Tag: war

World Globalization

Every year, Heads of State and/or their representatives (for example, Foreign Affairs Ministers) travel to the headquarters of the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) for the opening of its annual session. Besides high-level meetings and events, the week includes the General Debate, where all 193 countries integrating the UN have the opportunity to make a speech to the General Assembly.

In the UN General Assembly all countries are equal and each represents one vote. Of the 193 countries, 130 (67%) were colonized by European countries. Of these 130 countries, 45% (58 countries) were colonized by the United Kingdom (UK) and 18% (24 countries) by France. The other 48 countries were colonized by both, by other countries, or by more than one other country. To be noted that the UK and France are 2 of the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council and have the right of veto.

The General Debate speeches this year clearly shows a division between the countries:

      Group 1: Those justifying some kind of war and stating that the UN is going through an existential crisis.

      Group 2: Those defending peace (ending all conflicts through diplomacy) and thankful for the work of the UN, which have been helping their countries overcome their struggles and challenges (mainly related to climate change and the improvement of their population’s living conditions). They are fierce defenders of the UN, stating, however, that the seats at the table are unevenly distributed.

Colonization is still an open wound. Ex-colonies have many complaints regarding ex-colonizers, of interference in their sovereignty and financial aid that keeps them in poverty. However, these countries, that fought and successfully achieved their independence, are not giving up. They are finding ways (most of them as alternatives to those provided by the Western countries) to solve their problems. Organizations aiming at international collaboration are being established between them and funding in alternating channels is being sought for their innovative projects.

The United States of America (USA) is leading Group 1. In his speech, which lasted for 56 minutes, the President of the USA stressed the need for protectionism, threats, and war (both domestically and internationally). No country was spared: all of them were on a wrong path, according to him, especially in what climate change was concerned. He also stated that the UN was useless.

China, leading Group 2, made a point to contradict the USA’s statement. In 20 minutes, the Premier of the State Council of China advocated for peace, international cooperation, and the need to fight climate change. Although recognizing that the UN is in need of a reform, especially to distribute more seats to non-Western countries at the table, he reinforced how important the role of the UN is to the world. He also showed that alternatives to the Western rules and initiatives are being developed. In sheer contrast to the USA’s statement, China summarized their achievements on the path to peace, international cooperation, and fight against climate change. The Premier of the State Council said:

As a founding member of the UN, China has all along taken an active part in Global Affairs and worked for the betterment of humanity. Over the years, President Xi Jinping has put forward the vision of building a community with a shared future for humanity: the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilizacional Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative.

The fact that Heads of State from 193 countries can make a speech at the same podium shows that the UN is a place where everyone can have a voice. Whether that voice is heard or not by the other countries is another matter. Countries from Group 1 do not listen to anything but their own voices whereas countries from Group 2 pay attention to everything everyone is saying… and they learn. Interestingly, the UN principles were set by the countries of Group 1, but they are followed and advocated by the countries of Group 2. Countries from Group 1 vowed never again to go down the very same path they are walking on now. And countries from Group 2 are warning them to leave that path and go back.

As it was repeated abundantly in the General Debate, this year marks the 80th year of the end of World War II and the establishment of the UN Charter. German Nazism and Italian fascism were defeated by France, Russia (then Soviet Union), the UK, and the USA in Europe (with repercussions to the rest of the world due to the colonies) and Japanese fascism was defeated by China in Asia (with repercussions to neighbouring countries). These victorious countries are the permanent members of the UN Security Council with the right to veto and the ones that created the UN Charter and defined the rules for its implementation and operation.

Since then, many countries were divided into more countries and many colonies gained their independence. In 1945, of the 193 current UN countries, 91 countries (47%) were still under the sovereignty of one or more founding members as colonies, protectorates or under a UN trusteeship. These countries have a total of 30,556,569 km2 of surface area, which correspond to 23% of the total surface area of all 193 UN countries (which is 133,663,404 km2).

Of these 91 countries, 67 countries (74%) were under the direct administration of the UK (45 countries, 49%) and France (22 countries, 24%). The other 24 countries (26%) were under the administration of the UK together with France and/or other countries, the USA (3 countries), or the direct administration of other countries. On the other hand, when the Soviet Union collapsed, 12 countries (6% of the total of the current UN countries) gained their independence. As the Russian Federation was the “heir” of what was left from the Soviet Union, in a way these 12 countries were under Russian administration. This means that 82 countries out of the current 193 countries were, in 1945, integrated in 4 (out of 5) of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. It corresponds to a total of 22,671,758 km2 of surface area, 17% of the total surface area of the 193 current UN countries

As we can see, the world has changed. Or, better yet, the political world has changed. Nature is still the same, resources are still in the same place. Yet, those precious resources have changed hands. Until 1945, the world was divided between those that would provide the resources (the colonies) and those that would transform the resources and get wealthier and wealthier. Now that the ex-colonies are independent, they are looking to learn how to transform their own resources and create wealth. And the wealthier countries are losing ground.

