Provider Dispute Resolution Request Form Blank: Fill & Download for Free

The short answer to how to teach emotional maturity to students is:Model, encourage and reinforce their use of these phrases:1.) When they DON’T LIKE/disapprove of what someone did:”I didn’t like it when you…(fill in the blank, be specific).” “Next time would you please…(fill in the blank, be specific)…”2.) When they DON’T LIKE what someone is suggesting:“I respectfully disagree, would you please consider…”3.) When they DON’T LIKE what’s being offered:“No thank you, I don’t care for…“When they DO LIKE what someone did:“I liked it when you….(fill in the blank with the specific behavior they appreciated). Thank you.”When they DO LIKE what someone is suggesting:“I agree.”When they DO LIKE what’s being offered:“Yes please, thank you.”These tools essentially teach people how to respectfully train others to treat them, using the oldest and most effective behavior-change tools known to mankind—positive and negative reinforcement.The long answer is:Emotional maturity develops at its own pace, but the tools and skills that foster its development can begin to be acquired quite young.The tools are not difficult, a four-year-old can learn them, but to become skilled and develop them as a habit requires consistency and repetition on the part of the teaching adult/parent. As we get older, if old, destructive habits have to be broken first that adds a layer of complexity, but it’s still highly do-able.Some people are emotionally mature already as young children, others have to be taught somewhere along the way how to navigate their emotional lives and constructively express their emotions.But even among children who were taught emotional regulation skills, the ones who are the most sensitive and have the most internal emotional turmoil often don’t get nearly enough repeated, consistent, guided practice using the tools for their particular level of need.It seems to me to be the children most overwhelmed by the intensity of their own emotions who go on in later grades to rebel against the emotional management skills they did learn, which they perceive to be totally inadequate for the level of difficulty they are going through.(It’s worth mentioning here, there will probably also always be a subset of children who feel emotionally more mature than those around them, who may find the level of emotional challenge in their lives totally inadequate for the level of challenge they are capable of dealing with, so they may ‘stir the pot’ sometimes just to have something interesting to do. Their scariest thought is probably boredom, and it can be truly terrifying for them, but I will focus on the former group first.)In particular those who have less emotional skills than their life demands, may reject or mock others’ public displays of emotion, until an increasingly toxic emotional environment develops, where fewer people around them want to make themselves emotionally vulnerable, a necessary and crucial first step for meaningful social connection and cohesion.The increasing isolation others feel fuels the overall problem, and more and more disconnected, emotionally volatile children may end up resorting to bravado, ‘couldn’t care less’ attitudes, pre-emptive criticisms of each other and ‘playful’ insults as their primary interactions.But even when intended ‘playfully’, when old hurts get triggered and unprocessed, repressed emotions are part of the mix, conversations quickly become toxic, and hurtful comments that take seconds to say, for the most vulnerable, sensitive children can take years to heal, easily coloring a child’s life choices and the recklessness of their decisions for days, weeks, months, and beyond.Fortunately however, repeated enough contact with a teacher, parent, or mentor who consistently demonstrates, promotes, and prompts emotionally constructive language and interaction, has the potential to rewire old, counter-productive neural networks in favor of emotional maturity, at almost any age.What fires together, wires together.From my professional, personal, and parenting experience, I consider these the basics for fostering emotional maturity in children.1.) Thoughts and feelings work together, but have distinct roles. Thoughts connect peoples’ minds, feelings connect peoples’ hearts, both are vital for emotional maturity to be able to develop.Imagine thoughts as oil and feelings as water—the two co-exist, are equally important, separate naturally, and are most useful when kept organized.A useful example of oil and water working together for the benefit of the organism, is in cell biology with the phospholipid bylayer of cell membranes.The membrane is made up of water-loving heads attached to oil-based tails that arrange themselves into rows where the tails point toward each other, and the heads stick out.Here’s an image, for reference:Lipid bilayer - WikipediaCell membranes have a huge responsibility to maintain the integrity of the cell, providing the infrastructure that allows what’s needed in, and keeping what’s not out.The same holds for the infrastructure of our mind, with respect to our thoughts and feelings.Kept organized and properly integrated, thoughts and feelings work together to help us maintain our personal integrity and keep our boundaries secure so that we can bring in to our lives what we want and need and keep out what we don’t.Like oil and water, thoughts and feelings also get mixed-up with agitation. And when thoughts and feelings mix and get disorganized, for safety reasons they are equally important to handle with care.Just like exposing oil and water to open flame causes a firestorm, when the heat of passion gets added to a mixture of thoughts and feelings, the potential for volatile and deeply scarring reactions increases.It is absolutely fundamental to emotional resiliency to know the difference between a thought and a feeling, their functions separately and together, and how to navigate them for best possible outcomes.Feelings arise from the body in response to unmet bodily needs, and ride up into our minds alongside our thoughts. Our thoughts then guide our actions. So any time thoughts have become distorted, repetitive, or destructive, they are typically reflecting unmet needs or deeply held unrealistic expectations.In order to understand what our body is really trying to communicate versus what our thoughts may be telling us, it helps us more quickly decode them if we bypass our thinking completely, and go directly to the underlying feelings for clues.The clues from our feelings tell us what our underlying, unmet needs actually are, so we can eithermeet the true, unmet needs (true needs are always constructive, never destructive), orbegin the work to change the unrealistic expectations that underlie them,both of which help re-normalize our thoughts.If ever we feel confused by a mixture of thoughts and feelings, its helpful to separate out our feelings from our thoughts first, then proceed. This is the most effective and efficient strategy I know of to separate out feelings from thoughts: Sonia Elkes's answer to What are the best ways to express feeling?And for a specific example of decoding thoughts using feelings to prompt us, see this answer:Sonia Elkes' answer to How can I stop the thoughts in my head (you're not good enough) everytime I'm about to do something?2.) Helping kids move past grudges and unhealed hurts from the past is crucial not just for constructive emotional interactions, but to enable learning itself.When extreme feelings start to build up, constructive thinking and focused learning have little chance.All things being equal, in a contest between passion and ration, passion seems to win.For some reason, it seems to be part of our wiring.The conjecture that when we have a strong emotional reaction, about ~10% of our feelings are about what is currently happening while ~90% is about unhealed hurts from the past that got triggered, is probably not far from the truth.Yet instructional environments rarely lend themselves well to long, drawn-out, individual emotional healing sessions, nor is that the purpose of classroom learning.(It can be done, and when done well, can create positive memories and powerful learning for a lifetime. But to effectively process intense emotions in a group setting, since emotions trigger each other like a nuclear chain reaction, is most effectively done with a skilled facilitator to maintain safety in the group.)So, how to discharge volatile emotions that do happen to come out during class, or in school, to prevent those emotions from actively inhibiting learning even when no skilled facilitator or ‘safety inspector’ is around?There is a quick technique I use because it acts as a sort of lightning rod. If used correctly, it can safely discharge volatile emotional surges that occur when two people clash.It serves to acknowledge both people’s pertinent-to-the-situation pain (without unnecessarily dwelling on it), and then sets the stage for empathy and vulnerability, but not through the usual exchange of how each side feels, because that only works in already close, caring relationships. Rather it’s effectiveness rests on the vulnerability generated through mutual, respectful request for behavior change.The technique can be used during class if teacher and students are already familiar with the technique, because resolution to many issues can be reached fairly quickly. If the teacher or students are new to the technique though, I would recommend practicing first outside of class.Discharging Volatile Emotions (‘Lightning Rod’) TechniqueWhen two people are upset with one another, tensions are escalating, and non-violent resolution seems unlikely, regardless who started what, I prompt the most offended looking one to tell the other specifically which behavior they didn't like:“I didn't like it when you…”and fill in the sentence.(For example: …shoved me, …blocked me, …blamed me, …yelled at me, …flipped me off, …hurt my friend, …wrote bad stuff about me, …moved my stuff…ignored me, etc.)The key is insisting they describe the specific behavior that set them off.What isn’t ok is name calling, insults, dismissiveness or vagueness, because those don’t describe the specific, changeable behavior(s) that triggered their intense reaction.(Unacceptable examples: …did that., …were annoying, …are an idiot, …acted like an a**hole, …were mean, etc)If I am working with a kid to teach them this skill and they don’t get it right the first time, I matter-of-fairly remind them I need to hear exactly what the other person did that upset them, so please try again.Generally, by the second or even third time of trying they have figured out in their own mind exactly which behavior set them off and are able to describe it without using insults.Note: If insults were expressed initially, the process can still work because, while painful to hear for the other person, the act of insulting someone at least has the benefit of clarifying the speaker’s thinking process because they just blew off some ‘steam’. (Remember feelings are like water, passion acts as the heat source.) And fortunately, the negative emotional impact on the person being insulted tends to be offset by the fact that the speaker is getting corrected by an authority figure in front of them. (The adult’s non-reactive, dispassionate, matter-of-fact correction is really helpful here.)As soon as the first person does finally manage to express simply and correctly what bugged them though, they then request that the other person please not repeat that behavior in particular:“Next time would you please not…” (filling in the sentence).(For example : “…not shove me, …not block me, …not blame me, …not yell at me, …not flip me off, …not hurt my friends, …not write mean things about me, …not touch my stuff, …not ignore me when I’m talking to you.”)The other person can respond to the request or not, but people generally don’t. They’re too focused on the fact they haven’t yet had their own say in the situation. Fortunately, it’s not important at this stage of the interaction.What is important, is that now it’s the other person’s turn to do the same thing:“Well, I didn’t like it when you…”and they do the same process.“Next time would you please not…”again, same requirements.Then, they alternate back and forth, til all outstanding grievances have been aired (takes a little longer if it’s both of their first time doing this or they have a history of conflict) and requests for specific, practical behavior change on both sides have been made.The awareness that pain was felt on both sides and the acknowledgment that they are both vulnerable to emotional triggers, are the keys to mutual empathy and potential for reconciliation.It’s not a requirement that they each apologize to each other for their part in the altercation, in fact it tends to be counter-productive to insist on it. But if the process is allowed to come to completion, one or the other participant typically reaches the point of empathy first, and tends to initiate the first apology on their own.Unsolicited by us, mutual, sincere apology indicates that the situation has been, for the moment at least, diffused. If resolution still does not seem to be reached though, maybe because unexpressed resentments are still brewing and a deadlock is happening, one way you can get the ball re-rolling and both sides talking again is by asking if both are ready to end here and apologize to one another. (Because few things get a person riled up and ready to talk again like being asked to apologize when we’re still furiously angry and don’t feel like we’ve been heard or justice has been served.)3.) Know that not all kids want to let go of their built-up emotions, especially if their identity or sense of security is wrapped up in them, like with pride, hostility, or victimhood.There are many reasons a child may balk at expressing feelings according to a preset, requested, ‘safe’ format. Those might include shame about their actions, fear of repercussions, fear of loss of power, and of course, the natural desire to rebel, stand out, and ‘be different.’Encouraging children to speak up about how they are feeling in constructive ways even when they really, really don’t want to, can be done in several ways that I know of:Preventatively:by establishing what the communication expectations are for conflict resolution beforehand, and clearly delineating what the consequences are if guidelines aren’t followed, especially if not following the guidelines caused the conflict to disrupt the learning environment, or peace of the classroom, or family dynamic.by offering nominal incentives, acknowledgment or