Princess Diana - 1253 Words

One year ago, the death of a princess brought an entire world to tears. The wounds are slowly healing and the grief is less painful. What remains are the lessons that can be learned from a phenomenon that few can entirely forget. At the time it was a mystery. A divorced member of the royal family of a medium-sized European nation dies in a banal car accident in Paris, and for a week the sun, moon and stars are knocked off their appointed tracks. Within days, Europe suffers a shortage of cut flowers as tens of thousands of bouquets are laid before the house of the victim. Demand for newsprint soars; the funeral, watched live on television throughout the world, attracts an audience of 1 billion. A few years later, the mystery remains.†¦show more content†¦97) Children were Dianas delight, she always wanted a little girl. When one little eight-year-old girl Danielle first met the princess, she had no idea of the identity of the special person who was to visit the Rose Ward of Londons Royal Brampton Hospital, where she was lying ill with an irregular heartbeat. Danielle thought it was going to be Alan Shearer. It was, in fact, Diana, paying a private visit to the hospital to see a patient. Diana visited Nepal to see for herself the type of fieldwork in which the Red Cross was involved. As well as her often-unnoticed help at British hospitals, Diana also famously helped the work of Mother Theresa of Calcutta and Imran Khan, the former Pakistani cricket hero, with his charity cancer hospital. ‘This world has few people like Diana, Imran Khan said, ‘who work so devotedly for the well-being of the poor, deprived and down-trodden. (2, page 103) Dianas most recent campaign was against landmines, which really engaged her passion. How, she was asked, had she got involved in the first place? ‘A lot of information started landing on my desk about landmines, and I suppose the pictures were so horrificÂ…that I felt perhaps if I could be part of a team to raise the profile around the world, it would help. Film director Lord Attenborough was a vital link, too: ‘He invited me to the film premiere of In Love and War, which is raising money for the British Red Cross landmines appeal. So it seemedShow MoreRelatedPrincess Diana 2268 Words   |  10 Pagesextravagant. The whole palace was made of the finest materials, it was beautiful. The roof was even made of gold. Despite the royal family’s golden exterior with love for one another and their children, I saw the real Prince and Princess of Wales. I often had time to talk to Princess Diana, although she preferred when I called her Di ( Tompson 1). While Diana’s life was cut too short, every minute that she was alive was exciting, the outfits, the press, and the charities. People could not get enough of herRead More Princess Diana Spencer1421 Words   |  6 PagesPrincess Diana Spencer As I relax on a Sunday evening, breathe in fresh air before I enter my chamber, I catch a glimpse of something magically beautiful. With a long silk blue dress and a pearl-diamond tiara on her golden hair, the Lady, the Princess, the beauty of the world walks down the steps to the cheering crowds. She gives hope to her people when there is none. Sitting here, I feel her warm smile full of love and joy. This is my Diana, the light of this world! Diana’s childhood was fullRead MorePrincess Diana Essay534 Words   |  3 PagesPrincess Diana Princess Diana, also known as Princess of Wales was born on July 1, 1961 at Park House near Sandringham, Norfolk. Her parents, who were married in 1954, were separated when Diana was 13 years old in 1967. Their marriage was dissolved 2 years later in 1969. Dianas mother later married Earl Spencer, who was the Countess of Dartmouth in 1976. Diana was living with her dad with her siblings Sarah, Jane, and Charles. She lived there until her grandfather, Earl Spencer the 7thRead More Princess Diana Essay1065 Words   |  5 PagesThroughout Princess Diana’s lifetime she loved, cared, and helped others along the way. She had many accomplishments in life. Such as her children and her many organizations. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Lady Diana Frances Spencer was born on July 1, 1961 at Park House, a residence on the royal estate at Sandringham. She was the third of four children and the youngest daughter. Diana was born to her father Edward John Spencer Viscount Althorp and mother Frances Roche Spencer (King 27). Diana sharedRead MoreEssay on Princess Diana1723 Words   |  7 Pagesyielding herself from the constant harassment and persistence. Princess Diana of Wales always knew how to make an entrance. Rich, poor, famous, and obscure gathered around for a glimpse of the famous Diana, hoping to see her beauty, hoping to see the elegance she carried, hoping for one single glance in their direction. Through all movies and documentaries exposed, the knowledge of Princess Diana has grown extensively to me. Princess Diana’s journey through the media begins with the accident thatRead MoreEssay Princess Diana1202 Words   |  5 Pages One year ago, the death of a princess brough t an entire world to tears. The wounds are slowly healing and the grief is less painful. What remains are the lessons that can be learned from a phenomenon that few can entirely forget. At the time it was a mystery. A divorced member of the royal family of a medium-sized European nation dies in a banal car accident in Paris, and for a week the sun, moon and stars are knocked off their appointed tracks. Within days, Europe suffers a shortage of cut flowersRead MorePrincess Diana Essay957 Words   |  4 PagesHearts Throughout her life all eyes were always on Princess Diana. Millions came to identify with her and, when she died, they felt as though they have lost a best friend. Princess Di was known across the world as â€Å"The People’s Princess† and â€Å"The Queen of Our Hearts†. She was one of the most admired and relatable princesses to society. Through her charity and her life struggles, many people can admire and relate to Princess Diana. Princess Diana was involved in nearly 100 charities during her lifeRead More Princess Diana Essay2975 Words   |  12 Pages Princess Diana was born The Honorable Diana Frances Spencer on July 1, 1961. She was the third female child to Viscount and Viscountess Althorp. Diana had two older sisters, Sarah and Jane and one younger brother, Charles. Her family was well off and Diana had a privileged childhood. The Spencer’s made their money as successful sheep traders in the 15th century. With their fortune they built Althorp House in Northamptonshire and acquired a family crest and motto – amp;quot;God defend the rightamp;quot;Read MorePrincess Diana Essay1384 Words   |  6 PagesPrincess Diana Diana Spencer was born July 1, 1961. This date was the start of one of the most remarkable individuals in the world . She was once quoted as saying, One minute I was a nobody the next minute I was Princess of Wales, mother ,member of the royal family and it was too much for one person to handle (Morton story,104). The Princess of Wales struggled throughout her life due to bulimia, an unhappy marriage, and the media. Dianas astrologer, Felix Lyle, quotedRead MorePrincess Diana Essay example1691 Words   |  7 Pagesthe world. Princess Diana influenced millions of people from all over the world, and her legacy will remain forever. Lady Diana Frances Spencer was born at home on July 1, 1961, in Norfolk, England (Morton 70). Her parents were very ashamed that she was a girl. They wanted a boy very badly to keep the Spencer name (Morton 71). Diana had two older sisters and one younger brother. She was always the closest to her brother, Charles, and admired him strongly (Vickers 160). As a child, Diana was somewhat

Is Lebanon a Fragile State Free Essays

string(94) " of fragility to conflict or immediate post-conflict countries \(Stewart and Brown 2005: 2\)\." Introduction Middle Eastern nation states came into existence not as a result of naturally-evolving and unique historical, social, or political processes reaching a nexus of cohesion, but rather, they emerged as a manifestation of the fragility of colonial power in the region (Zweiri a. o. 2008: 4). We will write a custom essay sample on Is Lebanon a Fragile State? or any similar topic only for you Order Now The history of statehood in the Middle East and its establishment by colonial powers has ensured that this remains a fragile and unstable region (Zweiri a. o. 2008: 4). After the collapse of the Ottoman empire the state structure of Lebanon, for example, was instituted to ensure the protection and local hegemony of the Christian Maronites, who were backed by the French in the 1930s and 1940s (Zweiri a. o. 2008: 4). The consequences of this structuring can still be felt today (Zweiri a. o. 2008: 4). Furthermore, external actors continue to provide support – either through foreign aid or their policies – to certain select actors within fragile state systems. Such a process of â€Å"choosing sides† only causes further instability and exacerbates state fragility (Zweiri a. o. 2008: 4). In the contemporary turbulent world of globalization and ever-increasing interdependence across individuals, groups, international organizations and nation-states, the existence of weak/fragile/failed states is more and more seen as a significant concern (Iqbal Starr 2007: 2). The media, states, and international organizations have seen such states as threats to order and stability in the international system (Iqbal Starr 2007: 2). Failed states are seen as being associated with a range of problems: economic, social, political, and military (Iqbal Starr 2007: 3). And they are seen as having a wide range of negative consequences for their own people, their neighbors, their regions, and the global community; â€Å"the chief reason why the world should worry about state failure is that it is contagious† (The Economist, cited in Iqbal Starr 2007: 3). Is Lebanon a fragile state? Since her independence Lebanon has struggled in keeping up the difficult balance: a small country in a conflict zone, Christians versus Muslims, the civil war, the negative influence of big neighbor Syria, the role of the Palestinians and the refugee problem, the tension with Israel, the murder of former prime minister Rafik Hariri on 14 February 2005 which put the political order of the country in great danger, the emergence of Muslim adicalism and extremism and the rise of Hezbollah, the crumbling of the Christian community and the role of the Lebanese diasporas. To answer this question the political order of Lebanon will be examined from a geo-political and internal perspective. The book Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis, is taken as starting point for this paper. It is one of the books from the ‘Middle East in Focus series’, edited by Barry Rubin. The Middle East has become simultaneously the world’s most controversial, crisis-ridden, and yet least-unde rstood region. Taking new perspectives on the area that has undergone the most dramatic changes, the Middle East in Focus series seeks to bring the best, most accurate expertise to bear for understanding the area’s countries, issues, and problems. The resulting books are designed to be balanced, accurate, and comprehensive compendiums of both facts and analysis presented clearly for both experts and the general reader. To answer the central question, the concept of a ‘fragile state’ will first be scrutinized. In the following section the demographics of Lebanon will be reflected upon. The third section outlines the Lebanese state and political system. The fourth section takes into consideration the external influences on the country. The final section depicts the effects of these various factors on the fragility of the Lebanese political system. 1. Conceptualization and determinants of a fragile state The Failed States Index 2010 ranks Lebanon on the 34th place. With a score of 90. 