Safetechgroupin at 04:25, 1 June 2026

2026-06-01T04:25:44Z

New page

{{short description|Strategy in politics and sociology}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2023}}
{{other uses}}

[[File:Philip-ii-of-macedon.jpg|thumb|Tradition attributes the origin of the motto to [[Philip II of Macedon]]: {{langx|grc|διαίρει καὶ βασίλευε}} ''diaírei kài basíleue'', meaning "divide and rule"]]

The term '''divide and conquer''' in [[politics]] refers to an entity gaining and maintaining political power by using divisive measures.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/divide%20and%20conquer | title=Definition of DIVIDE AND CONQUER }}</ref> This includes the exploitation of existing divisions within a political group by its political opponents, and also the deliberate creation or strengthening of such divisions.<ref name="EW">{{Cite web|url=https://www.dictionary.com/browse/divide-and-conquer|title=Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words|website=Dictionary.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | doi=10.1093/jla/2.2.417 | title=Divide and Conquer | date=2010 | last1=Posner | first1=Eric A. | last2=Spier | first2=Kathryn E. | last3=Vermeule | first3=Adrian | journal=Journal of Legal Analysis | volume=2 | issue=2 | pages=417–471| doi-access=free }}</ref>

==Definition==
The concept primarily refers to the practice of creating divisions between opponents to prevent them from uniting against a common foe, allowing the one who divides to gain or maintain political control.<ref name="EW" /><ref name="AH">{{cite web | url=https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=divide |title=The American Heritage Dictionary entry: Divide}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/divide%20and%20conquer |title=Definition of DIVIDE AND CONQUER}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191828836.001.0001/acref-9780191828836-e-104 | isbn=978-0-19-182883-6 |title=A Dictionary of African Politics | chapter=Divide and rule | date=24 January 2019 |publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref> As a [[Maxim (philosophy)|maxim]], it is commonly recommended to political rulers.<ref>{{cite book | url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780198734901.001.0001/acref-9780198734901-e-561 | isbn=978-0-19-873490-1 | title=Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs | chapter=DIVIDE and rule | date=17 September 2015 | publisher=Oxford University Press }}</ref> A secondary usage of the idea refers to the practice of "dividing one's own forces or personnel so as to deal with different tasks simultaneously."<ref name="AH" /> The exact wording of the idiom in English is varied,<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EuvqPkAq2bkC&pg=PA112 | title=Early American Proverbs and Proverbial Phrases | isbn=978-0-674-21981-6 | last1=Whiting | first1=Bartlett Jere | date=1977 | publisher=Harvard University Press }}</ref> including ''divide and rule'' (mainly in [[British English]] but rarely used),<ref>{{cite web | url=https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/divide-and-conquer | title=Divide and conquer}}</ref> ''divide and conquer'' (in [[American English|American]], the most common variation),<ref>{{cite web | url=https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/divide-and-rule | title=Divide and rule }}</ref> ''divide and govern'', and ''divide so that you may rule''.<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rT5PEAAAQBAJ | title=Dictionary of European Proverbs | isbn=978-1-134-86461-4 | last1=Strauss | first1=Emanuel | date=12 November 2012 | publisher=Routledge}}</ref>

==Etymology==
The phrase "divide and conquer" (from the [[Latin language|Latin]] {{lang|lat|divide et impera}}) first appeared in English around 1600.<ref name="EW" />

[[Edward Coke]] denounces it in Chapter I of the Fourth Part of the ''[[Institutes of the Lawes of England]]'', reporting that when it was demanded by the [[House of Lords|Lords]] and [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|Commons]] what might be a principal motive for them to have good success in [[Parliament of England|Parliament]], it was answered: "{{lang|lat|Eritis insuperabiles, si fueritis inseparabiles. Explosum est illud diverbium: Divide, & impera, cum radix & vertex imperii in obedientium consensu rata sunt.}}" ("You would be invincible if you were inseparable. This proverb, Divide and rule, has been rejected, since the root and the summit of authority are confirmed by the consent of the subjects.")<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K2pOAAAAYAAJ&q=Divide+and+rule,+has+been+rejected,+since+the+root+and+the+summit+of+authority+are+confirmed+by+the+consent+of+the+subjects.%22 | title=The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke | isbn=978-0-86597-313-8 | last1=Coke | first1=Sir Edward | date=2003 | publisher=Liberty Fund }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1cRwEAAAQBAJ&dq=Divide+and+rule%2C+has+been+rejected%2C+since+the+root+and+the+summit+of+authority+are+confirmed+by+the+consent+of+the+subjects.%22&pg=PA213 | title=The American Colonies and the British Empire, 1607-1783, Part II | isbn=978-1-000-17333-8 | last1=Greene | first1=Jack P. | date=29 May 2022 | publisher=Taylor & Francis }}</ref>