meaningful rewards to anyone who is seen voluntarily and independently using pretty nearly the exact phrases being requested of them to settle their own disputes or interact respectfully with others. Pretty close to exact language is important so that the subconscious can take over sooner and the habit can develop.In-the-moment:by offering to waive or lighten disciplinary action that normally would have been prompted by the child’s action.Usually by the time an altercation requires adult intervention, one or the other child has already gotten pushed, hit, hurt, or something valuable was broken (whether accidentally or on purpose), and some sort of consequence, reparation or disciplinary action is already called for.When I use this technique with a child who is balking at following the format I am requesting, since the technique has such long-term, powerful potential to avoid build-up of shame, blame, and toxic residual resentment as well as the potential to begin to rewire the neural networks to favor emotional maturity, it’s nearly always worth it to me to offer an incentive for compliance. Maybe I offer to lighten the consequence, to help them clean up their mess, or I propose an alternative, more appealing task to accomplish instead, to help motivate them to do what I am asking. Even small incentives can be enough to sway a child to ‘spill their beans’. :)The potential payoff for getting kids to start practicing emotionally more mature ways to resolve conflict cannot, to me, be overstated.Remember, what fires together wires and rewires together, so every little bit counts.4.) Starting kids early with consistent language and repetition are the best ways I know of to set the stage for earlier emotional maturation in a child.In my own home, (out of desperation for more civil interactions between and from my four children) once I identified which phrases I most wanted to hear from them, I established a system with them I called the “Nickel System”, to encourage more respectful communication and peaceful conflict resolution.I told them ahead of time which phrases I was expecting of them, posted them for reference, and offered my kids a nickel for every time they used any one of these phrases independently, preferably without my prompting. There was no limit to what they could earn in a day.(It’s worth noting that expressing emotions tends to be a self-limiting activity, meaning eventually one starts to feel so balanced and energized from the resulting emotional catharsis, almost anything seems more fun than sitting around talking about feelings. And anyway, the more practice the better for us and them, so it’s an arrangement that is hard to abuse.These are the phrases I identified as most effective and helpful to hear from my children for my own peace of mind, not to mention my sanity:Yes, please./No, thank you. (in response to offers)Would you please…? (to ask a favor)May I please… (to make a request)Thank you. (to show appreciation)Yes, Mom. (or) I respectfully disagree,… (in response to my requests of them)Ouch, that hurt, please stop. (to express current irritation)I didn’t like it when you…/Next time would you please not… (to express past irritation)I’m sorry. Are you ok? Do you need anything? (when we find out we’ve hurt someone)I like your/how you…(to show we are impressed—this is especially useful for dispelling jealousy)And:I feel angry that… (to express frustration)I feel sad that…(to express disappointment)I feel scared that…(to express doubt and insecurity)I feel guilty that…(to express regret)I feel grateful that…(to express relief and gratitude)I feel happy that…(to express delight)I feel excited that…(to express anticipation)I feel proud that…(to express pride)These last eight “I feel…” statements may be the most valuable of all, and also tend to be the hardest to express, so I have been known to give double nickels for them :)The reason they are so important is because constructively expressing them, as they come up, helps prevent them from building up into toxic versions of themselves, like: blame, shame, resentment, contempt, disdain, depression, panic, self-loathing, mania, arrogance, etc.5.) Expressing one’s feelings regularly, preferably out loud, seems to be a key to staying in emotional balance.Research does back up that emotional expression appears to be highly beneficial, and my own experience is that of all the the possible forms of expression, speaking them out loud seems to be the most therapeutic.Expressing your emotions can reduce fear: studyAnd emotional repression can be harmful:PsycNETAnd that there are potential health benefits to expressing emotions regularly:Negative Emotions Are Key to Well-BeingDepending which emotion we express, positive or negative, seems to affect the direction that our mood can shift, up or down.Our emotions can range from extreme, painful lows (that nevertheless tend to be very educational) at the bottom, to extreme, pleasurable highs (that tend to leave us reckless and ‘out-of-touch’), at the extreme top.Expressing negative emotions seems to have the potential to bring us UP, away from those unnecessarily painful lows.Expressing anger, sadness, fear and guilt when we feel it,has the potential to lift our mood and prevent us from going too low, somehow bringing us back up to a more neutral, emotional baseline.And likewise, expressing positive emotions seems to have the potential to bring us DOWN, away from those manic, ‘out-of-touch’ highs.Expressing gratitude, joy, excitement, and pride has the potential to ground us, to calm us down and keep us from going emotionally too high, this time bringing us back down to that same neutral, grounded emotional baseline.Converging back toward this more neutral ‘0’, away from both positive and negative extremes, helps maintain our emotional balance.6.) Noticing what physical factors seem to affect our own and our children’s/students moods, helps avoid unpleasant emotional roller coaster-ing.As to what factors influence our personal emotional trajectories, I can only speak anecdotally from my observations of myself, my children, and the students I have worked with when I taught as a guest lecturer.My unofficial, anecdotal observation is that hunger, thirst and fatigue seem to have a net negative effect on my mood and seem to depress my mood downward toward the painful end. For me personally, feelings of insecurity also accompany my sensations of hunger, thirst and tired.On the other hand, at least for myself, the feeling of satisfaction, quenched thirst, and feeling rested enhance my mood.For me, feelings of over-security and over-confidence seem to accompany nutritional, mineral, or electrolyte depletion for me, for example maybe if I haven’t eaten very nutritiously over a period of time.I also notice in myself that I am more likely to use curse and swear words in my speech as my emotions start drifting toward both the higher and lower ends of my emotional comfort zone.In my experience, cursing and swearing can have incredible therapeutic effect if they help someone release pent up emotions, but if they are directed specifically and angrily at another person, the benefit is completely and utterly outweighed by their net destructiveness.So if I notice myself using swear words more often, maybe peppering my speech with them as adjectives and adverbs, I make a mental note to check in on what else is going on in my life, particularly what I might not have been eating and drinking enough of lately, to consider what changes might be in order.Knowing one’s own red flags of emotional imbalance can be very helpful for developing emotional maturity, in ourselves and others.Over time, as kids become quicker from practicing and better at identifying their own feelings, they start to become more adept at seeing situations from other people’s perspectives, and become better able to bypass getting emotionally triggered.At some point they may even develop the skill to see both sides almost instantly, the mastery of empathy.7.) Recognizing when someone is emotionally ‘too high’, rather than ‘too low’ is helpful, because the help they need is an emotional boost down, not up.The group I alluded to at the beginning, who tend to be over-confident about their emotional prowess relative to the challenges they face, easily get themselves emotionally ‘treed’ from over-confidence. Once they get stuck in an emotionally ‘high’ place, they tend to have no more idea how to come ‘down’, than the other group had about how to come ‘up.’They might be in a temporary ‘too high’ moment from a physical sensation or occurrence happening within their body, but if it seems to have become part of their personality already, it might be a manifestation of their core beliefs about themselves in relation to their surroundings. It’s basically confidence gone extreme.But confidence gone extreme, while usually very pleasant for the one experiencing it, at some point starts to have serious consequence for unnecessary recklessness, irresponsibility, putting other people in dangerous situations, or even just callousness.A tendency to brag is one of the signs that natural confidence might be taking a turn for over-confidence, and can be a problem when it burns social bridges with peers and jeopardizes important relationships.Bragging comes from a messy combination of both positive and negative feelings all jumbled up, like excitement and pride plus insecurity about belonging and the disappointment of not feeling acknowledged enough.When we make statements that reflect jumbled up positive and negative feelings at the same time, things get confusing, and we often come off sounding unnatural, insecure, pathetic, manipulative, insincere, etc.When things aren’t clearly expressed, people get confused, and it seems to be our natural instinct as human beings to avoid things (and especially people) who confuse us.So the child who simply wanted to express their delight and pride and desire to celebrate their achievement, may find themselves instead being distanced from or rejected. This is a sad and unnecessary cycle often repeated in classrooms everywhere.So when I hear a child brag, especially my own, I ask them what it is specifically that they feel proud of.For example, if the brag was“I can run faster than anyone else on my team”,what I want them to get in the habit of saying instead is“I feel proud…that I can run fast.”Often that’s all they need to release the pressure that was building up in their ego and pushing out their other thoughts.Usually there is a sense of relief that comes from expressing pride in this way, and it doesn’t feel disingenuous or off-putting to the listener, because it makes no reference or comparison to anyone else.Nevertheless, wherever there is one basic positive emotion, there will inevitably be the other three as well and so to nip the ‘going too high’ problem in the bud, it helps to have the child also express what they are happy about, excited about and grateful for as well.(The same appears to be true for the basic negative emotions—where there is one, the other three will also be found.)For example, until asked, the child who feels good at running might not have realized the other positive emotions were there too;“I feel happy I have something I’m really good at,”“ I feel excited about challenging myself at the track meet that’s coming up,”“ I feel grateful i have supportive parents and a great coach.”And it’s by getting all the way to the “I feel grateful that…” part, where the real power to bring us back down off our own pedestal is—by reminding us that we are either deeply cared about by someone who helped us get where we are, or we were helped by being able to stand on all those ‘shoulders of giants’ who have gone before and paved the way for our own success.If our confidence isn’t regularly pruned, over-confidence can go way beyond bragging, topicking on other people just to get a reaction, or trolling online,acting superior to peers, andbeing condescending, disdainful or contemptuous toward peers.In this case a child is in serious need of an ‘ego’ dump. The pressure of an overly-inflated ego can crowd out nearly all other thoughts in one’s mind, and the child becomes emotionally trapped by their own obsessive thoughts of self, unable to see things around themselves clearly.The Ego-Dump TechniqueProvided they are not acting unsafely, sit them down one-on-one and let them know you can see by their natural confidence (which is a sign of mental strength, not everyone has this) that they are capable of making a big difference in the world, and you’d like to help them achieve great things.Let them know that you’d specifically like to hear more about what they think their strengths are—what are the things they feel particularly proud of, and what do they think they do better than the average Joe.It may help if you let them know you aren’t just singling them out, but like to hear from all students what they feel their strengths and accomplishments are so you know better how to guide them as a teacher.Since society shuns pride in particular, it helps for you to prompt them to start with the words “I feel proud that..”. Say:“Tell me about your strengths… ‘I feel proud that…’”Have them keep going as long as they possibly can, telling you everything they think they do well, no matter how small.And when they’re done with that, sayNow tell me, what you are happy about?… ‘I feel happy that…’”Until they are done, followed by:“Ok, how about what you are excited about?… ‘I feel excited that…’”Until they are done, and this should open the door for their awareness of gratitude.“So, now tell me all the things you can think of that you are grateful for:…‘I feel grateful that…”and feel free once they run out to suggest other possibilities they have forgotten to mention.Note: Optimal is that they themselves say the actual words, “I feel…” when they say these sentences. It seems to have the most power to reach furthest into their subconscious. To remind them, just prompt them by saying “I feel…” and they should take it from there.Sometimes though, even that isn’t enough for the truly superior-feeling, hard-core, narcissistic tendencies of some people, who were never blessed with adequate ego deflation along the way.Sadly, they had to figure out on their own some way to survive, even with a giant, massively over-inflated ego crowding out their true self, like an elephant in the living room of their minds, taking up most of their waking thoughts, and consuming them with a relentless need for validation. Their guiding, subconscious thought, is probably something along the lines of “Help!!!!! I’m getting squeezed out, I need to be bigger, I need to matter more!”For these folks, children and adults alike, to me the ultimate goal is to gently coax them into learning how to laugh amusedly at themselves, because that is the single most painless way I know of to release the pressure of an ego that has been long over-inflated and seems to have taken on a life of its own.