Young Diplomats

Only US, Russia and China claimed the title of Space Power and now India has joined the list by shooting down a live satellite on the LEO (Low Earth Orbit) in just three minutes using a missile on March 29, 2019. Anti satellites are space weapons designed to destroy or incapacitate satellites for strategic military purposes.

Beginning of Space Race
Space race was triggered with the launch of Sputnik 1 by the Soviet Union in 1957. As a result, the USA and Russia started developing on their own space industries. Today, countries like Canada, Japan, India and China have started to prove their capacity in the space programmes. The United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UN-COPUOS) was set up by the General Assembly in 1959 to make sure that the benefits of space-based services reach the people on the ground.

Space Agencies of the world
There are six government space agencies in the world. They are; the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), the Russian Federal Space Agency (RFSA or Roscosmos), the European Space Agency (ESA), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), the China National Space Administration (CNSA), and the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO).

What do satellite do?
They take pictures of the sun, black holes, dark matter or faraway galaxies. Scientists use these pictures to better understand the solar system and the universe. Some satellites are uses for communication such as beaming TV signals and phone calls around the world. Satellites also help in GPS technology which helps figure out our exact location.

Will anti-satellites missiles be used in future wars?
Anti-satellite missiles can destroy enemy satellites in times of war in order to prevent the intelligence and communication networks of a country. It can also be used to destroy the spy satellites. The US tested its anti-satellite missiles in 1958 while the Soviet Union did it in the 1960 and 70s. China tested its anti-satellite missile in 2007. Though Prime Minister Modi reiterated the international community that this new capability of India will be used only for its own security and development, Ajay Lele, senior fellow at the Institute for Defense and Analysis, mentioned that India needed to do it “because adversary China has already done it in 2007”. Therefore, India’s Mission Shakthi programme would be seen as a threat mainly by China and Pakistan.

North Korea had a couple of talks with the Trump administration but unfortunately all the attempts made from Trump’s side went futile. Trump wanted Kim to stop North Korea’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) programme, but the recent satellite images have proved that Trumped failed to make a deal.

On 4 July 2017, Pyongyang announced that it has tested an ICBM named Hwasong-14 which can hit “any part of the world” and again on 28 July 2017, the second ICBT test was made which could reach the altitude of 3000km. North Korea has tested Hwasong 5/6, Pukguksong, Nodong, and Musudan which have ranges of 1000km, 1000km, 1300km and 3500km respectively. Its KN-14 and KN-08 which have the ranges of 10000km and 11500km are under development.

The reasons behind ICBM

The major reason for North Korea’s development of its ICBT is the power projection to the world. North Korean leaders believe that Saddam Hussein would still be alive if he had possessed weapons of mass destruction. Therefore, for them nuclear weapon is a a necessity for the survival of their regime. They are not ready to believe any promises from the West regarding economic cooperation or security arrangements as they have learnt lessons from Libya and Ukraine. After agreeing to surrender his nuclear programme in exchange of economic development of his country in 2004, Muammar Gaddafi of Libya was killed by the rebels with the support of the Western powers. Ukraine, believing the security guarantee given by the United States, Russia and the United Kingdom, decided to remove its nuclear weapons after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but it was finally disappointed by the annexation of Crimea by Russia.

Why negotiations failed

The major reason is that, the North Korean decision makers have little enthusiasm towards any negotiation compromising their nuclear programme as they see it as their own death warrant. Moreover, no economic sanctions from the US or its allies would affect North Korea as China dominates more than 90 percentage of its foreign trade.

In the recent Singapore summit, analysts believe that the USA had over expectation with the demand of denuclearizing the peninsula. Kim Jong Un is never ready to give up nukes as it’s necessary for his survival.
The Vietnam summit which followed the Singapore summit was also failed as Kim wanted all sanctions to be lifted but Trump wants Kim to give up more before taking off sanctions.

As there is no proposal or schedule from both the sides for the next summit and the rebuilding process of its missile launch site may put both the countries in the starting point again.

