By the year 1914 political
independence from Western peoples was preserved only in the shrinking, badly weakened Turkish Empire; in Arabia, where encroachments had begun in Aden; in Ethiopia, with a precarious insecurity in its mountain fastnesses; in Persia, partly partitioned in Russian and British spheres
of influence; in Afghanistan, a mountain buffer state between the British and Russian empires; in Thailand (Siam as it was then known), relatively safe because the British and the French, eyeing each other from Burma and Indo - China, would not permit either to annex it; in China, technically independent, but in fact occupied by Western powers who fixed the tariffs and whose citizens had extraterritorial status, and partially carved into spheres
of influence; and in Japan, and from the 1850's into 1890's the
independence of Japan had been
compromised by the extraterritorial privileges
of Westerners and the
lack of full tariff autonomy.
Amnesty has been pressing the UK government for months on their strategy, or
lack of it, to achieve tangible improvements in the current human rights crackdown going on in Sri Lanka which has seen journalists silenced, the
independence of the judiciary
compromised and activists and campaigners intimidated.
Are we supposed to
compromise our
independence, a
compromise that is irreversible and will surely weaken us over time, because some survey respondents answer the questions in (a) their naked self - interest (and I would argue that penny wise and pound foolish is contrary to their self - interest if they but knew it), or (b) out
of ignorance or
lack of knowledge?