Many countries around the world have debated about development issues such as social and economic development so as to bring development for their countries and to get rid of poverty and hunger. Therefore, some definitions of development have been defined such as the development is an expansion of economy and increase of economic development (Peter, 2008). Others defined that it is an increase of people’s choices (Sen 1999, p. 36). The development is divided into two main types. That is, spontaneous and intentional development. The negative and positive outcomes refer to the spontaneous development and the intentional development deals with the negative of spontaneous development. On this topic of development, there are some opinions states that ‘Conflicts and crises, even sometimes wars are significant for stimulating development’.
Regarding this statement, I will argue these opinions due to three main reasons such as war generally brings holocausts, death, and poverty, et cetera. But at the same time, it can be seen both positive and negative effects for both sides. Another reason is that governments’ policies and actions are more important after the crisis, conflicts and wars. Having said that, the necessity of crises and conflicts, even sometimes wars just shape the development but it does not stimulate the development. The other reason is that, crises and conflicts lead to instability and underdevelopment in the society. In order to support my argument, I will discuss about the effect of crises and conflicts, and war. Some evidences and examples will be provided.
Regarding this statement, I will argue these opinions due to three main reasons such as war generally brings holocausts, death, and poverty, et cetera. But at the same time, it can be seen both positive and negative effects for both sides. Another reason is that governments’ policies and actions are more important after the crisis, conflicts and wars. Having said that, the necessity of crises and conflicts, even sometimes wars just shape the development but it does not stimulate the development. The other reason is that, crises and conflicts lead to instability and underdevelopment in the society. In order to support my argument, I will discuss about the effect of crises and conflicts, and war. Some evidences and examples will be provided.
First, the positive effect of war can shape economic development in the countries. For instance, the war on poverty, which is the United States (US) government’s strategies, aims to eliminate hunger across the country. Then the poverty reduction plan is created by the government to enhance the living condition of the people and promote full employment and equal opportunity for the African Americans to end poverty in the United States. Nevertheless, it is sometimes unsuccessful to solve this problem because of the inequality of income and job opportunities. So the government will then announce a war state in order to fight poverty and hunger. As evidence, Lyndon in the United States announced the war on poverty in 1964 due to the unemployment issues and the inequitable income of the black and white people. By using this strategy, it can be seen that there is a notably decrease of unemployment rate between the blacks and whites. The blacks were 17.4 percent; which dropped to 3.4 per cent. the whites were 7.1 percent which dropped to 1.6 percent in 1961 after the war on poverty (Fine 1988, p.72). Therefore, it can be seen that the war on poverty can help to improve the people’s living standard in the country. Another example of the positive effect of the war is the fall of Berlin Wall in 1989. There are two different systems in Germany called capitalism and communism prior to the fall of Berlin Wall. Then, it has been combined into a one system after the Berlin fall; which the economy’s condition was changed from the top down to bottom up (Friedman 2005, pp. 53-55). It is not only the changes of the economy’s condition but also the combination of the West and East Germany as Germany. Since they have united, the development in Germany has been notably improved. Therefore, the Berlin Wall fall is a positive effect which can shape development.
Furthermore, the positive outcome from crises is lessons-learnt. The government sometimes realizes that there are problems, which will affect the development and economic growth, needed to be addressed and solved, but they seem to ignore the problems and no actions have been taken. As a result, crises appear. As an example, in late 1990s in England, the sexuality became a crisis due to an increase of sexual transmission. Thus, a high demand for health care services is needed. Concurrently, the National Sexual Health Strategies was issued by the government of the United Kingdom, which aims to protect the transmission across the society (Laverty 2005, pp. 37-43). Moreover, the war of independence is also another positive effect. Many countries around the world had been colonized by the other countries. So, it is impossible to make development happens in that country. Thus, the war of independence is created such as Algeria and Zimbabwe (Arnold, 1992).
However, if we look at the negative effect of the war, it causes severe consequence with high casualties. That is: many people die and injure; the infrastructures were destroyed; and most of the sectors were damaged in the whole society. For instance, the First World War; It was a global war and primarily occurred in Europe from 1914 to 1918. Coming to the end of the war, the total estimated casualties both the civilian and military was more than 40 million; which 20 million were killed including about 10 million civilian and 9.7 million military were died. Around 21 million were wounded (National Archives, 2008). Thus, we can see that war brought about big holocaust for the whole country and the globe. That is, how many people were died and how many infrastructures were destroyed, et cetera. Similarly, the Second World War, It was a conflict global military, which began in Europe from 1939 to 1945. The world's nations were split by this global conflict. There were around 100 million military soldiers mobilized across the state of the war. During the closing days Second World War, the nuclear weapons were detonated by the United States. On 6 August 1945, the first nuclear weapon was detonated by the US on the Hiroshima’s territory, which is a one of the major Japanese city. Three days later, the second bomb occurred on Nagasaki which is another major Japanese city. Around 120,000 people and even more over time were immediately killed by these bombs. Seriously, not only these people died but also the bombs’ effect impacts on the rest of the Japanese people as a whole till present. At the end, the total estimated human loss was approximately 72 million people. About 25 million military soldiers were killed including around 4 million prisoners’ death of war. About 47 million civilians were killed including roughly 20 million died due to the war which related to the disease and famine. (National Archives, 2008). So, we can see that how much casualties due to the war killed the human beings and the effect of war; which leads to a poverty and crises for the whole world. As a result, there was no development during the war but living in hunger and poverty. If we look the war in Algeria, 141,000 Algerian were killed during the war in1954. 51,800 French were wounded and 17,250 were killed. Not only many people die or wounded but also the other sectors and infrastructures in the whole society were severely damaged and destroyed. That is, roads, bridges, schools, et cetera (Arnold 1992, pp. 10-12). Similarly, in 1965 in Zimbabwe, 45,000 were killed during the war. So, the people were forced to be in the military service which means that they need almost all males to be soldiers in order to support war. Therefore, we can see that there is no development almost all sectors in Zimbabwe during this period (Arnold 1992, pp. 68-70).