Claude Coasguen, a prominent deputee in the French Parliament was interviewed by Young Diplomats, in the Academic College of Netanya.

The Acamedic College of Netanya is one of the leading institution in Israel, promoting the French-Israeli relations. It hosts every year several panels of French philosophers,Writers and Politicians.  To know more about the Academic College of Netanya please click here :

Interview : 

French Diplomacy has a strong pro-Arab Policy

1. Dear Mr. Coasguen, you have been elected 6 times in a row in Paris, why do people like you so much?

People like me because I’m on the field, and I am close to people. Politics need to bring you something on the personal plan, you need to be open minded and a bit ideologue. Politics is passionating, even if sometimes It’s bitter and you have bad surprises.

During the last elections, I had to struggle against the candidate coming from the Macron’s political wave.

2. You are highly engaged in International Relations, such as France-Israel, France-Vietnam… didn’t you dream to do a career in diplomacy

No because diplomacy is very different from politics, and I have no affinities with French Diplomacy , especially regarding the Middle East. The Quai D’Orsay has a tragic anti-Israeli foreign policy since decades. Today International problems have become entangled with National problems as the world is more and more globalized.

I have been tasked by French Parliament to do a full scale report about the Middle East. I am supposed to fly in Eritrea and Iran in the coming weeks to explore those countries.

French diplomacy has a strong pro-Arab policy, which is archaic, but Arabs have become incredibly divided along the years. Israel should be a French Ally, French diplomacy is archaic.

One day Europe will want to ally with Israel because they will not have the choice

3. You are one of the strongest deputies in the French Parliament that is vigorously defending Israel, why?

I have a specific love for Mediterranean countries. I had a lot of Jewish Friends, I have witnessed the exceptional rise of Israel along the years. A country born in war, after the Holocaust, which will become after only a few decades a strong and robust country, that will help mankind with science like the Jewish people always did. One day Europe will want to ally with Israel because they will not have the choice. I consider that now Israel should help France, France need Israeli technology, Science, Intelligence and Security.  France should seek answers into Israeli approach to Terrorism and to economic success. This small country has a lot of energy.

Israel helps more France than France helps Israel.

4. What do you think about Foreign Policy of Emmanual Macron, the President of France

I don’t know about it, and also Macron’s don’t know about it (Laugh..).  No basically, French diplomacy is dictated by the Quai d’Orsay more than Emmanuel Macron. As I said previously, the French Diplomacy is archaic and based on the fact that Arab Countries would be the best allies for France, which is a mistake.

Usually, a French President will be inclined to be pro-Israel, but after the fatigue and the “usure”, the Quai d’Orsday will likelover, over , over time and always come back to a pro-Arab policy instead of leaning toward Israel.

We are one of the only country in the world, that refuse to speak English and to open Internationally , alongside with Japan. As such, French we have a vision of International Affairs, very oriented toward the past. Our Foreign Policy almost didn’t change since decades. Regarding Europe the role of France is difficult compared to the German Power, that has become a very strong economic power.

I am preparing to write a book on Mediterranean. American are wrong to leave this region , especially as Africa is becoming a major power and continent over the coming decades. And regarding Africa, we can clearly identify that the influence of France is being reduced every year in Africa at the benefits of China, Japan,Israel,Germany and other countries.

My main goal in Geopolitics is to show that there is not only Continental Europe that exists but also southern Europe that will be able to play a huge role in the coming decades. And Israel will be a major asset for Europe in the future.

Intelligence agents arrested on Thursday 21 March at dawn the chief of staff of the Venezuelan opposition Juan Guaido, the self-proclaimed interim president. The latter denounced a “vile” and “crude” manoeuvre and warned that he would not be intimidated.

Roberto Marrero is accused of “terrorism”, announced Interior Minister Nestor Reverol, live on television. He is also accused of having “held a significant amount of weapons”.