Of the 49 remaining UN founding countries (Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia gave rise to new countries), 22 countries are from America (45%), 12 countries are from Europe (25%), 9 countries are from Asia (18%), 4 countries are from Africa (8%), and 2 countries are from Oceania (4%). Now, in 2025, 54 countries are from Africa (28%), 47 countries are from Asia (24%), 43 countries are from Europe (22%), 35 countries are from America (18%), and 14 countries (7%) are from Oceania. It is obvious that the weight of African countries has shifted. Actually, the weight of African countries in the UN grew from 4 countries to 54 countries, which corresponds to a 1150% increase in representation. Oceania is the second continent with the greatest increase: from only 2 countries to 14 countries, it had a 600% increase in representation. Asia increased 422% and Europe increased 258%. America was the continent with the smallest increase: 59%.

Due to the loss of their colonies, the UK and France have considerably shrunk their territory and influence in the world. Their surface area is 242,495 km2 (UK) and 551,500 (France), which corresponds to 0.2% and 0.4%, respectively, of the total surface areas of all 193 UN countries. On the other hand, Russian Federation is still the largest country in the world (17,098,246 km2 of surface area, which corresponds to 13% of the total surface areas of all 193 UN countries), even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and it remains an important player in world politics. The USA is the third largest country in the world (with 9,833,517 km2, which corresponds to 7% of the total surface areas of all 193 UN countries) while China is the fourth (with 9,600,000 km2, which corresponds to 7% of the total surface areas of all 193 UN countries).

Therefore, the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council (those with the right to veto) have together a surface area of 37,325,758 km2, corresponding to 28% of the total surface areas of all 193 UN countries. African countries have a total of 30,023,968 km2 (22%). If the surface areas of Oceania countries (a sum of 8,488,032km2, corresponding to 6% of the total) are added, then these two continents surpass the 5 permanent members of the Security Council because they have 29% of the total.

Europe includes the Russian Federation in its statistics. However, and considering that most of Russian territory is in fact located in Asia (Siberia), if we take out Russian surface area from Europe’s, the sum of the surface area of all other countries is 5,886,912 km2, corresponding to 4% of the total surface areas of all 193 UN countries. European countries, especially the UK and France, which used to rule the world, are now facing their real dimension. It is scary and it is no wonder they are trying their best to remain relevant. Unfortunately, their continued arrogance is not doing them any favors. In the meanwhile, the USA is relying on their wealth and military power to keep its hegemony, but the Russian Federation and, especially, China have already understood the figures. And the figures are saying that African countries, together with the islands in the Pacific, all the countries south of the USA, and China’s Asian neighbours are rising. Independence was just the first step. Now, they are climbing the other steps, regardless of having the support or the opposition of their former masters.

 
Sources:

 


 

The finalists of the Earthshot Prize 2025 have been announced. Founded in 2020, the Earthshot Prize aims to finance every year the best initiatives that effectively help tackle climate change and environment issues. It’s truly remarkable how many people are working to make the planet a better place for all of us to live in.

 
Check the website daily to read the highlight of the day.
 


 

Best of “Foreign Lands”

Dear Readers,

After renewing its website, “Words in Ideas” is preparing its 3rd year of fresh new articles, starting in October. While you wait, you can read (or re-read) the best articles under the category “Foreign Lands”. These articles aim to compare languages and cultures.

 

 
During the first year, articles described some traditional food around the world. Here are the 5 best:

 

 
In the 2nd year, we followed the discoveries of a group of language learners. Here are the 5 best:

 

 
This 3rd year, “Words in Ideas” will discuss some cultural crossroads.

 
If you wish to comment or send suggestions, please fill in the form at the end of each website page.

Thank you!
Words in Ideas
https://wordsinideas.com/
 

Best of “Word Chronicles”

Dear Readers,

After renewing its website, “Words in Ideas” is preparing its 3rd year of fresh new articles, starting in October. While you wait, you can read (or re-read) the best articles under the category “Word Chronicles”. These articles aim to clarify words’ meaning.

 

 
During the first year, articles were focused on words’ origin and meaning. Here are the 5 best:

 

 
In the 2nd year, keywords are analysed under two different perspectives. Here are the 5 best:

 

 
This 3rd year, “Words in Ideas” will confront two opposite concepts.

 
If you wish to comment or send suggestions, please fill in the form at the end of each website page.

Thank you!
Words in Ideas
https://wordsinideas.com/
 

Best of “The Intrepid Book Society”

Dear Readers,

After renewing its website, “Words in Ideas” is preparing its 3rd year of fresh new articles, starting in October. While you wait, you can read (or re-read) the best articles under the category “The Intrepid Book Society”. This “Society” is a fictional book club, analysing a book per month according to a keyword or a key place.

