Victoria Yantseva – Pike & Hurricane

Collective Weddings to Fight Inequality

Victoria Yantseva — Thu, 30 Apr 2015 04:19:30 +0000

Wedding is a costly celebration, ask anyone who has ever been married. In some countries, a couple is expected to invite anywhere from 100 to 400 guests to the ceremony. In others, the bride’s relatives might have to save up money for a dowry, which is then given to the groom’s family as “payment” for the bride. Not many families can afford to uphold these traditions. Striving to eliminate this injustice, governments and local communities in some countries have found a way out: collective weddings.

A collective wedding is a matrimonial ceremony that is held for several couples simultaneously. It can be hosted by a government, a civil organisation, an individual donor, or in some cases by the couples’ parents. Collective weddings are popular in India, Japan, South Korea and Muslim countries, such as Iran or Afghanistan.

A collective wedding held in Macedonia

Marriage has a sacral meaning for many people around the world. Thus, there is small wonder that even families from lower classes tend to spend what little they have on these occasions. By being unable to afford these expensive celebrations, they fall in a vicious circle of debt and poverty. However, in collective weddings all the costs are either shared by participants or are paid by a third party. Thus, men and women from underprivileged families get a chance to a decent life without getting themselves into debt bondage for the rest of their lives.

This is especially relevant for the families that plan to marry off their daughters. In some countries the parents of the bride have to pay a dowry, so that the girl might have a good start in the new family. While paying a dowry is officially illegal in most countries, it is still happening in India, Bangladesh and other places. For a girl, paying a large dowry is one way to “buy” herself into a better future. If her family is wealthy enough, she may choose a well-educated man from a respected family; if not, she might have to settle for someone less prosperous. Apart from being humiliating in its nature, the dowry tradition creates many cases of domestic violence towards women. For instance, in 2012 one Indian woman was killed every hour because her parents were unable to pay the dowry that the groom’s family demanded.

When it comes to collective weddings, the dowry is often (but not always) paid to the bride by the government or by the organisation holding the wedding ceremony. The happy couple may also receive a wedding gift, or a “bridal gift”, consisting of furniture, electronic devices and other useful things. These gifts help to take the financial burden from bride’s relatives and reduce the likelihood of domestic violence to occur in the new family.

One of the organisations holding collective weddings in Pakistan is called Minjah Welfare Foundation. As of now, the organisation has married over 700 couples and spent over one million Euro on this purpose. According to the Foundation’s rules, each spouse can invite up to fifty guests to the ceremony. It also takes care of “a proper wedding atmosphere”, the dowry and bridal gifts such as a double bed, a gas stove, a sewing machine, etc. In total, one couple’s wedding’s cost is worth 150,000 Pakistani rupees, or approximately 1360 Euro.

Not everyone may be able to afford the luxury of a proper wedding

In India, a famous businessman, Mahesh Savani, is known for his support in organising marriages for “fatherless” girls. He started by marrying off two girls several years ago, and in 2014 he sponsored wedding ceremonies for one hundred eleven couples. All these women who received aid from Savani had lost their fathers and had an underprivileged background. They were, therefore, unable to sponsor their own weddings. Savani did not only pay for the ceremony itself, but also made generous gifts to the couples.

In Kano, a predominantly Muslim Nigerian state, a series of mass weddings were organised by local authorities. The main aim of these ceremonies was to promote family values andto reduce the number of divorces and births out of wedlock. Apart from organising the ceremonies, the authorities also paid for the brides’ dowries and gave some useful presents to the newly married couples. Just as in other cases, the main beneficiaries of the ceremonies were people from lower-class families. Special attention was given to widowed and divorced Nigerian women, who often end up being involved in prostitution and begging in the streets. Kano’s authorities also played the role of a match-maker by helping some women to find a suitable partner.

However, special attention should be paid to the fact that all marriages should be conducted with the full consent of those getting married, especially girls. In many cases, collective weddings protect women from abuse and injustices; but if somebody is married against their will, the whole meaning of collective weddings is lost. The obligation to marry the person one does not like or an obligation to marry unwillingly is an abuse itself. Still, when conducted correctly, collective weddings solve many of the problems that underprivileged families are confronted with, such as dowry payments and domestic violence as well as helping newly weds start out a new life together.