9/120 the country is considered to be â€Å"in danger† (Foreign Policy 2011b). What does â€Å"state failure† actually mean? There is no agreement on what constitutes fragility and no state likes to be labeled as fragile by the international community (Iqbal Starr: 4, see also Stewart and Brown 2010). Below a set of existing definitions or characterizations of the general phenomenon of state failure will be outlined. It is helpful to begin by looking at existing definitions within the aid community. According to the Fund for Peace â€Å"A state that is failing has several attributes. One of the most common is the loss of physical control of its territory or a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Other attributes of state failure include the erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions, an inability to provide reasonable public services, and the inability to nteract with other states as a full member of the international community. The 12 social, economic, political and military indicators cover a wide range of elements of the risk of state failure, such as extensive corruption and criminal behavior, inability to collect taxes or otherwise draw on citizen support, large-scale involuntary dislocation of the population, sharp economic decline, group-based inequal ity, institutionalized persecution or discrimination, severe demographic pressures, brain drain, and environmental decay. States can fail at varying rates through explosion, implosion, erosion, or invasion over different time periods. (Foreign Policy 2011a). The UK’s Department for International Development (DfID) definition of fragile states focuses on service entitlements (Stewart and Brown 2005: 1-2). DfID defines fragile states as occurring â€Å"†¦ where the government cannot or will not deliver core functions to the majority of its people, including the poor. The most important functions of the state for poverty reduction are territorial control, safety and security, capacity to manage public resources, delivery of basic services, and the ability to protect and support the ways in which the poorest people sustain themselves. (DfID 2005: 7). Four broad categories of â€Å"indicative features of fragile states† were provided: state authority for safety and se curity; effective political power; economic management; administrative capacity to deliver services (Iqball Starr: 4). Each was categorized in terms of â€Å"capacity† to provide them, and the â€Å"willingness† to provide them (Iqball Starr: 4). In as much, DfID explicitly notes that it does not restrict its definition of fragility to conflict or immediate post-conflict countries (Stewart and Brown 2005: 2). You read "Is Lebanon a Fragile State?" in category "Essay examples" Non-conflict countries which are failing to ensure service entitlements constitute fragile states under DfID’s definition; similarly, countries in conflict but which are nonetheless providing an acceptable level of service entitlements to the majority of the population would not constitute fragile states under DfID’s definition (Stewart and Brown 2005: 2). The definition which the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) employs, is similar but goes beyond a government’s failure to provide comprehensive services and includes the protection of the population’s human rights and security: ‘States are fragile when state tructures lack political will and/or capacity to provide the basic functions needed for poverty reduction, development and to safeguard the security and human rights of their populations’ (Stewart Brown 2010: 9). Finally, for the World Bank ‘fragile states’ refers to â€Å"countries facing particu larly severe development challenges: weak institutional capacity, poor governance, and political instability. Often these countries experience ongoing violence as the residue of past severe conflict. Ongoing armed conflicts affect three out of four fragile states† (World Bank 2011). From this brief review, we can see that there are considerable areas of overlap in the current use of the term ‘fragile states’ within the development community, but also differences of breadth and emphasis. Here, in this paper, fragile states are to be defined as states that are failing, or at risk of failing, with respect to authority, comprehensive basic service provision, or legitimacy. Authority failures are cases where the state lacks the authority to protect its citizens from violence of various kinds; service failures are cases where the state fails to ensure that all citizens have access to basic services; legitimacy failures occur where the state lacks legitimacy (Stewart Brown 2010: 10). 2. Demographic dilemmas One of the features that distinguish Lebanon in the region is its social composition, a spectrum of different religious minorities. (Fawaz 2009: 25). A large majority of the 4. million Lebanese belong to one of three main sects—Sunni Muslims, Shi’a Muslims, and Maronite Christians—with Greek Orthodox, Druze, and over a dozen other groups comprising the rest (Farha 2009: 83). Demographic and political representations never fully overlapped in the course of Lebanon’s history (Farha 2009: 83). Recurrent phases of incongruity between demographic and political balances of power have been a major driving force in all cycles of co nflict (Farha 2009: 83). â€Å"Lebanon’s modern history has been punctuated by periodic outbreaks of fratricidal violence, followed by political compromises that recalibrated the istribution of power and privilege among the major confessional communities† (Farha 2009:83). Let’s have a closer look at the demographics of Lebanon. In Lebanon we find higher Muslims birthrates (Farha 2009: 87). Fertility favors the Shi’a of Lebanon in particular and the Muslims in general (Raphaeli 2009: 110). However, a projection based on fertility rates, ignores the lower infant and child mortality rates among Christians, which have counterbalanced higher Muslim birthrates to some extent (Farha 2009: 87). Some doubt should always be cast on the accuracy of projected estimates with regard to the precise size of the resident population as the last census took place in 1932. Different actors present different numbers for different political reasons (Farha 2009). Emigration is a big issue; there are more Lebanese living abroad than Lebanese-born living inside the country. A disproportionately high rate of Christian emigration took place from the mid-nineteenth- through the twentieth century, particularly during and after eruptions of civil strife in 1860, 1914–1918, and 1975–1990 (Farha 2009: 86). Over 900,000 Lebanese emigrated between the outbreak of civil war in 1975 and 2001† (Farha 2009: 86). By 2006, the size of the Christian community was reduced to 30 percent of the total Lebanese population (Raphaeli 2009: 110). However it is said that these recent immigrants were not only Christians, but also Muslims (Farha 2009: 86). It is debated whether the Christian Leban ese people worldwide outnumber the Muslim Lebanese. Against the notion that descendants of Lebanese Christians comprise the overwhelming majority of the Lebanese in the diaspora, Farha (2009: 86) argues that emigration is equally sought By Muslims and Christians. Moreover, a 2006 study conducted by the Lebanese Emigration Research Center at NDU found that the percentage departure rates within each confession were almost equal (Farha 2009: 86). This is politically relevant as MP Nimtallah Abi Nasr hopes to expand the prospective pool of expatriate Christian voters with his campaign for a (re)naturalization of second and third-generation Lebanese abroad (Farha 2009: 87). Also â€Å"Hezbollah has actively encouraged first-generation Shi’a emigrants to register their children as citizens for much the same reason (Farha 2009: 87)†. Lebanon’s current power sharing covenant is far out of step with demographic realities (Farha 2009: 88). â€Å"Even the most conservative statistical conjectures leave Lebanese Muslims significantly underrepresented in the parliament and the council of ministers, an incongruity that will grow in the years ahead† (Farha 2009: 88). A revision of the 1989 Ta’if agreement, which was the basis for ending the decades-long Lebanese civil war, and in which the Christians gave up their majority whereby granting Muslims a true partnership in the political process, has been discussed though. However, up till now we see that the Ta’if agreement is being preserved not amended. Amending the Ta’if will not serve the interests of the Christians considering the population-increase of non-Christians. In view of the growing disequilibrium between demographic and political representation in Lebanon, a recalibration of the Ta’if power-sharing formula along the lines of a tripartite division of power (muthalatha) among Christians, Sunnis, and Shi’a is all but inevitable in the coming years (Farha 2009: 90). While a tripartite division of power may not correspond precisely with Lebanon’s demographic balance, it is the closest possible approximation in the absence of a census and the only recalibration formula that could conceivably win the support of all three (Farha 2009: 90). â€Å"So long as no one sect compromises a demographic majority few Lebanese would feel themselves egregiously underrepresented by a tripartite division of power† (Farha 2009: 90). However, while proposals to this effect have circulated for over two decades a sweeping revision of the Constitution is highly unlikely in the short term (Farha 2009: 90). â€Å"Indeed, the main leaders of both March 14 and the opposition have explicitly rejected Sunni-Shi’a-Christian tripartism as an alternative to Muslim-Christian parity—a position that perhaps has less to do with innate preferences than with the political exigencies of appealing to a deeply divided and anxious Christian community† (Farha 2009: 90). Ideally, Lebanon should of course be reconfigured on a non-confessional basis. A political system is needed which is not based on the (numerical) strength of religious communities. â€Å"Although, deconfessionalization may be a better cure for Lebanon’s ailments in principle, in practice those who hold positions of power under the sectarian system are not likely to promulgate its abrogation† (Farha 2009: 90) . 3. The dilemmas of the Lebanese political system and state 3. The state â€Å"In Lebanon there is controversy over the nature of the state, as well as over national identity† (El-Khazer 2004: 6). There is a problem of defining the boundaries of the state and, more important, of the nation (El-Khazen 2004: 6). Lebanon is a multi-communal state which raises the question of legitimacy, and, by extension, the effectiveness of the political system in situations of crisis (El-Khazen 2004: 6). We see loyalties transcending state boundaries. El-Khazen (2004: 8) argues that several, interpretations explaining the weakness of the Lebanese state, and later the causes of its collapse in the mid-1970s such as the growing imbalance between loads and capabilities on the political system, the divisive forces inherent in Lebanon’s political system, increasing socio-economic inequalities along sectarian, class and regional lines or government inefficiency, nepotism and corruption, are of limited explanatory value, as none of these problems where unique to Lebanon. While Lebanon shares broad characteristic with other heterogeneous societies, it has particular features of its own† (El-Khazen 2004: 32). First Lebanon has a large number of communities that are politically active, some of whom have distinctly communal agenda’s; second, in Lebanon there is no numerically dominant group which constitutes 60 or 70 percent of the total population (furthermore, the differences in the size of the three major groups are relatively small, which limits political significance); third is the changing demographic balance in Lebanon; fourth, communal transformations in Lebanon have not reached a significant degree of maturity, moreover, in Lebanon communal development has been in constant flux and disputes have changed partly because of internal politics and partly because of the unstable regional situation which has deeply affected Lebanon; fifth, what sets Lebanon apart from other divided societies is the regional order with which it has had to interact, the Middle East in one of the most unstable regional orders in the post-Second World War international system (El-Khazen 2004: 32). Where Lebanon’s problems ultimately differ according to El-Khazen (2004: 10) is in the nature and scope of externally-generated problems originating mainly from its regional order – specifically the Arab state system and post-1967 PLO. â€Å"Lebanon’s confessional political system (†¦) functioned relatively well for over three decades. It collapsed when it was subjected to pressure, particularly externally-generated pressure, which the system could not contain while preserving its open character and the plural nature of society† (El-Kahzen 2004:32). El-Khazen (2004: 6) suggests three phases which characterize the breakdown of the state in Lebanon: first the erosion and eventual loss of power; second, the political paralysis and power vacuum; third, the collapse of state institutions and the eruption of violence. 3. 