In a minor variation, [[Francis Bacon|Sir Francis Bacon]] wrote the phrase as {{lang|lat|separa et impera}} in a letter to [[James VI and I|James I]] of 15 February 1615. [[James Madison]] made this recommendation in a letter to [[Thomas Jefferson]] of 24 October 1787,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch17s22.html |title=Constitutional Government: James Madison to Thomas Jefferson |publisher=Press-pubs.uchicago.edu |access-date=2011-08-27}}</ref> which summarized the thesis of ''[[Federalist No. 10]]'':<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.htm|title=The Federalist #10|work=constitution.org}}</ref> "Divide et impera, the reprobated axiom of tyranny, is under certain (some) qualifications, the only policy, by which a republic can be administered on just principles."<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9nd2vRt1JGMC&dq=the%20reprobated%20axiom%20of%20tyranny&pg=PA207 | title=Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution | isbn=978-1-4299-2366-8 | last1=Holton | first1=Woody | date=14 October 2008 | publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | url=https://doi.org/10.2307/3491599 | doi=10.2307/3491599 | jstor=3491599 | last1=Holton | first1=Woody | title="Divide et Impera": "Federalist 10" in a Wider Sphere | journal=The William and Mary Quarterly | date=2005 | volume=62 | issue=2 | pages=175–212 | url-access=subscription }}</ref>

{{lang|lat|Divide et impera}} is the third of three political maxims in [[Immanuel Kant]]'s ''[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch|Perpetual Peace]]'' (1795), ''Appendix I'', the others being {{lang|lat|Fac et excusa}} ("Act now, and make excuses later") and {{lang|lat|Si fecisti, nega}} ("If you commit a crime, deny it"):<ref>{{cite web|title=Immanuel Kant: Perpetual Peace: Appendix I|url=https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/latta-perpetual-peace-a-philosophical-essay-1917-ed|url-status=live|access-date=11 October 2021|website=Online Library of Liberty|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201218192525/https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/latta-perpetual-peace-a-philosophical-essay-1917-ed |archive-date=18 December 2020 }}</ref> Kant refers to these tactics when describing the traits of “despotic moralists."<ref>{{cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xMB7BsT_w4gC&dq=kant%20%22Si%20fecisti%2C%20nega%22&pg=PA120 | title=Political Writings | isbn=978-0-521-39837-4 | last1=Kant | first1=Immanuel | date=1991 | publisher=Cambridge University Press }}</ref>

== Politics ==

In politics, the concept refers to a strategy that breaks up existing power structures, and especially prevents smaller power groups from linking up, causing rivalries and fomenting discord among the people to prevent a [[rebellion]] against the elites or the people implementing the strategy. The goal is either to pit the lower classes against themselves to prevent a [[revolution]], or to provide a desired solution to the growing discord that strengthens the power of the elites.<ref name="Ilia Xypolia 2016. P. 9">{{Cite journal | doi=10.1080/03017605.2016.1199629 |title = Divide et Impera: Vertical and Horizontal Dimensions of British Imperialism|journal = Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory|volume = 44|issue = 3|pages = 221–231|year = 2016|last1 = Xypolia|first1 = Ilia|hdl = 2164/9956|s2cid = 148118309|hdl-access=free| url=https://aura.abdn.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/2164/9956/Xypolia_Divide_et_Impera_Vertical_and_Horizontal_imperialism.pdf}} p. 221.</ref>

The principle "{{lang|lat|divide et impera}}" is cited as a common in politics by [[Traiano Boccalini]] in {{lang|it|La bilancia politica}}.<ref>'''1''' [https://archive.org/details/imgGI273MiscellaneaOpal/page/n151 §136] and '''2''' [https://books.google.com/books?id=w36PM_6gDOoC&pg=PA225 §225]</ref>

=== Economics ===

In economics, the concept is also mentioned as a strategy for [[market segmentation]] to get the most out of the players in a competitive market.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Webber|first=Harry|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6DtxbznhRYsC|title=Divide and Conquer: Target Your Customers Through Market Segmentation|date=1998-06-19|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=978-0-471-17633-6|language=en}}</ref>