 

 
During the first year, articles were written as reviews. Here are the 5 best:

 

 
In the 2nd year, fictional members discussed the plots between themselves. Here are the 5 best:

 

 
This 3rd year, “Words in Ideas” will test your knowledge (or, hopefully, making you curious in reading) the book of the month.

 
If you wish to comment or send suggestions, please fill in the form at the end of each website page.

Thank you!
Words in Ideas
https://wordsinideas.com/
 

Elizabeth in Vietnam

The decision to visit Vietnam was made on an impulse after months of looking for possible travel destinations. The descriptions of how beautiful the country was, the fact that the country was located in an exotic geographical location, or just because Elizabeth knew nothing about it, could have influenced her choice. She was aware that a fierce war had taken place there, which the USA had lost. After booking the trip, she found out that Vietnam had been a French colony and this sparked her curiosity even more, as she was a student of the French language. What would have been the legacy left by the French, she wondered.

Once there, she realized that the French influence was elusive, but the country turned out to be surprising, with a fascinating culture. The war with the USA was present, yet gone. It was like it was something that had happened and which had shaped the country, but, although the people were still overcoming it, it was a closed matter. Interestingly enough, Elizabeth didn’t see any burgers or pizzas franchises. The Western influence was like the Chinese influence: had been assimilated and transformed into something typically Vietnamese.