“They arrested Roberto Marrero, my chief of staff, on charges of holding two rifles and a grenade[intentionally placed in his home]. The arrest occurred at around 2 a.m.[7 a.m. in Paris],” Guaido announced on Twitter, engaged in an arm wrestling match with incumbent Head of State Nicolas Maduro for two months.

Mr. Guaido then spoke to journalists:

“They want to intimidate me? But they can’t all go after us. They want to come and get me? Let them come[but] they will not be able to divert us from the road we are setting out. »

For him, Mr. Maduro’s government is trying to instill “fear” in the opposition ranks and exposes his “weakness” in doing so.

The EU calls for the “immediate release” of Mr. Marrero.

Juan Guaido, President of the opposition-dominated National Assembly, was himself arrested by the Venezuelan intelligence services (Sebin) on 13 January in a spectacular operation on the highway, before being released an hour later.

Mr. Marrero’s brutal arrest was immediately condemned by the head of American diplomacy, Mike Pompeo: “We call for his immediate release. Those who hold him will have to be held accountable,” he warned via Twitter.

The UN has called for “no escalation” of tension: “We reiterate our call for all actors in Venezuela to take immediate steps to reduce tensions,” said one of its spokespersons in New York.

The European Union has also called for an “immediate and unconditional release” of the opponent. France also insisted on “stopping the repression against the opposition to Nicolas Maduro’s regime” while human rights organisations denounce the arrests and detentions without trial in the country.

“The dictatorship is holding these two citizens back.”

Mr. Marrero, a lawyer by profession, was arrested during a Sebin operation at his home. Marrero lived near MP Sergio Vergara. He was arrested during an Sebin operation in the Las Mercedes residential area of Caracas, not far from there.

During his arrest, Roberto Marrero “shouted that[the members of the Sebin] had placed two rifles and a grenade in his home. They took him away and I told him to stay strong,” Mr. Vergara told the press.

Vergara said that about 15 agents had thrown him to the ground and “visited” his house, before questioning him about Roberto Marrero’s home. During this operation, which he said lasted two hours, two prosecutors were present. He added that “They started to force into Roberto Marrero’s house, which is a few meters from mine, until they managed to get in.”

This arrest comes at a time when Venezuela has been plunged into a deep political crisis since Mr. Guaido proclaimed himself interim president on 23 January, challenging the regularity of Mr. Maduro’s re-election, which he claims is marred by fraud.

Mr. Guaido has repeatedly stated that he is prepared to authorize foreign military intervention. US President Donald Trump reiterated on Tuesday that “all options” were being examined to remove Nicolas Maduro from power. “It is shameful what is happening in Venezuela – debt and destruction and famine,” he added.

British Prime Minister Theresa May blamed members of Parliament for the need to extend the Brexit deadline, a move that’s already undermined attempts to win support for her Brexit deal.

May gave a brief speech on Wednesday, hours after she had asked the European Union for a short extension to the current March 29 deadline. But rather than reassure the country, the prime minister’s remarks incited a backlash from the public and members of Parliament (MPs) — the very people she needs to back her plan.

In her address, May called the request delay “a matter of great personal regret for me” and said that she was certain the public had had enough. She continued, saying:

You’re tired of the infighting, you’re tired of the political games and the arcane procedural rows, tired of MPs talking about nothing else but Brexit when you have real concerns about our children’s schools, our National Health Service, knife crime.

You want this stage of the Brexit process to be over and done with. I agree. I am on your side.

It is now time for MPs to decide.

The speech bombed for many reasons. For starters, it reiterated what May has been saying for months — pass my deal, or risk a no-deal exit from the EU or no Brexit at all.

It also failed because many of May’s critics believe the prime minister holds at least some of the responsibility for the current impasse. The prime minister has promoted Conservative Party unity throughout the Brexit process, often caving to pressure from the pro-Brexit hardliners rather than attempting to forge a consensus among moderates across parties. And through it all, May has insisted on pushing her unpopular Brexit deal through Parliament. She’s even planning to try a third time, despite losing the two previous votes by historically large margins.