== Historical examples ==

===Roman Empire===
In his history of the Gallic Wars, ''[[Commentarii de Bello Gallico]]'', Julius Caesar narrates the following episode:

{{blockquote|Ipse Diviciacum Haeduum magnopere cohortatus docet necesse esse manus hostium distineri, ne cum tanta multitudine uno tempore confligendum sit.<ref>Caesar, ''De Bello Gallico'' 1.31.6</ref>}}

Translated into English, this reads:

{{blockquote|He made a powerful and a personal appeal to Diviciacus the Aeduan, showing him how important an advantage it was for the Roman state, and for the welfare of both parties, to keep the contingents of the enemy apart, so as to avoid the necessity of fighting at one time against so large a host.<ref>trans. H. J. Edwards, Loeb Classical Library (1917)</ref>}}

The Gauls were a people who shared a language and culture but were politically independent from one another, being separated into a number of tribes. Their interests frequently being at odds, and with existing populations being disrupted by large-scale migrations of other peoples being commonplace, warfare between the tribes was endemic; mostly simmering at a low level in the form of constant raids, but occasionally erupting in paroxysms of violence which saw entire cities laid waste and their populations dispersed or enslaved. For this reason the tribes frequently had bitter hatred for the others.<ref>Goldsworthy (2006), pp. 212–214</ref><ref>Woolf, ''Becoming Roman'' (1998), pp. 23–25</ref><ref>Drinkwater, ''Roman Gaul'' (1983), p. 19</ref>

These weaknesses — the lack of centralized political authority and the resultant animosity between the tribes — were relentlessly and systematically exploited by Caesar during his conquest of Gaul.<ref>Goudineau, ''Le Dossier Vercingétorix'' (2001), pp. 180–185</ref> Caesar used a system of incentives and punishments to ally with some tribes and intimidate others, ensuring that he was only ever fighting one opponent at a time.<ref>Goldsworthy (2006), pp. 280–285</ref> He carefully presented himself as a defender of Gallic interests, and his military actions as aimed only at hostile tribes who threatened the peace and stability of Gaul.<ref>Caesar, ''BG'' 1.33–35 (on the Aedui as "brothers of the Roman people")</ref> Neighboring tribes often agreed with his assessment, viewing those he assailed as deadly foes who had all too often plagued them, rather than as fierce potential allies in the wars to come. Many even supplied Roman forces with grain or auxiliary troops, or even offered the use of their towns as permanent bases for legionaries.<ref>Woolf (2012), p. 119</ref><ref>Example: the Remi in ''BG'' 2.3–5</ref>

Eventually, though, there could be no mistaking Caesar’s true motive: not pacification, but conquest.<ref>Goudineau (2001), p. 201: "Ce que César voulait, c’était la domination permanente."</ref> The Gauls realized that they were on the verge of becoming a conquered people without ever having fought a war in their defense.<ref>Roymans, ''Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity'' (2009), p. 224</ref>

In response they elected [[Vercingetorix]] of the Arverni to lead the unified Gallic resistance with the goal of expelling the Romans from Gaul.<ref>Caesar, ''BG'' 7.4</ref> Although Vercingetorix was a leader of an exceptionally high caliber, banding together the disparate tribes as had never been done, and enforcing discipline and order on a people who never known either; and despite his innovative strategy of continual retreat before the superior legions, burning or destroying all food that they left behind them denying Caesar the set-piece battle he desired, Vercingetorix eventually erred. Harried by the Romans, he and his forces sheltered in the walled city of [[Alesia (city)|Alesia]]. Caesar entrapped them within a double ring of defensive fortifications: one to keep Vercingetorix and his army confined, the other as protection against the relief army that was sure to come, and the Romans waited.<ref>Goldsworthy (2006), pp. 320–335</ref><ref>Goudineau (2001), pp. 280–295</ref>