(There are of course still the usual extremely painful ways of humbling someone, just be aware they still have the usual painful, hard-to-predict and potentially volatile consequences. Like with a garden, one can use toxic pesticides to solve one’s problems temporarily, but the longer term consequences eventually tend to come back and bite us in the proverbial behind.)The Exaggeration Technique (‘Laughter Cure’) for Ego DeflationWhen my own children go through this stage, I challenge them to fill in one or more of these more dramatic sentences out loud, over and over as needed, ever more dramatically and grandiosely, with my full attention on them, until we both burst out laughing.“I am the best in the world because…”“I am SO amazing, I deserve to…”“Everybody loves me because…”“I should be the king (or queen) of the world because…”“Nothing bad could ever happen to me because..”“I can do whatever I want because…”(If they balk, I model some of my own ridiculous exaggerations, for example, “Well, in fact, I’m the best in the world, because i know eeeeeverything,,,”, or “Eeeeeeeeeverybody loves me because I’m sooooooooo perfect all the time…” or “I don’t have to take care of myself, because i am innnvinnncibllllle..”Things like that. The more ridiculous and exaggerated, and based on obviously spurious conclusions the better.Getting them to express thoughts that go through their mind, (through all of our minds from time to time), out loud, in a safe space where they aren’t afraid to be made fun of, that they quickly realize are ridiculous, is key to the process.When their own ears and different parts of their own brain hear their own words, in a safe, loving space, the internal shift can start to happen, and they hopefully will start to be able to see the humor in their own (formerly subconscious, now brought to consciousness) thoughts.I just don't end the process until we both burst out laughing. They have to recognize the ridiculousness of their statements and truly laugh out loud for these overconfidence feelings to naturally fade.If however they never see the humor, and still truly believe the preposterous things they are saying, I would get them to a specialist pretty darn quickly. That is beyond the scope of these techniques.(Note: Adults too, by the way, don’t have a socially-acceptable way to dump egos from time to time, which is really a shame because a good ego dump or laughter-cure can clear and balance the mind like few other things can. Nearly everyone’s ego will get overly inflated now and then, so here’s the quickest, least painful way I know to release the pressure valve when our own egos start to over-inflate enough to distract us from our more important activities:Sonia Elkes's answer to I think I may come off as arrogant. I truly don’t mean to, but someone close to me has recently commented on it and I think it’s a fair criticism. How do I get better?And finally, I want to mention that the truly most difficult child to work with, I think, is a child who is at the same time deeply over-secure and deeply insecure.This is a child who is holding a superposition of beliefs from one extreme end of the spectrum to the other, which takes an INCREDIBLE amount of physical energy, and is exhausting for them. I suspect we do this when we are so afraid of finding out which point on the worthiness spectrum we will fall on when the ‘wave function finally collapses’ so to speak, that we hold ourselves in this state of perpetual tension as a survival strategy.As a side note, the answer to that question if anyone ever asks, is that each of us can fall on ANY of the points on the worthiness scale to other people, but to ourselves, we always belong in the middle—not superior, not inferior, to anyone else. There will always be people who don’t know us and don’t care about us, people who know us and don’t care for us, people who know us and love us, and people who don’t know us but still love us.What matters is that we can recognize that, to ourselves, we are always equally worthy to everyone else—we are not inferior or superior to anyone. It’s perfectly natural for us to like or dislike being around some people more than others, and that some people will like or dislike being around us more than others, but it’s a sign of emotional imbalance to view ourselves as more or less worthy than someone, anyone, else.But with a little help, these kids too can land safely back at their own center, viewing themselves as neither superior or inferior, to their own and everyone’s relief. But of all of the tools I have mentioned, this is the one that tends to be most difficult for the teacher/adult who is guiding the student, because it becomes most crucial when a child is already stuck in strong hostility and has begun taking it out on us, so tends to be most triggering for us as well.In my experience, I see these children as the ones who vacillate between effortless compliance and hostile defiance, or even subversive non-compliance. Between behaviors that sometimes reflect deep insecurity, and other times baffling over-security. The student who is very smart, but seems capable of making particularly dumb decisions. The student who is fearless about bad-mouthing, talking back, being rude, disdainful, condescending and/or contemptuous toward peers and authority, but when called out for it are still capable of being truly, authentically, sincerely remorseful (though that doesn’t mean they won’t do it again the next day). The ones that confuse teachers and peers, because we are unsure whether to love them or hate them.However, this is no more a hard and fast trait than any of the others I have described. We all from time to time shift through all these stages, this most difficult one included, its just that some people get more stuck here than others. (For me I start feeling this way when I am tired, hungry and haven’t been eating well nutritionally or hydrating regularly lately.)I don’t really know how I would recommend that a teacher handle this situation, because of the nature of their role as teacher, not therapist.However, for the sake of comprehensiveness, I will share how I choose to handle it as a parent:When my children are experiencing a hostile stage like this, the most effective way for me to help bring them back up and back down at the same time to come to emotional balance in the middle, is a technique I don’t even have a name for.At a moment when they are being venomously hostile or their body language drips of condescension, but I can tell they are also feeling deeply internally uncomfortable at the same time, I ask them to tell me all the reasons they clearly think they are better than me.“Ok, well then, you’ve clearly got it all figured out. Why don’t you tell me what makes you such a fabulous person compared to me?”Of course, they generally don’t want to talk, but if for example we’re driving, and they’re being rude or hostile toward me, I might pull over and say, “Look, I’m not going to move, until you have come up with at least 5 ways that you are such a better a human than me.” Then I wait. And wait. As long as I need to til they explode and get off their chest whatever negative, vitriolic thought(s) have been coursing through their minds.And nine times out of ten once they’re done, they apologize sincerely and forget they were ever upset, and the rest of the drive is pleasant.The trick for me, is to not let myself get triggered by whatever garbage spills out of their mouth. Just remember:Whatever comes out of someone’s mouth when they are in a ‘too high’ or ‘too low’ emotional place, is NOT their true truth. Those words have ‘spin’—they are a perverted version of their truth, and not what they would EVER think, much less say, from a central, emotionally balanced perspective.That said, do take note of what they say, because invariably they do come up with things about us that we might actually be well-served to work harder on in ourselves. We can’t let our own shame about our shortcomings, which they may have just thrown in our faces, be a reason not to take their feedback to heart, and at some point give thought to whether we need to make a conscious effort to improve something about ourselves that they mentioned. :)I find this to also be a good time in the conversation to apologize for my part in something that my child is deeply unhappy with.If she says, “I’m better than you because I don’t sit around on my phone doing Quora and making us leave late,” as long as there is actually truth to that, I might say, “You know, I think you have a point. I could do a better job of not getting distracted right before we have to leave. I’ll give some thought to how I might handle that better.”I hope the thoughts I have presented here are helpful and clear.While the conclusions and inferences I draw are mostly my own, my original interest in this field was sparked by the ground-breaking work done by Institute for Health Solutions founder, Laurel Mellin, Ph.D., whose amazing program (www.ebt.org) specializes in researching emotion as it relates to helping people develop the emotional fluency skills needed to go underneath addictive tendencies and turn off the drive to go to excess from within.The big aha moment for me from that program was learning how to harness the power of our most basic, universal feelings, (the four negative ones and the four positive ones as I described above), in their natural order, called the Natural Flow of Feelings.A link to a description I wrote of that particularly useful but more individually therapeutically focused tool is here:Sonia Elkes's answer to How can I control my anger?Let me know if you have changes, additions or corrections that would make any of my suggestions more practical, effective, or successful. I always look forward to learning about effective ways to prevent conflict, to peacefully resolve it when it happens, and to generally promote more respectful communication whenever possible.And thanks for reading to this (very long) end.

The Japanese still viewed the Soviets as weak as they had been in the 1905 war. Originally the Japanese thought they could get their oil from the Soviet Union by invading the Soviet Union before the start of WWII. They were repulsed and decided that the Dutch East Indies and to consider a preemptive strike on Pearl Harbor.“General Georgi Zhukov had arrived at the Mongolia-Manchuria border in the early morning hours of June 5, 1939, after a grueling three-day trip from Moscow. He insisted on immediately questioning the Soviet defenders and touring the site of the recent border clashes with Japanese troops. Peering through his field glasses at the small figures scurrying about on the east bank of the Halha River and after tossing out sharply worded questions, Zhukov came to the belief that this was not another mere border clash with the Japanese. For years, Japanese troops had been probing the nearly 3,000-mile-long border that separated the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Soviet-protected Mongolia from the Japanese protectorate of Manchukuo, which was created shortly after the Japanese invaded Manchuria in 1931.”“The energetic Zhukov filed a report at the end of his first day, saying this looked to be the beginning of a major escalation by the Japanese and the forces of Manchukuo. The Soviet 57th Corps did not appear up to the task of stopping the Japanese in Zhukov’s assessment. He recommended a temporary holding action to protect the bridgehead on the east bank of the Halha River, which was called Khalkhin Gol by the Soviets, until substantial reinforcements could be mustered for a counteroffensive.”“One day after submitting his report to Moscow, the Soviet high command responded by naming the 42-year-old Zhukov to head the military effort, succeeding former General Nikolai Feklenko. The Soviets had tired of the Japanese incursions and were determined to make a point in the East as war clouds continued to build over Western Europe.”“Both sides were about to square off in a decisive struggle that became known as the Nomonhan Incident, which lasted several months with upward of 50,000 killed or wounded. More than 3,000 miles from Moscow, the small undeclared war went largely unnoticed in the West, but it was to have a profound influence on the coming world war. The defeat at Nomonhan caused the Japanese to turn southward toward the oil-rich East Indies and prompted the Imperial Japanese Navy to consider a preemptive strike on the U.S. Navy at Pearl Harbor. The use of combined arms and overwhelming force under Zhukov was later to play a significant role in the eventual Soviet repulse of the Nazi thrusts at Moscow and Stalingrad.”Zhukov’s Opportunity to Prove Himself“In reviewing the situation at Nomonhan, Zhukov realized that he had some skin in the game. Stalin’s purge of the Red Army had just come to an end, with its leadership cadre, including Commander in Chief Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky and more than half of its senior commanders were executed. This void opened opportunities for younger, talented, and savvy men like Zhukov if they could prove themselves and survive the rough and tumble atmosphere created by the bloody purges.”“The bright, ambitious Zhukov, the son of peasants born some 60 miles east of Moscow, was determined to succeed. Once his June 5 report was filed, the Soviets provided substantial reinforcements to the young commander, including the 36th Mechanized Infantry Division; 7th, 8th, and 9th Mechanized Brigades; 11th Tank Brigade; and the 8th Cavalry Division. In addition, Zhukov’s newly named First Army Group received a heavy artillery regiment and a tactical air wing with more than 100 planes and a group of 21 experienced pilots, who had won combat citations while fighting in Spain.”“The Soviets were aided by the fact that their military buildup occurred at Tamsag Bulak, 80 to 90 miles west of the Halha River and away from Japanese aerial observation. However, the nearest Soviet rail line was at Borzya, some 400 miles west of the Halha River. Japanese self-confidence and racist stereotypes of their Soviet opponents also played a role. Their railhead was only 50 miles away, and they believed that the Soviets simply could not concentrate a large combined armed force so far from their nearest railhead. Supplies would have to be transported by truck over dirt roads or over flat, open territory, making the convoys vulnerable to air attack if matters escalated. Japanese commanders also rejected the idea that the Soviets could adapt themselves to defeat Japanese tactics, which had proven so successful earlier in Korea, Manchuria, and China.”