DISRUPTION PATHOLOGY

Contextuality has an enduring effect on defining an event. It is in relation to time, space, situation, and the attributes of our own perceptual analysis. Everything is in relation to a context, and nothing is out of it. A context is specified by time, space, situation, and perception. When all of these factors are considered, disruption, or disruptive force, is context-specific. It is being observed here from the perspective of an established independent sovereign nation-state.

1.Outline

In a nation-state system, the central axial structure is critical in guiding the disparate entities towards its core values, which must consistently receive five or more approval ratings from its members on a ten-point scale.

Through the alignment of current and prospective ideas and practises in the political, social, economic, and cultural spheres, the core values evolve into a pattern over time. It involves the intermingling of its participatory and delivery mechanisms.

The power structure and process have ramifications in the political, social, economic, and cultural spheres. The acceptance pattern depends on the central values and the extent of its existing and prospective scope for involvement, as well as its delivery to its stakeholders. In this case, the central axial value that aligns and coalesces the disparate entities needs to play a pivotal role in assigning value, ensuring an equitable enabling mechanism for access to power and resource structures and processes. Equitable mechanisms are not only to be ensured but also seem to be ensured to give a perception of justice based on equity, harmony, and stability.

2. Disruptions

2.1. Primary Disruption

The primary disruptions typically arise from geo-ethnicity, or symbols, or moorings, or culture, or language, or affinity and orientation, religion, and creed, or all in combination, or all together to assert their independent identities vis-à-vis others, or suo moto of the system as a whole.Primary disruptions typically result from geo-ethnicity, symbols, or moorings, or culture, or language, or affinity and orientation, religion, and creed, or all in combination, or all together to assert their independent identities vis-à-vis others, or suo moto of the system as a whole.Such propensity impacts or challenges the core areas of a system, unit, or establishment.

Such assertions undermine the societal system's core structure and processes.It questions the very existence of the system that is considered anathema to their very own. That way, it repudiates any form of submission or acceptance to the symbols, laws, and authority of the existing state system. Open defiance becomes the primary mode for venting the demand and fulfilling the aspirations of a given population.

Any system or unit, when it starts operating, has all the forces in a state of motion surrounding a nucleus, primarily in a centripetal or centrifugal cycle. The former towards integration or association and the latter towards disintegration or disassociation.

However, in the case of disparate entities based on geographic-based ethnicity, symbols, moorings culture, language, religion, creed, affinity, and orientation, the state of axial motion may become vulnerable to disruption. Which may tend towards disruption because of a feeling of incompatibilities in disparate entities’ interest structures and those of others, as well as affiliation and mode of operation. The disruptive forces have a tendency to operate on a sustainable basis through well-entrenched channels based on geography, ethnicity, culture, language, religion, creed, affinity, and orientation. That enables them to remain firm on their ground and grow exponentially without being challenged systematically.

The basic features of such well-entrenched disruptionist are:

• Negation to the identities of the established nation-state.
• Assertion of identities based on geography, people, culture, language, creed, religion, faith, or orientation.
• Assertion and distinct identification associated with specific geographic areas, symbols, ideas, literature, art, monuments, and so on.
• Formation of alternative structures of governance within or outside the system

 It may also be congenital at the time of conception and during the process of integrating disparate units into a single entity.However, during the course of time and the unfolding of events, the perception, or, to say, the visibility, of power inequities related to social, political, and economic factors among certain entities distinct by their affiliation grew to a phenomenal proposition. This, in combination with congenital defects, has dented the growth and sustainability of certain independent states in the last three decades or so.

 History is replete with such cases found in former Yugoslavia, where through incusion, amalgamation, and occupation, the state of the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia, renamed in 1963 as the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,  was formed in 1945 during the World Wars, only to be dissolved again into multiple independent entities when its constituent units started splitting into the republics of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Kosovo.

 In the early 1990s, the former Soviet Union suffered from congenital disruption of its disruptive forces when fifteen new states emerged: Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Byelorussian, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakstan, Kirgizstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tazikhstan, and Georgia.Separate disruptive forces, however, are still gaining traction in other ethnic regions of modern-day Russia, such as Dagestan and Chechnya.Though the significant majority of the population of these regions adheres to Islam, they still maintain their tribal affiliation.

 Within those separate independent states from the former Soviet Union, there are also separatist disruptive forces in Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan, and South Ossetia in Georgia, just to name a few.

 2.2. Secondary Disruption

The secondary disruptions normally emerge from the same root as the primary ones. But the only difference is in terms of acceptance and the impact they generate. Normally, their focus remains on autonomy vis-à-vis the nation-state system they live in. They broadly operate within and sometimes outside the constitutional framework with demands for:

• Greater autonomy to their groupings in matters of governance.
• Self-determination based on geo-ethnicity, ethno-religiousness, or such related culture or faith-based moorings
• Separate autonomous structures of governance within the perimeter of the nation-state
• National legislation, laws, or executive orders, if any, shall be limited to national security, sovereignty, external relations, communication, money, and currency

 They sometimes accept broader non-core areas while having an impact on structural and processual parts of the societal system.

 Secondary disruption occurs when various elements of a given population seek significant autonomy in governance as well as ownership stakes and shares in natural resources and management.

There are so many cases all over the world.

Basque, Catalonia, Garcia, and Andalusia are autonomous communities recognised as autonomous in matters of governance by Spain as per the Statute of Autonomy, 1979. They were "the first ones to adopt their own Statutes of Autonomy (Estatutos de Autonoma) using the special fast-track procedure of Art. 151 of the Spanish Constitution.

Scotland tried several methods, including referendums for full independence from the United Kingdom. Recently, the U.K. Supreme Court, in a unanimous judgement, ruled that the Scottish Parliament cannot hold a second independence referendum on October 23, 2023, without Westminster approval. The legislative and constitutional framework of the United Kingdom governs Scottish autonomy.

Faroe Islands, archipelagos in the North Atlantic, are self-governing under the external sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark.

2.3. Tertiary Disruption

In tertiary disruption, the demands are more for individual or group autonomy or demands related to career, promotion, devolution or decentralisation in decision-making, etc.

 Unlike the other two, the tertiary disruption identities relate to issues related to individual and group autonomy, aspirations, empowerment, and livelihood generation. Sometimes it becomes geocentric and sometimes it is non-geocentric in relation to income, career, profession, ethnicity, language, culture, etc.

 These types of disruptions are not well oiled, work discontinuously, and sometimes join in on disruptions on a sudden call by their associations or groups. hey typically operate within the nation-state boundary as well as the legal and constitutional framework.

 The lawyers' demand for a High Court Bench in Sambalpur, Odisha State, India, was strongly disapproved by the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court observes that Odisha is not such a big state for a separate High Court bench.

 3. Remarks

When disruptions disrupt the entire legal and constitutional fabric of a nation-state and become a threat to the very concept and essentiality of the nation-state and its sovereignty in certain contexts, that requires extraordinary, drastic security-related interventions with proactive steps to secure its sovereignty and integrity.

When the demand for greater autonomy resurfaces in a specific context, interventional measures include participatory negotiated settlement, initiating the empowerment process, and, if necessary, a bridging mechanism to address any shortfall or gap in the course of evolution or development.

-Asutosh Satpathy