In the subsequent [[Battle of Alesia]], Caesar's legions won such a crushing victory that Gallic resistance to Roman rule was no longer possible.<ref>Caesar, ''BG'' 7.88–89</ref> Vercingetorix rode into the Roman camp alone and silently fell at the feet of Caesar, laying down his arms in token of submission in what Plutarch described as “the most famous surrender in antiquity.”<ref>Plutarch, ''Life of Caesar'' 27.3</ref> The rest of the tribes followed, and they were integrated as the province of Roman Gaul. The region was eventually organized into the Tres Galliae ([[Gallia Belgica]], [[Gallia Lugdunensis]], and [[Gallia Aquitania]]) alongside the older [[Gallia Narbonensis]].<ref>Drinkwater (1983), pp. 15–20</ref><ref>Strabo, ''Geography'' 4.1–3</ref>

===Mongol Empire===

While the [[Mongols]] imported [[Islam in Central Asia|Central Asian Muslims]] to serve as administrators in [[China]], the Mongols also sent Han Chinese and Khitans from China to serve as administrators over the Muslim population in Bukhara in Central Asia, using foreigners to curtail the power of the local peoples of both lands.<ref>{{cite journal|jstor=41930343|journal=Journal of Asian History|volume= 13|number=2|date=1979|pages=137–8|publisher=Harrassowitz Verlag|title=Sino-Khitan Administration in Mongol Bukhara|last1=Buell|first1=Paul D.}}</ref>

=== British India ===
Some Indian historians and politicians, such as politician [[Shashi Tharoor]], assert that the [[British Raj]] frequently used this tactic to consolidate their rule and prevent the emergence of the [[Indian independence movement]], citing [[Mountstuart Elphinstone|Lord Elphinstone]] who said that "''Divide et impera'' was the old Roman maxim, and it should be ours."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Tharoor |first=Shashi |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=atcqMQAACAAJ |title=Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India |date=2017 |publisher=Hurst |isbn=978-1-84904-808-8 |pages=101 |language=en}}</ref> A ''Times Literary Supplement'' review by British historian Jon Wilson suggests that although this was broadly the case, a more nuanced approach might be closer to the facts.<ref>Wilson, Jon, 2016, ''[[India Conquered|India Conquered: Britain's Raj and the chaos of empire]]'', cited in a review of Tharoor's work by Elizabeth Buettner in "Debt of Honour: why the European impact on India must be fully acknowledged", ''Times Literary Supplement'', 11 August 2017, pages 13-14.</ref> On the other hand, Proponents of [[Hindutva]], the ideology of the current and recent Indian governments over the years, strongly stress Hindu-Muslim conflict going back centuries before the arrival of the British.

The classic nationalist position was expressed by the Indian jurist and supporter of [[Indian reunification]] [[Markandey Katju]], who wrote in the Pakistani paper ''[[The Nation (Pakistan)|The Nation]]'' in 2013:<ref name="Katju2013">{{cite web |author1=Markandey Katju |url=https://www.nation.com.pk/02-Mar-2013/the-truth-about-pakistan |publisher=[[The Nation (Pakistan)|The Nation]] |title=The truth about Pakistan|date=2 March 2013 |access-date=29 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131110103720/http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/columns/02-Mar-2013/the-truth-about-pakistan |archive-date=10 November 2013 |language=en|url-status=live |author1-link=Markandey Katju }}</ref>
{{blockquote| Up to [[Indian Rebellion of 1857|1857]], there were no communal problems in India; all communal riots and animosity began after 1857. No doubt even before 1857, there were differences between Hindus and Muslims, the Hindus going to temples and the Muslims going to mosques, but there was no animosity. In fact, the Hindus and Muslims used to help each other; Hindus used to participate in [[Eid al-Fitr|Eid]] celebrations, and Muslims in [[Holi]] and [[Diwali]]. The Muslim rulers like the [[Mughals]], [[Nawab of Awadh]] and [[Murshidabad]], [[Tipu Sultan]], etc. were totally secular; they organised [[Ramlilas]], participated in Holi, Diwali, etc. [[Ghalib]]'s affectionate letters to his Hindu friends like Munshi Shiv Naraln Aram, Har Gopal Tofta, etc. attest to the affection between Hindus and Muslims at that time. In 1857, the ‘[[Indian Rebellion of 1857|Great Mutiny]]’ broke out in which the Hindus and Muslims jointly fought against the British. This shocked the British government so much that after suppressing the Mutiny, they decided to start the policy of divide and rule (see online "History in the Service of Imperialism" by B.N. Pande). All communal riots began after 1857, artificially engineered by the British authorities. The British collector would secretly call the Hindu [[Pandit]], pay him money, and tell him to speak against Muslims, and similarly he would secretly call the [[Maulvi]], pay him money, and tell him to speak against Hindus. This communal poison was injected into our body politic year after year and decade after decade.<ref name="Katju2013"/>}}