2 The political system Ever since it attained independence from the French in 1943, Lebanon’s political system has been based on the National Charter (al-mithaq al-watani)—an unwritten but enforced pact that recognizes the division of the country into religious communities (Raphaeli 2009: 110). According to the 1943 National Pact between sectarian leaders, the president would be a Maronite; the prime minister a Sunni; and the parliamentary speaker a Shi’a (Harris 2009: 16). The charter’s distribution of power among the various religious communities reflects the fact that in the 1940s, Christians represented 60 percent of the population and the various Muslim communities occupied the remaining 40 percent (Raphaeli 2009: 110). This was adjusted to an even split in 1989. Unstable multisectarian factions rather than ideological parties have dominated the legislature (Harris 2009: 17). The Lebanese political system has some positives to it. First, Lebanon is one of the very few Middle Eastern countries where the government arises from parliament (Harris 2009: 17). Second, the Lebanese system has been the political framework for a dynamic public pluralism unheard of anywhere else in the Arab world (Harris 2009: 17). Even the intimidation from 1990 to 2005 by the Damascus-directed security apparatus did not destroy a freewheeling civil society and an assertive media (Harris 2009: 17). Third, the reemergence of â€Å"confessional democracy† in May 2005, with Syria’s enforced military withdrawal and the first free elections since 1972, produced a parliamentary balance close to the probable numerical weight of major political forces (Harris 2009: 17). Still, Lebanon’s political system has many deficiencies. Between 1975 and 2005, it effectively ceased to function, with 15 years of violent breakdown followed by 15 years of manipulative Syrian hegemony—a hegemony approved by the West until about 2000 (Harris 2009: 17). Even when operating, the system has never reconciled representation of communities with representation of individual citizens (Harris 2009: 17). Parliamentary deputies are elected under sectarian labels at the same time as they are constitutionally bound to act for the citizenry regardless of sect (Harris 2009: 17). The allocation of parliamentary seats has become out of line with the numerical weighting of the communities (Harris 2009: 17). Only an internationally supervised census, which no one wants, can resolve the issue (Harris 2009: 17). Every community has its demographic mythology, which they do not want punctured (Harris 2009: 17). The Shi’a community has increased from one-fifth of the population in 1932 to probably around one-third today. Even under the 1989 adjustment, it gets 27 seats out of 128 when it should have at least 40 (Harris 2009: 17). 4. Regionally powered dilemmas â€Å"The external connections of Lebanon’s communal blocs involve antagonists in Middle Eastern disputes† (Harris 2009: 10). The Maronite Catholics have longstanding relations with the west; Lebanon’s Shi’a provided religious scholars who assisted the conversion of Iranians to Twelver Shi’ism in the sixteenth century, Lebanese Sunni affinities is more with Saudi-Arabia (Harris 2009: 10). The extension of Lebanon’s differences reach[es] into the divide between Sunni Arab states and Shi’a Iran and into the standoff between the United States, France, and Saudi Arabia on one hand and Syria and Iran on the other. â€Å"In this sense, Lebanon really is the cockpit of the Middle East† (Harris 2009: 10). As we shall see it is in Syrian, Israeli and Iran’s interest to see a high degree of conflict. 4. 1 Syria Due to its geography and history, Lebanon always has to deal with Syria, whose regime had always considered it as an ‘illegitimate political entity’ that has to be dominated. According to Harris (2009: 1) â€Å"Lebanon is therefore the target of all the ambitions and phobias of the Syrian dictatorship, which cannot function as an Arab power without commanding the Lebanese†. Lebanon’s multicommunal history makes for problems of coherence in modern Lebanese politics. â€Å"Communal suspicion—today principally on a Sunni-Shi’a fault line—produces paralysis that saps Lebanon’s viability and pluralist foundations. This is fine for a Syrian Ba’thist regime that denies there is anything significant about the Lebanese and their history, despises pluralism, and regards restored command of Lebanon as vital to its own viability as the â€Å"beating heart† of Arabism† (Harris 2009: 20). Syria and its Lebanese allies paralyzed the Lebanese state, declaring the government illegitimate, refusing to allow parliament to meet, and blocking the election of a Lebanese president after Emile Lahoud finally left off ice in November 2007. Syrian military intelligence manipulated so-called al-Qa’ida elements in a Palestinian refugee camp in northern Lebanon—the Fath al-Islam group—to destabilize Lebanon, debilitate its army, and disrupt Lebanon’s Sunni community† (Harris 2009: 19). â€Å"The problem is that the Syrian ruling clique will not leave Lebanon alone. It is determined on reassertion through its allies, and its victory will be the end of any decent Lebanon. Lebanese pluralism cannot coexist with Bashar al-Asad’s regime† (Harris 2009: 22). The 2005 murder of Rafik Hariri started a period of exceptional domestic political turbulence and regional tensions, it led to institutional paralysis (ICG 2010: i). Initially experts accused Damascus. It is assumed that it is part of a Syrian plot to destabilize the country. Officially no one knows who carried out the attack and who was behind it. What can be said is that the assassination of Hariri opened doors for many political actors to get into the Lebanese and Arab political scene. 4. 2 Israel â€Å"Throughout the relatively short history of their existence as modern states, Israel’s and Lebanon’s mutual border has proven to be largely disadvantageous to both countries† (Spyer 2009: 195). For Lebanon, Israel’s establishment was the primary cause for the eventual arrival of the Palestinian national movement to within its borders in 1970 (Spyer 2009: 195). This, in turn, was a key factor in precipitating the country’s ruinous civil war, the Israel-PLO war on Lebanese soil in 1982, the partial collapse of Lebanese sovereignty after the Syrian entry in 1990, and the partial Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon until 2000 (Spyer 2009: 195). The series of events that would lead to Israel’s involvement in Lebanon began with the Palestinian national movement in Lebanon. (Spyer 2009: 198). â€Å"Beirut became the international center of focus for the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the place of residence of its senior leadership† (Spyer 2009: 198). As a result, Lebanon became one of the theatres in which the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians would be played out (Spyer 2009:198). Civil order broke down in Lebanon in 1975, in a civil war in which the Palestinians played a central role. Contacts between Israel and prominent Lebanese Maronite politicians had been developing since the mid-1970s against the background of the breakdown of civil order in Lebanon and the central role of the PLO in the Muslim/ leftist coalition against which the Maronites were fighting (Spyer 2009: 199). Over time, Bashir Gemayel, most prominent among anti- Syrian Maronite leaders at the time, became the main Maronite contact for the Israelis (Spyer 2009: 199). Throughout, Bashir’s purpose was to encourage Israel to intervene against the Syrian garrison forces in Lebanon† (Spyer 2009: 199). The 1982 Lebanon War was very much the brainchild of Menachem Begin, the Israeli prime minister from 1977 till 1983 and Ariel Sharon the Israeli Minister of Defense during the war (Spyer 2009: 202). An anti-Gemayel, anti-Israel, anti-U. S. , and pro-Syrian alignment was now emerging as the key political force in the country (Spyer 2009: 203). A number of inflammatory incidents deriving from Israel’s ignorance of the sensibilities of Shi’a Muslims contributed to the deterioration of the situation (Spyer 2009: 203). In 1985 Israeli forces occupied a strip of territory in southern Lebanon. A â€Å"security zone† close to the Israeli border, which was maintained in cooperation with the SLA (Spyer 2009: 204). Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the security zone took place in 2000, thus ending the 18-year period of Israeli military involvement on Lebanese soil (Spyer 2009: 205). The Second Lebanon War which began on July 12, 2006 was one between Hezbollah and Israel. Resolution 1701, which ended the fighting, changed the situation in southern Lebanon to Israel’s advantage, in that it ended the de facto Hezbollah domination of the southern border area that had pertained since the unilateral Israeli withdrawal in May 2000 (Spyer 2009: 208). Israel currently has no dealings with any of the major political actors within Lebanon. However, while large-scale Israeli adventures to make alliance with political forces within Lebanon are part of the past, the weakness of the Lebanese state and central authority remain very much part of the present. One of the results of this weakness, which is itself a product of the country’s divided sectarian makeup, is its vulnerability to outside penetration, and therefore its oft-repeated, luckless fate as the launching ground for attacks by various forces (the PLO, Syria, now Iran and Hizballah) against Israel, its southern neighbor. This fact remains the core reality behind Israel’s relations with Lebanon. It is unlikely that the final word in this story has been written. 4. 3 Iran Lebanon’s Shi’a community resides in the heart of the largely Sunni Arab world and on the frontline with Israel; therefore, Lebanon’s Shi’a are of double interest to their coreligionists in revolutionary Shi’a Iran† (Harris 2009: 10). â€Å"H ezbollah was and remains a militant Khomeinist Islamist movement that adheres to Khomeini’s doctrine of velayet-e-faqih, rule by a cleric in an Islamist state. Its ties to Iran are organic, multifaceted, and complex† (Badran 2009: 47). In order to understand Hezbollah’s origins properly, one must remember that the major force pushing for its establishment was the Islamic regime in Iran, as it worked to unite the Shi’a factions and forces operating in Lebanon (Zisser 2009: 158). Iran wanted everyone to work together under the Hezbollah framework (Zisser 2009: 158). The crisis situation that developed from the early 1970s onward became the breeding ground for a process of religious radicalization (Zisser 2009: 158). In these circumstances, Musa al-Sadr, a religious figure of Iranian origin, appeared and gained a position of great influence and power in the Shi’a community (Zisser 2009: 158). Hezbollah’s dilemma has to do with its identity, which contains a tension built into its very origins and being (Zisser 2009: 156). How is this tension—between the organization’s Lebanese-Shi’a identity on the one hand and its Islamic-revolutionary identity, its commitments to Iran, and its conception of the holy jihad on the other—to be resolved? The balance ow seems to be turning in favor of the Islamic-revolutionary identity, which also means turning in favor of Tehran (Zisser 2009: 156). There is no doubt that the war and its aftermath revealed as never before, and against the desire and interests of Hezbollah, t he fact that the organization is the handiwork of Tehran, if not simply its instrument. Hezbollah has also been exposed as an organization dedicated to and active in achieving radical and far-reaching aims (Zisser 2009: 156-157). Its aim in the short term is to gain dominance over Lebanon and in the long term to turn that country into a Shi’a-dominated state ruled by Islamic law and closely linked to Iran (Zisser 2009: 157). From the mid- 1980s the organization began (with generous Iranian help) to establish a network of social and welfare services that would draw the support of the Shi’a community and provide it with an alternative to the services provided by the Lebanese state, or, to be more precise, to the benefits and aid the state should have provided for this population and did not (Zisser 2009: 159). With the build-up of this social infrastructure, the movement contributed to undermining the position of the Lebanese government. By the end of the 1980s the Iranian-sponsored Hezbollah grew in popularity as a force combining opposition to Israeli occupation with a wider Shi’a Islamist ideology implacably opposed to Israel’s existence and to the West (Sper 2009: 204). Hezbollah’s advance to the international boundary in southern Lebanon made it even more useful to its Iranian and Syrian patrons as a deterrent force in case of threats from Israel or the United States. It seemed to have it within its power to take over Lebanon—or at least those parts of the country inhabited by Shi’a—and to establish an Islamic order there on the Iranian model (Harris 2009: 71). As a result of the Iranian-Syrian agreement after the Ta’if Accord ended the Lebanese war, Hezbollah was the only militia to be excluded from handing over its weapons under the pretext that it was a â€Å"resistance