“In short, the Japanese did not believe the Soviets would rise to the challenge over such a small sliver of territory in such a faraway place. While the Japanese claimed the border to the Halha River, which flows northwest into Lake Buir Nor, the Soviets contended the border ran through the mud-brick hamlet of Nomonhan, some 10 miles east of the river. At its widest point, the disputed backwater area was less than 12 miles wide and approximately 30 miles long.”Tensions Rise on the Japanese-Soviet Border“Japanese-Soviet antagonism ran deep, dating back even before the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905 as the two powers struggled for years to assert dominance over parts of China, Korea, and Manchuria. After their defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, the Russian czars were forced to recognize Japan’s interests in Korea, and they ceded the Liaoutung Peninsula, renamed Kwantung by the Japanese. Kwantung contained the port of Dairen and the important naval base of Port Arthur. A few years later the Japanese established a special force, the Kwantung Army, to administer the area. The army was to later spearhead Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland.”“For its part, the Russian bear managed to paw Outer Mongolia from China in 1911, making it a protectorate called the Mongolian People’s Republic (MPR). World War I and the subsequent Russian Revolution caused considerable internal strife as the Bolsheviks took power in Russia. The resulting power vacuum and a weak China enabled the Japanese to take Manchuria. The poorly defined borders created additional uncertainty. In June 1937, Japanese forces fired on Soviet gunboats, killing 37 sailors in the Amur River that flowed between the USSR and Manchukuo. Border problems arose again in the summer of 1938 where the poorly defined borders of Korea, Manchukuo, and the Soviet Union met. The skirmishes at Changkufeng Hill provided a reminder to Stalin that the Imperial Japanese Army still threatened his eastern flank as matters heated up in Europe.”First Clashes on the Border“Although the reports differ considerably, the initial conflict at Nomonhan began on May 11, 1939, when a Japanese-backed force of provincial Manchukuo cavalry clashed with a Mongolian-Soviet patrol north of the Holsten River that flows westward to the Halha River. Japan’s Kwantung Army, which operated with some autonomy from Tokyo, decided to take matters into its own hands despite the fact that its eight divisions faced 30 Soviet divisions along the mutual border running from Lake Baikal to Vladivostok on the Pacific. Matters continued to escalate, and the next day a flight of Japanese light bombers attacked an MPR border post on the west bank of the Halha River, indisputably within the borders of the Soviet-backed country. MPR troops then crossed the fast-flowing 100- to 150-meter-wide Halha River and took up new positions between the river and Nomonhan as combat resumed.”“The Japanese saw this as a direct challenge to the Kwantung Army’s 23rd Division, an undermanned and poorly supported unit assigned to the backwater area. The 23rd had thinly armored tankettes armed only with a machine gun, and 40 percent of its 60 artillery pieces were Type 38 short-range 75mm guns dating back to 1907. The artillery regiment had a dozen 120mm howitzers, and most of the artillery was horse drawn. In addition, each infantry regiment had four rapid-fire 37mm guns and four 75mm mountain guns, but the division lacked high-velocity, low-trajectory guns appropriate to the terrain and necessary to handle oncoming tanks.”The Japanese Repulsed at the Halha River“On May 20, Japanese aerial reconnaissance discovered the Soviet buildup near Tamsag Bulak. The Japanese pulled together a force of 2,000 men to attack the enemy troops that had crossed the Halha River, starting with a two-pronged drive 40 miles south from Kanchuerhmiao along the east bank of the Halha. Four infantry companies and additional troops from Manchukuo were to push west from Nomonhan to help pin and destroy an approximately 400-man force of Soviet-MPR troops. That should have worked, except the Japanese failed to consider the possibility that the Soviet units spotted at Tamsag Bulak would be committed.”“The Japanese had substantially greater numbers, and they surprised the Soviet-Mongolian forces near Nomonhan. The Mongolian cavalry was routed and forced back, causing the Soviets to pullback as well toward the Halha River. As they neared the river, the fighting intensified and Soviet artillery and armored cars forced the Japanese forces to dig in on a low hill several miles east of the Halha. Because of faulty radio equipment, a 220-man Japanese unit under Lt. Col. Azuma was not kept apprised of the changing picture near the bridgehead. He continued south, unaware that the main Japanese force had been deflected and forced to dig in well away from the river crossing. Azuma’s force was spotted, and additional Soviet artillery was brought east across the Halha to further protect the bridgehead.”“The main Japanese force was now bogged down, dug in and under fire some two to three miles away, while Azuma’s lightly armed force was trapped by heavy fire. Azuma was nearly surrounded, with enemy infantry and cavalry attacking while heavy bombardment came from both sides of the Halha River. His cavalry dismounted and struggled to dig defensive positions in the sand. He could retreat northward, but doing so without orders would be a criminal offense punishable by death under the Japanese system. The artillery barrage continued and destroyed Azuma’s remaining trucks and the unit’s small reserve of ammunition. Only four men in his command managed to escape that night with the rest killed or captured. The main Japanese unit was not able to make progress, and three nights later it pulled back to Kanchuerhmiao. Japanese casualties neared 500, with one-fourth attributed to the main unit.”The Soviets and Japanese Reinforce“Although the Soviets had forced the enemy from the field, little mention of that fact was made at the time by either side. The Kwantung Army continued to assure Tokyo that it planned to avoid prolonged conflict, telling superiors that the Soviets would not be able to deploy large ground forces around Nomonhan. The Japanese forces, however, did request river-crossing equipment and craft, which should have alerted Tokyo that their army might be planning forays west across the Halha River into mutually recognized Mongolian territory. Moscow was growing suspicious of Japanese actions, and Zhukov was pulled from his duties as deputy commander of the Belarusian Military District in Minsk and sent east to investigate the disputed border area.”“With Zhukov now on the scene, the Soviet buildup continued at Tamsag Bulak. On the other side, Japanese confidence was high, and the Imperial forces remained largely unaware of either the size of the buildup or the change in the enemy’s command with the arrival of Zhukov. The Soviet-MPR bridgehead east of the Halha was gradually expanded during the first half of June with no response from the Japanese. Soviet strafing raids east of the river did cause concern at Japanese headquarters. The Japanese decided to respond in kind to the air attacks to send a strong message to the Soviets, a decision that dramatically escalated the situation. Japan’s 7th Division was to be pressed into service to assist the relatively new and understrength 23rd Division. The 23rd was to be reinforced with 180 planes, a strong strike force of two regiments of medium and light tanks, an artillery regiment, and an infantry regiment. Japanese strength would grow to some 15,000 men, 120 artillery and antitank guns, 70 tanks, and 180 aircraft.”“The Japanese remained exceptionally confident—so much so that they cut back the aerial reconnaissance west of the Halha so as not to alert the enemy. They were unaware that they were now facing a Soviet force of some 12,500 men, 109 artillery and antitank guns, 186 tanks, 266 armored cars, and more than 100 planes. Although the Japanese may have had a modest advantage in some categories, it was more than offset by the Soviets’ six-to-one armor advantage, which proved crucial in the relatively flat, open terrain.”Seizing Air Superiority“The Japanese plan of attack was rather straightforward. The main body of the 23rd Division would seize the Fui Heights, a pancake-shaped raised area located on the east bank of the Halha some 11 miles north of the confluence of the Halha and Holsten Rivers, where much of the fighting would occur. The 23rd Division and related units would cross the Halha near the Fui Heights on a freshly built pontoon bridge and move southward along the west bank of the Halha toward the Soviet bridge. At the same time, another force under Lt. Gen. Yasuoka Masaomi would move south along the east side of the Halha to engage the Soviet and MPR units and pin them between the two advancing forces near the Soviet-built bridge located near the confluence of the two rivers.”“The Japanese planned to neutralize Soviet airpower with a preemptive strike at the Soviet base near Tamsag Bulak, located well inside the MPR. The Kwantung Army kept this component of the plan secret from Tokyo, concerned that higher ups would not approve. The general staff in Tokyo did learn of the planned air attack and went on record opposing it, but the semi-independent Kwantung Army actually elected to move the air attack two days forward to June 27. The Japanese surprise air attack caught a group of newly arrived Soviet airmen flat-footed. Returning pilots claimed 98 Soviet planes destroyed and 51 damaged, while the Japanese reportedly lost only one bomber, two fighters, and a scout plane. In short, the Japanese had achieved air supremacy over the Halha at the start of the Kwantung Army’s July offensive.””The Kwantung Army was ecstatic over the results of the air attack, but it received a severe rebuke from Tokyo. The Kwanting commanders resented the desk jockeys at the general staff and continued to believe in a need to maintain its dignity and maintain the border against what it perceived to be Soviet incursions. The Japanese plans went forward, and on July 1 the Japanese took the Fui Heights east of the Halha. Then, on the moonless night of July 2-3, the Japanese managed to build a pontoon bridge on the Halha River across from the Fui Heights. By early morning, the 26th Regiment and the 71st and 72nd Infantry Regiments began the slow crossing on the narrow bridge. The heavy armored vehicles had to remain behind, but the 18 37mm antitank guns, 12 75mm mountain guns, eight 75mm field guns, and four 120mm howitzers made it across undetected with all the infantry by nightfall.”“The Soviets were now vulnerable with the enemy moving southward undetected on the west bank toward their bridgehead while facing a Japanese tank and infantry force on the east bank. Again the Japanese caught the Soviets by surprise when Yasuoka’s tanks attacked in the early morning hours of July 3, with guns blazing amid a passing thunderstorm. The startled Soviet 149th Infantry Regiment scattered before the tanks.”“Zhukov, still apparently unaware of the Japanese presence on the west bank of the Halha, ordered his 11th Tank Brigade and related units north toward a hill called Bain Tsagan, located on the west bank. In the early morning hours of July 3, the Japanese, with their rapid-firing 37mm antitank guns and armor-piercing shells, mauled the Soviets. Zhukov, now realizing that a large Japanese force had crossed the Halha and was threatening his position, ordered the remainder of the 11th Tank Brigade, 7th Brigade, 24th Regiment, and an armored battalion of the 8th Mongolian Cavalry Division against the southward-moving Japanese force.”“The Soviet armor had little infantry support, enabling the Japanese infantry to swarm over the Soviet vehicles, prying open hatch covers and destroying many of the tanks with gasoline bombs. Successive Soviet attacks were dealt with by the Japanese, who quickly found that the Russian gasoline tank engines could be taken out by gunners and gasoline bombs. However, by that afternoon unrelenting Soviet counterattacks and ranged-in artillery forced the Japanese to begin digging defensive positions on the west bank of the Halha just south of Bain Tsagan.”An Untenable Position“Zhukov then massed more than 450 tanks and armored cars in the area against a Japanese force that had left its armored vehicles behind before crossing the shaky pontoon bridge over the Halha. The only hope then lay with Yasuoka’s force, which had proceeded southward on the east side of the Halha. If that force succeeded, it would relieve pressure on Komatsubara’s embattled unit on the west bank. Yasuoka’s initial efforts were successful in crushing the first lines of Soviet artillery, but successive lines of Soviet infantry, tanks, and artillery slowed them and inflicted heavy losses. The Japanese Type 89 medium tank with its low-velocity 57mm cannon and relatively thin 17mm armor proved a poor match against the Soviet antitank guns and BT 5/7 tanks and armored cars. And the Soviets had another trick up their sleeves east of the Halha in the form of Japanese-produced piano wire coiled nearly invisibly as part of the defensive works. The wire entangled the gears and wheels of the Japanese light tanks like butterflies in a web, enabling Soviet artillery to zero in and finish off the tanks.”“Making matters worse for the Japanese, Yasuoka’s infantry units were not able to catch up with the tanks, so the two forces fought separately and less effectively. By evening, his forces slowed, with the infantry dug in well short of the Soviet bridgehead. At that time, only 50 percent of the Japanese tanks were operable and able to withdraw to the initial jumping off point. Additional Soviet aircraft had also appeared over the combat zone, engaging the Japanese in fierce struggles for air supremacy.”“The Japanese commanders now realized they were indeed in an untenable position, with their forces divided on both sides of the river and with a more powerful than imagined enemy force between them. The Japanese commander realized his forces had no additional bridge-building materials on hand, making it imperative that his forces west of the Halha be withdrawn immediately. Most of the forces made it back north and across the Halha that night and reestablished themselves by the morning of July 4 on the Fui Heights. The covering Japanese unit managed to make the crossing the following night before destroying the pontoon bridge.”