May sent a letter to European Council President Donald Tusk earlier on Wednesday asking for the EU to push the UK exit date to June 30, to try once again to win approval for a Brexit deal, and, if it passed, give lawmakers time to pass the necessary accompanying legislation.

But Parliament defeated May’s deal last week by about 150 votes, which is a tremendous margin to make up. Attacking MPs for failing to vote on a deal they all hate doesn’t exactly seem like a sound strategy — and it incensed members of Parliament within the opposition Labour Party and within her own Conservative Party, who took to Twitter to express their frustration.

May’s speech mostly channeled anger over the Brexit process in the direction of the MPs, some politicians pointed out, potentially making them targets of a divided British public exasperated with the political paralysis.

May’s speech also inspired Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow to give MPs a pep talk, in which he said that “none of you is a traitor.”

The Brexit debate is far from over

Parliament does have some responsibility for the Brexit logjam. It’s punted on past opportunities to wrest control of the Brexit process. The handwringing may also seem kind of weird with just eight days to go until the deadline and the European Union still discussing whether to grant the UK an extension.

Tusk, the European Council president, indicated that the EU would be open to a short extension (though they’d likely set the date in May, rather than May’s proposed June 30) on the condition that the UK Parliament approves the Brexit deal next week. But, ultimately, all 27 EU member states have to agree. It seems unlikely that these countries will risk a disastrous no-deal on March 29 if May’s agreement fails again — but it certainly can’t be ruled out.

May’s speech, however, had the unintended effect of amplifying the very real political crisis that’s unfolding in the UK. Her withdrawal agreement is a compromise and likely the best she could have made by adhering to her Brexit red lines. But that hasn’t stopped the deal from being deeply unpopular, and her address only increases the perception among MPs that the prime minister is trying to strong-arm them into voting for this proposal by threatening them with the two extreme options: no deal, or no Brexit at all.

MPs may ultimately be willing to take the least bad option, but her speech offered them little incentive to take the political risk to back her unpopular plan.

Brexit fatigue is real in the UK among both Leavers and Remainers. And a recent poll indicated the public blamed just about everyone for the mess, though May’s government topped the list.

The UK is also still deeply divided on how (or if) the UK should break up with the EU. Support for “remaining” has increased, but so has support for a no-deal Brexit instead of May’s deal, according to a recent YouGov poll. On Thursday, a petition for the UK government to Revoke Article 50 — which would basically cancel Brexit — received 1 million signatures, after briefly crashing the UK Parliament website.

May’s pitch — in short, “Listen to me, and let’s get Brexit over with” — won’t easily overcome this polarization.

this article was found on the website Vox here’s the link towards this website https://www.vox.com/world/2019/3/21/18275752/brexit-theresa-may-parliament-speech-delay

Over the past centuries Western societies have believed in a myth. From France to Russia, religion has been veiled by ideology. Nevertheless, these ideologies look like religion by many aspects. The purpose of this article will focus on the closeness between religions and political ideologies.

The lessons from the French revolution

The fathers of the French revolution did their best to reduce the influence of the Christian Church.  Around 1790s the French Kingdom is the target of its neighbors. At the beginning of the Revolution, they backed this movement because it could weaken France. Nevertheless, the new Republic started to scare the European powers. Robespierre was one of the most famous leaders of the French revolution. He understood that men needs transcendence to take weapons. Consequently, he decided to setup a new belief, in the spirit of Renaissance and individualism : the Supreme Being. This secular ideology was supposed to inspire soldiers of the Revolution.