movement† fighting Israeli occupation rather than a militia (Badran 2009: 47). This was a big mistake as it induces fragility. Since the Israeli withdrawal in 2000 and more so after the Syrian withdrawal in 2005, the fate of Hezbollah’s armed status (which has grown massively and developed doctrinally, ironically, after the Israeli withdrawal) is the central issue in Lebanon today (Badran 2009: 47). Hezbollah had presented itself as the â€Å"defender of Lebanon† but proved to be its ruination since it brought so much destruction down upon the heads of its people (Zisser 2009: 166). After the 2006 war Hezbollah had difficulty maintaining the ambiguity about its identity (Zisser 2009: 166). In particular, the contrasts and contradictions between the organization’s Lebanese identity and its loyalty to Iran, on the one hand, and its Islamic-revolutionary identity with its commitments to Iran, on the other, were exposed (Zisser 2009: 173). Hezbollah had tried to bridge or obscure these troublesome conflicting elements over the years (Zisser 2009: 173). Yet in the moment of truth it became clear that it was not prepared to renounce its partially hidden agenda—that is, its loyalty to Iran and the ideas of radical Islam and jihad (Zisser 2009: 173). Hezbollah was now perceived more and more as a Shi’a organization serving the interests of Iran, as well as being an organization sinking deeper and deeper into the quicksand of Lebanese politics (Zisser 2009: 166). It dragged Lebanon into a bloody battle with Israel, whose price was paid, first and foremost, by the Shi’a of Lebanon but also by many other Lebanese from other ethnic communities (Zisser 2009: 173). It seems that the organization, inspired and helped by Iran, its ally and patron, is more committed than ever to continue the long and unremitting struggle it began when it was first established in the early 1980s, with the ultimate aim of taking power in Lebanon (Zisser 2009: 174). The possibility that Hezbollah might succeed in its mission has become more realistic, thanks to the demographic processes taking place in Lebanon. Hezbollah is therefore a major destabilizing factor (Zisser 2009: 175). 5. Lebanon: a conflict-affected fragile state When Lebanon gained independence in 1941, the country found itself at a loss without the French hierarchy to maintain internal control and order. A new class of political elites, with little experience, was forced to discover ways to deal with the diversity of Lebanese society. It was with this in mind that the National Pact of 1943 was crafted. The Pact was based on the census of 1932, and sought to address divisions among the Lebanese, but in the end, it would only serve to deepen them. In the years after the Arab-Israeli War, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict landed on Lebanon’s doorstep with the arrival of Palestinian commandos. Many Palestinian refugees, as well as militants, settled in camps in southern Lebanon, the legacy of which continues to influence Lebanese society. The migration of Shi’a to the capital, which was triggered by Israeli raids, heightened the already volatile mix of interests within the Lebanese political sphere. Ignored throughout the mandate years, the introduction of the confessional system saw the Shi’a fight for an equal voice alongside the Sunnis, Druze, and Maronites. As Lebanese society became increasingly divided, individual sectarian groups began to arm themselves militarily through their own militia organizations. Today, these militias still play a key role within the Lebanese security sphere. Ultimately, the Palestinian presence within Lebanon acted as a trigger to the outbreak of civil war among all Lebanese factions. Although Palestinian militants were the original cause of the war, it was sectarian interest and division that sustained the conflict well into the following decade. The ceasefire agreement reached by Syria and the PLO in 1976 sealed Syrian dominance within Lebanon and has had a lasting impact on the country well into the early 2000s. Nonetheless, the agreement did little to improve sectarian division and militia violence on the ground. The decades following the 1982 Israeli War continued to be marred by sectarian conflict and an international tug of war for Lebanon. Tensions along the Lebanese-Israeli border have continued well into the present day, in light of suspicions that Hezbollah is rearming for any future conflict. Ultimately, the greatest consequence of the summer war can be understood in terms of power within Lebanon. Indeed, the summer 2006 war marked the advent of power for Hezbollah, both within Lebanon and throughout the region. Considering it is a non-state actor, and that Lebanese President Fouad Siniora was in power, Hezbollah acted with state authority. This conflict reopened old wounds within Lebanese society, seeing as Hezbollah feels vindicated by the 2006 conflict and now seeks full recognition of its power. Moreover, state fragility is further deepened in a context where conflict has led to the intervention of external actors, each of whom have chosen sides in a dispute whose political and strategic consequences extend well beyond Lebanon. The current dynamics of fragile state security in Lebanon are not being dictated by Lebanese interests, but rather by the broader external policy aims of foreign parties such as Syria, Israel, and Iran. This situation is particularly problematic for the prospects of long-term and lasting stability within Lebanon. Although sectarian politics have been an influential reality since Lebanon became a fully independent state in 1941, they have taken on a new shape in an environment defined by the post 9/11 context and by three main evolutions, namely the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese President Rafik Hariri, the 2005 withdrawal of Syrian military forces, and Hezbollah’s rise to power in Lebanon. Conclusion The central question throughout this paper has been whether Lebanon is a fragile state or not. The precarious political order of Lebanon has illustrated the distinctiveness of the country. Although colonial rule is not unique to the Lebanon, its colonial past, combined with the evolution of politics, economics, and society in the region, as well as the role played by external actors, molds a very specific set of circumstances vis-a-vis state security that translates into an expression of fragile state security very specific to the region. The Lebanese State has always been weak. Politicians have generally sought to serve interests of their constituencies instead of the national interest. This factor has its roots in the National Pact that limited the authority of the state to maximize the autonomy of sectarian groups. As a result, Lebanese citizens feel loyalty towards their community instead of towards the country. Lebanon’s political system erodes the authority of the state by fuelling clientelism. Foreign protection of or influence on each community further undermines this authority. Moreover, Lebanon’s political system makes the state vulnerable to any stifled sense of frustration or injustice or dispossession felt by any community. Consequently, patronage networks swiftly re-emerged. In all, Lebanon’s political system is based upon the principle that the State should interfere in society as little as possible. The resulting weakness of state institutions has made Lebanon vulnerable to infringements of its domestic, interdependence and sovereignty. The rise of Hezbollah has made this clear. In section 1, fragile states were defined as states that are failing, or at risk of failing, with respect to authority, comprehensive basic service provision, or legitimacy. In conclusion, in this sense, Lebanon â€Å"passed† on all three domains. Lebanon fails to protect its citizens as there is significant organized political violence; civil war’s. Also there is periodic political or communal violence causing deaths and destruction. Although the authority of the state is being undermined, it does not go as far as to say that the state authority (at present) does not extend to a significant proportion of the country. Hezbollah made sure to illustrate the inadequate delivery of services by the state. Also, in Lebanon the question of legitimacy is raised, inherent in being a multi-communal state. â€Å"Lebanon, from all observable indicators, embodies the phenomenon of schism in the political and cultural realms (†¦) it is a society without foundation, fragile, divided, disjointed and torn† (Dr. Khalaf, cited in Raphaeli 2009: 109). Bibliography – Badran, T. (2009) ‘Lebanon’s militia wars’, in: Rubin (ed), Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 35-62. – DfID (2005) Why we need to work more effectively in fragile states . Department for International Development. – El-Khazen, F. (2000) The breakdown of the state in Lebanon, 1967-76. London : I. B. Tauris Co Ltd – Farha, M. (2009) ‘Demographic Dilemma’s’, in: B. Rubin (ed), Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 83-99. – Foreign Policy (2011a) FAQ Methodology, Foreign policy. Online at: http://www. foreignpolicy. om/articles/2009/06/22/2009_failed_states_index_faq_methodology(retrieved 28 February 2011). – Foreign Policy (2011b) The Failed States Index 2010, Foreign policy. Online at: http://www. foreignpolicy. com/articles/2010/06/21/2010_failed_states_index_interactive_map_and_ rankings (retrieved 28 February 2011). – Harris, W. (2009) ‘Lebanon’s Roller Coaster Ride’, in: B. Rubin (ed), Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 63-82. – ICG (2010) Lebanon’s Politics: The Sunni Community and Hariri’s Future Current, Middle East Report, N °96. – Iqbal, Z. and H. Starr (2007) State Failure: Conceptualization and Determinants. Working paper, University of South How to cite Is Lebanon a Fragile State?, Essay examples

Analysis Of Mark Strands Keeping Things Whole Essay Example For Students

Analysis Of Mark Strands Keeping Things Whole Essay Although its not a lengthy poem, the few words and their layout in Keeping Things Whole certainly possess great significance. This poem is centered on the idea that the narrators life is lacking purpose. In exploring the meaning of his existence, he determined that his reason for living was to keep moving so that peoples lives were only temporarily interrupted. Strands technique of splitting up his sentences helps emphasize certain phrases and ideas. When I read poetry I naturally pause for a brief second at the end of each line to allow the words to sink in, therefore taking an extra moment to realize what the author is saying. With each line in this poem only a few words long, there is a higher pause-to-word ratio, which allows for more thought for each idea the first time you read through it. Strand splits up the sentences in places where he is trying to convey more meaning, with the hope that the reader will pause and contemplate what was just read. His stanzas are concluded when he wants more attention placed on his current idea. The narrators viewpoint towards life in this poem is quite different from how most people see it. Where he writes, In a field / I am the absence / of field. ll. 1-3 instead of acknowledging his existence as something, he regards it as a lack of something. This negativity towards himself is what the entire poem is focused on. He uses the idea that when his body enters an area the parts of that area are momentarily interrupted and are forced around him, just waiting to return back to normal once he leaves: When I walk / I part the air / and always / the air moves in / to fill the spaces / where my bodys been. ll. 8-13 The air in that line symbolizes the existence of other people around him, and the narrator sees himself as a nuisance to those people, always being in the way. He is saying that whenever he enters into a location with a bunch of people, those people see him as a bother and simply as something that they must put up with for a little while. They cant wait for the narrator to leave so that they dont have to put up with him anymore and can therefore return to what they were doing. The last stanza explains the narrators reason for moving, or in other words living: I move / to keep things whole. ll. 16 17 He understands that he must keep moving and going on with his life even though he is interrupting the existence and paths of others. When I read those last two lines I felt a sense of saddened acceptance of life in the narrators speech. Since he concluded that his existence was unnecessary and bothersome, the only way he can continue in his monotonous life is by continually moving around, so that he disturbs everyones lives equally  and doesnt become too much of a bother in one place. With that mindset, the narrator believes that his absence is what keeps things whole.