By Victoria Yantseva

Image credit:

Picture 1: Marjan Lazarevski, licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

Picture 2: jit bag, licensed under CC BY 2.0

The post Collective Weddings to Fight Inequality appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Children Memories on “Operation Allied Force” in Yugoslavia

Victoria Yantseva — Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:22:35 +0000

This is a story about children who survived the bombing of their home country. This story, however, is not about a war-torn society in the Middle East or Africa. It happened much closer to us, in the centre of Europe. These kids went to school, liked playing video games and dreamt about a new bicycle for their birthday. They are young adults now and one of them probably goes with you to the same class at University or lives in the same building as you. Even though they lead “normal” lives now, their most terrible memories surface again whenever they hear the sound of air raid sirens. What was it like for them to grow up?

In 1999, NATO started its air campaign, so-called “Operation Allied Force”, to stop human rights abuses in Kosovo, which at that time was a part of former Yugoslavia. Aleksandra* was only seven years old but she still remembers some striking moments from that period. She lived in Belgrade, the capital of former Yugoslavia and modern Serbia, when the bombing started. During the bombing neither she nor her sister went to school. Every day, her grandmother took her to a nearby park to play with other children until the deafening sound of air raid sirens set in again. This sound made her feel anxious and scared, as it meant that a bombing was about to start. Her parents, on the other hand, continued going to work and tried hard to maintain a careless atmosphere as much as it was possible, but still, Aleksandra could notice that they weren’t left unaffected by the misery that had befallen them. The general panic and uncertainty caused shortages of basic food supplies such as milk, bread and water.

After the infamous missile attack on the state television headquarters, which were located less than a mile away from their house, Aleksandra started to feel the fear and panic of her parents and neighbours. From that day on, the residents of her building gathered in the lobby every day, fearing that the next target could be the tallest building in Belgrade, which was, and still is, located right across the street. In order to be prepared for any unforeseen circumstances they always brought small suitcases filled with essential goods with them. Luckily, nothing happened to any of them. They survived the bombings and continued with their everyday lives and occupations. Still, Aleksandra says that this experience definitely changed many people in one way or another, including her parents, who felt indignation and sadness. After the attacks ceased, all of them managed more or less to recover from this experience. Nevertheless, it has left scars that will probably never go away.

Dimitrije* was ten when the bombing started. He also lived in Belgrade, in a nice house shared by his grandmother, parents and younger sister. After the bombing started, he quickly got used to the new living conditions. All classes at school were cancelled and he enjoyed playing all day long and watching American cartoons which were broadcast on television without licence, as if in protest against NATO actions. He suspended his child occupations only when he heard the sound of air raid sirens. This sound reminded the whole family that it was time to hide in the hand-made bomb shelter in the house’s basement, to which they had moved all necessary belongings right after the start of the airstrikes. Dimitrije’s father continued to go to work, but instead of receiving real money, he got his salary in the form of food and other essential supplies.

One of Dimitrije’s brightest memories from that time is when his father took him to the attic of their house to see the bombing with his own eyes, and he could watch the explosions kicking up gigantic clouds of dust in the air. Even though it was a dangerous and risky thing to do, his father was careless enough to let his son see their life being destroyed. And the general atmosphere around Dimitrije was also little wrought with fear. Rather, people displayed a cynical and a bit doomed attitude. Hearing the sound of air raid sirens, some people would just go outside and sit in the café, making jokes about the allied forces and drinking coffee until the bombing ended. The only things important to them were the bridges. Sometimes, people would gather on them to become a living shield and to protect the bridges from being destroyed. The most striking episode from that time, however, happened when his neighbour, who was a journalist, was supposed to go to the state television headquarters for her night shift. Her senior colleague insisted that she should stay at home with her children and that he would take her shift. She complied. That night, the headquarters were attacked by NATO forces. Her colleague never came back home.

Today, if you walk around Belgrade, you can still see and feel the consequences of war. The bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 resulted in around 500 civilians being killed. The number of victims of the Yugoslav wars, including the one in the Kosovo, is hundreds of times higher, and the scale of the catastrophe and human suffering in the region should not be underestimated. These people and children who had to go through fear, violence and suffering – they live right here, in the centre of the seemingly quiet and peaceful Europe. Even though the conflicts have ebbed away lately, there are still many unsolved problems, both ethnic and economic ones. Combined with each other, they can produce a devastating effect on the stability of the whole of Europe.

By Victioria Yantseva

Image credit:

Picture 1, 2, 3: Victoria Yantseva

*The names of interviewees were purposely changed.