After war, some countries can develop their countries faster than the others. As evidence, the infrastructure, poverty and socioeconomic development in Cambodia still poor after getting peace in 1989 (Annear, 1997). According to (Koubi, 2006), researched the war impact on economic growth between 1975 and 1989. That is, most of the countries, which do not have involvement in the war, always have more economic growth than countries involved. Moreover, the average of the expenditure of government, the economic growth of GDP, real income, and investment rate were used to measure the effects of the economy of the war. But due to some other factors, which also could contribute to the growth of the economy, it was difficult to measure (Lindgren 2005, pp. 84-87). It is hard to state that war stimulate development as there are some factors, which contribute to development. Generally, wars produce severe casualties and holocaust in the society.
After the Asian financial crisis in late 1990s, social policies attentions were taken into account by the government. The governments started adopting some strategies such as employment services improvement, financial assistance for poor families, and training (Chan 2000 pp. 520-522). Before the crisis, the progress of democracy in South Korea, Thailand and Taiwan were not well connected to the social policy. Nevertheless, this trend has been improved by this economic crisis (Croissant 2003, pp. 520-523). On the other hand, they were linked to the response of good government policies (Martin 1998, pp. 30-33). That is, it does not result from the crisis alone. Moreover, an example of Indonesia was shown due to the situation of finance remained inadequate such as depreciated currency and floating rates. So, we can see that it is vital for the government’s policies which were used in crises’ responses. Therefore, after the crisis and conflict, even sometimes war, it is good or bad based on the government’s policies used to bring development. In addition, economic development also needs good policies as it is necessary to development efforts success (Stiglitz 1998, p. 5).
In contrary, if a bad policy was used by the government, the crises and conflicts will bring about underdevelopment and violence in terms of social, economic and political instability. As evidence, a conflict between Pol Pot and Lon Nol in 1975 in Cambodia, when he came to power, Pol Pot used his bad and cruel policies which made the whole country’s infrastructures destroyed and all the people live in hunger and horror. That is, all the people, who were living in the city, were evacuated to the rural areas and provinces to work in the rice fields almost all days and nights without giving enough food. They forced the innocent people to work like animals. Moreover, more than two million innocent people were killed during his cruel regime. In addition, Cambodia was isolated from the international (Sina and Zimmer, 2005, pp. 330-333). As evidence, we can see that it was underdevelopment during this period because the infrastructures were destroyed and families have been separated from their parents and siblings. That is, people, who lived under his regime, only know the word ‘Angkar’ (which means organisation). Moreover, there was no freedom for people to express their ideas. Thus, it is contradicted to Sen’s development definition which it is as the real freedoms that people enjoy and people’s choices enlargement (Sen 1999, p. 36).
In addition, conflicts sometimes bring about violence in the society causing a decrease of economic development. According to (Lindgren 2005, pp. 70-75), ‘Different conflicts would result in different impacts. There are of four types of armed conflict’. The internal armed conflict is chosen to explain in this context. This conflict occurs between the opposition groups and a state itself. It does not get involved from the other countries. As an example, in 1997 in Cambodia, two political parties were in the conflict both political wordings and fighting afterwards. That is, the current political party called the Cambodian People’s Party and Funcinpec party. The political conflicts were then become a fighting in the central city of Phnom Penh. Like a war in the city by using all soldiers and military forces to fight each other which make the whole country into political and economical instability and people’s horror. At the end, the current political leading party was hardly got controlled the situations. So some people, who are in the conflict areas, moved to the other areas for a while. Concurrently, there were a lot of robberies from the innocent people and business people and killings because of this conflict. Some business properties have been destroyed and robbed. Then, the current leading party got controlled the situation. However, it took long times to secure the social security and public order. Not only the political and economic instability but also the impact on the other sectors in the country such as international and local business and investment stopped. Some companies were completely destroyed during that time. Specially, most of the major international business and investment companies moved to the neighboring countries such as Thailand and Vietnam (Springer, 2004). Similarly, in Thailand, there was a conflict of political party - between the current leading party and opposition party. Then a coup detat was established by the opposition party by using military forces to evacuate the current prime minister. Then, they came to power. As a result, the political situation was severe instability in the whole country. It effects on the economic development and other sectors et cetera. That is, the rising of inflation rate, interest rate and a decrease in tourism after this conflict. Four percent decreased compared to Malaysia and Indonesia due to this conflict. While the economic growth of Thai government was well increased before the coup and the international relations were well connected to the other nations. According to Ockey, the relation between Thai government and the international still remained poor after this conflict (2006, pp. 148-149).
Finally, based on my arguments, evidences and examples, I disagree with the topic as the conflicts and crises, even sometimes wars are significant for stimulating development. First, the war generally brings holocausts, death, and poverty in the whole society. Thus, there is no development for almost all sectors during conducting the war. Concurrently, it can be seen both positive and negative effects of the war. However, it does not stimulate development but it just shapes development. Second, the good policies and actions of the government are more important to bring development for the country after the crises and conflicts. Third, the crises and conflicts lead to the instability and underdevelopment in the society. Evidently, a result of the conflict and crisis will be underdevelopment rather than the development. As the above evidence from Cambodia and Thailand’s cases, which show the conflicts, bring about violence and strong impact on the development of the economy and the political instability in the whole country.
(Writer: Bong Angkeara)