Shooting an Elephant Imperialism. Symbolism in George Orwells Story Essay

Introduction â€Å"Shooting the elephant† is a story that explores the description of an imaginary encounter of an Englishman working in the Colonial police force in Burma. The story describes an experience with an uncontrollable and deterministic elephant. The narrator shows that he did not want to shoot the elephant but he had to do it by the will of the submissive Burmese people to bring about redemption of the people.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Shooting an Elephant Imperialism. Symbolism in George Orwell’s Story Essay specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The study gives the breakdown of colonial nations as applied by the actors in the colonised regions. The officer describes his breakdown by expressing the mockery received for the authority. The story captures the violent reality of colonialism as the narrator unfolds the events of the actual shooting and the description of the slow an d painful death of the elephant that seemed peaceful in hands of a colonial officer. The above study argues that George Orwell’s â€Å"Shooting an elephant† story represents a symbol of imperialism. Discussion The story of shooting the elephant begins with a thoughtful introduction of the actions where the narrator, Orwell, describes the difficulty of being a colonial police officer, especially, in the middle of the twentieth century in British Burma; where many people hated him. Orwell shows how the anti-Europeans were bitter to an extent of spitting on the European women as they crossed over to the market. The sub divisional police officers would now raise more alarm as the Burmese could yell with revolting laughter. Orwell therefore understood the hatred and thought was justified, though he admits that he would be happy if he could run through his oppressors. Johnston (375) puts that the event of shooting the elephant begins with a phone call that Orwell received ab out an elephant ravaging the bazaar. As a police officer and his hunting rifle, he followed the elephant to the village where the Buddhist priests had much hatred and were so many in the streets idle and jeering Europeans. Runciman (182-183) shows that George Orwell’s book â€Å"Shooting an elephant† reflects the author as a socially conscious individual. He also says that the book served as a supplement in the days of the Burmese. Orwell shows his experience as a colonial official to both India and Burma, which were regions in the British Empire (Runciman 82-183). This study involves a colonial officer obligated to shoot a rogue elephant by the crowd from the indigenous residents for not wanting to seem a coward in the eyes of the huge crowd. Orwell describes the event of shooting the elephant and compares it to the hostility reigning between the British Empire and the administrators, as well as the natives. In this situation, both parties have much hatred, mistrust, resentment and degrade one another and therefore the shooting represents a huge suffering expressed economically (Runciman 82-183). â€Å"Shooting an Elephant† has created much criticism in the British literature, and especially in the political environment of modern criticism. This is because it has generated a debate on whether Orwell was legally right to condemn imperialism. Critics show insufficient condemnation and that the narrator is an agent of the British Empire who denounces the presence of the British who were corrupting their regions.Advertising Looking for research paper on british literature? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More To begin with, it is important to analyse the historical background of the colonisation of Burma and describe the people of Burma. It is also necessary to provide the biography and bibliographical experience of George Orwell. This is because the author focuses on the relationship betwee n the natives and the government. The breakdown of colonial rhetoric linking theory and practice shapes some of the phrases used by Orwell, for example, Orwell used the sea of yellow faces to display the idea of racism from the colonising people. The author also looks at the Burmese villagers as the same people with no distinct characteristics. He describes the unplanned scattering of their houses and the palm-leaf thatched huts, marking them with yellow color create the difference between the white man’s power and the Burmese. This also describes poverty and foulness within the neighborhood. On the other hand, the narrator is afraid of the Burmese and their forces and he describes them as a sea of people. The officer also offers the people presence and much more force than his. He also realises that he is one person among a â€Å"sea† of many others. The colonial officer notices that though he is legally powerful and has a rifle, the events of the day remain dictated by the people behind him who would see him as a fool if he did not shoot the elephant in spite of having the weapon amidst many helpless Burmese. The author also uses words such as magical, conjurer and absurd puppet to show he is against the British colonial powers. The words take the fear of the colonised people that the British people criticise. Orwell uses un-scientific words when describing the event. The use of diction displays a corrupt British influence to the colonized people and reflects the degradation of the style of the colonising powers. This study therefore shows the moving symbol of the colonial experience. The view of British imperialism is more reflected where the colonial officer shows that he is against the oppressors and their evil deeds. Though he is a British officer and has much authority among the Burmese people, he has some build up hatred and remorse towards himself and his empire, as well as to the Burma people whom he refers to as evil spirited little be asts. The essay therefore does not only show the personal experience with the elephant, but also uses metaphors to show the experience with the imperialism and his views towards the colonial rule.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Shooting an Elephant Imperialism. Symbolism in George Orwell’s Story Essay specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Orwell expresses hostile feelings towards the imperialism, British justification for taking over the powers of the Burma people and the entire British Empire. Orwell has set the mood of the essay by illustrating the climate to be cloudy and stuffy morning at the beginning of the rain. This shows that Orwell has established that his character is weak and discomforting especially by describing how the Burma people laughed and mocked him. According to Adas Peter (54-58) imperialism has been a cause for the poor relationship between the Burma people and police officers . The breakdown brings the beliefs of imperialism in practical application. This is shown by how the British came to power and the history of the Burma and how the society had been exploited. Orwell gives his experience in Burma and the story shows the mood and feeling of a person experiencing British imperial break down. Orwell realised that though he is the authority in the region, the Burmese people had control over his actions. This shows that there was a poor relationship between the coloniser and the colonised. The officer describes his nature of authority as derived from the people as opposed to self-designed force. He states that he stood with a rifle in his hands and thought of the hollowness and ineffectiveness of the power of the white man in the East. With much power between citizens and political leaders in England over the Burmese people, the people using the authority had also recognised the poor relationship between the colonised and the colonisers. It is therefore c lear that the buildup of the story of finding the elephant serves a metaphoric force to illuminate on the imperialist powers that usurps the rights of the people. The narrator shows that the elephant’s rampaging destroyed homes, food shelves and worse of all, it killed a man described as having an unbearable agony on his face. Upon finding the elephant, the narrator also describes that he knew for sure that he had no right to shoot him. This shows that as a colonial officer, he ought not to kill his ruling government but support it (Barbara 46). The narrator also says that when he laid his eyes on the huge mass of Burmese behind him, he changed his attitude towards shooting the elephant. He continually says that he did not want to shoot the elephant and this explains that the narrator understands the guilt of shooting an elephant that seemed so peaceful from a distance. The narrator also gives various reasons why he did not want to shoot the elephant, for example, he states t hat an elephant was worth more alive than it dead. He also states that he is bad at shooting, and he would not want to miss the target, as he never wanted the crowd to laugh at him and make him seem defeated. This shows that the colonial police officer fell to the expectations of the Burmese. He went against his will and moral belief and decided to shoot (Barbara 46). This describes how the British people would never want to seem less powerful than the natives as the colonisers in the story did. The death of the elephant metaphorically represents the British Imperialism in Burma. This is because before the British expansion came to Burma, it was a free kingdom and the Burmese and the British oppressors fought three wars. Barbara (2006) describes that the first was the Anglo-Burmese War fought in 1824 and the other was in 1852. The third war was in 1855 where the British took over Burma.Advertising Looking for research paper on british literature? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Orwell states that he did not hear the bang or kick of the first trigger, and he had to fire again at the same spot between the ears where it was easier to kill the elephant. The third firing illustrates the final shot to the elephant, as it showed the agony that jolted its whole body. The elephant knocked its last strength from his legs. The three wars therefore represented the three shots. Hobson (2005) puts it that the elephant represented Burma and its unyielding struggle to remain powerful over the colonisers (5-7). This can be compared to how the elephant had tried to remain alive after the third shot. By staying down after the third shot, the elephant is still alive, just like the Burmese people who were still there, powerless and helpless once the three wars. Orwell (1936) explains that the Burmese are now under the control of the British, and the death of the elephant is a metaphor showing the British rule and how it has declined against Burmese as some went away and others died (67). Orwell reflects guilt by stating that seeing the elephant lying so powerless on the ground unable to move and yet powerless to die. The narrator shows that he is guilty being a colonial police officer who fought in the war against Burma. Beissinger (294-303) shows that Britons were also doubtful of their right to rule others in their territory. This mounted much hatred and resentment from the Burmese. By killing the elephant, Orwell justifies himself for having the right to shoot and that it was legal. He justifies this using the fact that a mad elephant deserves being killed just as a mad dog is once the owner does not control it (Beissinger 299). He also admits being glad for the elephant had killed a villager and legally that justifies a legal act. However, Orwell realises the truth to be false in the wake of the efforts to save the elephant. Orwell uses the metaphors; for example, by comparing himself to a magician and the huge masses of villagers was his audience. H e also compares himself to a lead actor and as an absurd puppet. Orwell states that he represents a posing dummy and that he looked like a person wearing a mask. This is because by holding the rifle, the Burma people expected to see the elephant down. John (2008) describes that though he was a white man and more so, in the authority, it was more expected that he had to kill the elephant. This describes George Orwell’s realisation of the position of the whites in the East and the negative contribution of imperialism. Orwell also realised that once a white man became a tormenter, he destroyed his own freedom. He says that white men should constantly do what the natives expect from them and impress them as they have control over the white man. Orwell completes his role and realises that throughout his rule in Burma, he is the Burmese victim. Conclusion Shooting the elephant is a clear depiction of the imperialist powers that wok to the detriment of the subjects. In his metaphori c epresentations, Orwell manages to demonstrate in clear terms the immense negative images portrayed by the inhibiting powers of the colonial masters. By mentioning himself as an actor in the play, the narrator realised that he had to impress his audience who were people from Burma, and says that by aiming at the elephant’s head, the people behind him felt as if the curtains from the theatre were finally opened for the audience to view the play. These descriptions show his weaker character of submission to the crowd, which defines the order of the day through control of his actions. However, he had to wear a mask and act like a powerful white man. The examples show the double-edged sword of imperialism and its misrepresentation of the people. The personal experience shows a moral dilemma reflecting the evils influenced by the colonial politics and imperialism. Orwell represents an anti-imperialist writer that promotes this through the story of shooting the elephant. This is b ecause, in this case, both the colonisers and the colonised are destroyed at the end. He detests the tethering effects of the colonial Britain and the story shows that the conqueror does not control the situation, but the expectations of the people guide him. Works Cited Adas, Michael. Peter, N. Turbulent passage a global history of the Twentieth Century. New York: Pearson Education, Inc. 2008. Print. Barbara, Bush. Imperialism and Post colonialism, History: Concepts, Theories and Practice, Longmans, 2006. Print. Beissinger, Mark. â€Å"Soviet Empire as Family Resemblance,† Slavic Review 65 (2006): 294-303. Hobson, Atkinson. Imperialism: a study. Cosimo, Inc. New York: 2005. Print. John, Darwin. After Tamerlane: The Rise and Fall of Global Empires, 1400–2000. New York: Penguin Books, 2008. Print. Johnston, Ronald. The Dictionary of Human Geography. eds. New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2000, Print. Orwell, George. â€Å"Shooting an Elephant,†The Literature Network, 1936. Web. http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/887/ Runciman, David. Political Hypocrisy: The Mask of Power, from Hobbes to Orwell and Beyond. New York: Princeton University Press, 2010. Print. This research paper on Shooting an Elephant Imperialism. Symbolism in George Orwell’s Story Essay was written and submitted by user Ryder Mckenzie to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Chinua Achebe Things Fall Apart

Chinua Achebe Things Fall Apart Introduction ‘Things Fall Apart’, is story written by Chinua Achebe in 1958. It talks of the social and cultural aspects of pre-colonial Africa and the effects of western civilizations (Ogbaa xv). The author criticizes imperialism and British colonization.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Chinua Achebe: Things Fall Apart specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More It is a tragic story where the protagonist is Okonkwo. It talks of a man named Okonkwo, who was a wrestler and an influential leader in an African village called Umofia, inhabited by the Igbo ethnic group. He initially amasses fame, and honor in Umofia through victorious wrestling but finally comes to a tragic downfall. Okonkwo was polygamous with three wives and several children. The novel emphasize on the encounters of the pre-colonial Africa and the effect of British colonialism during the 19th century (Bloom 51). This paper shall discuss culture and tr adition as a social issue involved in the Chinua Achebe’s Things fall Apart. Culture and Traditions of Igbo The author emphasize on cultural and social aspects on the brink of change thorough different characters, creating tension on if to embrace change or to remain for status quo. Okonkwo disregard the new system religiously and politically, may be because he would lose his social status. The Igbo however, have been oppressed by these traditions and therefore find refuge in the new system, where once outcasts, are now be recognized. There exists a dilemma on the new dawn that scares them since it could interfere with their social life such as farming and trade. Okonkwo is a rich and respectable African warrior in Umofia. However his late father, Unoka was a lazy man, a coward, disreputable and died with several debts since he concentrated on taking palm-wine, leaving his family to go hungry. Unoka became the laughingstock of Umofia being referred to as Agbala to mean, †˜womanly weaknesses’ Unlike him, Okonkwo is resentful to his father and evades being like him by becoming ‘manly’ as a clansman, a wealthy farmer, and a respectable warrior not to mention him being a controlling family man. This parent-child relationship affects him to become violent, over-ambitious and disrespectful, associating masculinity with aggression and acts irrationally (Bloom 141).Advertising Looking for essay on literature languages? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Okonkwo‘s son, Nwoye is lazy and it disturbs Okonkwo that his son might take after his grandfather, Unoka. This indicates that the villagers believed in passing inheritable aspects to future generations. Moreover, they engage in adoption, for instance the village adopts a young boy called Ikemefuna whom Okonkwo takes guardianship as a surrogate son, for peace offering from the village, Mbaino to maintain peace after t he boy’s father murdered an Umofian woman. He has to live with the boy until further instructions are given to elders from the oracle. The two becomes so close to each other, as the boy regard Okonkwo as a father and Nwoye becomes friends with the boy. Ikemefuna coexist happily with the family for three years, becoming part of them. In another instance, Okonkwo’s kinsmen particularly, Uchendu his uncle, welcomes him and his family in his maternal village called Mbanta after they are sent into exile. He seeks refuge in his motherland as Uchendu states that; It is true that a child belongs to his father. But when the father beats his child, it seeks sympathy in its mothers hut. A man belongs to his fatherland when things are good and life is sweet. But when there is sorrow and bitterness, he finds refuge in his motherland. Your mother is there to protect you. She is buried there. And that is why we say that mother is supreme (Achebe 134). The quote not only emphasizes th e position of women in the village but also the importance of having good family relationships. He is built his huts and given yam seed to plant in his motherland although he is still depressed, blaming chief his spirit for disappointing his greatness in the village. After exile, he had gone back to Umofia after organizing a farewell ceremony to thank his kinsmen for the stay. This emphasizes on the significance of maintaining close family bonds to the Igbo (Bloom 39). Wife beating and carrying out sacrifices are other practices in the village. Okonkwo proves volatile and easily provoked as he beats his youngest wife called Ojiugo during an important period referred to as Week of Peace, accusing her of neglect of the family.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Chinua Achebe: Things Fall Apart specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This interrupts with the peace meant to prevail the whole week but Okonkwo has to sacrifice to p ay up for his sins and to show repentance. Okonkwo also shoots Ekwefi, his second wife due to a small issue of wrapping food with Okonkwo’s banana leaves during Feast of the New Yam. From this practice, the reader is enlightened of the significance of ceremonies and farming in Umofia. It is clear that the Igbo practice farming and trade as depicted where Okonkwo receives cowries from selling yams from Oberika who promise to sell them until he would go back to Umofia. Clansmen preside over public trials in Umofia, where nine clansmen have met to signify the ancestor’s spirits. The nine clansmen also referred to as Egwugwu, signify the nine Umofian clans. Okonkwo is separated from the rest of the clansmen to settle a domestic case where Mgbafo, a woman has suffered assaults from his husband, taken back to her motherland, but the husband needed her to go back. The Egwugwu, advices the man to offer palm wine to his in-laws to appease the wife to return home. This case is t oo trivial to be presented to the Egwugwu as some elders perceive it (Heiser 26). The villagers believe in unnatural phenomenon, which have to be prevented through human sacrifice to appease the gods. When locusts invade the village, the elder informs Okonkwo the Oracle’s guideline, which require killing of Ikemefuna to avenge for Umofian woman murdered in the previous year in Mbaino. He is warned of killing Ikemefuna as it would despise the earth goddess who could show his vengeance to the village. Okonkwo kills Ikemefuna irrespective of being warned by a village elder, Ogbuefu Ezeudu. Following this event, he lie to the boy that he is to be returned to his home village as the entire family mourns his departure. However, the boy is excited to reunite with his family but he is unfortunately attacked by Okonkwo’s clansmen. On seeking help from Okonkwo, he kills the boy to showoff his might to the clansmen irrespective of the Oracle’s caution. Consequently, things start to fall apart. This emphasize on the need to adhere to elders and more so, the religious directives. As Okonkwo becomes greatly saddened, he loses his appetite and spends sleepless nights and decides to visit Obierika who is disappointed with Okonkwo’s act. He is however consoled and is able to find sleep. Bad omens follow consequently, as his daughter becomes ill. As a result, the use of herbal medicine among the Igbo is manifested as Okonkwo prepares some for his daughter, and she recovers after taking the medicine.Advertising Looking for essay on literature languages? