Loss of the Indian territories and the reactions. The first problem that the Portuguese had to deal with was the conflict with the Indian Union, independent state in 1947. The Indian nationalism had triumphed over the English occupation, and in 1956 forced the French to abandon their establishments in 1956. The same was demanded to the Portuguese over their territories of Goa, Daman and Diu, but in face of refusal. India severed the diplomatic relations. The passage through Indian territory in order to reach the two enclaves dependent of Daman was denied since 1954, and despite the recognition of such right by International Court of Justice recognized t (1960), Dadrб and Nagar Haveli were effectively lost. This was followed by mass invasions of passive resisters which Portuguese were still able to hinder until December 19 of 1961, when the Indian Union made prevail it's superior military force, to obtain final retreat of the Portuguese.
Goa had been capital of the Portuguese expansion to the East. Conquered in 1510 by Afonso de Albuquerque, it was also an active center of religious diffusion to the point of being called the Rome of the Orient. In spite of it's the historical and spiritual importance, the reactions against the military attack of the Indian Union parted mainly from official sectors, and only moderately shared by the public opinion. For the historian J. Hermano de Saraiva whom we have followed, it reflected the dominant politic ideologies: at the end of the XIXth century, the colonizing activity was considered a service rendered to civilization but since World War II viewed as an attempt to the liberty of the peoples. This “doctrinal involucre of interest to which the Portuguese were completely strange was rapidly adopted by the intellectual groups, in great part responsible for the formation of the public opinion”. That's how Saraiva justifies that the protests for the loss of Goa to the Indian Union were directed less to the foreign power than to the Portuguese authorities, “for not having known to negotiate a modus viviendi acceptable for both parts”. More than that, he detects in this curious reaction a tendency that would accentuate along the two following decades: the crisis of patriotism. To defend or to exalt the national values appeared to the bourgeois elites of the 60's as a provincial attitude, expression of cultural under-development.
Indonesia invaded the territory in December 1975, relying on US diplomatic support and arms, used illegally but with secret authorisation from Washington; new arms shipments were sent under the cover of an official "embargo".
There was no need to threaten bombing or even sanctions. It would have sufficed for the US and its allies to withdraw active participation and inform their associates in the Indonesian military command that the atrocities must be terminated and the territory granted the right of self-determination, as upheld by the United Nations and the international court of justice. “We cannot undo the past, but should at least be willing to recognise what we have done, and face the moral responsibility of saving the remnants and providing reparations” - a small gesture of compensation for terrible crimes.
Many were immediately killed, while their villages were burned down to the ground. Others run to the mountains in the heart of their land, and organized a resistance movement. These brave peasants - and their sons - have opposed the barbarian indonesian soldiers for 23 years now. Torture, rape, all kinds of physical, sexual and psychological violations, violent repression and brutal murder have been the daily life of the Maubere people (the original people of East Timor) since.
Even before president Habibie's surprise call for a referendum this year, the army anticipated threats to its rule, including its control over East Timor's resources, and undertook careful planning with "the aim, quite simply . to destroy a nation".
Реферат опубликован: 4/09/2009