The post Children Memories on “Operation Allied Force” in Yugoslavia appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The Power of the #Hashtag

Victoria Yantseva — Sat, 28 Feb 2015 18:01:31 +0000

Who is more likely to change the policy of a state – a militant with a machine gun or a lonely picketer standing on a lively street? Can a single tweet with a meaningful #hashtag break the ice and start the process of transformation? The possibility that a citizen armed with a smartphone can change powerful state machinery seems to be rather doubtful: you might as well try to break a concrete wall with your head. But statistics show the exact opposite: non-violent resistance is twice more likely to lead to desired result than a violent campaign. Moreover, non-violent resistance does not entail high costs, such as destroyed infrastructure or civil casualties.

From demonstrations to the occupation of buildings, from mock funerals to so-called “white strikes”, the 20th century knows around 200 non-violent ways to challenge an oppressive government. The initial list was compiled more than forty years ago by Gene Sharp, an American political science scholar who studied non-violent resistance in authoritarian countries. Since then, the world has changed dramatically, and today the Internet and social media provide us with endless opportunities for non-violent resistance.

Social media outlets such as Facebook or Twitter were widely used in peaceful protests during the Arab spring and in particular in Tunisia and Egypt. According to a survey, nine out of ten Egyptians claim to have used Facebook to coordinate their actions, and more than 85% of respondents in both Egypt and Tunisia were using social media to acquire new information concerning the protests. Authorities’ efforts to restrict the use of the social media had the opposite effect. Indeed, these attempts have become an important factor in protesters’ motivation to continue resistance. It is worth mentioning that people’s efforts led to the change of the governments in both countries.

The “Umbrella Revolution” in Hong Kong, which took place this autumn, has seen the rise of yet another tool. The social media was a natural source for civil disobedience in Honk Kong, as great parts of the protesters were secondary school or university students. The problem was that the Chinese authorities tried to block the social media, and Instagram in particular, with Facebook and Twitter already being restricted. The protesters, however, found a way to circumvent the communication blackouts: they used an application called FireChat, which uses Bluetooth technology for communication between users. This application allowed them to keep in touch and to unite their efforts even without access to the Internet.

One of the latest examples of non-violent resistance using the internet can be found in Russia. On the 21st of January, Russian authorities accused Svetlana Davydova, mother of seven children, of high treason after she had made several calls to the Ukrainian embassy about suspicious troop movements at a local military base. Svetlana was arrested and placed in a pre-detention facility to await her trial. It took less than two weeks to collect thirty thousand signatures for a petition demanding her release through the website of one Russian newspaper and the petitioning platform change.org. On the 3rd of February, she was released from the pre-detention facility in Moscow and was returned back home.

YouTube, prominent for funny videos with cats and other animals, is also a wonderful tool for shaming authorities and making their mistakes known to the rest of the world, especially when a state is not planning to punish officials who violate laws. All you need to do is to take your smartphone and film a policeman taking a bribe or election staff throwing a pile of ballots into the ballot box, and half of the work is done. The second part of the job is to boycott a person who is known to have committed unlawful actions, because no one wants to be socially isolated, especially from their own friends, neighbours and colleagues.

It can happen that a government tries to restrict the usage of social media and Internet for the sake of counteracting terrorism or in order to protect children against violence. The good news is that citizens are usually one step ahead of the state. The so-called “mirror websites” are one of the many inventions in use today that are providing access to websites blocked by the government. A mirror website is basically an actual and up-to-date copy of a website that was blocked because its contents are unwanted by the authorities. Tech-savvy people usually resort to using VPNs and proxies, which allow users to divert all their internet traffic through another country while staying anonymous.

However, even if social media and modern technology are promising tools for peaceful resistance, they have their own limitations and should always be used wisely. First and foremost, they can be misused to plan terrorist attacks or to promote religious intolerance. Second of all, they may also be exploited for purposes that might lead to civil casualties, and in this case the events cannot be called “peaceful” or “non-violent”. The question whether governments should control social media and the internet to some extent is still very controversial. Users should be wise and mature enough to understand the difference between non-violent resistance and revolution, between civil disobedience and terrorism.

Another problem is that social media and internet are quite useless in the face of serious atrocities or highhandedness of authorities, and this leads us back to our comparison of trying to break a concrete wall with your head. Just sharing a post or adding a hashtag to your photo won’t actually change a government policy – social movements still need people and their motivation and talents to achieve aims. Nonetheless, despite all its negative sides and limitations, the social media and the internet are powerful resources when people want to be heard. Most importantly, they give us an opportunity to access independent sources of information and an ability to easily attract and mobilize people for further actions.

