Power Sharing — Notes

Belgium and Sri Lanka

This section explores the diverse ethnic compositions of Belgium and Sri Lanka and the resultant tensions, highlighting why power-sharing becomes crucial in managing such diversity.

Ethnic Composition of Belgium

Belgium is a small European nation with a complex ethnic makeup.

• Location: Borders France, Netherlands, Germany, and Luxembourg.
• Population: Slightly over 1 crore (half of Haryana's population).
• Regions and Languages:
• Flemish Region: 59% of the population, speak Dutch.
• Wallonia Region: 40% of the population, speak French.
• German-speaking: Remaining 1% of the population.
• Capital City (Brussels):
• 80% speak French.
• 20% speak Dutch.

Key Issue: The French-speaking minority was relatively richer and more powerful, leading to resentment from the Dutch-speaking majority who lagged in economic development and education. This caused significant tensions in the 1950s and 1960s. Brussels presented a unique challenge as the Dutch were a majority in the country but a minority in the capital.

Ethnic Composition of Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka, an island nation near India, also has a diverse population, leading to different power-sharing challenges.

• Population: Approximately 2 crore (similar to Haryana).
• Major Social Groups:
• Sinhala-speakers: 74% of the population.
• Tamil-speakers: 18% of the population.
• Tamil Sub-groups:
• Sri Lankan Tamils: Natives of the country.
• Indian Tamils: Descendants of plantation workers from India during the colonial period.
• Geographical Distribution: Sri Lankan Tamils are concentrated in the North and East of the country.
• Religious Demographics:
• Most Sinhala-speakers are Buddhists.
• Most Tamils are Hindus or Muslims.
• About 7% are Christians (both Sinhala and Tamil speakers).

Key Issue: The Sinhala community forms a large majority, creating a potential for them to impose their will on the entire country, which differs from the Belgian scenario where the majority language group was concentrated in one region but a minority in the capital.

Remember

The core difference in the initial ethnic makeup is that Belgium has a majority Dutch-speaking population overall, but a minority in its capital, Brussels. Sri Lanka has a clear, large majority of Sinhala speakers dominating the entire nation.

Exam-smart

A question might present data on the percentage of speakers of different languages in Belgium or Sri Lanka and ask you to infer potential sources of conflict or the type of power-sharing arrangement that might be needed, drawing parallels or contrasts between the two nations.

Majoritarianism in Sri Lanka

Majoritarianism is a belief system where the majority community is expected to rule a country as it wishes, without considering the needs and desires of the minority communities.

Sri Lanka, an independent nation since 1948, became a case study for the adverse effects of majoritarian policies. The Sinhala community, being the majority, aimed to establish dominance. This led to a series of democratically elected government measures designed to ensure Sinhala supremacy.

Key Measures and Their Impact:

• Official Language Act (1956): This act declared Sinhala as the sole official language, effectively marginalizing the Tamil language.
• Preferential Policies: The government implemented policies that favoured Sinhala applicants for university admissions and government jobs, creating a sense of inequality for Tamils.
• State Protection of Buddhism: The constitution was amended to state that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism, further alienating non-Buddhist minority communities.

These measures, enacted sequentially, fostered a profound feeling of alienation among the Sri Lankan Tamils. They perceived that the political leadership, dominated by Buddhist Sinhala leaders, was insensitive to their language, culture, political rights, and economic opportunities.

Consequences of Majoritarian Policies:

The widening gap between the Sinhala and Tamil communities led to strained relations. Sri Lankan Tamils began forming political organizations and launching movements demanding:

• Recognition of Tamil as an official language.
• Regional autonomy for areas where Tamils were concentrated.
• Equal opportunities in education and employment.

However, their demands, particularly for provincial autonomy, were consistently rejected. By the 1980s, numerous political groups emerged, advocating for an independent Tamil Eelam (state) in the northern and eastern parts of Sri Lanka.

This escalating distrust and conflict culminated in a civil war, a violent internal conflict that resulted in:

• Thousands of deaths from both communities.
• Displacement of families as refugees.
• Loss of livelihoods.
• A severe setback to the nation's social, cultural, and economic development.

The civil war eventually ended in 2009.

Remember

Majoritarian policies can undermine national unity by alienating minority groups, leading to conflict and instability, even in democracies.

Exam-smart

Case studies like Sri Lanka are used to assess understanding of how unchecked majority rule can lead to ethnic conflict. You might be given a scenario describing a country with a dominant majority and asked to predict potential outcomes or suggest alternative policies based on the Sri Lankan example.

Accommodation in Belgium

In contrast to Sri Lanka, Belgium's leaders adopted a different approach to managing diversity, focusing on accommodation and mutual respect.

