hand are involved in atrocities and
misconduct on some of the most deprived sections of the world, in order to
retain or sometime restore the hegemony of the big players involved. Every
conflict has some hidden economic agenda; every battle has something to do with
resources. There exists one genuine question after this entire hullabaloo-which
one of those ‘warriors’ is right.
The answer is simple. The sanctity of a single human life is
something that has to be honoured and respected. In all religions of the world,
in every philanthropic concept of the world, the sacredness of human life is
above everything regardless of time and space. It has to be understood that
killing some innocent destitute may restore ‘Government’s Writ’ (The best
narration nowadays used to by the governments to evade the blames of atrocities
done by them on their own citizens) or it may bring ‘Peace’ (The common
rhetoric used by the supreme to attack and vandalise the weak nowadays), but it
is but something called brutality and barbarism-and these two things always
fire back not in matter of years, but days and months. If some religious sect is killing people-innocent people- they are wrong, because they destroy the
sanctity of the human existence and life. If some country does the same, they
are wrong- no matter how strong their economy is, or how strong this propaganda
machine is working. It has to be established that those who are defenceless,
are human beings after all, and that under no pretext-be it economy, security
or peace- can their right to live and prosper be deteriorated or even questioned.
In the world of today, where even the best of the ideologies are seemingly incapable
of holding back devastation and destruction by one another of human beings,
this seems to be the only and constructive way to idealize and construct the
ideas of one’s self.
No comments:
Post a Comment