Case Studies MCQs Quiz | Class 10

Understanding Power Sharing: Lessons from Belgium and Sri Lanka

Power sharing is a fundamental principle in modern democracies, referring to the distribution of power among different organs of government, levels of government, social groups, or political parties. It is crucial for ensuring political stability, preventing conflict, and promoting the spirit of democracy. The contrasting experiences of Belgium and Sri Lanka provide valuable insights into the merits of accommodating diverse groups versus pursuing majoritarian policies.

Why Power Sharing is Desirable

• Prudential Reasons: Power sharing helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instability, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order.
• Moral Reasons: Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system.

Forms of Power Sharing

Power can be shared in various forms:

• Horizontal Distribution: Among different organs of government, such as the legislature, executive, and judiciary. This is known as the system of checks and balances.
• Vertical Distribution: Among governments at different levels, such as a union or central government, state governments, and local governments.
• Among Social Groups: Like linguistic and religious groups (e.g., Community Government in Belgium).
• Among Political Parties, Pressure Groups, and Movements: Where power is shared through competition, coalition governments, or influence.

Case Study: Belgium’s Accommodation Model

Belgium is a small European country with a complex ethnic composition:

• Ethnic Composition: 59% Dutch-speaking (Flemish region), 40% French-speaking (Wallonia region), and 1% German-speaking. In Brussels (the capital), 80% are French-speaking and 20% are Dutch-speaking.
• Accommodation Policies: The Belgian leaders recognized the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities and amended their constitution four times between 1970 and 1993 to work out an arrangement that would enable everyone to live together within the same country. Key elements include:
  1. Equal Ministers: The number of Dutch and French-speaking ministers shall be equal in the Central Government.
  2. Special Laws: Some special laws require the support of a majority of members from each linguistic group, preventing any single community from making unilateral decisions.
  3. State Governments: Many powers of the Central Government were given to state governments of the two regions. The state governments are not subordinate to the Central Government.
  4. Brussels Special Status: Brussels has a separate government where both communities have equal representation.
  5. Community Government: A third kind of government, elected by people belonging to one language community (Dutch, French, and German), regardless of where they live. This government has the power regarding cultural, educational, and language-related issues.
• Outcome: This power-sharing arrangement successfully prevented a civil war and maintained the unity of the country, making Belgium a model for managing diversity.

Case Study: Sri Lanka’s Majoritarianism

Sri Lanka, an island nation, also has diverse social groups:

• Ethnic Composition: 74% Sinhala speakers and 18% Tamil speakers (13% Sri Lankan Tamils and 5% Indian Tamils).
• Majoritarian Policies: After gaining independence in 1948, the democratically elected government adopted a series of majoritarian measures to establish Sinhala supremacy:
  1. 1956 Act: Declared Sinhala as the only official language, disregarding Tamil.
  2. Preferential Policies: Governments followed preferential policies that favoured Sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
  3. State Religion: A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
• Outcome: These majoritarian measures gradually increased the feeling of alienation among the Sri Lankan Tamils. They felt that the constitution and government policies denied them equal political rights, discriminated against them in getting jobs and other opportunities, and ignored their interests. This led to distrust and eventually escalated into a civil war, causing a terrible setback to the social, cultural, and economic life of the country.

Comparative Analysis: Belgium vs. Sri Lanka

Quick Revision

• Power Sharing: Distribution of power to avoid conflict and promote democracy.
• Prudential Reason: Reduces conflict, ensures stability.
• Moral Reason: Spirit of democracy, citizen participation.
• Horizontal Power Sharing: Legislature, executive, judiciary (checks and balances).
• Vertical Power Sharing: Central, state, local governments (federalism).
• Community Government (Belgium): Power for linguistic groups on cultural, educational, language matters.
• Majoritarianism (Sri Lanka): Belief that the majority community should be able to rule a country in whichever way it wants, disregarding the wishes and needs of the minority.
• Consequences: Accommodation leads to stability; majoritarianism can lead to conflict and civil war.

Extra Practice Questions

1. Explain the concept of ‘checks and balances’ in power sharing.
2. How did the Belgian model of power sharing address the problem of ethnic diversity, particularly in Brussels?
3. Discuss the main reasons behind the Sri Lankan Tamils’ feeling of alienation.
4. Identify and describe the three major forms of power sharing practiced in modern democracies.
5. What lessons can be learned from the contrasting experiences of Belgium and Sri Lanka regarding power sharing?