Open Enemies of Democracy, Peace and Development: Clan Balance and Authoritarian Regimes

My Afghanistan experience has introduced how there can be a failed state model using the name of Allah, in which Allah's provisions are violated and the constitution is not even read. Because there were such things that were told and claimed to have been done that they did not comply with universal morals or religious rules, and they evolved into crimes that could never be accepted. It was as if some clans were rooting out others and not listening to women, children or elders. Why were they doing to their Muslim brothers that they did not see the kafir they used to vilify?

What was the dynamic side of this brutality?

Life is balance.

Man, nature, flora and fauna are in a delicate balance. The balance in the universe, on the other hand, not only shows the existence of existence with a deviation as big as a needle and shows the enormous dimensions of the balance, but also exhibits an admirable positivity and grace. But there is a balance that can only demoize it so much:

Clan Balance

There were movies that I was afraid of when I was a kid. Foremost among these, images of the Ku Klux Klan burning innocent blacks with their white hoods never leave my mind. Their white masks served a function to hide the members of this gang. This would make the terror and terror even more terrifying. Usually the mayor, sheriff, etc. The clan members brought out the notables of the city. But these are not the clans that I will dwell on. Using the example of India, I will try to explain how the cooperation of elite clans is destructive for countries.

Governing of india

I've always had a curiosity. How does a small island state manage to rule India? In fact, different cornerstones can be mentioned: The long-standing presence of Missionaries, colonial traders, intimidation by mass killings, humiliation and collaboration with local clans… In this article, the last element will be examined under the terminology of “clan balance”.

Turkish and British administrations in India

Three thousand years ago, the Turkish influence began in India with the descent of the Saka into Sind and Mekrana. Kushan, Ak Hun, Türkşahi, Ghazni, Gur, Delhi Turkish Sultanate, Babur Shah established Turkish rule in India. How did the Turks rule India between 1206-1857, and especially the British after this date? The first part of the question is not within the scope of the study. British India from 1858 and Victoria's declaring herself as Empress of India after 1876, the British rule until 1901 and then until 1947, the questions of how a small army controlled a large army gain importance. To this must be added the secret administration of the East India Company between 1757 and 1858 under the slogan "By order of the King and Parliament of England".

“The Red Robes Behind the Raja”

The backbone of the British Raja Army was the Bengal Army, of which only a quarter were British. The Madras and Bombay Armies also made up the rest of the army. The interesting thing is that the Indian soldiers, who were humiliated by not being made high-ranking, accepted the arrogant and arrogant behavior of the British officers who were declining in number. The weakness of the British in this appearance was compensated by a few red robes behind their local partner, the rajas. The Raja was using the power of Queen Victoria with these red robes. This was another manifestation of the influence the Red Janissary outfit had had on Central Europe years later.

 “Great Game” Turns into “New Great Game” Based on Central Asia/Middle East

In the Central Asian policy, regime transitions are taking place with the establishment of the Turkic Republics. The Middle East has not been stable since the Great Ottoman Empire. Although it cannot be expressed within the country due to its nature, there are political developments that lead to authoritarian regimes in these countries. In these regimes, elite clans and clan balance are the basic dynamics. Because the newly liberated states of Central Asia and the states of the Middle East have become authoritarian states based entirely on elite clans.

Although Central Asian politics continues to be dominated by Soviet-educated elite clans and is heavily influenced by their Soviet legacy, through the elite clans and clan balance, the "Great Game" played out between Great Britain and Russia a century ago, is now the "New Great Game". started to be played between Russia and the USA. The constant feature is that Afghanistan continues to be in the central position. The Middle East maintains its similar structure. Whether under Russian or American influence, a real democracy and the rule of law do not exist in this large neighboring region.

Why do all of Central Asia and the Middle East have authoritarian signs? Why is democracy not taking hold?

When examining the relationship between regime transitions in the Middle East and Central Asia, one of the important obstacles to the democratization of the region is the elite-clans. There is no democracy in Russia anyway, and the answer to the question of why there is no democracy in the countries where the USA is effective is more dramatic: The West is exporting its own democracy.