COMPROMISE OR CARVE UP

The 4^th May is an interesting anniversary for a number of political events.

This date usually signifies election results in the United Kingdom. On this day, 4^th May 1979 Margaret Thatcher became the first female Prime Minister of the UK and it was also 21 years later on the 4^th May 2000 that Ken Livingstone became the first directly elected Mayor of London. He would try again twelve years later. Today 4^th May 2012 will reveal the result of yesterdays ballot. Ken or not Ken?

Of greater historical significance (in my view) is the anniversary of the May Fourth Movement in China. On the 4^th May 1919, student  demonstrations took place in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China, protesting the Treaty of Versailles, which transferred Chinese territory to Japan.

Students in Beijing rallied during the May Fourth Movement.

On the afternoon of 4^th May over 3,000 students of Peking University and other schools gathered together in front of Tiananmen and held a demonstration. The general opinion was that the Chinese government was "spineless". They voiced their anger at the Allied betrayal of China and the government's inability to secure Chinese interests in the conference. A boycott of Japanese products during this period was advocated, which boosted the domestic Chinese industry slightly. Throughout the streets of China, students packed the streets to protest China's concession to Japanese demands. During these demonstrations, students also insisted on the resignation of three Chinese officials involved in these proceedings. After burning the residence of one of the three despised officials, student protesters were arrested and severely assaulted.

Protestors dissatisfied with the 

Treaty of Versailles for China

The May Fourth Movement was an anti-imperialist, cultural, and political movement growing out of student demonstrations in Beijing on 4^th May 1919, protesting the Chinese government's weak response to the Treaty of Versailles, especially the Shandong Problem. These demonstrations sparked national protests and marked the upsurge of Chinese nationalism, a shift towards political mobilization and away from cultural activities, and a move towards populist base rather than intellectual elites.

China had entered World War I on the side of the Allied Triple Entente in 1917 with the condition that all German spheres of influence, such as Shandong [Shantung], would be returned to China; although in that year, 140,000 Chinese labourers (as a part of the British army, the Chinese Labour Corps) were sent to France. The Versailles Treaty of April 1919 awarded German rights in Shandong Province to Japan. The representatives of the Chinese government put forth the following requests:

1. the abolition of all privileges of foreign powers in China, such as extraterritoriality

2. the cancelling of the "Twenty One Demands" with the Japanese

3. the return to China of the territory and rights of Shandong, which Japan had taken from Germany during World War I.

The Western Allies dominated the meeting and paid little heed to the Chinese representatives' demands. This disregard of Chinese sensibilities was the seed for the founding of the Communist Party of China in 1921. How’s that for performance writing?

Alexander VI

Another bit of political performance writing emerged on 4^th May 1493 when the Spanish-born Pope Alexander VI decreed in the bull Inter caetera that all lands west and south of a pole-to-pole line 100 leagues west and south of any of the islands of the Azores or the Cape Verde Islands should belong to Spain, although territory under Christian rule as of Christmas 1492 would remain untouched. The bull did not mention Portugal or its lands, so Portugal couldn't claim newly discovered lands even if they were east of the line. The usual land grab stuff of treaties and papal bulls, which was reflected at Versailles 426 years later.

Does the concept of carve up never stop? Some call it compromise. When does compromise become a peaceful solution? If the compromise is genuine, I suppose it can be effective. We all have to give a little in reaching a solution to a contentious situation; but at what point does effective compromise become an expedient carve up? In examining the results of yesterday’s local elections in the UK, the Liberal Democrats have more cause than most to be disgruntled with their ‘carve up’ with the Conservative Party. It is they who are suffering most from the amateur politics being practiced at present. In abandoning their corps policies for a seat on the board, they have clearly compromised too far. Is it not time for the shareholders in the party to make a protest?