“The Kwantung Army made the fateful decision to pull its two tank regiments from the combat zone. The Soviets had actually suffered heavier tank losses, but they had begun with a significant numerical advantage in armor and were able to continue delivering improved tanks to the battlefield.”Lessons of the First Battles“In both the May 28 and the early June battles, the Japanese lacked sufficient military intelligence, and they had seriously underestimated the enemy’s strength and determination. Hubris and their racist sense of inherent superiority over the Soviets and their MPR allies played a role as well. Most could not contemplate the idea that Soviet firepower could overcome the Japanese fighting spirit. The events also gave the Soviets reason to pause. The movement of some 10,000 enemy troops over the Halha River had gone undetected despite heightened awareness, and the Soviets might have been able to pin and destroy the units west of the Halha had they moved faster.”“Zhukov was no fool. In fact, he proved to be a quick learner throughout his career. In those two days at Nomonhan, Zhukov learned to use large tank formations as an independent attack force, rather than simply as support for infantry. This was far different from conventional views, and the concept would be proven again and on a much larger scale by the German panzer divisions early in World War II. The Soviets had learned the importance of hatch covers that could be locked from the inside, frustrating enemy infantry attempts to put tanks out of commission by opening the hatches. They also found that gasoline-powered tanks, with their exposed ventilation grills and exhaust manifolds, could be easily set afire. The combat at Bain Tsagan clearly showed the importance of overwhelming force and close integration of tanks, motorized infantry, artillery, and air power in defeating an enemy. The need for improved aerial reconnaissance was also apparent. These were important lessons for Zhukov and the Red Army as World War II loomed.”An 800-Mile Supply Loop“Moscow now agreed to send additional reinforcements to Zhukov. Thousands of men and machines were sent east, requiring additional trucks and transports to shuttle the men and equipment from the railhead at Borzya to the front lines. The effort resulted in a continuous 800-mile, five-day, round-trip shuttle that put both men and machines to the test.”“The Soviets by now had managed to build seven bridges across the Halha and Holsten Rivers to support their operations, including one invisible bridge built with its surface some 10-12 inches below the water level so it would not be seen by Japanese pilots. Between July 8-12, Japanese probing continued making gradual progress against the Soviets although they suffered substantial losses to superior Soviet artillery. The fighting became especially fierce in the early morning hours of July 12 as the Japanese forces pushed to within 1,500 yards of the primary Soviet bridgehead over the Halha. As the day wore on, Soviet counterattacks with two infantry battalions and some 150 armored vehicles coupled with strong artillery support managed to push the Japanese back to their starting point. The Soviet artillery especially had taken its toll and the Japanese decided to suspend their night attacks that had resulted in 85 deaths and three times that in wounded personnel in one regiment alone.”“The officers of the Kwantung Army were determined to save face and push the invaders back to the west side of the Halha. Other divisions were stripped of their heavy artillery, and the 3rd Heavy Field Artillery Brigade was shipped from Japan to Nomonhan. That brigade came equipped with 16 relatively modern 150mm howitzers and 16 100mm artillery pieces, all pulled by tractors rather than horses like the artillery in the 23rd Division. Army officials hoped to mount a large-scale artillery duel, force the enemy back to the west bank, and then withdraw after saving face.”“The Soviets were not standing pat, and reinforcements and supplies continued to pour into Zhukov’s First Army Group, including two additional artillery regiments and literally tons of artillery shells.”Looking For Conflict Resolution“The Japanese fired the next salvos in the conflict with a sustained barrage on July 23. The Soviets rose to the challenge, with artillery rounds falling on the Japanese positions from artillery located on both sides of the Halha. The Soviets wrested air supremacy from the Japanese, their fighters strafing enemy positions and shooting down two Japanese balloons used for artillery spotting. The intense artillery duel went on for two days with the Soviets demonstrating that they had plentiful ammunition, better artillery, and more of it. The heavy Soviet guns were deployed out of range of the Japanese guns, and the Russian 152mm artillery was deadly beyond 15,000 yards.”“The Kwantung Army ended its ill-fated artillery attack on July 25, and the general staff in Tokyo began pursuing a diplomatic resolution. That, in turn, irritated the Kwantung Army, which wanted to fight on to save face. The army’s General Isogai was called to Tokyo and told point blank that the Kwantung Army was to maintain its defensive position east of the Soviet positions while the government worked to resolve matters through diplomacy.”“Amazingly, the Kwantung Army chose to ignore the directive, but it was the Soviets under Zhukov who were to take the next step, based in part on events in both the West and the East. German demands on Poland were heating things up in the West, and both the Germans and the British were attempting to obtain an alliance with the Soviets. In addition, Richard Sorge, the Soviet super spy in Japan, confirmed that the Japanese high command wanted a diplomatic resolution to the problems at Nomonhan.”“In light of these developments, Soviet Premier Josef Stalin decided to order massive combat operations against the Japanese. Zhukov’s First Army Group was further strengthened by two infantry divisions, the 6th Tank Brigade, 212th Airborne Brigade, additional smaller units, and two Mongolian cavalry divisions. Zhukov’s air support also was considerably strengthened. The Japanese remained unaware of the additional buildup. They had only one and a half divisions in place.”Zhukov’s Maskirovka“Zhukov kept up his aerial reconnaissance and scouting efforts to gather information on the opposing forces. He planned to lead his central force in a frontal assault against the main Japanese positions several miles east of the Halha. Zhukov’s northern and southern forces—with the bulk of the Soviet armor—would turn the enemy’s flanks, creating an envelopment of the Japanese. Overwhelming force and tactical surprise would be keys to the plan.”“During World War II the Soviets were to become masters of maskirovka—or military deception—but Zhukov was to prove his near mastery of the concept even at this early stage. Trucks carrying men and matériel on the long journey from the staging area at Tamsag Bulak traveled only at night with their vehicles’ lights blacked out. Aware that the Japanese were tapping their telephone lines and intercepting their radio messages, the Soviets sent a series of easily deciphered messages concerning the building of defensive positions and preparations for a long winter campaign. Well before the attack, the Soviets nightly broadcasted the recorded sounds of tank and aircraft engines along with construction sounds. The Japanese became accustomed to the broadcasts and were unconcerned by the actual noise as the Soviets moved their tanks and equipment into position on the night of the attack.”“Zhukov cleverly directed a series of minor attacks on August 7-8 to expand his bridgehead east of the Halha by some three miles. He made sure these were contained by the Kwantung Army, further lulling the enemy into believing that the Soviets were relatively weak and poorly led. Under the cover of darkness on the night of August 19-20, the major force of his First Army Group crossed to the east bank of the Halha into the expanded Soviet enclave. Massive amounts of artillery on both sides of the river were available to support the assault.”Stalin’s Offensive Begins“The attack began with Soviet bombers pounding the Japanese lines just before 6 am on August 20, followed by nearly three full hours of heavy artillery fire before the bombers attacked again. “The shock and vibration of incoming bombs and artillery rounds” caused Japanese “radio-telegraph keys to chatter so uncontrollably that the frontline troops could not communicate with the rear, compounding their confusion and helplessness,” reported one observer.”“At 9 am, Soviet infantry and armor began moving forward with artillery supporting their efforts. An early morning fog along the river assisted the advancing troops, and the damaged communications lines prevented the Japanese artillery from participating until a bit after 10 am when many of the forward positions had already been overrun. Japanese resistance had stiffened by noon, and combat raged over a 40-mile front. The southern Soviet force, consisting of MPR Cavalry, armor, and mechanized infantry, pushed the southern Japanese force northward and inward by eight miles during the first day’s fighting. The northern Soviet force, consisting of two MPR cavalry units, supporting armor, and mechanized infantry, pushed the northern flank back two miles to the Fui Heights. Zhukov’s central force pushed some 750 yards forward against resistance so fierce that the Japanese dared not move troops to reinforce the flanks.”“Over the next two days, the southern Soviet force broke through the Japanese lines and then proceeded to encircle and eliminate the enemy in small pockets. Once the heavy Japanese weapons were eliminated, Soviet artillery and armor tightened the ring further with flame-throwing tanks and infantry. By August 23, the southern thrust had reached Nomonhan where it could block a possible Japanese retreat.”“Japanese airpower tangled with Soviet planes, which had a two to one advantage. The Soviets had recently brought forward updated I-16 fighter planes with thicker armor plating and a strengthened windshield that could withstand the 7.7mm machine-gun fire of the Japanese Type-97 fighters. The Japanese upgunned some of their planes, but this was quickly offset once the Soviets discovered that the enemy’s fighters had unprotected fuel tanks and began filling the sky with burning Japanese planes.”Eliminating the Remaining Pockets of Japanese Resistance“On the night of August 22, the Japanese planned a counterattack against the Soviet forces that were crushing their southern flank. The 26th and 28th Regiments of the 7th Division and the 71st and 72nd Regiments were pressed into action. Only the 28th was at full strength, although its men had marched 25 miles to the front just a day earlier. The units were deployed on the night of August 23, and many units did not reach their assigned positions by the next morning. Those that did arrive scurried into position before fully reconnoitering the enemy positions.”“Using the early morning fog to mask its movements on August 24, the 72nd Regiment made for a distant stand of scrub pines only to discover rather late in the going that the pines consisted of a well-camouflaged force of Soviet tanks. The Japanese, in fact, had stumbled into a massive Soviet tank force equipped with prototype models of the superb T-34 tank with its high-velocity 76mm gun and thick sloping armor. Later models of that versatile and well-designed tank were to cause nightmares for Nazi forces in World War II. The Soviets also had updated models of the BT-7 tanks, which were now equipped with diesel rather than gasoline engines and had protection over grills and exhaust manifolds to help protect them from Japanese fire.”“The attacking Japanese southern force suffered nearly 50 percent casualties and was ordered to withdraw shortly after sunset. The Japanese forces on the northern end of the line at Fui Heights had sustained three days of hammering by the Soviets, but the 800 well-entrenched men inflicted heavy losses on the advancing Soviets while disrupting Zhukov’s time table for the entire operation.”“The ambitious Zhukov was not pleased. He got on the horn, fired the commander of the northern force, and then fired his replacement as well before sending up a member of his own staff to lead the faltering force. That night a renewed Soviet attack led by flame-throwing tanks and supported by heavy artillery managed to quash the remaining Japanese artillery on the heights. Supplies of ammunition and food were cut off as the encircling Soviets tightened the ring over the next two days. On the night of August 24-25, the remaining Japanese withdrew from Fui Heights without orders. The Soviets counted more than 600 Japanese bodies when they occupied the heights the next morning.”“Zhukov’s northern force moved on, pushing south and east toward Nomonhan. Within a day the northern and southern forces had linked up near Nomonhan. The encircled Japanese fought on, with many of their howitzers seizing up from heated overuse. The artillery units were destroyed by tank and heavy artillery fire or overrun by Soviet forces. By August 27, a Japanese relief force of two infantry regiments and an artillery regiment reached the northeast portion of the Soviet ring. The 5,000-man force could not break through, and it retired four miles east of the Soviet-claimed border at Nomonhan. Over the course of the next two days, Soviet planes, artillery, and armor continued to destroy remaining pockets of Japanese resistance within the solid ring created by Zhukov’s forces. A few hundred lucky Japanese managed to escape to relative safety east of Nomonhan.”Resolving the Japanese-Soviet Border War“Zhukov declared the disputed territory to be enemy free on August 31. The fighting had been the worst modern Japanese defeat up to that time with the Sixth Army losing between 18,000 and 23,000 men killed or wounded between May and September. The Kwantung Army lost nearly 150 aircraft and many of its tanks and artillery. The Soviets lost more than 25,600 killed or wounded according to a fairly recent Russian report. While the Soviets suffered more deaths and injuries, their repeated overpowering attacks forced the enemy from the field.”