A new scar

For the leader of a nation with over 140 million people, whose decisions have a big impact on economic, political and social level, and whose responsibility in the protection of the security and sovereignty of its people, his leadership and image outside its borders is essential for staying strong in power. For that same leader the annexation of a 27,000 sq. km territory and with a population of around 2'300,000 inhabitants, who mostly apparently agreed, a territory that is related by its former belonging to the greater union of Republics of the modern era, but now extinct, means a significant achievement to his people and to the neighboring territories, despite strong criticisms and threats of the majority of countries in the opposite block. In the end, that is the way in which has been configured the political geography of our planet, at least in the last 12 centuries. With the emergence of the cold line created by the end of WWII cases of dissection between neighboring communities has been a constant: Federal and Democratic Germanys, North and South of Korea, North and South of Vietnam, among other cases. It is now the turn of Crimea, which history is strongly linked to Ukraine and whose social ties are as strong as those that hold together any whole nation.

However, there are subtleties that are not perceived from great distances. The border between Crimea and Ukraine will be from the beginning of 2014 a new scar on the planet's human geography, since families and relatives of different order will be separated by this subtle boundary line but which will mean a profound political distance given the interests of each of the blocks that hold to either side of it. A few four weeks ago was made public the news of the reunion of brothers and other Korean relatives, some from the North and some from the South, after 60 years apart. People who had shared a childhood together and who are already at retirement age, and had had no approach to their loved ones in all those years. And this is a real human drama. It is outrageous that we have not reached such a level of social development in the world by this 21st century so that these things keep happening. The global village may never be a means of dignified human development while they continue to exist these sovereign demonstrations by the planet's most powerful leaders, which persist in maintaining positions of dominance and hostility with its counterpart. It is not a matter of favor no ideology in particular, but rather to point the tremendous lack of definition concerning the dialogue, tolerance and rapprochement between peoples, indispensable so that there are territories that provide a life of dignity.