Civil politics as a religion 

In reaction to this downing Christianism, individuals started believing in other transcendences : nation, State, History and People. Voting became a religious act and nation-states became an ideology. The example of the USSR is also relevant.  Stalin sacralized Lenin as the founder of the new country. Statues were erected on his behalf. Then, as every religion, sovietism needed heretics such as Trotsky. Civil politics has become the new religion and ideologies have replaced religions. The interesting point of this reasoning is that it doesn’t always function. Indeed, in order to motivate the troops to counter Germany in 1941, Stalin did argue that this war was paramount to defend Orthodoxy. Consequently, it has to be said that civil politics doesn’t function perfectly.

Conclusion

To sum up, it’s hard to assume that religion has completely vanished in favor of secularism and civil politics. Both of them are deeply entangled and inhabitants sometimes mix their loyalty.

What is the A380 ? 

The A380 program was launched at the end of the 1980s to counter the offensive of Boeing. It is the biggest civil plane in the world capable of carrying 800 passengers. This program was kept secret by Airbus for several years. Finally the first tests occurred in 2005 and the commercialization started in 2006-2007. On February 14, 2019, Airbus announced the end of A380 production from 2021, after several years of disappointing sales.

Nevertheless an important aspect of this affair is that Airbus is an interstate society. The production is split between Spain, France, Germany and the UK. Beyond economy, this society carries, for many, the dream of a more integrated EU. Airbus looks like the proof that Europe can be victorious on economy and big companies.

How can we explain the failure

The failure of the A380 is due to several reasons. At the very beginning of the commercialization, numerous airlines had to face delivery delays, namely Emirates. The initial program suffered from a delay of 18 month and this delay costed around 4€ billions. It plays a lot in the image of the company. When it comes to delivery delays, airlines might be less confident in the acquisition of such big products. Moreover, the size of the A380 was sometimes disabling. Indeed, all airports do not have the infrastructures to host this plane. Then, it has to be said that getting 800 customers on a plane is not an easy task for an airline.

What does the failure mean ?

The European Union was quite proud of the A380. They did launch such a program to show that the EU could be at the forefront in aeronautical industry and innovation. One could stress out that many European leaders supported the project to make Europeans proud of interstates cooperation. The creation of the A380 does not respond to an economical need, but a political one. Then, regarding international negotiations, an interstate company is less competitive in front of Boeing which has the full background of the US government.

In his books, Admiral Mahan tried to explain the origins of the British power. He claimed to find the answer in Britain’s acquisition of maritime supremacy. At the same time, the British had succeeded in :

• Securing a prosperous foreign trade that enriched them.
• A flourishing merchant navy to carry out this trade.
• A powerful navy to defend merchant ships all over the world.
• A series of maritime bases where ships could refuel or be repaired.
• An empire that provided the raw materials needed by the industry and constituted a consumer market for finished products.

These five elements appeared to Mahan to be both complementary and essential to ensure power and prosperity. Mahan worked for the US Navy and understood that his country had to develop an important sea power. 

Mahan was well aware that it was not possible to compete immediately with the British. The acquisition of colonies was only the last step in this process: the American government first had to acquire a war fleet capable of controlling the oceans around the United States. Secondly, it had to prevent potential enemies from gaining access to certain strategic sites near the areas to be defended. Finally, it was to occupy positions on the world’s main shipping routes.

He did not recommend the annexation of any territory: he was against the acquisition of Guam, the Philippines, any island west of Hawaii. In the Caribbean, he was poorly interested in Cuba, Haiti or Puerto Rico, heavily populated islands. He preferred to acquire Hawaii and one of the Danish West Indies, control the area of a transoceanic canal and lease a port in Central or South America.

Mahan is a worldly-recognized specialist when it comes to sea power. The influence of Sea Power was published in 1890 but it’s a key piece to understand sea power. His ideas were accepted by generations of American officers. They were sure to work in the frame of an unfailing theory. From a budgetary perspective, the Congress understood the works of Mahan and provided credits to the US Marine. 

This article is the first one of a set of three, trying to highlight the key facts, the causes, and the consequences of the separatist events that took place in Catalonia in the decade 2010.

In Spain, it has been called ‘El procès’. This word refers to the process which aimed at gaining Catalonia’s independence in 2017.