Key Elements of the Belgian Model:

The Belgian constitution was amended four times between 1970 and 1993 to create an arrangement allowing different communities to coexist. This innovative model includes:

• Equal Representation in Central Government: The number of Dutch and French-speaking ministers is equal in the central government. Certain special laws require a majority vote from each linguistic group, preventing any single community from making unilateral decisions.
• Devolution of Power: Significant powers of the Central Government have been transferred to State Governments in the two regions. These State Governments operate independently and are not subordinate to the Central Government.
• Separate Government for Brussels: The capital city, Brussels, has its own separate government where both French and Dutch communities have equal representation. This was a compromise that allowed the Dutch-speaking community to accept equal representation at the central level.
• Community Government: A third tier of government, the community government, is elected by people of one language group (Dutch, French, or German-speaking) regardless of where they live. This government has authority over cultural, educational, and language-related issues.

While complex, these arrangements have been successful in avoiding major civic strife between the Dutch and French-speaking communities and preventing the country's potential division along linguistic lines.

Example: The bilingual street signs in Brussels (French and Dutch) are a visible representation of this power-sharing arrangement.

Remember

Belgium's model highlights that power sharing can involve creating multiple layers of government and ensuring equal representation, even for smaller groups, to maintain national unity.

Exam-smart

You might be asked to compare and contrast the approaches of Sri Lanka and Belgium to power sharing, identifying the key features of each and explaining why one led to conflict while the other achieved stability. You could also be given a scenario about a diverse country and asked to suggest elements of the Belgian model that could be applied.

Why Power Sharing is Desirable

Power sharing is fundamental to democracies for two primary reasons: prudential (based on practical outcomes) and moral (based on the inherent value of the act).

Prudential Reasons:

• Reduces Conflict: Power sharing helps to minimise conflicts between different social groups. Conflicts can lead to violence and political instability. By sharing power, the possibility of one group dominating another is reduced, thus ensuring a more stable political order.
• Ensures National Unity: Imposing the will of the majority on minorities may seem effective in the short term but can undermine national unity in the long run. Tyranny of the majority is detrimental not only to minorities but also, eventually, to the majority.

Moral Reasons:

• Spirit of Democracy: Power sharing is considered the essence of democracy. A democratic government involves sharing power with all citizens who are affected by its decisions and have to live with the consequences.
• Right to be Consulted: People have a right to participate in decisions that govern them. A legitimate government is one where citizens have a stake in the system through their participation.

Forms of Power Sharing

Power sharing arrangements in modern democracies can take various forms to ensure that political power is distributed and no single entity holds absolute authority.

Horizontal Distribution of Power

This form of power sharing involves distributing power among different organs of government at the same level. These organs are typically the legislature, executive, and judiciary.

• How it works: Each organ exercises distinct powers, preventing any single organ from gaining unlimited authority. This system creates a balance of power.
• Checks and Balances: The legislature makes laws, the executive implements them, and the judiciary interprets them. The judiciary can check the laws made by the legislature and the actions of the executive. Similarly, ministers and government officials (executive) are accountable to the Parliament (legislature). This interdependency ensures that each organ monitors and limits the others.

Vertical Division of Power

This refers to the sharing of power among governments at different levels.

• How it works: A general government (often called the federal or central government) governs the entire country, while provincial or regional governments (like State governments in India) govern specific areas.
• Constitutional Division: The constitution clearly defines the powers of each level of government. This system, known as federalism, is adopted in countries like India and was implemented in Belgium but rejected in Sri Lanka.
• Lower Levels: This principle can also extend to governments at local levels, such as municipalities and panchayats.

Power Sharing among Social Groups

Power can be shared among different social groups, such as religious or linguistic communities.

• Example: Belgium's 'community government' is a prime example. This government is elected by people belonging to one language community (Dutch, French, German) and has the power to deal with cultural, educational, and language-related issues.
• Accommodation: In some countries, constitutional and legal arrangements are made to ensure representation for socially weaker sections and women. This can include systems like reserved constituencies, where seats in legislatures are set aside for minority communities or women, ensuring their participation and preventing alienation. This aims to give minority communities a fair share in governance.

Power Sharing among Political Parties, Pressure Groups and Movements

This form involves the sharing of power through competition and influence among various political actors.

• Political Parties: In democracies, citizens choose from different political parties that contest for power. This competition ensures power is not concentrated in one hand. When no single party gets a clear majority, coalition governments are formed, where multiple parties share power.
• Pressure Groups and Movements: Interest groups (like traders, industrialists, farmers, workers) influence government decisions by participating in committees or lobbying. They exert influence to ensure their concerns are addressed in policy-making.

Remember

Prudential reasons focus on the practical benefits of power sharing (stability, better outcomes), while moral reasons emphasize it as an intrinsic good for democracy (people's right to participate).

Exam-smart

Case study questions might present scenarios similar to Belgium or Lebanon and ask you to identify the type of power sharing used or suggest improvements. You might also be asked to differentiate between prudential and moral reasons for power sharing, perhaps with examples from India. Questions may also test your understanding of horizontal versus vertical distribution or power sharing among social groups.