Historian [[John Keay]] takes a contrary position regarding British policy, writing:

{{blockquote|Stock accusations of a wider Machiavellian intent to 'divide and rule' and to 'stir up Hindu-Muslim animosity' assume some premonition of a later partition. They make little sense in the contemporary context. 'Divide and rule' as a governing precept supposes the pre-existence of an integrated entity. In an India politically united only by British rule – and not yet even by the opposition which it generated – such a thing did not exist. Division was a fact of life. As [[Maulana Muhammad Ali]] would later put it, 'we divide and you rule'. Without recognising, exploring and accommodating such division, British dominion in India would have been impossible to establish, let alone sustain. Provoking sectarian conflict, on the other hand, was rarely in British interest.<ref>''History of India'', John Keay, pp. 464, 2010</ref>}}

[[Srinivas Kumar Sinha|General S.K. Sinha]], former Vice-Chief of Army Staff, writes that contrary to what the notion of divide and rule would predict, the [[British Indian Army]] was effectively integrated:

{{quotation|The undivided army was a unique institution set up by the British in India... [A]ll combat units, except [[Gurkha|Gorkhas]] and [[The Garhwal Rifles|Garhwalis]], had a mixed combination of Muslims and non-Muslims. They fought wars together and lived as friendly comrades in peace, owing loyalty to their regiments. Political developments with the emergency of the Congress and the Muslim League did not affect them. The Indian Army was totally apolitical till June 3rd 1947... In fact, during the Partition holocaust and till that date, both Muslim and non-Muslim soldiers remained totally impartial in dealing with communal violence. After June 3, 1947 things started changing.<ref>''The Partition of Soldiers'', General S.K. Sinha, ''The Asian Age'', 2015, [https://www.pressreader.com/india/the-asian-age/20150129/281943131290027]</ref>}}

=== French Algeria ===
{{Excerpt|Kabyle myth|paragraphs=1-2}}

=== Ottoman Empire ===
The Ottoman Empire often used a divide-and-rule strategy, pitting [[Armenians]] and [[Kurds]] against each other.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cheterian |first1=Vicken |title=Denial of violence. Ottoman past, Turkish present, and collective violence against the Armenians 1789–2009, Fatma Müge Göçek, New York, Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 656, US$78.00 (hardback), HC 978-0199334209 |journal=Nationalities Papers |date=2016 |volume=44 |issue=4 |pages=652–654 |doi=10.1080/00905992.2016.1158006 |s2cid=156252380 |quote=Yet, irony of history, instead of chasing the Armenians from the eastern provinces to make a new home for the Balkan Muslim refugees, they practically eliminated Armenians and consolidated an ethnic Kurdish presence in eastern Anatolia. Having lost the capacity to practice imperial policies of "divide and rule", today Turkey finds itself face-to-face with Kurdish nationalism.}}</ref>