“The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, signed on August 23, 1939, also helped to weaken the hawks in the Kwantung Army. Close military cooperation with the Germans against the Soviets—as the militants had long advocated—was no longer a realistic possibility. Following the disaster at Nomonhan, the Kwantung Army had submitted an aggressive plan for an escalation of the war, but authorities in Tokyo were determined to finally bring the Kwantung Army under control. General Nakajima of the headquarters staff flew from Tokyo to direct the Japanese forces to hold their positions and to ensure a quick, diplomatic resolution. Once on the ground, he was unbelievably swayed by the Kwantung Army’s arguments and had to be sent back again by Tokyo to convince the Kwantung Army that enough was enough. The imperial order was to be obeyed. General headquarters then cleaned house, relieving some of the Kwantung command and transferring other officers so that diplomatic efforts could move forward.”“While the world was focused on the September 1, 1939, German invasion of Poland, the Japanese and the Soviets quietly worked on an agreement signed September 15. Both sides recognized their troop positions as the temporary border. It approximated the earlier Soviet-MPR border claim with a joint commission to later formalize the boundary. Prisoners were exchanged and both the new Kwantung Army leaders and the Red Army leaders closely followed the agreement, bringing the war to a close.”“Stalin waited until the agreement was concluded, and then on September 17—when he was sure he did not face the prospect of a two-front war—sent the Red Army across the Polish border per his earlier agreement with Hitler on the partition of Poland.”The Remarkable Strategic Impact of the Nomonhan Incident“The Nomonhan Incident provided quite a learning curve for all involved. The Japanese came away with a black eye and a healthy respect for the Soviet military, which many in the international community had viewed as weak and lethargic in the wake of Stalin’s extensive purges. Japanese attention was turned southward toward the oil-rich East Indies and subsequently to the only major force that might hamper Japan’s expansionistic plans—the U.S. Navy and its base at Pearl Harbor. Japanese officials knew that U.S. industrial strength was much greater than the Soviet Union’s, and it superseded Japan’s strength by a factor of 10 to one. Japanese militants believed that a surprise attack would provide time for the Japanese to seize the resource-rich areas to the south and then build a strong defensive perimeter enabling them to negotiate a settlement with an America focused primarily on Europe.”“The Japanese elected to move southward, rebuffing German overtures to strike the Soviet Union in the Far East as the war progressed. Maj. Gen. Eugene Ort, the German ambassador to Japan, reported in late 1941 that Nomonhan had left a lasting impression on the Japanese, who “considered participation in the war against the Soviet Union too risky and too unprofitable.”“Soviet master spy Richard Sorge remained active in Tokyo. Later, his reliable reports assured Stalin that he could safely transport thousands of Siberian troops westward to deal with the German onslaught after the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, especially around Moscow and later Stalingrad. Zhukov and the winter-hardened Siberian troops used the combined arms tactics and maskirovka (deception) that had proven so successful at Nomonhan, but on a much larger scale with much more at stake.”Could the Soviet Union Have Fought a Two-Front War?T”he Soviet archives have been opened in recent years, and many military analysts now assert that the Soviet Union simply could not have survived a two-front war. Even in 1941, Maj. Gen. Arkady Kozakovtsev, then head of the Red Army in the Far East, reported quietly to a trusted confidant that the Soviet cause was hopeless “if the Japanese enter the war [against the Soviet Union] on Hitler’s side.”“The Soviet Union, in fact, was the only major power in World War II that did not have to contend with an energy-draining and resource-depleting two-front war. The early success at Nomonhan meant the Soviets could later focus solely on the Nazis at the front gate, using the hard-fought lessons learned in the East to help the Allies subdue and defeat Nazi Germany.”Soviet Surprise: How Imperial Japan Was Beat at the Battle of Nomonh An

In history hm tough one one i really admire was the ruler of a very small state that did very well very quickly Lee Kuan YewGCMG CH SPMJ李光耀Lee Kuan Yew in 20021st Prime Minister of SingaporeIn office5 June 1959[1]– 28 November 1990PresidentYusof IshakBenjamin ShearesDevan NairWee Kim WeeGovernorSir William GoodeDeputyToh Chin ChyeGoh Keng SweeS RajaratnamGoh Chok TongOng Teng CheongPreceded byLim Yew Hock (as Chief Minister)Succeeded byGoh Chok TongMinister Mentor of SingaporeIn office12 August 2004 – 21 May 2011Prime MinisterLee Hsien LoongPreceded byPosition establishedSucceeded byPosition abolished2nd Senior Minister of SingaporeIn office28 November 1990 – 12 August 2004Prime MinisterGoh Chok TongPreceded byS. RajaratnamSucceeded byGoh Chok Tong1st Secretary-General of the People's Action PartyIn office21 November 1954 – 1 November 1992Preceded byPosition establishedSucceeded byGoh Chok TongMember of Parliamentfor Tanjong Pagar GRCTanjong Pagar SMC (1965–1991)In office9 August 1965 – 23 March 2015Preceded byParliament establishedSucceeded byIndranee Thurai RajahMember of the Legislative Assembly for Tanjong PagarIn office2 April 1955 – 9 August 1965Preceded byConstituency establishedSucceeded byLegislative Assemblyrenamed to Parliament of SingaporeMember of the Malaysian Parliament for SingaporeIn office2 November 1963[2]– 9 August 19651st Leader of the Opposition of SingaporeIn office22 April 1955 – 31 March 1959Preceded byPosition establishedSucceeded byLim Yew HockPersonal detailsBornHarry Lee Kuan Yew16 September 1923Singapore, Straits SettlementsDied23 March 2015 (aged 91)Singapore General Hospital, SingaporeCause of deathPneumoniaResting placeMandai CrematoriumCitizenshipSingaporeanNationalitySingaporeanPolitical partyPeople's Action Party (1955–2015)Spouse(s)Kwa Geok Choo(m.1950; died 2010)ChildrenLee Hsien Loong (son)Lee Wei Ling (daughter)Lee Hsien Yang (son)MotherChua Jim Neo (mother)FatherLee Chin Koon (father)Alma materRaffles InstitutionLondon School of EconomicsFitzwilliam College, CambridgeLee Kuan YewLee's name in Chinese charactersChinese李光耀showTranscriptionsLee Kuan Yew GCMG CH SPMJ (16 September 1923 – 23 March 2015), commonly referred to by his initials LKY and sometimes referred to in his earlier years as Harry Lee, was the first Prime Minister of Singapore, governing for three decades. Lee is recognised as the nation's founding father, with the country described as transitioning from the "third world country to first world country in a single generation" under his leadership.After attending the London School of Economics, Lee graduated from Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, with double starred-first-class honours in law. He became a barrister of the Middle Temple in 1950, and practised law until 1959. Lee co-founded the People's Action Party (PAP) in 1954 and was its first secretary-general until 1992, leading the party to eight consecutive victories. After Lee chose to step down as Prime Minister in 1990, he served as Senior Minister under his successor Goh Chok Tong until 2004, then as Minister Mentor (an advisory post) until 2011, under his own son Lee Hsien Loong. In total, Lee held successive ministerial positions for 56 years. He continued to serve his Tanjong Pagar constituency for nearly 60 years as a member of parliament until his death in 2015.From 1991, he helmed the five-member Tanjong Pagar Group Representation Constituency and remained unopposed for a record five elections.Lee campaigned for Britain to relinquish its colonial rule, and eventually attained through a national referendum to merge with other former British territories to form Malaysia in 1963. However, racial strife and ideological differences led to its separation to become a sovereign city-state two years later. With overwhelming parliamentary control at every election, Lee oversaw Singapore's transformation from a British crown colony with a natural deep harbour to a developed economy. In the process, he forged a system of meritocratic, highly effective and incorrupt government and civil service. Many of his policies are now taught at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. Lee eschewed populist policies in favour of long-term social and economic planning. He championed meritocracy and multiracialism as governing principles, making English the common language to integrate its immigrant society and to facilitate trade with the West, whilst mandating bilingualism in schools to preserve students' mother tongue and ethnic identity.Lee's rule was criticised for curtailing civil liberties (media control and limits on public protests) and bringing libel suits against political opponents. He argued that such disciplinary measures were necessary for political stability which, together with the rule of law, were essential for economic progress,once saying: "Anybody who decides to take me on needs to put on knuckle-dusters. If you think you can hurt me more than I can hurt you, try. There is no other way you can govern a Chinese society".He died of pneumonia on 23 March 2015, aged 91. In a week of national mourning, 1.7 million residents and guests paid tribute to him at his lying-in-state at Parliament House and at community tribute sites around the island.Contents1Family background2Personal life3Education4Early life5Early political career (1951–1959)5.1Fajar trial5.2Formation of the People's Action Party5.3In opposition6Prime Minister, pre-independence (1959–1965)6.1Self-government administration (1959–1963)6.1.1PAP split of 19616.2Merger with Malaysia (1963–1965)6.2.1Lead up to merger6.2.2From merger to separation7Prime Minister, post-independence (1965–1990)7.1Decisions and policies7.1.1National security7.1.2Economy7.1.3Anti-corruption measures7.1.4Population policies7.1.5Corporal punishment7.1.6Water resources in Singapore7.2Relations with Malaysia7.2.1Mahathir Mohamad8Senior Minister (1990–2004)9Minister Mentor (2004–2011)10Retirement11Failing health and death12International organisations13Personal views13.1LGBT rights13.2Religious views14Legacy14.1Political legacy15Controversies15.1Devan Nair15.2Eugenics15.3FEER defamation case15.4International Herald Tribune defamation case15.5Islam16Population planning17Cultural depictions18Memoirs19Awards20Additional honours21See also22References23Further reading23.1Primary sources23.2Other sources24External linksFamily background[edit]Lee was a fourth-generation Singaporean of ethnic Chinese ancestry of mostly Hakka and Peranakan descent.His Hakka great-grandfather, Lee Bok Boon, born in 1846, emigrated from Dabu County, Guangdong, China, to Singapore in 1863.He married a shopkeeper's daughter, Seow Huan Nio, but returned to China in 1882, leaving behind his wife and three children. He died just two years after his return.Lee Kuan Yew's grandfather Lee Hoon Leong, was born in Singapore in 1871. He was educated in English at Raffles Institution, and graduated with the top mark among Malay and other Singaporean students in the school. Lee Hoon Leong then worked as a dispenser, an unqualified pharmacist, and later as a purser on a steamship of the Heap Eng Moh Shipping Line, then owned by a Chinese Indonesian businessman, Oei Tiong HamWhile working as a purser, Lee Hoon Leong, aged 26, married 16-year-old Ko Liem Nio, an Indonesian Peranakan,in Semarang, Java, Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia).It was an arranged marriage, as was then the custom. Both families were middle-class, and the bride and groom were both English-educated. Lee Hoon Leong's maternal grandfather owned the Katong market, a few rubber estates and houses at Orchard Road.Lee Hoon Leong eventually became managing director of the Heap Eng Moh Steamship Company Ltd.Lee Hoon Leong had two wives, which was common at that time, and fathered five daughters and three sons. His son Lee Chin Koon was educated in English too. He married Chua Jim Neo, a Peranakan,who gave birth to Lee Kuan Yew, their first child, in 1923, in Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew had three younger brothers: Dennis Lee Kim Yew (1925–2003; lawyer and member of Lee & Lee), Freddy Lee Thiam Yew (1927–2012; former Chairman of stockbroker J Ballas and Company)and Dr Lee Suan Yew (President of Singapore Medical Council); and one younger sister, Monica Lee Kim Mon.Like Lee Kuan Yew, his brother Dennis read law at the University of Cambridge, and they set up a law firm, Lee & Lee. Edmund W. Barker, Lee's close friend, also joined the law firm. Lee and Barker later left the law firm to enter politics. Lee's brother Freddy became a stockbroker; another brother, Suan Yew, read medicine at the University of Cambridge and opened a successful practice.Lee Kuan Yew's grandfathers' wealth declined considerably during the Great Depression. However, his father had a secure job as a shopkeeper at Shell, where he was eventually promoted to depot manager and provided with a chauffeured car and houseHis aunt, Lee Choo Neo, was the first female doctor to practice in Singapore.Lee Kuan Yew once described his father as a man who affected his family negatively due to his nasty temper, and Lee learned from a young age to keep his temper in check.Personal life[edit]Lee's English-educated parents named him 'Kuan Yew', which stands for 'light and brightness', with an alternate meaning 'bringing great glory to one's ancestors'. His paternal grandfather gave him the English name 'Harry'.Lee and his wife, Kwa Geok Choo, were married on 30 September 1950. Both spoke English as their first language; Lee first started learning Chinese in 1955, aged 32.He learned Japanese as an adult, and worked as a Japanese translator during the Japanese occupation of Singapore.Lee and Kwa had two sons and a daughter.Lee's elder son Lee Hsien Loong, a former Brigadier-General, became Prime Minister of Singapore in 2004. Several members of Lee's family hold prominent positions in Singaporean society. His younger son Lee Hsien Yang is likewise a former Brigadier-General, and former President and chief executive officer (CEO) of SingTel. He was the Chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS).Lee's daughter, Lee Wei Ling, is the head of the National Neuroscience Institute. Lee Hsien Loong's wife, Ho Ching, is the Executive Director and CEO of Temasek Holdings.Kwa Geok Choo died on 2 October 2010.His grandson, Lee