By Victoria Yantseva

Image credit:

Picture 1: Pasu Au Yeung, licensed under CC BY 2.0

Picture 2: Quinn Dombrowski, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

The post The Power of the #Hashtag appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The Future of the Last Socialistic Resort

Victoria Yantseva — Fri, 28 Nov 2014 22:24:43 +0000

Imagine: one day you wake up and find out from the newspaper that the North Korean government announced widespread democratic and market reforms. They introduce freedom of speech, private entrepreneurship and convertible currency, and many other things inherent to liberal and democratic countries. Their citizens can now travel to other countries, buy imported goods and vote for the government they like. The democratic peace is established. Other states can exhale and no longer worry about North Korean military power.

Now you can stop dreaming: this did not happen. The North Korean reality is actually full of contradictions. It combines planned economy with individual entrepreneurship, ”iron curtain” with escaping from the country, ration cards with individual farming, repressions with reforms, censorship with dreams about Chinese video recorders.

Still, we can only guess about the future of the North Korean regime, as it is not that predictable in the modern market-oriented and interdependent world. It may endure for an indefinite period of time; it may be dismantled and substituted with a more democratic and market-oriented system (following the example of the USSR). Other options are, it might transform into a system with state control over the political system and market economy (following example of China); or perhaps the existing socialist system might be replaced with some other form of dictatorship.

Either way, what would happen if North Korea was to finally embark on the road to democratisation and the building of a market economy? Let’s make some guess-work. Democratisation would probably be welcomed by the international community and its own citizens. Though, it could create obstacles inconveniencing many interested parties.

The current elite, led by Kim Jong-un, are the main decision-makers and the ones with the power to reform North Korea. It is possible that they would honestly be willing to introduce democratic and economic reforms in the country to the full extent. But having perpetrated gross human rights violations in the country, no one could guarantee their immunity after the liberation of their people and no one would guarantee that they wouldn’t be massacred by citizens or stand trial at court. Therefore, safest option left for decision-makers would be to continue moving towards a bright, socialistic future.

Let’s once again imagine that, in order to facilitate the transition to democracy in the country, the international community decides to strike a bargain with the North Korean elites and promise to refrain from prosecution. This causes a moral dilemma: this promise may provide an impetus for democratic development and liberation of 25 million people. At the same time, this would be unfair to those who suffered from the regime and would create a precedent demonstrating that violating human rights and international law can be justified. However, to keep the promise to punish the guilty means to preserve the situation in its current form.

No doubt, the United Nations would warmly welcome a newly born democratic North Korea that would live in peace with its neighbours. However, in case a new government couldn’t make a smooth transition to market system, the economy could end up in a fine pickle. This creates the potential for whopping inflation, unemployment and famine, which the United Nations may have to deal with. Yet, the situation with malnutrition is already a burden for the North Korean government. The United Nations has been helping to feed hungry North Korean citizens, as the planned economy cannot cope with the people’s existing nutritional needs. Still, North Korea is not on the list of top aid recipients. But it could be – if the situation with food supplies worsens. In this case, to help North Korea get on its own feet, the United Nations would need to provide additional monetary injections, staff resources and humanitarian aid to avoid growing human suffering.

North and South Korea used to be one country in the past, and reunification is a dream that has been bothering both countries since their parting. Reunification could become more of a reality if there were to be reforms in the Northern part. The problem is that the infrastructure and living standards of these two parts would have to be aligned. The South would have to invest a lot of hard-earned money in North Korean economy to close the gap between the former neighbours’ economic situation. At the same time, the South could possibly be overwhelmed by the migrant flow, coming from above the 38^th parallel.

China, the main trading partner of North Korea, would feel the consequences of its ally making a 180 degree-turn as well. North Koreans could also dash to China in pursuit of jobs or a better life. The immigration would impact China’s national security. Some consider North Korea to be a buffer between China and South Korea which has American troops on its territory, and China and the USA don’t have a very warm relationship. The region would need time to redress the balance of power.

However, the above-mentioned scenarios are quite moderate depictions of how the situation might actually develop in the future. Even though a Third World War seems to be the most unrealistic option, we should always keep in mind that North Korea is a nuclear power. Increased pressure on the current regime, humanitarian interventions or military operations could rock the fragile boat of non-war. We shouldn’t write off the possibility of civil war and a race for power if the current elite would prove unable to continue governing the country. In that case, total state control would be replaced with complete anarchy and humanitarian catastrophe.