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

“Looking back into the future”, by Isabella Muir

I’ve been looking back as a way of looking forward! Studying history is a useful way to reflect on the past, to discover lessons that may be learned to prepare ourselves for the future. The more I look back, the more I can see that so many world events recycle themselves in a never-ending repetition of gain and loss.
My personal fascination with history is in events that affected Britain during and after the Second World War, and the more I learn, the more I see a familiarity in the arguments being posed today about the way forward for our increasingly fractured world.
But for now let’s focus on the 1960s, when more than a decade after the end of the Second World War, Britain was still reeling from the loss of life, the devastation, and the underlying fear that such hard-earned peace might be short-lived.
The sixties brought with it a generation of youngsters who believed they could put the past behind them and surge forward to a better life. Social and political attitudes began to change, with significant events acting as forerunners of even greater change.
I explore some of those changes in a series of fictional stories, entitled the Mountfield Road Mysteries where we meet some tenants who come to live in a tiny bedsit at Number 1, Mountfield Road, in the Sussex seaside town of Hastings. The tenants have little in common, except for their decision to rent a room from a certain Mr Humphrey, a landlord who is a stickler for traditions and protocols that were fast disappearing.
The first book in the series, Storms of Change [external link], is set in 1960. We meet Marcus Chase, a young man keen to throw off the constraints of his childhood and teenage years, breaking free from his home in London and moving south to Hastings.
He meets Fred and Gilly Barnes, the couple who rent the flat below, and is soon absorbed by their tales of adventure, impressed by their carefree attitude to life. But like everything in life, all is not as bright as it would first appear…
One year on, in Whispers of Fortune [external link], we meet Sally Hilton, a young woman who is certain 1961 could be her year.
‘You can be whoever and whatever you want to be,’ are her mother’s words to Sally throughout her childhood. But Sally doesn’t know who she wants to be. That is the problem.
When the thirty-fifth President of the United States is elected to office, Sally Hilton is worrying about the ladder in her stockings. It’s her only pair and needs to last until payday on Friday. In his augural speech, John F. Kennedy promises significant change to his fellow Americans. In Britain, the sense of euphoria is contagious. If not us, then who? If not now, when? Powerful words spill out from the skilled orator, and Sally Hilton, with her laddered stockings and empty purse, wants to believe they will make a difference. Change is coming, not just for Americans, but for the ‘free world’, whatever that means.
Then Sally notices a card in the newsagent’s window. It feels like a sign…
In the third book in the series, Flashes of Doubt [external link], we meet William Arnold. Forced into retirement, having to leave his cosy cottage and move to a tiny bedsit in Mountfield Road, Hastings, William Arnold wants nothing more than to remember the past, a time when he understood the world, when he had a role to play, a purpose. Then William meets sixteen-year-old Peter, a young lad who challenges William to revise his thinking completely…
The 1960s was a decade when young people were finding their voice and older people were struggling to come to terms with the newly defined ‘generation gap’.
Some say the ‘swinging sixties’ really took off in Britain in 1964, the year that saw the Beatles rise to international fame, but it was 1960 when the group first got together, playing sessions in the now world-famous Cavern Club in Liverpool by 1961. An explosion of talent emerged during the next few years, with a host of pop and rock artists, many whose music is just as popular today.
Mary Quant, among others, transformed the way young people dressed, as interior designers, such as Terence Conran, transformed the way many people furnished their homes, offering contemporary furniture at affordable prices.
As well as music and fashion, the growth of consumerism and the widespread availability of labour-saving devices meant people had more leisure time to enjoy.
It was also the decade when car ownership took off, with estimates suggesting the numbers of people owning cars rose during the decade from around nine million to fifteen million. Thinking back to my childhood, I recall so few cars passed by our house there was no danger for me to cross the road on my own at the tender age of eight. And yet, that same road now sees tens of thousands of vehicles pass along it every day, with young and old taking their life in their hands should they decide to venture from one side to the other.
A typical 1960s house was difficult to heat, with windows that let in as much of the weather as they kept out. Central heating hadn’t arrived for most families, leaving them with few options – a coal fire (with coal being an expensive commodity), a two-bar electric fire, which would eat up any money being put into the meter, or a paraffin stove with its fumes.
Young people had grown up in the shadow of war, with new threats being posed by the Cold War and growing tensions between the East and West. National Service was still in place, an experience that brought up conflicting emotions for many young men. What was right and what was wrong when it came to conflict? There were no easy answers then and many would say, there are no easy answers now.
With the threat of nuclear armaments circling, many young people joined the peace protests taking place across Britain. The term ‘teenager’ only entered into common usage in Britain during the 1950s. Around that time young people started to find their voice, with two distinct groups emerging: beatniks and teddy boys.
Both groups were strongly influenced by American music, Teddy Boys loving rock and roll, wearing long, draped jackets, and sporting the kind of hairstyle worn by Elvis Presley with his slicked back quiff, all kept in place with plenty of Brylcreem. Beatniks, by contrast, wore duffel coats and berets, long hair and preferred jazz. The ‘beat generation’ was said to have been inspired by writers such as Jack Kerouac, among others. Reacting to the experiences of the Second World War, this was a movement that sought to promote peace. Later in the sixties, the ideals promoted by beatniks were taken forward by another aspect of the counter-culture of that period – the hippies.
Both groups frequented coffee bars, vying over the jukebox. In the 1950s and 1960s, coffee bars were popular meeting places for teenagers. They were often the setting for live music, as well as the ubiquitous jukebox. Skiffle music was popular at that time, a type of jazz and blues-influenced folk music that was the precursor to British rock ‘n’ roll.
British teenagers made coffee bars their own; they were a cheap place to ‘hang out’, after all, coffee had no legal age limit. It’s said that London’s most famous 1950s coffee bar – the ’21s’ – famously launched, among others, Tommy Steele and Cliff Richard. In Liverpool, the Jacaranda club in Slater Street was a haunt for the Beatles in their early days, while Cilla Black waitressed at the Zodiac coffee bar in Duke Street, another musicians’ favourite.
Many women in their middle years who survived the Second World War came to realise they could achieve more with their lives than previously imagined. With so many men away fighting, women had taken on vital roles as mechanics, engineers, air raid wardens, bus and fire engine drivers. They took on dangerous work in munition factories and helped to build ships and aeroplanes. The end of the war brought an enormous change for them, as well as for the men who returned from the front. Attitudes had shifted, new horizons had opened up, and the years that followed confirmed that nothing would be quite the same again.
Aside from the changes that a strengthening youth culture brought about, Britain began to see the problems brought about by intensive farming, with nature beginning to suffer. Alongside the rise in car ownership, new towns were built where there was previously agricultural land. How much consideration was being given to the environment? We see the longer term effects now, with our loss of wildlife habitats and the very real fears about climate change.
Across the world, in China, as part of Chairman Mao Zedong’s ‘Great Leap Forward’ initiative that ran from 1958 to 1962, the Chinese people were ordered to eliminate rats, flies, mosquitoes, and sparrows. The order came as the authorities decided that these ‘pests’ were damaging crops and the sparrows were eating too much grain. Over that period some one billion sparrows were killed, including the total population of tree sparrows. However, it seems the Chairman’s plan would backfire. The sparrows were a vital part of the Chinese ecosystem, as well as eating grain, sparrows ate locusts. Without the sparrows the locusts flourished. By 1960, locusts decimated the rice crops, resulting in one of the worst man-made famines ever experienced. The exact numbers of people who died during the famine is unknown, but it’s suggested that it was between twenty and forty million people. It’s certainly a reminder that tampering with nature will inevitably create problems for our whole ecosystem, mankind included.
I will continue to explore the past, to learn from the good and the bad, and above all, continue to hope for a positive future. •

Isabella Muir [external link] writes novels, novellas, and short stories about post-Second War World Britain and she runs an independent publishing company, Outset Publishing. Some of Isabella Muir’s books are translated into Italian [external link] and Portuguese.