Hsien Yang’s second son, Li Huanwu, is openly gay, having married his partner, Heng Yirui, at a ceremony in South Africa on 24 May 2019.showLee Kuan Yew family treeEducation[edit]In 1931, Lee Kuan Yew studied at Telok Kurau English School in Singapore. He described his schoolmates at Telok Kurau as generally poor and not very bright. He then attended Raffles Institution in 1935, where he had difficulties keeping up because he met the top 150 students from all over Singapore. Lee joined the Scouts for three years, played cricket, tennis, and chess, and debated for the school. He obtained several scholarships, and came top in the School Certificate examinations in 1940, gaining the John Anderson scholarship to attend Raffles College (now Raffles Institution Junior College). Lee's future wife, Kwa Geok Choo, was his classmate and the only girl at Raffles Institution at that time. Kwa, who was a brilliant student herself, was the only one to beat his scores in the English and economics subjects.Another classmate at Raffles was Malaysian tycoon Robert Kuok.Lee's university education was delayed by World War II and the Japanese occupation of Singapore from 1942 to 1945. After the war, Lee went on to study in England. He briefly attended London School of Economics as enrolment at University of Cambridge had already closed. He related that London overwhelmed him and he sought the more pleasant surroundings of Cambridge, where he read law at Fitzwilliam College. A fellow Raffles College student introduced him to the Censor of Fitzwilliam House, W. S. Thatcher, who admitted him for the 1947 Lent term. He matriculated in January 1947.Lee graduated First Class in both parts of the Tripos with an exceptional Starred-First (perfect score) for Part II Law in 1949; this placed him at the very top of his cohort, and he was awarded the Fitzwilliam's Whitlock Prize. The college said he was placed above two contemporaries who later became Professors of Law in Cambridge. Lee was called to the Bar at the Middle Temple in 1950. In 1969, he was elected an honorary fellow of Fitzwilliam College and was the most senior of the College's Honorary Fellows for many years. In 1971, Lee gave the Foundation Lecture – "East and West: the twain have met".Early life[edit]Lee experienced hardship during the Japanese occupation from 1942 to 1945. During the war, Lee learnt Japanese and first worked as a SAS (Singapore Administration Service) officer in Sentosa islands where he listened to Allied radio stations and wrote down what they were reporting in the Hodobu office (報道部 – a Japanese propaganda department).Towards the end of the war, by listening to Allied radio stations, he realised the Japanese were losing the war, and fearing that a brutal war would break out in Singapore as the Japanese made their last stand, he made plans to purchase and move to a farm on the Cameron Highlands with his family. However, a liftboy in his office told him his file had been taken out by the security department, and he realised he was being followed by Japanese security personnel (which continued for three months), so he abandoned those plans as he knew if he went ahead, he would be in trouble. Lee set up private small enterprises during the war to survive; among which was one that manufactured stationery glue, branded as "Stikfas".Lee had a near-miss with a Japanese Occupation atrocity. The Japanese army was rounding up Chinese men for questioning and Lee was told to fall in and join the segregated Chinese men. Sensing that something was amiss, he asked for permission to return home to collect his clothes first, and the Japanese guard agreed. It turned out that those who were segregated were taken to the beach to be shot as part of the Sook Ching massacre.The Japanese occupation had a profound impact on the young Lee, who recalled being slapped and forced to kneel for failing to bow to a Japanese soldier. He and other young Singaporeans "emerged determined that no one—neither Japanese nor British—had the right to push and kick us around ... (and) that we could govern ourselves." The occupation also drove home lessons about raw power and the effectiveness of harsh punishment in deterring crime.After the war, whilst studying in England, Lee campaigned for a friend named David Widdicombe, who was in the Labour Party. He drove Widdicombe around in a lorry and delivered several speeches on his behalf. Widdicombe lost the election in 1950, but went on to become a member of the Inner Temple with Lee.After seeing how the British had failed to defend Singapore from the Japanese, and after his stay in England, Lee decided that Singapore had to govern itself. He returned to Singapore in 1949.He also decided to omit his English name, Harry, and simply be known as Lee Kuan Yew,although until the end of his life, old comrades and English friends would still refer to him as Harry Lee.Early political career (1951–1959)[edit]In his memoirs, Lee recounted that he had intended to return to Singapore to work as a lawyer. Upon his return, Lee worked in John Laycock's law firm for $500 per month (equivalent to about $2500 in 2017). He also worked as a legal advisor to the trade and students' unions.His first experience with politics in Singapore was his role as election agent for Laycock under the banner of the pro-British Progressive Party in the 1951 legislative council electionsFajar trial[edit]Lee was the junior counsel for the Fajar trial in May 1954 when members of the University Socialist Club were arrested for publishing an article considered seditious in the club's magazine The Fajar. One story is that it was Lee who invited the lead counsel D. N. Pritt to defend the students, although this was denied by Club members. Lee gained a widespread reputation through the victory of the trial, the first sedition trial in Colonial post-war Malaya. The Straits Times on 26 August 1954 proclaimed this a "tremendous victory for freedom of speech". At the same time, Lee was accepted by most Singaporeans as the "hero of high". Furthermore, the co-operation between Lee and the Club members strengthened their relationship which was significant for Lee's future political career and the founding of the PAP.Formation of the People's Action Party[edit]Lee Kuan Yew's opportunity to formally enter politics came when members of the Singapore Chinese Middle Schools Union launched anti-colonial, non-violent protests against the enactment of the national service ordinance law on 13 May 1954.Forty-sixto sixtystudents were arrested after an initial use of violence by members of the police riot squad. The student arrests gave rise to Lee's reputation as a "left-wing lawyer"which provided a path for Lee into Singaporean politics through the Communist Party of Malaya.Coincidentally, the People's Action Party (PAP) was officially inaugurated on 12 November 1954.Together with a group of fellow English-educated middle-class men whom he described as "beer-swilling bourgeois", Lee formed the socialist PAP in an expedient alliance with the pro-communist trade unionists. This alliance was described by Lee as a marriage of convenience since his English-speaking group needed the Chinese-speaking majority's mass support base.Their common aim was to struggle for self-government and put an end to British colonial rule.An inaugural conference was held at the Victoria Memorial Hall, attended by over 1,500 supporters and trade unionists. Lee became secretary-general, a post he held until 1992, save for a brief period in 1957.In opposition[edit]Lee Kuan Yew won the Tanjong Pagar seat in the 1955 elections. He became the opposition leader against David Saul Marshall's Labour Front-led coalition government. He was also one of PAP's representatives to the two constitutional discussions held in London over the future status of Singapore, the first led by Marshall and the second by Lim Yew Hock, Marshall's hardline successor. It was during this period that Lee had to contend with rivals from both within and outside the PAP.Lee's position in the PAP was seriously under threat in 1957 when pro-communists took over the leadership posts, following a party conference which the party's left wing had stacked with fake members.[Fortunately for Lee and the party's moderate faction, Lim Yew Hock ordered a mass arrest of the pro-communists and Lee was reinstated as secretary-general. After the communist "scare", Lee subsequently received a new, stronger mandate from his Tanjong Pagar constituents in a by-election in 1957.[53]Prime Minister, pre-independence (1959–1965)[edit]Self-government administration (1959–1963)[edit]In the national elections held on 30 May 1959, the PAP won 43 of the 51 seats in the legislative assembly. Singapore gained self-government with autonomy in all state matters except defence and foreign affairs, and Lee became the first Prime Minister of Singapore on 5 June 1959, taking over from Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock.PAP split of 1961[edit]In 1961, former PAP minister and Mayor of Singapore after PAP's victory in the 1957 Singapore City Council election, Ong Eng Guan resigned his parliamentary seat of Hong Lim, filing the famous "16 resolutions" in the legislative assembly against the government and challenged the PAP to defeat him there after his sacking from the cabinet. He had been expelled by the party after making open disputes with his Cabinet colleagues, including over the abolishment of the City Council when he was the last Mayor. Two other PAP members had followed him to join his faction and resigned from the party but did not resign their seats with Ong. Ong stood as an independent and he won the Hong Lim by-election defeating PAP candidate Jek Yeun Thong, which proved a blow to the PAP for the leaders had campaigned non-stop for Jek but Ong was too popular in the Chinese community and so Jek lost the elections.Later that year another by-election was held after the death of the incumbent PAP member Baharuddin Mohammed Ariff in the constituency of Anson on 15 July 1961 which saw the political return of former Labour Front chief minister David Marshall, now Workers' Party (WP) leader.Two days after the Anson result, Lee assumed full responsibility for the two election setbacks and resigned as prime minister to PAP chairman Toh Chin Chye, only for Toh to reject it.On 21 July 1961, Lee then moved a motion of confidence in his own government five days after the Anson by election. The motion was agreed to with 27 "Ayes", 8 "Noes" and 16 abstentions. The members who voted "No" included David Marshall and members of the Singapore People's Alliance. 13 allegedly pro-communist PAP members and 3 members of Ong Eng Guan's UPP abstained.Lee's view was that the PAP members who did not vote for his motion would be expelled for breaking ranks and pulling support away to Communist opponents and he did so, sacking the 13 abstainees and reducing his assembly majority to 1. Together with six prominent left-leaning leaders from trade unions, the breakaway members established a new party, the Barisan Sosialis. 35 of 51 branches of the PAP and 19 of 23 branch secretaries defected to Barisan.Merger with Malaysia (1963–1965)[edit]Main article: Singapore in MalaysiaLee Kuan Yew declaring the forming of the Federation of Malaysia on 16 September 1963 in SingaporeLead up to merger[edit]Independence of Singapore from Britain through merger with the Federation of Malaya had been the PAP's platform since its founding in 1954. Merger was supported both by the non-communists and the communists in the PAP. So when the PAP won a strong mandate in the 1959 General Election, it pursued merger vigorously.After Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman proposed the formation of a federation which would include Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak in 1961, Lee began to campaign for a merger to end British colonial rule. The communists made a startling about-turn and were determined to derail merger, even though they had all along insisted that Malaya and Singapore were one entity. Chin Peng, leader of the Malayan Communist Party made it clear that the it wished to sabotage merger or delay its implementation at that stage.Lee explained in a series of radio broadcasts in 1961 that the communists and Barisan Sosialis opposed merger because they wanted to establish control over Singapore so they could subsequently subvert and take over Malaya. The radio talks won over public opinion in favour of merger on the terms proposed by Lee's government. Lee would use the results of a referendum held on 1 September 1962, in which 70% of the votes were cast in support of his merger proposal, to demonstrate that the people supported his plan; most of the other votes were blank, as Lee had not allowed a "No" option.From merger to separation[edit]On 16 September 1963, Singapore became part of the new Federation of Malaysia. However, the union was short-lived. The Malaysian central government, ruled by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), became worried by the inclusion of Singapore's Chinese majority and the political challenge of the PAP in Malaysia.The 1964 race riots in Singapore followed, such as that on 21 July 1964 near Kallang Gasworks in which 23 people were killed and hundreds injured as Chinese and Malays attacked each other. It is still disputed how the riots started, and theories include a bottle being thrown into a Muslim rally by a Chinese, while others have argued that it was started by a Malay. More riots broke out in September 1964, as rioters looted cars and shops, forcing both Tunku Abdul Rahman and Lee to make public appearances to calm the situation.Unable to resolve the crisis, Tunku Abdul Rahman decided to expel Singapore from Malaysia, choosing to "sever all ties with a State Government that showed no measure of loyalty to its Central Government". Lee refused and tried to work out a compromise, but without success. He was later convinced by Goh Keng Swee that the secession was inevitable.Lee signed a separation agreement on 7 August 1965, which discussed Singapore's post-separation relations with Malaysia in order to continue co-operation in areas such as trade and mutual defence.The failure of the merger was a blow to Lee, who believed that it was crucial for Singapore's survival. In a televised press conference that day, he fought back tearsand briefly stopped to regain his composure as he formally announced the separation and the full independence of Singapore to an anxious population:[E]very time we look back on this moment when we signed this agreement which severed Singapore from Malaysia, it will be a moment of anguish. For