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The Igbo are religious as seen through various rituals. Besides, there are priestess e.g. Chielo, who advice the second wife of Okonkwo, Ekwefi that Agbala required the sight of Ezinma, which makes Okonkwo to argue. Chielo present Ezinma to the nine clans and moves inside the cave of the Oracle. Ekwefi has been following in secret despite being warned by Chielo and stands beside the entrance to be surprised by appearance of Okonkwo as they wait together. The following morning Ekwefi is offered Ezinma by Chielo and they sleeps together. Moreover, the Igbo conduct funeral ceremonies where clansmen take the lead. When the elder, Ogbuefu Ezeudu dies his death is announced using ekwe. This depresses Okonkwo more since he failed to adhere to the elder’s advice. During his funeral ceremony, Okonkwo’s gun fatefully shoots at teenage boy, who is Ogbuefu Ezeudu’s son unexpectedly. Since causing death of a village elder is a despicable act for the earth goddess, he is take n hostage in exile for a period of 7 years for atonement. Moreover, his properties are burnt in order to cleanse. Additionally, Enoch, a Christian convert reveals Egwugwu on an occasion meant to adore earth god. This act is so despicable and is compared to putting to death ancestral spirits (Whittaker Msiska 120). The upset of these traditions and cultural practices begins as missionaries and colonialists arrive in the village as tension and dilemma prevails. Okonkwo is informed by Oberika, who visit him in his second year that Abame, which is a neighboring village, was put to destruction by a white man who arrived with a bicycle. After conferring from the oracle, they became aware that the foreigner and his fellows would put into devastation, the clans, which led him to be killed but the villagers. In vengeance, the villagers were killed in mass by the white men. Okonkwo see the villagers as having acted foolishly to murder a stranger. Later, six missionaries arrive in Mbanta led by Kiaga, the interpreter of Mr. Brown who addresses the villagers on Christianity, and whom Okonkwo sees as being cynical. Conversely, Nwoye is converted to become a Christian. Brown points out that the villagers serve a false god and having several gods for worship is idolatry, advocating for Holy Trinity as the supreme deity. The missionaries are offered a land to build the church by the elders whose intention is to kill them all since the land lies within the Evil forest, a cursed land. Unexpectedly, they do not die and villagers maintain that the missionaries have unusual power or magic. This depicts their conservativeness and permittivity in thinking, being led by traditions rather than rational thinking or reason. However, the social outcasts such as women and some men are given a privilege in the new system. The first convert is Efulefu, a useless villager, followed by women. However, the system has no place for conservatives such as Okonkwo, whose term in exile has ended. H e is surprised how things have changed in the village with many Christian converts. In Umofia, the missionaries start a school in which Nwoye attends, leaving his family behind. There is even a prison built by the whites having a governmental legal court, used for trying the law breakers, where native Umofians have been employed. He wonders why the villagers have not reacted back to chase away Christianity and oppressive government. The villagers have been assimilated in the new political system. As a way to show cultural assimilation, Mr. Brown shows regard for the traditions of the natives and aspires to learn of their culture and even befriends the clansmen. He advocate for education for all, as seen by Nwoye who now is called Isaac and has been attending the teacher’s college. However, Okonkwo is not pleased with the changes. Mr. Brown only hopes to convert the villagers to Christianity (Ogbaa xix). His health deteriorates and he is forced to go back home and Reverend Jam es Smith takes over. He is stricter and does not tolerate the traditions of the clans, though he amasses several converts e.g. Enoch an extremely zealous convert. When Egwugwu puts Enoch’s compound on fire and brings down Reverend Smith’s church, the acts disappoints the District commissioner who demands meeting with the six leaders. They are arrested an imprisoned and fined 250 cowries bags where the villagers gather them and the six are released. On their freeing, a gathering is held by clansmen but is dispersed by a court order. Okonkwo resists courageously and portray his bravely expecting support from clansmen as he murders the messenger leader using a machete. The crowd releases other messengers, which makes Okonkwo to realize he is alone in the fight and the village has surrendered since the social values and cohesion has been compromised in his absence realizing that, things have fallen apart. The DC goes to Okonkwo’s compound only to realize that he com mitted suicide through hanging, an act which he ironically meant to express his manliness and forever escape to be defeated. Oberika, his friend claims that suicide is inauspicious thus the tradition prevents the clansmen to touch him (Achebe 125). Conclusion The novel handles the experiences during the 1890s in Umofia, a small village along the Niger River in the African nation, Nigeria. After the British colonialists arrived in the village, there were missionaries already and people sought solace in the churches. Western civilizations interfered with cultural, economic and social values of the village. Villagers inhabited Umofia in patriarchal political system where decisions came from council, made up of nine clansmen who sometimes, got directives from religious leaders. British arrival however, upset this socio-political system and began to interfere with social disputes, even establishing courts and prisons. This disregarded the traditional social setup and the reallocation of power in this village, leading to the tragedy of Okonkwo, who would rather be seen dead than alive but helpless (Whittaker Msiska 66). Igbo people are depicted by the author as having powerful social institutions such as wrestling, practice of human sacrifice, religious rituals, ceremonies, and family. They rely heavily on traditions regarding justice as the people are led by the council made of elders, in this democratic village. The males are decision makers and leaders while the position of a woman is home making. Gender disparity is clear in this village and the crimes are identified with gender where the accidental killings by Okonkwo are referred to as female. Women are underrated in the village and oppressed by culture and traditions seen as child bearers, properties to their husbands, to be beaten and reprimanded. Men are allowed to marry as many wives for a status symbol. However, the colonialists interfere with these social setups, and introduce new ones. Achebe, Chinua. Things Fall Apart. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers. 1958. Print. Bloom, Harold. Chinua Achebes Things Fall Apart. New York: Infobase Publishing. 2010. Print. Heiser, Fred. Things Fall Apart. Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press. 2002. Print. Ogbaa, Kalu. Understanding Things Fall Apart: A Student Casebook To Issues, Sources, And Historical Documents. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. 1999. Print. Whittaker, David and Msiska, Mpalive-Hangson. Chinua Achebes Things Fall Apart. New York: Routledge. 2007. Print.

A Study Of The Hindrances And Sacrifices Made In William Shakespeare Play, Hamlet

A Study Of The Hindrances And Sacrifices Made In William Shakespeare Play, Hamlet And They Lived Unhappily Ever After In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, there are many sacrifices and obstacles that Hamlet must endure in order to fulfill his deceased father’s desire for revenge. One of the sacrifices involves ending his relationship with Ophelia. Many would argue that Hamlet never loved Ophelia anyway and claim that he is just using her for intimacy. However, it is clear that Hamlet and Ophelia do love each other and giving up their relationship is not an easy task. Because of the difficulty of ending their relationship, Hamlet is not honest about the challenges he is facing in order to bring justice to his father. Therefore, Ophelia can only believe that Hamlet never really did love her and this leads her to high levels of distress. Furthermore, Ophelia cannot escape the controlling behavior of her brother and father who both disapprove of her relationship with Hamlet. In the end, the obstacles become too much and tragedy overtakes their happy ending. Despite their love, Hamlet and Ophelia face many obstacles that they cannot overcome. Some argue that Hamlet never really loved Ophelia so it is not difficult for him to let her go; however, there is much evidence to prove that Hamlet’s feelings for Ophelia are true and loving. Perhaps the most compelling piece of evidence that Hamlet loves Ophelia is the letter he writes her that she is forced to share with the king and queen. In the letter Hamlet reminds Ophelia, that he loves her, â€Å"best, oh, most best/, believe it† (Shakespeare 2.2.120-121). This letter was meant to be private so Hamlet has no reason to lie in it. Therefore, his words are true as is his love for Ophelia. Hamlet admits his love again during the nunnery scene. As Hamlet tries to convince Ophelia that he does not love her, he breaks down for a brief moment and admits, â€Å"I did love you once† (Shakespeare 3.1.115-116). Some may see this as Hamlet trying to tell Ophelia that maybe he did love her, but he doesn’t anymore. However, it is more likely Hamlet is trying to spare her feelings when he sees how hurt she is as he dismisses her. If Hamlet does not love Ophelia, he would have no obligation to spare her feelings; he would not need to feel guilty for betraying her. Finally, Hamlet’s last expression of love comes after Ophelia’s death during the grave digger scene when he says, â€Å"I loved Ophelia. Forty thousand brothers/could not with all their quantity of love/make up my sum† (Shakespeare 5.1.249-251). This is the most definite declaration of Hamlet’s love for Ophelia. Hamlet’s admittance of his overwhelming love for Ophelia shows that the reason Hamlet was not able to always express his love for her is because his attention had to be on his father’s revenge and when Ophelia dies, Hamlet realizes how big of sacrifice that is to make. Hamlet now realizes that even if he achieves his father’s revenge, he can never be with Ophelia. Love is a powerful motivator, but it is not always romantic. Hamlet does love Ophelia, but his love and devotion to his father is a little bit stronger. Hamlet realizes that he cannot commit to a relationship with Ophelia and commit to revenge for father’s death. As Thomas Holcroft’s suggests in Carol J. Carlisle’s essay, â€Å"Hamlet’s â€Å"Cruelty† in the Nunnery Scene: The Actors’ Views, â€Å"Hamlet, whose mind is absorbed with a master passion (grief for his father and desire to avenge his death), feels that he must give up Ophelia in order to fulfill his vow to his father’s spirt† (132). Because Hamlet’s dedication to his father’s wishes is so strong, he cannot commit himself to both a relationship with Ophelia and achieving justice for his father. Hamlet’s mind is so absorbed with revenge and he knows he cannot explain it to Ophelia. Therefore, the only solution is to dismiss Ophelia thus ending the relationship all together. As is stated in Arthur Hudson’s essay â€Å"Romantic Apologiae for Hamlets Treatment of Ophelia† originally expressed by William Hazlitt, â€Å"it would have taken [Hamlet] years to come to a direct explanation on the point. In the harassed state of his mind, he could not have done otherwise than he did.