 

The war, la guerre, der Krieg, la guerra

While in Europe nations were busy with wars like the Greco-Persian Wars (including the Battle of Thermopylae, when King Leonidas from Esparta, with his 300 soldiers, faced the troops of King Xerxes from Persia), in China people were living under the Zhou Dynasty. Sun Tzu, the author of “The Art of War”, and Confucius lived and developed their work at this time. The latter deeply influenced China and his philosophy is still at the root of today’s society. He based his teachings on family devotion, rituals, and a sense of community, refusing the idea that wealth and power were paramount. Complementarily, Sun Tzu stated in his book that “supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting” (chapter III, #2). Chinese culture was based on the belief that diplomacy and trade was more effective than war and war should only be considered as a last resort, only when it was absolutely unavoidable. When finally going to war, according to Sun Tzu, five factors would be taken into account: the moral influence, time, terrain, commander, and doctrine. In other words, they would carefully study the enemy, the terrain and its conditions before they would attack.

Nearby, Feudal Japan was permanently in war because warlords were always fighting for power. Samurai were a group of warriors (called bushi) that were allowed to carry swords everywhere and had a licence to kill. The word means “to serve”, as in serving their master, their daimyo. The onna-musha, meaning “female warriors”, were women-samurai, who fought alongside men-samurai. Over time, samurai became more powerful, rising to an aristocratic level and being even more important than warlords.

However, at that time, there were other groups of warriors. Ninjas, meaning a “person (ja) that perseveres, conceals, moves stealthily (nin)”, were trained very secretly in different martial art techniques, especially ninjutsu, to become spies and assassins. The ashigaru, meaning “light foot”, were former peasants turned into foot soldiers that were under the orders of samurai. The ikkō-ikki were rebels that stood against samurai. Then there were the “monk soldiers”, the sōhei, who had their own agenda. A final mention to the rōnin, who were samurai that had lost their master and were roaming the country. Often, they would become trouble makers.

If Robin Hood and his gang were Japanese, they would belong to the ikkō-ikki class. In Feudal Europe, instead of daimyo there were kings, instead of samurai there were knights, instead of ashigaru there were mercenaries. Knights were loyal to their kings or to their religious order (like Templars). If Templars were Japanese, they would belong to the sōhei class. Mercenaries were men hired by the armies to fight for money. Back then, the notion of “nation” or “country” was very different from today’s concept and men didn’t fight out of patriotism. It was a job, like any other, and men would fight for whoever paid higher. It could happen that they would fight one day for an army and fight for the opposing army the next day. They were loyal only to money. Before their country would become neutral, Swiss mercenaries were considered the most prestigious soldiers. They were regarded as “elite”.

Germany was also a great provider of mercenaries and this had an impact in its culture, namely in some idiomatic expressions that are still used today. For example, in the battlefield, there were men whose job was to hold the flag to serve as reference for the troops. It was not easy, but they would “bei der Stange bleiben” (“stick with it” by standing by the pole). There was also a lot of dust, with horses running up and down and warriors fighting fiercely. Those who would desert during the battle would “aus dem Staub machen” (“make a run for it” by getting out of the dust). If they would desert outside the battlefields, they would only have “die Flinge ins Korn werfen” (“throw in the towel” by tossing their rifle to a corn field). Back in the day, mercenaries didn’t wear a uniform, like military do nowadays, so they would only be recognised by being in the possession of a rifle. If they would get rid of their rifle, they would kind of stop being a soldier. However, they could leave the army without deserting if the army would one “Laufpass geben” (“end the relationship” by giving a pass).

According to the United Nations, peace «not only is the absence of conflict, but also requires a positive, dynamic participatory process where dialogue is encouraged and conflicts are solved in a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation». This definition is included in the “Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace”. In a way, this is in line with the Chinese ancient view of war: to avoid it and focus on trade prosperity instead. In fact, peace is much more advantageous, economically and socially. Check the examples of Germany and Japan after the Second World War. However, war fills mythological stories around the world. Warriors are seen as heroes and conflicts are often shown as necessary to defend a nation from aggressive, powerful, and overwhelming armies or to liberate some oppressed nation. The “best” stories are those where a few defeats many. On the other hand, there are also stories about the consequences of the war on civilians during and/or afterwards.

The Second World War is the period with (by far) most “stories”, mainly because of spies. Oh, yes. A spy in this context is someone who is paid to “spill the beans” about the enemy. In Britain they are known as “spooks”. This means that “ghosts” are trying to find and disclose secret information, like “flies on the wall” (someone who hears without being seen).

Wars continue to evolve, even if they are basically the same and are based on similar “justifications”. Nowadays, new concepts are emerging like cyberwar and hybrid warfare. In an increasingly globalized world, where everything and everyone is connected, war is also becoming a global issue and the ways to fight it are getting similar from country to country.

 

Keyword: WAR | Women in war

War is no place for women. There is too much violence and terror. Women should be protected and stay at home where it is safe, patiently waiting for men to return while taking care of the children. Except… “at home”, they are left to be raped my enemy troops, bombed by enemy planes, expelled from their houses by enemy invaders. Violence and terror are unavoidable, unless war is thousands of kilometres away. In this case, apprehension takes over and women live in constant anxiety. Better to do something. That is why they prepare the defences of the places where they live, they go to work the fields and feed themselves and their children (and also sending supplies to the troops); they replace men in factories (especially of weapons and ammunition); they take care of their husbands’ businesses; they fundraise money to send to the army. Others enlist as nurses, as spies, as members of the resistance, as code breakers, as strategists *.