For a couple of days now, the judgment of the twelve Catalan separatist leaders who organized this ‘Procés’ has been reviving the tensions in Catalonia. The yellow ribbons have reappeared on the coats of many Catalans. On the top of that, the coming local elections scheduled for the 26th of May brings a shadow of uncertainty about the future of Catalonia.

A lot has been said about this separatism, but what are the keys events that led to the first of October (1-O), when dozens of cameras recorded the brutal confrontation between the Spanish State and the separatists?

1/ The Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia of 2006

When Franco died in 1975, the Prime Minister Adolfo Suárez started a peaceful transition towards a Spanish democracy. In 1978, Spain had its own Constitution, and one year later, the Statute of Sau guaranteed for Catalonia a large autonomy.

In June 2006, a new Statute was proposed by the Catalan government to the Catalan citizens, who accepted it by referendum, even if the turnout was low (around 50%). This new Statute aimed at clarifying the relationship between Spain and Catalonia, and also the way the Catalan government was financed.

The PP (Partido Popular) declared that several articles of this Statute were unconstitutional, amongst them the one declaring that Catalonia was a nation. They asked the Constitutional Court to judge it, but the judgment came only four years later. The Constitutional Court rewrote 14 articles, and this brought to a large part of the Catalan society the feeling that the essence of the Statute had been taken away.

A huge demonstration followed this event, gathering around one million protesters, under the Catalan slogan ‘Som una nació. Nosaltres decidim’ (We are a nation, we decide.)

This event, combined with the impact of the economic crisis in Spain and other factors that will be analyzed in a second article, led to a brutal raise of the pro-independence voting intentions from 24.5% to 47% between 2010 and 2012. (according to the CEO, Centro de Estudios de Opinió)

2/ The referendum of 2014

It is usually forgotten that the referendum of the first of October 2017 was not the first one taking place in Catalonia. In fact, between 2009 and 2011, 522 towns organized their own referendums about the independence.

In November 2014, after another huge demonstration that had taken place two months before, where protesters had formed in the streets of Barcelona a giant ‘V’ to call for a vote, a referendum finally occurred. The result was 81% in favor of the independence but with a turnout of just 42%, thus no significant.

3/ The referendum of the 1-O

Carles Puigdemont promised in 2016 that a referendum with the question ‘”Do you want Catalonia to become an independent state in the form of a republic?” would be held in 2017.

This referendum was suspended by the Constitutional Court, but it did happen, even if the Spanish police had been sent to the polling centers in order to seize the ballots. The Catalan government then declared that 90% of the votes were in favor of an independence. However, as it occurred in 2014, the turnout was really low, just 43% of the Catalan voters, not to mention that some people voted more than once.

4/ The declaration of independence and the triggering of the article 155

At the end of October 2017, Carles Puigdemont declared the independence of Catalonia. As a result, the article 155 was immediately triggered. The Catalan government was dismissed and Madrid took temporarily the control of Catalonia.

New elections were quickly organized, and even if the anti-independence party Ciudadanos got most of the votes (25%), the pro-independence parties stayed with a majority in the Parliament.

5/ And now?

A demonstration of 200 000 protesters was organized last month, as the judgment of the ex- separatist leaders started.

The current president of the Catalan government, Quim Torra, is right now struggling against the accusation of not having got rid of the yellow ribbons on the fronts of the public Catalan institutions, which should normally remain neutral.

From all of this, it appears that the apparent calmness that Catalonia experienced in 2018 is now compromised. The outcome of the judgment of the ‘Procès’ will certainly be decisive to know the future of Catalonia.

With its 1.3 billion inhabitants, India is called the largest democracy in the world. It is the product of a multicultural history which started around 2,500 BC, with the Vedic period.