† Hamlet wants to spare Ophelia the drama and pain of his plans for revenge so despite how cruel he seems, he is coming from a loving place. After all, Hamlet knew he could not change his mind about the revenge plot because he made a clear promise to his father that justice would prevail. When the Ghost exits, Hamlet vows that his father’s, â€Å"commandment all alone shall live/within the book and volume of my brain,/unmixed with baser matter† (Shakespeare 1.5.102-104). Hamlet knows there is no turning back so his promise to his father became the biggest obstacle for Hamlet and Ophelia’s relationship. However, it is not the only one. During the late 16th century, women were not seen as independent individuals with their own opinions; instead, they were controlled by the men in their life and expected to comply with their demands. Ophelia’s situation was no different than any other woman and she was molded to be obedient to her father and brother’s requests. â€Å"Motherless and completely circumscribed by the men around her, Ophelia has been shaped to conform to external demands, to reflect others’ desires† (Dane 1). First, Ophelia’s brother Laertes tries to make her see how insignificant her relationship with Hamlet is. He tells her the relationship is â€Å"forward, not permanent, sweet, not lasting/, the perfume and suppliance of a minute-/no more† (Shakespeare 1.3.6-8). Laertes may recognize Ophelia’s feelings and even admits they are real, but he wants to convince her that the relationship will not last. He tells her it is all flirtation and temporary affectio n. Ophelia may want him to see the relationship her way, but Laertes is a man and has both influence and some power over her actions. Similarly, Ophelia’s father wants her to have no contact with Hamlet and stop her feelings all together. Polonius commands her, â€Å"This is for all:/I would not, in plain terms, from this time forth/have you so slander any moment leisure/as to give words or talk with the Lord Hamlet† (Shakespeare 1.4.130-133). Polonius does not even ask this of Ophelia, he simply demands it. Polonius has authority over Ophelia not only because she is a woman, but also because she is his child. Therefore, Ophelia has no choice but to obey him as he will continue to keep watch over her. Some may think that Polonius only does this to protect Ophelia but as David Leverenz notes â€Å"Polonius cares more for his position at court than for his daughter’s well-being, and he uses his paternal authority to better his status as king’s advisor† (Qtd in Green 301). Polonius believes that if Hamlet and Ophelia have a relationship, it may threaten his standing with the king, es pecially if she gets pregnant. Therefore, he ignores her happiness and uses his influence over her to protect his reputation. With the amount of influence her brother and father have over her, Ophelia’s obedience to the men in her life is yet another obstacle for Hamlet and Ophelia. No matter how much Hamlet and Ophelia want to be together, they just cannot overcome the obstacles that keep them separated. Between Hamlet’s betrayal and the murder of her father, Ophelia’s life ends up in disarray and she turns to suicide as an escape. Every man in her life betrays her and she goes mad. After her father’s death, Ophelia tries to moves forward â€Å"but carefully programmed into her psyche by Polonius is the fear of autonomy and sexuality so that Ophelia is unable to navigate her own way once the â€Å"protective† custody of her father is unavailable to her† (Smith 97). Even though her father was not concerned about her happiness, Ophelia is reliant on his demands and custody and without him there to guide her, Ophelia is lost and scared. She has no way of thinking for herself and the pain becomes so overwhelming that she chooses death over the hurtfulness of life. Along with the pain of her father’s death Ophelia has a completely broken view of love and trust. â€Å"Under the pressure of irresponsible paternal demands and because of the larger political issues unbeknownst to her, Ophelia’s faith in love and sincerity is crushed† (Smith 97). Ophelia has been shielded from reality behind the cruelty of the men in her life. Some may think they would be good thing as she was only being protected from pain and suffering. But when she loses guidance from her father and faith in Hamlet, it leaves her totally lost and betrayed until she finds herself too far gone to live anymore. No matter how much the men in her life care for her, they make a fatal mistake in hiding reality from her because she is so sheltered that when all the hurt and betrayal become known to her, it is too much for her to handle. Ophelia’s ignorance to reality is the final obstacle challenging Hamlet and Ophelia’s relationship. No matter how much the men in her life want to protect her, they could not prepare her for what happens when everything falls apart. â€Å"Ophelia’s suicide is a sad but credible response by her own impaired psyche. It invites us to re-examine the worsening psychological hell brought on by the abuse and neglect she suffered at the hands of those she loved most† (Smith 110). While it seems as though the treatment by her male influences is out of protection, Barbara Smith explains that it is really abusive and neglectful because she is not respected enough to be trusted with reality and when she did discover it, she was not equipped to cope with it. Ophelia’s madness is simply explained by the sudden lack of male influence in her life. Despite the modern view that women are strong individuals that do not need male influence, Ophelia lives in a time where she doesn’t know any different than relying on the men in her life for guidance, hearing their voices at all times for how to behave. â€Å"Then suddenly-with her brother in France, and her lover banished to England for the murder of her father—the voices stop. Confronted with such thunderous silence, Ophelia becomes mad† (Dane 3). Some may believe that this madness is the worst thing that could happen to her. Ophelia is no longer the beautiful, obedient woman everyone knows. However, Dane suggests that â€Å"madness releases Ophelia from the enforced repressions of obedience, chastity, patience, liberates her from the prescribed roles of daughter, sister, lover, subject† (4).Without influences pouring in from every direction, Ophelia is left to be her authentic, raw self. However, because she does not know how to handle her real self, she feels overwhelmed and ultimately commits suicide to escape all of the change in her life. Hamlet and Ophelia did truly love each other but could not overcome the obstacles that threaten their happiness. Hamlet’s devotion to his father outweighs his love for Ophelia and influences his decision to choose revenge over happiness with Ophelia. This was unbeknownst to Ophelia and she believes Hamlet was simply betraying her and dismissing the love they once shared. Also, Ophelia was forced to be obedient to her brother and father which meant not making further contact with Hamlet. This, along with the betrayal from Hamlet, caused Ophelia distress and pain. She was trapped and confused and ultimately chose death over living with the hurt and sadness. Despite their love for one another, Hamlet and Ophelia could not overcome the obstacles that challenged their relationship. Therefore, their love could never prevail and instead ends in tragedy and regret. Though many would argue that Hamlet and Ophelia never shared true love, it is clear that they shared a deep love that was just not strong enough to overcome the obstacles that stood in their way. No matter how much they wanted it, Hamlet and Ophelia’s love could not prevail through the darkness of lies and betrayal.

Organize a debate on the vietnam war, iraqi war or any controversial Essay

Organize a debate on the vietnam war, iraqi war or any controversial historical event that has taken place within 40years. Write - Essay Example Hussein did not comply with the inspection, prompting the United Nations to draft a resolution seeking for serious consequences if the Iraqi leader dismissed the UN Security Council’s strict inspection of the alleged dangerous weapons. Now, had Hussein not cultivated nuclear weapons, he could have freely let the team inspect and let his conscience be freed. If there were no impositions of serious actions towards terrorism, Iraqi people would still remain to witness a never-ending siege of terrorism, hiding behind Hussein’s dictatorship. Second justification, had the U.S. and its allies not launched the war, global security is at stake (Copson 4). The Al Qaeda terrorist organization has established connections with the radical leader, and the creation of nuclear weapons is a stepping stone to Iraq’s claiming to govern the world under his tutelage. The war was an indication, moreover, to other countries, which are cultivating destructive weapons to learn a lesson f rom the war in order for them to stop. For instance, Libyan dictator Gaddafi was reported to have ceased creating weapons of mass destruction upon knowing what happened to Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, Iraqis were freed from the regime of Saddam Hussein, which clearly would not happen if the United States remained relaxed. It is a concession that war yields damages, both life and property. However, it is also true that the clear and present danger posed by these weapons would turn out killing millions of people than one expected if there are no actions to stop violence and terrorism. Therefore, the war in Iraq in 2003 was worth it. Negative Side’s Justifications. It is ironic to talk peace while using violence to achieve it. This basic premise holds true to everyone, regardless of race, gender, religion and ideology. The 2003 Iraq war was an exaggerated action for an unproven claim that Iraq owns weapons of mass destructions (Prados and Ames par. 15), and posited questions to the real motive of the United States in waging the war; therefore, it is not worth it. First, the war killed, not just the alleged supporters of the terrorist organization Al Qaeda, but including children and civilian citizens. If Hussein’s body is highly important, then the United States should have launched a manhunt operation against him and his supporter so as to avoid collateral damages (Abrams and Gungwu 12). Secondly, the war was a burden to the fiduciary situation of the United States and to its allies. Curtis and Payne stated that while the world enjoyed Hussein’s loss, the cost of the war was â€Å"disproportionate† (45). Third justification, the motive of the United States was highly questionable. If the war was rested on the ground of justified reasons, there would be no other reason beyond the goal of global peace. The war was not a matter of â€Å"necessity,† but a â€Å"choice† (Harvey 1); therefore, it has clear motives. To name it explicitly, the oil reserves served as an indication of economic domination. Inasmuch as the pro-war were convinced of the presence of nuclear weapons, anti-war was also sure that the United States, under the cloak of salvaging Iraq from dictatorship, also eyed on the rich oil reserve of the country. Fourthly, the Iraqi people were now freed from one dictator, but the leadership was governed by people with vested interests. U.S. had various allies during the war, and it is highly anticipated that economic benefits of the war are likely