War is no place for women. John Keegan, an English historian and Professor in the Military Academy, stated that “women (…) do not fight” and that “warfare (…) is an entirely masculine activity”. John Keegan forgot (or was totally unaware) about the many women who disguised themselves as men to go to (probably) all battles that were ever fought. There are some records of this, but many remain hidden in history. John Keegan also forgot (or was totally unaware) about women like Queen Boudicca, who led her people in the fight (and beating) the Romans; the emperor’s consort Lady Fu Hao, who successfully commanded an entire army and conquered many lands; Queen Nzinga Mbande, who fought (and having some success) the Portuguese colonialism; and the university student Lyudmila Pavlichenko, who is still the most accomplished female sniper (having killed 309 Nazis). This is just to name a few **. Men with John Keegan’s mentality have been doing research on history and archaeology, deliberately preventing women from contributing. So, when a DNA test was made on a Viking’s skeleton, who everyone assumed was a male warrior, and it was discovered to be a skeleton of a female warrior no one could believe it. Surprise, surprise.

War is no place for women. Nowadays, there are 11 countries in the world where military service is mandatory for women (as well as for men): Benin, Cape Verde, Eritrea, Israel, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, North Korea, Norway, Sweden, and Tunisia. Denmark will soon be part of this list. Many other countries accept women in their armed forces as volunteers. Thus, today there are many generals, military engineers, commanders of Navy ships, Army troops, and Air Force squadrons, military nurses and military doctors who are women. There are even female snipers and submarine crew female members. This time, all official and duly registered.

War is no place for women. In a conversation with the military historian Margaret MacMillan, the writer Sarah Hall realized that “women’s exclusions from armies and from institutions are commonplace, but they are also excised from historical documentation and artistic representation”. It’s as if women are not allowed to write about war, whether it’s imposed by men or self-imposed. Margaret MacMillan ignored men who were trying to belittle her and wrote many books about war. Born right after World War II, Svetlana Alexievich had heard about war since a little child. War was everywhere, but little was being said about the one million women who fought alongside men in the Soviet Army. Thus, Svetlana Alexievich, as a journalist, decided to write the book “The Unwomanly Face of War: An Oral History of Women in World War II”, a collection of stories directly told by Soviet women who fought in World War II. More recently, a former USA trooper who served in Iraq, Brian Van Reet, chose a woman to be the protagonist of his book “Spoils”, where he describes, in a fictional story, the true horror of the war.

War is no place for women. Our society still sees women as “vulnerable”, “non-violent”, and only going to war as part of the “resistance” or to carry out “auxiliary jobs”. If we look closely, the narrative about women in war is often about how they sacrifice their motherhood, leaving their children behind, and how they stop feeling “feminine” as in becoming cold with their boyfriends or husbands. Or remaining unmarried, the horror. Men also have children and also leave them behind. Men also miss their families. Men also become cold with their girlfriends or wives when they return home due to the terrible things they have witnessed. But men are heroes whereas women are not even mentioned. The job is the same, the horror is the same, the consequences are the same to both men and women. Both men and women have to learn how to kill, learn the tactics of war, learn how to work with each other to avoid dying. The training is the same. But men are seen as more capable than women, regardless of the fact that women have proven over and over again that they are perfectly able to do the same as men. On the other hand, there are also pacifists among men. When military service is mandatory, there are always many men who try to escape it. And, as you read above, when women can’t be accepted, they disguise as men to take the place of those men who are escaping it.

War is no place for women. Yeah, right.

 

* Watch the documentary “War Gamers” on how a group of women found the way to beat the U-Boot strategy, turning the tables in the Battle of the Atlantic.

** Check the extensive lists of women in ancient warfare, women in warfare (1500–1699), women in 18th-century warfare, women in warfare and the military in the 19th century, women in warfare and the military (1900–1945), women in World War I, women in World War II, women in warfare and the military (1945–1999), and women in warfare and the military (2000–present).

Also…
. Read and watch the video at the end of the page about what happened to British women during the World War I: “12 Things You Didn’t Know About Women In The First World War”

 

Keyword: WAR | War’s Propaganda

In 1622, the Sacred Congregation for Propagation of the Faith (known as Propaganda), was established to regulate the work of missionaries. Their mission was to spread the word of the (Catholic) Lord to the entire world. It was not always peaceful and the word was sometimes more imposed than spread. The term Propaganda evolved to mean “the spreading of ideas, information, or rumour for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person”. Nowadays, it pretty much means making people believe in ideas or false information for a certain purpose. The difference between propaganda and marketing (or advertising) is the aim. The first aims to make people believe in governmental lies for political purposes, the second aims to make people believe they need to buy products or acquire services they don’t really need.

