Question

Compare the Belgian model and the Sri Lankan model of power sharing.

Hint:

Remember the contrast: \[ \boxed{\text{Belgium} \Rightarrow \text{Accommodation and Power Sharing}} \] \[ \boxed{\text{Sri Lanka} \Rightarrow \text{Majoritarianism and Conflict}} \] Use these keywords:

• Belgium -- equality, community government, accommodation.

• Sri Lanka -- Sinhala Only Act, majoritarianism, Tamil alienation.

Answer 1

Step 1: State the core difference in approach.
Belgium chose to accommodate its Dutch, French, and German speaking communities by sharing power between them, while Sri Lanka let its Sinhala majority use its numbers to dominate the Tamil minority.
Step 2: Look at what Belgium actually did.
The Belgian constitution was reworked so that Dutch and French speaking ministers got equal seats in the central government, regional governments got real powers, and a separate community government handled cultural and language matters for each group.
Step 3: Look at what Sri Lanka did instead.
Sri Lanka made Sinhala the sole official language in 1956 and gave government jobs and university seats preferentially to Sinhalese people, leaving Tamils with no share in decision making.
Step 4: Compare the results and conclude.
Belgium's power sharing kept its communities together in peace, while Sri Lanka's majoritarian approach bred distrust that grew into a long civil war. This contrast shows that sharing power works better than one group dominating the rest, which is the key lesson from comparing the two models.