Q1: Read the source below and answer the questions that follow:
Belgium is a small country in Europe with a complex ethnic composition. The country’s population consists of 59% Dutch-speaking people in the Flemish region, 40% French-speaking people in the Wallonia region, and 1% German-speaking people. In Brussels, the capital city, 80% speak French, while 20% speak Dutch. The French-speaking community was wealthier, which caused resentment among the Dutch-speaking population. To accommodate these differences and prevent conflicts, Belgium introduced a unique power-sharing model, ensuring equal representation for both communities in governance.
i. What were the two main linguistic groups in Belgium? (1 mark)
ii. Why did the Dutch-speaking community resent the French-speaking community? (1 mark)
iii. How did Belgium’s government ensure power-sharing among different communities? (2 marks)
Ans:
i. The two main linguistic groups in Belgium were Dutch-speaking (59%) and French-speaking (40%).
ii. The Dutch-speaking community resented the French-speaking community because the French-speaking people were wealthier and more powerful, despite being a minority.
iii. Belgium ensured power-sharing by:
- Giving equal representation to both linguistic groups in the central government.
- Granting autonomy to regional governments to manage their own affairs.
- Establishing a special community government to handle cultural and linguistic matters, ensuring the rights of all communities were protected.
Q2: Read the source below and answer the questions that follow:
After gaining independence in 1948, Sri Lanka adopted majoritarian policies that favored the Sinhala-speaking majority (74%) over the Tamil-speaking minority (18%). In 1956, Sinhala was declared the only official language, and Buddhism was given state protection, ignoring the interests of Tamil-speaking citizens. These policies led to discrimination in jobs, education, and political representation, creating deep divisions between the Sinhala and Tamil communities. The Sri Lankan Tamils demanded equal rights and regional autonomy, but their demands were denied, leading to a prolonged civil war.
i. What was the majoritarian policy adopted by Sri Lanka in 1956? (1 mark)
ii. Why did Sri Lankan Tamils feel alienated by the government? (1 mark)
iii. What were the consequences of the Sri Lankan government's refusal to share power? (2 marks)
Ans:
i. In 1956, Sri Lanka declared Sinhala as the only official language and gave state protection to Buddhism, disregarding Tamil interests.
ii. Sri Lankan Tamils felt alienated because they were denied equal political rights, faced discrimination in jobs and education, and were excluded from governance.
iii. The refusal to share power led to deep tensions between the Sinhala and Tamil communities, resulting in violent conflicts and demands for autonomy. This eventually escalated into a prolonged civil war, causing thousands of deaths, widespread suffering, and significant economic damage to the country.
Q3: Read the source below and answer the questions that follow:
The Belgian model of power-sharing ensured equal representation for all communities, preventing ethnic tensions. In contrast, Sri Lanka followed majoritarian policies, which led to discrimination and civil unrest. Belgium distributed power among different levels of government, while Sri Lanka concentrated power in the hands of the majority community. As a result, Belgium remained stable, whereas Sri Lanka faced a civil war.
i. What was the key difference between power-sharing in Belgium and Sri Lanka? (1 mark)
ii. Why did Belgium choose to share power among different communities? (1 mark)
iii. How did the lack of power-sharing lead to civil unrest in Sri Lanka? (2 marks)
Ans:
i. The key difference was that Belgium adopted an inclusive power-sharing model, while Sri Lanka followed majoritarian policies favoring the Sinhala majority.
ii. Belgium shared power to avoid ethnic conflicts and ensure political stability by respecting cultural and linguistic diversity.
iii. The lack of power-sharing in Sri Lanka led to discrimination against Tamils in jobs, education, and political representation, causing feelings of alienation and marginalization. This resulted in protests, demands for autonomy, and eventually a violent civil war, as Tamil grievances were ignored by the government.
Q4: Read the source below and answer the questions that follow:
Power-sharing can take various forms in modern democracies:
- Horizontal Power-Sharing: Power is divided among different organs of government—Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary—to maintain a system of checks and balances.
- Vertical Power-Sharing: Power is divided among different levels of government—Central, State, and Local governments.
- Social Group Power-Sharing: Representation is given to socially weaker sections and minority groups, like the reservation system in India.
- Power-sharing among Political Parties and Pressure Groups: Power is shared through coalition governments, political alliances, and movements influencing government policies.
i. What is horizontal power-sharing? (1 mark)
ii. How does vertical power-sharing function in India? (1 mark)
iii. Give one example of power-sharing among social groups in India. (2 marks)
Ans:
i. Horizontal power-sharing divides power among different organs of government (Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary) to ensure checks and balances.
ii. Vertical power-sharing in India divides power among Central, State, and Local governments, ensuring decentralized governance.
iii. An example of power-sharing among social groups in India is the reservation system , which ensures representation for socially weaker sections like Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government jobs, educational institutions, and legislatures. This promotes inclusivity and reduces social inequality.
Q5: Read the source below and answer the questions that follow:
Power-sharing is essential for democracy as it prevents conflicts, maintains political stability, and ensures fair governance. There are two main reasons for power-sharing:
- Prudential Reason: It helps in reducing social conflicts and promoting better governance.
- Moral Reason: It upholds the democratic principle of people's participation in governance, ensuring legitimacy.
A country that fails to share power fairly risks political instability, violence, and breakdown of democracy.
i. What is the prudential reason for power-sharing? (1 mark)
ii. How does power-sharing make democracy more legitimate? (1 mark)
iii. Why can the lack of power-sharing lead to instability in a country? (2 marks)
Ans:
i. The prudential reason for power-sharing is that it reduces social conflicts and promotes political stability.
ii. Power-sharing makes democracy legitimate by ensuring people's participation in governance, making the government more accountable.
iii. The lack of power-sharing can lead to instability in a country because it results in discrimination against minority groups, causing feelings of alienation and resentment. This can escalate into social tensions, protests, and even violent conflicts, as seen in Sri Lanka’s civil war, ultimately threatening the unity and functioning of democracy.