=== Europe ===
* [[Classical Athens|Athenian]] historian [[Thucydides]] in his book [[History of the Peloponnesian War]] claimed that [[Alcibiades]] recommended to [[Achaemenid Empire|Persian]] statesman Tissaphernes, to weaken both Athens and Sparta for his own Persian's benefit. Alcibiades, suggested to Tissaphernes that '''The cheapest plan was to let the Hellenes wear each other out, at a small share of the expense and without risk to himself''.<ref>Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, 8.46.2</ref>
* Tacitus in Germania. chapter 33 writes "May the tribes, I pray, ever retain if not love for us, at least hatred for each other; for while the destinies of empire hurry us on, fortune can give no greater boon than discord among our foes."<ref>{{cite web | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qxcMAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22I%20pray%2C%20ever%20retain%20if%20not%20love%20for%20us%22&pg=PA112 | title=The Agricola and Germany of Tacitus: And the Dialogue on Oratory | last1=Tacitus | first1=Cornelius | date=1877 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0083%3Achapter%3D33 | title=Cornelius Tacitus, Germany and its Tribes, chapter 33 }}</ref>
* In [[Revolutions of 1848]], the governments which were being revolted against used this tactic to counter the rebels.<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RSHEDwAAQBAJ&q=divide+et+impera | title=The Revolutionary Movement of 1848-9 in Italy, Austria-Hungary, and Germany: With Some Examination of the Previous Thirty-three Years| last1=Edmund Maurice| first1=C.| date=11 December 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Z0mKRsElYNkC&q=1848+%22divide+et+impera%22&pg=PA435 |title = A History of Ukraine: The Land and Its Peoples, Second Edition|isbn = 9781442698796|last1 = Magocsi|first1 = Paul Robert|date = 18 June 2010| publisher=University of Toronto Press }}</ref>
* The colonial authorities in [[British Cyprus]] often stirred up the [[Turkish Cypriots|Turkish minority]] in order to neutralize agitation from the [[Greek Cypriots|Greek majority]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Grob-Fitzgibbon|first1=Benjamin|title=Imperial Endgame: Britain's Dirty Wars and the End of Empire|date=2011|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|isbn=978-0-230-30038-5|page=285}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Jordan|first1=Preston Lim|title=The Evolution of British Counter-Insurgency during the Cyprus Revolt, 1955–1959|date=2018|publisher=Springer|isbn=9783319916200|page=58}}</ref> This policy intentionally cultivated further animosity between the already divided Greek majority and the Turkish minority (which consists of 18% of the population) in the island that remains [[Cyprus dispute|divided to this day]] after an invasion by [[Turkey]] to establish the state of [[North Cyprus]] (which is only [[Diplomatic recognition|diplomatically recognized]] by Turkey).<ref>{{cite web|title=International Justice: The Case of Cyprus|date=13 May 2016 |url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/constantine-tzanos/international-justice-the_b_9934090.html|publisher=The [[HuffPost]]|access-date=1 November 2017|location=Washington, D.C.}}</ref>
*The [[Partition of Ireland|partition of Ireland in 1921]] has been claimed as an intentional implementation of this strategy by [[David Lloyd George]], although the religious divisions in Ireland were notorious and of long standing.<ref>{{Cite news|last=McGreevy|first=Ronan|title=100 years ago today the partition of Ireland was made official|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/100-years-ago-today-the-partition-of-ireland-was-made-official-1.4444655|access-date=2021-01-04|newspaper=The Irish Times|language=en}}</ref> The [[Stanford University|Stanford]] historian [[Priya Satia]] claims that the partition of Ireland was in ways a patch-test for the [[Partition of India|partition of India in 1947]].<ref>{{Cite web|last=University|first=Stanford|date=2019-03-08|title=Partition of 1947 continues to haunt India, Pakistan|url=https://news.stanford.edu/2019/03/08/partition-1947-continues-haunt-india-pakistan-stanford-scholar-says/|access-date=2021-01-04|website=Stanford News|language=en}}</ref>

===Colonialism===

According to Richard Morrock, four tactics of divide and rule practiced by Western colonialists are:<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Morrock |first=Richard |date=1973 |title=Heritage of Strife: The Effects of Colonialist "Divide and Rule" Strategy upon the Colonized Peoples |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40401707 |journal=Science & Society |volume=37 |issue=2 |pages=129–151 |jstor=40401707 |issn=0036-8237}}</ref>

# The manufacture of differences within the targeted population;
# The amplification of existing differences;
# The use of these differences for the benefit of the colonial empire; and
# The carry over of these differences into the post-colonial period.

== Foreign policy ==

=== United States ===

Some analysts assert that the [[United States]] is practicing the strategy in the 21st-century Middle East through their supposed escalation of the [[Shia–Sunni relations |Sunni–Shia conflict]]. British journalist [[Nafeez Ahmed]] cited a 2008 [[RAND Corporation]] study for the [[United States Armed Forces |U.S Armed Forces]] which recommended "divide and rule" as a possible strategy against the [[Arab world |Muslim world]] in [[War on Terror #Etymology |"the Long War"]].<ref>{{Cite news |title=The Pentagon plan to 'divide and rule' the Muslim world |language=en |work=Middle East Eye |url=http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/pentagon-plan-divide-and-rule-muslim-world-1690265165 |access-date=2018-06-29}}</ref>

