Indi recently alluded to a British policy of "divide and rule" in administering its colonies. Lord Elphinstone is supposed to have said “Divide et impera was an old Roman maxim, and it shall be ours”, post the revolt of 1857 in India.
What does this mean in practice? A definition on the internet is
"the policy of maintaining control over one's subordinates or opponents by encouraging dissent between them, thereby preventing them from uniting in opposition."
While this may be a good military strategy, as a system of rule it dubious at best or counterproductive at worst. A historian with the International Islamic University, Islamabad, Akhtar Hussain Sandhu argues that:
" The very principle can be practical in a battlefield to cut the numbers of the enemies or create rift among the confronting forces but this strategy cannot be used by the rulers who seek peace or law and order in the region under their possession. Not unrest and communal clashes but regional peace and communal or factional harmony can better serve the aspirations of a conqueror who decides to stay and rule". (Reality of ‘Divide and Rule’ in British India, March 2015).
Regardless of whether the British practised this or not the burning question in India and Sri Lanka today is why post-independence rulers have adopted this tactic.
No comments:
Post a Comment