The Aryans, a semi-nomadic tribe coming from central Asia, arrived after 1500 BC. In the fifth century, large regions of India were united under the rule of the Mauryas leader, Ashoka. Converted to Buddhism, he spread this religion to his kingdom. Islam was introduced in India as soon as the eleventh century, which led to the Mughal Empire from 1526 to 1761. The Europeans arrived in India from the fifteenth century and the British crown decided to rule this country by itself during a period named the British Raj (1858-1747).

On the 15th of august 1947, India became independent and since this date, she has experienced a democratic governance.

 In 2018, India became the 6th most powerful country economically, with a growth rate of 7%. However, if we look closer at the numbers given by the Oxford Poverty and Human development initiative, using the multidimensional poverty index (MPI), in 2010, 55% of the Indian population live under the poverty line.

According to Christophe Jaffrelot, professor in Sciences Po Paris and specialist in India, the poorest in India come from three categories: the Muslim, the Dalits (officially Scheduled Castes, known as Untouchables) and the Adivasis (the Indian tribes). In 2019 they were respectively 14%, 16% and 8% of the Indian population.

Why are these categories the most affected by poverty? It is partly related to resilience of the caste system in the Indian mindset.

The first foundations of the caste system appeared in the Rigveda, an ancient religious book dated from around 2500 BC. According to Hinduism, at the beginning of the Earth, the main God, called Purusha, gave birth to four categories of people.

The Brahmins, the priests, were born from his head. The Kshatriyas came from his arms as warriors. Then the Vaishyas, the trademen, appeared from his tights, and finally the Shudras, the servants, came from his feet. These four groups are the four castes in India, called Varnas in Hindi.

There was a last group, who didn’t even come from a part of Purusha’s body. They were assigned all the impure tasks like cleaning the road, being butchers, burying the dead. Because the upper caste people could be polluted by them, they were called Untouchables. You can also encounter the term Dalit – ‘son of God’, which was invented by Gandhi.

From centuries, Untouchables have been marginalized, and this reached a paroxysm in the nineteenth century. The British Raj administration made censuses in India, and organized them by castes. As a consequence, the British would give the best positions in the administration to those registered as Brahmins. Robert Deliège, specialist in the Indian society, defends the theory that the discrimination increased during the British Raj, partly because of this.

Therefore, the first Untouchables uprisings began in India as soon as the nineteenth century, but were truly effective only with the arrival of Ambedkar. He was an Indian jurist who had studied in England, and decided to tackle the Untouchables problems, for example the fact that they couldn’t get water from the same wells as other Indians, because of their so-called ‘impureness’. Ambedkar was also one of the fathers of the 1947 Indian Constitution. India owes him its part affirming that any discrimination based on the caste system is prohibited.

However, on a practical level, has the caste system truly disappeared? Sadly, the answer is negative. Discrimination did step back in India, thanks to positive discrimination. Quotas were created in the mid-20th century and assure for the SC (Scheduled Castes, that is to say the Untouchables) and the ST (Scheduled Tribes) a certain percentage of the jobs in the Indian administration. In the Tamil Nadu State for example, these quotas represent nowadays up to 69% of all the administrative positions.

However, the marginalization of the Untouchables is still an issue in India. Despite of the positive discrimination, 70% live in the countryside, and 90% work in unskilled labor, mainly in agriculture.

In the countryside, where the mentality remains patriarchal and conservative, atrocities related to the caste system are still committed. In 2013, Nidhi and Dhamender, a young couple that told their families they wanted to get married, were killed by Nidhi’s family because both of them were from different castes, and the dishonor would have been too important for Nidhi’s mother. This fact, related by the BBC in 2013, is sadly not an exception in India.

According to an article from Times of India published in 2018, these honor killings reached a peak in 2015, with 215 cases in India. They are one of the worst and most visible markers that the caste system is still well implemented in India.

With a younger middle class generation reaching the age to make their voices heard, will India let its caste system slowly go?

The resilience of the caste system in India

With its 1.3 billion inhabitants, India is called the largest democracy in the world. It is the product of a multicultural history which started around 2,500 BC, with the Vedic period.