=== Israel ===
{{main|Israeli support for Hamas}}

Professor [[Avner Cohen]], a former Israeli religious affairs official, publicly acknowledged that Hamas was "Israel's creation."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Higgins |first1=Andrew |title=How Israel Helped to Spawn Hamas - WSJ |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123275572295011847 |access-date=1 May 2024 |work=WSJ |date=24 January 2009 |archive-date=26 September 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090926212507/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123275572295011847.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Similar statements have been made by [[Yasser Arafat]].<ref>{{cite news |title=How Israel went from helping 'create' Hamas to bombing it |url=https://www.tbsnews.net/hamas-israel-war/how-israel-went-helping-create-hamas-bombing-it-718378 |access-date=1 May 2024 |work=The Business Standard |date=14 October 2023 |language=en |archive-date=1 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240501014540/https://www.tbsnews.net/hamas-israel-war/how-israel-went-helping-create-hamas-bombing-it-718378 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Assertions of Israeli support for Hamas date back to the late 1970s and early 1980s, a period marked by significant political upheaval in the Middle East. Former Israeli officials have openly acknowledged Israel's role in providing funding and assistance to Hamas as a means of undermining secular Palestinian factions such as the [[Palestine Liberation Organization]] (PLO). Brigadier General [[Yitzhak Segev]], who served as the Israeli military governor in Gaza during the early 1980s, admitted to providing financial assistance to the [[Muslim Brotherhood]], the precursor of Hamas, on the instruction of the Israeli authorities. The aim of the support was to weaken leftist and secular Palestinian organizations.<ref name="blowback" />

Israel contributed to the construction of parts of Islamist politician [[Ahmed Yassin]]'s network of mosques, clubs, and schools in Gaza, as well as the expansion of these institutions.<ref name="blowback">{{cite news |last1=Sayedahmed |first1=Dina |title=Blowback: How Israel Went From Helping Create Hamas to Bombing It |url=https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ |access-date=30 April 2024 |work=The Intercept |date=19 February 2018 |archive-date=1 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231201211111/https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

[[Shlomo Brom]], retired general and former deputy to Israel's national security adviser, believes that an empowered Hamas helps Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu avoid negotiatings over a Palestinian state, suggesting that there is no viable partner for peace talks.<ref name="nyt">{{cite news |last1=Mazzetti |first1=Mark |last2=Bergman |first2=Ronen |title='Buying Quiet': Inside the Israeli Plan That Propped Up Hamas |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html |access-date=30 April 2024 |work=The New York Times |date=10 December 2023 |archive-date=1 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240501235259/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Bezalel Smotrich]], a far-right lawmaker and finance minister under Netanyahu Government, called the Palestinian Authority a "burden" and Hamas an "asset".<ref>{{cite news |title=Israeli far-right Minister Bezalel Smotrich described Hamas as 'asset' in unearthed tweet |url=https://www.thenationalnews.com/mena/palestine-israel/2024/01/23/israel-bezalel-smotrich-hamas-asset/ |access-date=1 May 2024 |work=The National |date=23 January 2024 |language=en |archive-date=1 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240501014540/https://www.thenationalnews.com/mena/palestine-israel/2024/01/23/israel-bezalel-smotrich-hamas-asset/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Russia ===

Some consider that contemporary [[Russia|Russian]] affairs also have characteristics of a "divide and rule" strategy. Applied domestically to secure [[Vladimir Putin|Vladimir Putin's]] power in Russia,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Reddaway |first=Peter |author-link=Peter Reddaway |title=Russia's domestic security wars: Putin's use of divide and rule against his hardline allies |publisher=Palgrave Pivot |year=2018 |isbn=978-3319773919}}</ref> it is used abroad in [[Russian disinformation]] campaigns to achieve "regime security, predominance in Russia’s near abroad, and world-power status for Russia".<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Karlsen |first=Geir Hågen |date=2019-02-08 |title=Divide and rule: ten lessons about Russian political influence activities in Europe |journal=Palgrave Communications |language=en |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=1–14 |article-number=19 |doi=10.1057/s41599-019-0227-8 |issn=2055-1045|doi-access=free }}</ref>

== See also ==
{{Wiktionary|divide and conquer}}
* [[Soft power]]
* [[Hard power]]
* [[International relations]]
* [[Political realism]]
* [[False flag]]
* [[Destabilisation]]
* [[Identity politics]]
* [[Black propaganda]]
* [[Might makes right]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Divide And Rule}}
[[Category:1st-millennium BC introductions]]
[[Category:Conflict (process)]]
[[Category:Latin words and phrases]]
[[Category:Organizational conflict]]
[[Category:Political terminology]]
[[Category:Power (social and political) concepts]]
[[Category:Strategy]]
[[Category:Concepts in political philosophy]]

Divide and conquer - Revision history

Safetechgroupin at 04:25, 1 June 2026