War is an especially fertile ground for propaganda. Governments need to make people believe that war is absolutely necessary and, thus, they twist the facts or simply lie about them. Arthur Ponson was a Member of Parliament in Great Britain and he was one of the few who stood against the participation of his country in World War I. In truth, he spent his life advocating for peace and he was even physically and psychologically attacked because of it. In 1928, he published the book “Falsehood in War-time”, where he stated at the beginning of the introduction:

      Falsehood is a recognized and extremely useful weapon in warfare, and every country uses it quite deliberately to deceive its own people, to attract neutrals, and to mislead the enemy. The ignorant and innocent masses in each country are unaware at the time that they are being misled, and when it is all over only here and there are the falsehoods discovered and exposed. As it is all past history and the desired effect has been produced by the stories and statements, no one troubles to investigate the facts and establish the truth.

In this book, Arthur Ponson exposes the lies told by governments during the World War I. Based on this, in 2001, Anne Morelli summarized his work and published the book “The Basic Principles of War Propaganda” *. She explains each Principle and gives examples from other wars that took place after World War I, showing that the same techniques are still used today. This is also confirmed in a documentary from Spiegel TV called “Fake War”, under the perspective of the use of mass media in war propaganda. The first episode is about World War I and mentions some of the false events described by Arthur Ponson.

Before World War I began, photography was used to complement articles published in newspapers. Film, which had been discovered by the end of the 19th century, was also used for the first time for propaganda purposes. Staged scenes of atrocities carried out by the enemy served Principle #3, showing the enemy as evil and full of heartless creatures. It also prepared the population for war. In fact, the British Government had created the first (secret) propaganda department with the aim of conveying false information in a way that looked objective and true. The target was the Germans and the Germans failed to properly respond to this campaign. However, years later, the Nazis took propaganda to another level. Inspired by the corporation advertising, the Minister of Propaganda conceived a coordinated plan using newspapers, photography, radio and film to influence the minds of the German population (they also tried to influence foreign countries, but failed), feeding them with lies and manipulating their thinking.

In the Vietnam War, the situation was reversed. There were no restrictions on journalists’ movements and there was not any kind of governmental censorship. This did not mean that the USA Government had given up on official propaganda. By this time, television was widespread throughout the world and journalists were no longer limited to written articles, outdated photos, and staged films. The problem was that the lies conveyed in official statements were being systematically debunked on a daily basis by the images that were shown on television and by the photographs that were published in newspapers. The discrepancy between these images and the official statements was considerable, which resulted in huge demonstrations and protests in the USA.

This was a lesson that the USA learned very well. In the Gulf War and in the Iraq War journalists were no longer authorized to go to the front line and they had no information on what was actually happening. This time, all the Principles were successfully applied. Both the general public and the journalists were fed with lies they could not dispute. Therefore, the war looked perfectly justifiable. It was only later, when the USA finally left Iraq, that journalists were made aware of the consequences of the US invasion and all the atrocities committed.

The Internet, especially social media, is making it increasingly difficult to control information. Yet, it is also making it increasingly easier to spread false information. Nowadays, propaganda is more than ever being confused with authentic information, even when it is proven to be false. Furthermore, there is this idea that propaganda is something that is only produced by the other side. People from “the other side” are the ones who are being brainwashed. Those in “our side” who disagree with what is said about the other side are liars and traitors. If we look closely, this is Principle #10.

As Aeschylus, the Greek and so-called father of tragedy, said: “in war, truth is the first casualty”.

 

* The 10 Principles are:
1. We do not want war.
2. The opposite party alone is guilty of war.
3. The enemy is inherently evil and resembles the devil.
4. We defend a noble cause, not our own interests.
5. The enemy commits atrocities on purpose; our mishaps are involuntary.
6. The enemy uses forbidden weapons.
7. We suffer small losses, those of the enemy are enormous.
8. Recognized artists and intellectuals back our cause.
9. Our cause is sacred.
10. All who doubt our propaganda are traitors.

 

Keyword: WAR | “Das Boot”, by Lothar-Günther Buchheim

Lothar-Günther Buchheim was born in 1918. He was 15 years old when the Nazis took power and, while attending the Hitler Youth’s meetings, where he had military training, he seized the opportunity to take photos and write articles about the activities of the organization. When World War II broke out, he was studying art, but he left his studies to become a war reporter for the regime. The Ministry of Propaganda had created military structures (called Propagandakompanie, known as PK) to train and employ war reports in the service of propaganda. These reporters would transmit information for the general public about what was happening in the front line (according to the Minister’s guidelines, obviously) via photography, cinema, and written articles.