Still, we can only guess what the future of 25 million people would be like. “Hope for the best, prepare for the worst” – democratisation could be accompanied by crisis. And it might turn out that North Korea was much better off with socialism, than with the greater economic hardship and human suffering democracy might bring.

Related articles:

Of brain drain, K-Pop, and other threats at the inter-Korean border

Tourism in North Korea

Photo credits:

Picture 1: Will De Freitas, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Picture 2 & 3: (stephan), licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

The post The Future of the Last Socialistic Resort appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Putin, Oil, AK-47: How Political Stereotypes Rule Our Everyday Lives

Victoria Yantseva — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:07:38 +0000

“Swedes are reserved, Russians are aggressive, Estonians are indolent, Spaniards are passionate” – how often do you hear such clichés from people around you and how often do you catch yourself reproducing them in your mind? Do these clichés have any real ground? Is it possible in first place to classify all people belonging to this or that particular nationality as “indolent”, “aggressive” or “reserved”? Myself being originally from Russia, there was one more important question, one that arose several months ago as a reflection on a very strained political situation in my region: how does politics influence the spread of these stereotypes among people?

When we see a group of politicians in one state acting in a certain way towards a neighbouring country, there is a great temptation to classify all citizens of this state in the same way you judge their politicians, especially since the latter are official elected representatives. The mass-media only fuels the flame. Creating an “enemy image”, it only simplifies reality and creates distinctions between “us” and “them”. We, the ordinary people, sometimes forget that mass-media has its own agenda, by expressing interests of their sponsors and supports.

Effective intercultural communication itself is an art that needs to be fostered. When I was planning my stay in Sweden, I was worried the political tensions between Russia and Ukraine would make my everyday communication with people from other countries even more complicated. I just wanted to be sure people felt comfortable when I was around. When I finally arrived in Malmo and started to settle in, getting to know each new person was a struggle because people always asked where I came from. After confessing that I was from Russia, I tried to read people’s thoughts asking myself “will they dislike me for that?”

After becoming familiarized with the city and having made friends at the university and dormitory, I decided to ask what their real thoughts were and if the political situation influenced their first impression of me. I got very different answers, and, even though my little survey does not attempt to be scientific, I suppose I got the whole scale of existing opinions, from positive to suspicious or quite negative. Here are a few:

“I think you are a very nice person and you confirm my opinion that Russians are friendly people. In the West, when people talk about Russia, they often think about Putin. But he is just one person and you cannot generalize...”

Dutch student

“I thought that it will be interesting to get to know someone of my age who is from Russia and to hear an insider’s perspective on Russian politics, which is quite incomprehensive to me partly because of (I suspect) – one–sided Swedish media perspective on Putin and the politics he is making”.

Swedish student

“…I think that sometimes media plays a large role in shaping our opinions which is quite evident in Australia. … On our news pages you can find stories about how bad Russia is almost daily. … Personally I think that Russia has a lot of history and traditions that at times other cultures do not understand and therefore they fear”.

Australian student

“The attitude to Russians in Georgia is actually quite negative. But when I came to Sweden, I understood that Russians are MY people – we have much more in common with them than with people from other cultures”.

Georgian student

“You, Russians, have no feelings, you are inhumane… But actually you are the first Russian I have ever met in my life. So this is more of a stereotype”.

Ukrainian student

So what are these opinions all about? When being asked such complicated and even philosophical questions, people usually admit there are good and bad people in any given country and that you never know what kind of person is standing in front of you. The difficult thing is to remember

this relativity in everyday life and the more difficult thing is to apply this rule to the

citizens of the confronting country. Don’t be too surprised when your neighbour pushes you in a puddle on a busy street, while your supposed-to-be enemy from another country helps you with heavy luggage at a train station.

Politics is complicated and often messy, we can admit it. But let’s not mix politics and our everyday life; let’s be unprejudiced and not let mass-media influence our thoughts and make stereotypes ever more engrained in our brains. Because politicians will finally make a good deal out of crisis under mutually agreed conditions, and ordinary people will end up being enemies with their closest neighbours.

By Victoria Yantseva

Image credit:

Picture 1: Mariano Mantel, licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

Picture 2: firdaus omar, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post Putin, Oil, AK-47: How Political Stereotypes Rule Our Everyday Lives appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.