me it is a moment of anguish because all my life. [...] [Y]ou see, the whole of my adult life [...] I have believed in Malaysian merger and the unity of these two territories. You know, it's a people connected by geography, economics, and ties of kinship.On that same day on 9 August 1965, just as the press conference ended, the Malaysian parliament passed the required resolution that would sever Singapore's ties to Malaysia as a state and the Republic of Singapore was created.Singapore's lack of natural resources, a water supply that was derived primarily from Malaysia and a very limited defensive capability were the major challenges which Lee and the nascent Singaporean government faced.Prime Minister, post-independence (1965–1990)[edit]Lee Kuan Yew and Frank Kitts, Mayor of Wellington City in 1965Despite the momentous event, Lee did not call for the parliament to convene to reconcile issues that Singapore would face immediately as a new nation. Without giving further instructions on who should act in his absence, he went into isolation for six weeks, unreachable by phone, on a Singapore island. According to Dr. Toh Chin Chye, the parliament hung in suspended animation until the sitting in December that year.Lee Kuan Yew and his wife Kwa Geok Choo with United States President Ronald Reagan and his wife Nancy Reagan on 8 October 1985In his memoirs, Lee said that he was unable to sleep. Upon learning of Lee's condition from the British High Commissioner to Singapore, John Robb, the British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, expressed concern, in response to which Lee replied:Do not worry about Singapore. My colleagues and I are sane, rational people even in our moments of anguish. We will weigh all possible consequences before we make any move on the political chessboard.Lee began to seek international recognition of Singapore's independence. Singapore joined the United Nations on 21 September 1965, and founded the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) on 8 August 1967 with four other South-East Asian countries. Lee made his first official visit to Indonesia on 25 May 1973, just a few years after the Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation under Sukarno's regime. Relations between Singapore and Indonesia substantially improved as subsequent visits were made between the two countries.Singapore has never had a dominant culture to which immigrants could assimilate even though Malay was the dominant language at that time.Together with efforts from the government and ruling party, Lee tried to create a unique Singaporean identity in the 1970s and 1980s—one which heavily recognised racial consciousness within the umbrella of multiculturalism.Lee and his government stressed the importance of maintaining religious tolerance and racial harmony, and they were ready to use the law to counter any threat that might incite ethnic and religious violence. For example, Lee warned against "insensitive evangelisation", by which he referred to instances of Christian proselytising directed at Malays. In 1974 the government advised the Bible Society of Singapore to stop publishing religious material in Malay.Decisions and policiesNational securityThe vulnerability of Singapore was deeply felt, with threats from multiple sources including the communists and Indonesia with its confrontational stance. As Singapore gained admission to the United Nations, Lee quickly sought international recognition of Singapore's independence. He appointed Goh Keng Swee as Minister for the Interior and Defence to build up the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and requested help from other countries, particularly Israel and Taiwan (ROC), for advice, training and facilities.In 1967, Lee introduced conscription whereby all able-bodied male Singaporean citizens age 18 and above are required to serve National Service (NS) either in the Singapore Armed Forces, Singapore Police Force or the Singapore Civil Defence Force. By 1971, Singapore had 17 national service battalions (16,000 men) with 14 battalions (11,000 men) in the reserves.In 1975, Lee managed to convince then-Premier Chiang Ching-kuo of Taiwan (ROC) to permit Singaporean troops to train in Taiwan, under the codename "Exercise Starlight".EconomyOne of Lee's most urgent tasks upon Singapore's independence was to address high unemployment. Tourism helped but did not completely resolve the unemployment problem. Together with his economic aide, Economic Development Board chairman Hon Sui Sen, and in consultation with Dutch economist Albert Winsemius, Lee set up factories and initially focused on the manufacturing industry. Before the British completely withdrew from Singapore in 1971, Lee also persuaded the British not to destroy their dock and had the British naval dockyard later converted for civilian use.After years of trial and error, Lee and his cabinet decided the best way to boost Singapore's economy was to attract foreign investments from multinational corporations (MNCs). By establishing First World infrastructure and standards in Singapore, the new nation could woo American, Japanese and European entrepreneurs and professionals to set up base there. By the 1970s, the arrival of MNCs like Texas Instruments, Hewlett-Packard and General Electric laid the foundations, turning Singapore into a major electronics exporter the following decade.Workers were frequently retrained to familiarise themselves with the work systems and cultures of foreign MNCs. The government also started several new industries, such as steel mills under 'National Iron and Steel Mills', service industries like Neptune Orient Lines, and the Singapore Airlines.Lee and his cabinet also worked to establish Singapore as an international financial centre. Foreign bankers were assured of the reliability of Singapore's social conditions, with top-class infrastructure and skilled professionals, and investors were made to understand that the Singapore government would pursue sound macroeconomic policies, with budget surpluses, leading to a stable valued Singapore dollar.Throughout the tenure of his office, Lee always placed great importance on developing the economy, and his attention to detail on this aspect went even to the extent of connecting it with other facets of Singapore, including the country's extensive and meticulous tending of its international image of being a "Garden City",something that has been sustained to this day.Anti-corruption measuresSingapore had problems with political corruption. Lee introduced legislation giving the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) greater power to conduct arrests, search, call up witnesses, and investigate bank accounts and income-tax returns of suspected persons and their families.Lee believed that ministers should be well paid in order to maintain a clean and honest government. On 21 November 1986, Lee received a complaint of corruption against then Minister for National Development Teh Cheang Wan.Lee was against corruption and he authorised the CPIB to carry out investigations on Teh but Teh committed suicide before any charges could be pressed against him.In 1994, he proposed to link the salaries of ministers, judges, and top civil servants to the salaries of top professionals in the private sector, arguing that this would help recruit and retain talent to serve in the public sector.Population policies[edit]See also: Population planning in SingaporeIn the late 1960s, fearing that Singapore's growing population might overburden the developing economy, Lee started a "Stop at Two" family planning campaign. Couples were urged to undergo sterilisation after their second child. Third or fourth children were given lower priorities in education and such families received fewer economic rebates.In 1983, Lee sparked the "Great Marriage Debate" when he encouraged Singapore men to choose highly educated women as wives.He was concerned that a large number of graduate women were unmarried.Some sections of the population, including graduate women, were upset by his views.Nevertheless, a match-making agency, the Social Development Unit (SDU),was set up to promote socialising among men and women graduates.In the Graduate Mothers Scheme, Lee also introduced incentives such as tax rebates, schooling, and housing priorities for graduate mothers who had three or four children, in a reversal of the over-successful "Stop at Two" family planning campaign in the 1960s and 1970s.Some sections of the population, including graduate women, were upset by the views of Lee, who had questioned that perhaps the campaign for women's rights had been too successful:Equal employment opportunities, yes, but we shouldn't get our women into jobs where they cannot, at the same time, be mothers...our most valuable asset is in the ability of our people, yet we are frittering away this asset through the unintended consequences of changes in our education policy and equal career opportunities for women. This has affected their traditional role ... as mothers, the creators and protectors of the next generation.—Lee Kuan Yew, "Talent for the future", 14 August 1983The uproar over the proposal led to a swing of 12.9 percent against the PAP government in the 1984 general election. In 1985, especially controversial portions of the policy that gave education and housing priorities to educated women were eventually abandoned or modified.By the late 1990s, the birth rate had fallen so low that Lee's successor Goh Chok Tong extended these incentives to all married women, and gave even more incentives, such as the "baby bonus" scheme.Corporal punishment[edit]Main article: Caning in SingaporeOne of Lee's abiding beliefs was in the efficacy of corporal punishment in the form of caning.In his autobiography The Singapore Story, Lee described his time at Raffles Institution in the 1930s, mentioning that he was caned there for chronic lateness by the then headmaster, D. W. McLeod. He wrote: "I bent over a chair and was given three of the best with my trousers on. I did not think he lightened his strokes. I have never understood why Western educationists are so much against corporal punishment. It did my fellow students and me no harm".Lee's government inherited judicial corporal punishment from British rule, but greatly expanded its scope. Under the British, it had been used as a penalty for offences involving personal violence, amounting to a handful of caning sentences per year. The PAP government under Lee extended its use to an ever-expanding range of crimes.By 1993, it was mandatory for 42 offences and optional for a further 42.Those routinely ordered by the courts to be caned now include drug addicts and illegal immigrants. From 602 canings in 1987, the figure rose to 3,244 in 1993and to 6,404 in 2007.In 1994, judicial caning was intensely publicised in the rest of the world when an American teenager, Michael P. Fay, was caned under the vandalism legislation.School corporal punishment (for male students only) was likewise inherited from the British, and this is in widespread use to discipline disobedient schoolboys, still under legislation from 1957.Lee also introduced caning in the Singapore Armed Forces, and Singapore is one of the few countries in the world where corporal punishment is an official penalty in military discipline.Water resources in Singapore[edit]Singapore has traditionally relied on water from Malaysia. However, this reliance has made Singapore subject to the possibility of price increases and allowed Malaysian officials to use the water reliance as a political leverage by threatening to cut off supply. To reduce this problem, Lee decided to experiment with water recycling in 1974.However, the water treatment plant was closed in 1975 due to cost and reliability issues. In 1998, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) and the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) initiated the Singapore Water Reclamation Study (NEWater Study). The aim was to determine if NEWater was a viable source of raw water for Singapore's needs. In 2001, PUB initiated efforts to increase water supplies for non-potable use. Using NEWater for these would help reduce the demand on the reservoirs for potable water.The Singapore International Water Week was started in 2008; it focused on sustainable water solutions for cities. The Lee Kuan Yew Water Prize was introduced in recognition given to outstanding contributions towards solving global water crisis. The prize has become an international award given out to individuals and groups worldwide.Relations with Malaysia[edit]Mahathir Mohamad[edit]Lee looked forward to improving relationships with Mahathir Mohamad upon the latter's promotion to Deputy Prime Minister. Knowing that Mahathir was in line to become the next Prime Minister of Malaysia, Lee invited Mahathir (through Singapore President Devan Nair) to visit Singapore in 1978. The first and subsequent visits improved both personal and diplomatic relationships between them. Then UMNO's Secretary-General Mahathir asked Lee to cut off all links with Democratic Action Party; in exchange, Mahathir undertook not to interfere in the affairs of Malay Singaporeans.[citation needed]In June 1988, Lee and Mahathir reached an agreement in Kuala Lumpur to build the Linggui dam on the Johor River.[90]Following Lee's death, Mahathir posted a blog post that suggested his respect for Lee despite their differences, stating that while "I am afraid on most other issues we could not agree [...] [h]is passage marks the end of the period when those who fought for independence lead their countries and knew the value of independence. Asean lost a strong leadership after President Suharto and Lee Kuan Yew".[91]Senior Minister (1990–2004)[edit]Lee Kuan Yew (middle) meets with United States Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Singapore's Ambassador to the United States Chan Heng Chee in 2000After leading the PAP to victory in seven elections, Lee stepped down on 28 November 1990, handing over the prime ministership to Goh Chok Tong.[92]At that point in time he had become the world's longest-serving prime minister.[93]This was the first leadership transition since independence. Goh was elected as the new Prime Minister by the younger ministers then in office.[94]When Goh Chok Tong became head of government, Lee remained in the cabinet with a non-executive position of Senior Minister and played a role he described as advisory. In public, Lee would refer to Goh as "my Prime Minister", in deference to Goh's authority.Lee subsequently stepped down as Secretary-General of the PAP and was succeeded by Goh Chok Tong in November 1992.