After finishing his PK training in Potsdam, he was sent to Baule-les-Pins, 15 kilometres away from the port of Saint-Nazaire, to report about U-Boots. In the meantime, the U-96, whose Commander was Captain Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock, arrived there around that time and the first photos Buchheim took in the port was precisely of its return from its 3rd mission in the Atlantic, in March 1941. Both men met later and, in October 1941, Buchheim was assigned to participate in the 7th mission of the U-96 submarine. A dedicated, thorough, and enthusiastic “PK man” (as he was known), Buchheim took 5000 photos, documenting everything and everyone. The result was unique and historical. His photos were published in several newspapers and magazines, influencing many young men to enlist in the Navy as submarine crew.

The mission began in October 1941 and ended in December 1941. During those months, Lothar-Günther Buchheim lived in the submarine alongside the crew and became a great friend of Captain Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock and First-Engineer Freidrich Grade. Years after the war had ended, when he wrote a book about this experience, the two military officials were paramount to review the details of “Das Boot”. Although it was a novel, he wanted the story to be as authentic as possible. Freidrich Grade corrected and explained all the technical details of a submarine and Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock gave him all the detailed information about the chain of command and how orders were given.

The book became an international bestseller precisely due to its detailed and authentic description of how life was inside a U-Boot. It starts with a scene at a hotel, as a way to describe the military setting. This was probably inspired by what Buchheim witnessed in the Hotel Majestic, where the U-Boot officials stayed when they were not on mission. The second chapter is dedicated to the submarine itself, how it was constructed, how it operated, how people would move around performing their routines, where they would sleep and eat, how they would relate to each other. The description of each post is detailed and we get an idea of the role that each man played inside the submarine. Then, the author tells what they did when there was nothing to do. Contrary to what one might expect, this is actually very interesting due to the mastery of the narrative.

The action itself (the attack on a convoy and the attempts to escape from the British Navy) are so vivid it seems the readers are there, alongside the military personnel, feeling the same emotions. The encounter with another U-Boot in the middle of a storm actually happened. In fact, the attacks and the escape also happened, as did the stopover in the Port of Vigo and the attempt to enter the Mediterranean Sea through the Strait of Gibraltar. Impressive is also the description of being inside of a submarine during a storm. It’s something similar to being inside a washing machine.

The book was published in 1973 and in 1981 a film was released, aiming to meticulously depict the book. A documentary entitled “U-96 – The true story of Das Boot” was released in 2022 with accounts from people who were involved in the production of the film. It also includes an interview with the First-Engineer Freidrich Grade himself, the last survivor of the U-96, who was still alive at the time.

The film was faithful to the book just as the book had been faithful to reality. After watching the film, submariners were surprised at how much the film captured what they actually lived. The aim of the book’s author was to show the military’s point of view, those who were fighting the war inside the German submarines and had just on mission: sinking British ships. Some say it was an antiwar story. Regardless of whether this is true or not, the book (and the film) is a remarkable historical document, even though it is fiction.

By reading the book and/or watching the film, we learn what those German military went through during the Battle of the Atlantic. About 70% of the U-Boots’ crew died.

 
The book for next month will be “Le Petit Prince”, by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry.

 

Keyword: PLACES | “Prisoners of Geography” by Tim Marshall

“Prisoners of Geography” is a book about geopolitics. It is written in a very easy-to-read manner, but with all the depth needed to fully understand what really is going on in the world. Most of the time, reporters fail to give us the news with the necessary depth for us to comprehend the events which are unfolding. Many grey areas are left unexplained and many layers remain to be unveiled.

In this book, we can find answers to some of the most pressing geopolitical issues that shape the world today. Why is Russia always looking to expand its territory and influence the neighbouring countries? How is China challenging the USA as a world superpower? How did the USA become a world superpower? Other topics are also explored about Europe and the geography that shaped its nations, Africa and its difficulties for developing itself economically, the Middle East and its eternal conflicts, India and Pakistan and their constant mutual threats as well as their relationship with Afghanistan, the history of Korea’s division, Japan after the World War II, the geographical reasons why Latin America struggles in the global economy… and the Arctic. The readers’ view of the world will definitely change.

Tim Marshall is a British journalist specialized in foreign affairs. He was in the field during the Balkan wars in the 1990s, Kosovo’s bombardments in 1999, and the “Arab Spring” in 2010. He also followed on site the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. Besides reporting throughout Europe, USA, and Asia, he was a Middle East Correspondent in Jerusalem and a Europe Correspondent in Brussels. After more than 30 years interviewing different people, from those in the field doing the fighting to world leaders making the decisions, he now dedicates himself to writing and analysing.

Tim Marshall wrote a second book, “The Power of Geography: Ten Maps that Reveal the Future of Our World”, detailing issues regarding some of the regions analysed in the first book plus other regions that were not included, like Australia… and the Space. Then, he furthered the Space topic in a third book, “The Future of Geography: How Power and Politics in Space will Change our World”.