The Aryans, a semi-nomadic tribe coming from central Asia, arrived after 1500 BC. In the fifth century, large regions of India were united under the rule of the Mauryas leader, Ashoka. Converted to Buddhism, he spread this religion to his kingdom. Islam was introduced in India as soon as the eleventh century, which led to the Mughal Empire from 1526 to 1761. The Europeans arrived in India from the fifteenth century and the British crown decided to rule this country by itself during a period named the British Raj (1858-1747).

On the 15th of august 1947, India became independent and since this date, she has experienced a democratic governance.

 In 2018, India became the 6th most powerful country economically, with a growth rate of 7%. However, if we look closer at the numbers given by the Oxford Poverty and Human development initiative, using the multidimensional poverty index (MPI), in 2010, 55% of the Indian population live under the poverty line.

According to Christophe Jaffrelot, professor in Sciences Po Paris and specialist in India, the poorest in India come from three categories: the Muslim, the Dalits (officially Scheduled Castes, known as Untouchables) and the Adivasis (the Indian tribes). In 2019 they were respectively 14%, 16% and 8% of the Indian population.

Why are these categories the most affected by poverty? It is partly related to resilience of the caste system in the Indian mindset.

 The first foundations of the caste system appeared in the Rigveda, an ancient religious book dated from around 2500 BC. According to Hinduism, at the beginning of the Earth, the main God, called Purusha, gave birth to four categories of people.

The Brahmins, the priests, were born from his head. The Kshatriyas came from his arms as warriors. Then the Vaishyas, the trademen, appeared from his tights, and finally the Shudras, the servants, came from his feet. These four groups are the four castes in India, called Varnas in Hindi.

There was a last group, who didn’t even come from a part of Purusha’s body. They were assigned all the impure tasks like cleaning the road, being butchers, burying the dead. Because the upper caste people could be polluted by them, they were called Untouchables. You can also encounter the term Dalit – ‘son of God’, which was invented by Gandhi.

From centuries, Untouchables have been marginalized, and this reached a paroxysm in the nineteenth century. The British Raj administration made censuses in India, and organized them by castes. As a consequence, the British would give the best positions in the administration to those registered as Brahmins. Robert Deliège, specialist in the Indian society, defends the theory that the discrimination increased during the British Raj, partly because of this.

Therefore, the first Untouchables uprisings began in India as soon as the nineteenth century, but were truly effective only with the arrival of Ambedkar. He was an Indian jurist who had studied in England, and decided to tackle the Untouchables problems, for example the fact that they couldn’t get water from the same wells as other Indians, because of their so-called ‘impureness’. Ambedkar was also one of the fathers of the 1947 Indian Constitution. India owes him its part affirming that any discrimination based on the caste system is prohibited.

However, on a practical level, has the caste system truly disappeared? Sadly, the answer is negative. Discrimination did step back in India, thanks to positive discrimination. Quotas were created in the mid-20th century and assure for the SC (Scheduled Castes, that is to say the Untouchables) and the ST (Scheduled Tribes) a certain percentage of the jobs in the Indian administration. In the Tamil Nadu State for example, these quotas represent nowadays up to 69% of all the administrative positions.

However, the marginalization of the Untouchables is still an issue in India. Despite of the positive discrimination, 70% live in the countryside, and 90% work in unskilled labor, mainly in agriculture.

In the countryside, where the mentality remains patriarchal and conservative, atrocities related to the caste system are still committed. In 2013, Nidhi and Dhamender, a young couple that told their families they wanted to get married, were killed by Nidhi’s family because both of them were from different castes, and the dishonor would have been too important for Nidhi’s mother. This fact, related by the BBC in 2013, is sadly not an exception in India.

According to an article from Times of India published in 2018, these honor killings reached a peak in 2015, with 215 cases in India. They are one of the worst and most visible markers that the caste system is still well implemented in India.

With a younger middle class generation reaching the age to make their voices heard, will India let its caste system slowly go?