Countries that hate each other

14 Most Hated Countries in the World 2022

– Most Hated Countries in the World –

There are over 150 countries in the world with various government ideologies. People have various perceptions about countries. In this post, we would take you through the most hated countries in the world. Don’t skip any part of this rendition.

A variety of causes influences anti-national attitudes toward individual countries.

The most crucial issue is that the government implements policy in the country. Terrorism, internal disputes, foreign invasions, human rights violations, and hereditary conflicts are all potential contributors to a state of emergency.

Most Hated Countries in the World

Some countries have a good international reputation, whereas others do not. There are some countries that are universally adored, while others are universally despised without hesitation. Look right down to see the 14 most hated countries in the world:

1. China

China is at the top of the list. There is significant anti-Chinese prejudice as a result of the coronavirus outbreak. That is why China is the world’s most despised country.

China is constantly attempting to assert sovereignty over the South China Sea.

To coerce neighboring countries like Bhutan, it invents bogus land border problems, such as the Sakteng wildlife sanctuary dispute.

China’s large-scale illegal monster fishing fleets have resulted in huge economic and environmental devastation because of overexploitation of ocean resources.

They’ve also been accused of debt trapping and meddling in the internal affairs of countries like Nepal. China has used coronavirus vaccines as a weapon to compel other countries to embrace their objectives.

In China, human rights are seriously injured, and there is no freedom of expression or assembly.

It has been accused of murdering Uyghur Muslims and has one of the most active death punishment systems in the world.

2. The United States of America

The United States of America is ranked second among the world’s most despised countries. Its citizens and the rest of the world because of its foreign policies and interference in other countries’ domestic issues despise America. Countless innocent people have died as a result of its counter-terrorism efforts in Syria and Afghanistan.

White supremacy, racial discrimination, has marred the United States’ reputation hate crimes, and gun culture. The United States is also admired for the freedom of its citizens.

3. Russia

Russia is despised by members of the Soviet Union for wanting to rule and dominate neighboring countries. The two countries have had a long-standing enmity since Russia intended to annex Ukraine.

Russia has a reputation for intervening in other countries’ affairs and undertaking clandestine military operations, which has sparked worldwide mistrust.

Russia and the United States, both superpowers, have been contemporaries and long-term adversaries since the end of the Cold War.

4. Pakistan

Pakistan has received international condemnation for significant human rights breaches and for housing terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Its connection with the Taliban has compounded Afghanistan’s vulnerability, whom they view as protectors.

Hundreds of UN-designated terrorists have sought refuge in the country. Pakistan is known for its religious intolerance. It has employed violent coercion and destroyed temples to force religious minorities to convert.

It is the only Muslim country with nuclear weapons, and it has made news for smuggling nuclear weapons to North Korea and threatening other countries with nuclear war.

They have been forcibly employing underage soldiers, causing concern in neighboring countries. Despite the fact that things have improved, the public perception remains poor.

5. Israel

Israel is ranked fifth on the list of the most despised countries in the world. Israel-war Palestine’s between Jews and Arabs has been one of the world’s longest, propelling Israel to international prominence.

As a result, both countries have seen tremendous violence and human rights violations. Law enforcement forces, such as the police-led assault on the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which resulted in the deaths of several individuals have led to many attacks.

As a result of terrorism and blame games between the two religious sects, they have killed several innocent bystanders. The recent bombing of Gaza fueled anti-Israel sentiment.

6. France

Many countries despise France because of its colonial past. The devastating consequences of nuclear testing in French Polynesia, as well as the subsequent suppression of facts and bad damage control, tainted the country’s reputation.

Despite knowing about the Rwandan genocide in advance, France did nothing to halt it. Muslims were angry when a French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, published drawings of the prophet, and the president backed them up.

The deployment of the French military in other countries, such as Mali, has outraged locals.

READ ALSO:

7. India

India is ranked seventh. Discrimination is a national sport of India. This is one of the key reasons people dislike this location.

Hating someone because of their skin color, race, or gender is considered natural in India.

People despise India because of its atrocities against Kashmiris, as it has been killing innocent people in Kashmir for nearly 75 years. In addition, the country is unsafe, especially for women.

They’re putting a stop to it, but it’s not uncommon to read about a woman being assaulted by a bunch of men. For a while, it seemed like it happened once a week.

It’s a dreadful situation. It wasn’t like touching on the bus; it was just revolting. Furthermore, they do not have the finest relationships with the countries in their immediate vicinity. In this aspect, they have a dreadful reputation.

8. Iran

Iran is the next most despised country on the list. Iran’s unpredictability has made it one of the world’s most disliked countries, despite its interesting past.

Nuclear programs that test ballistic missiles have sparked worry among world leaders. Other countries are concerned about the government’s support for terrorist militia organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as its developing nuclear programs.

Iran undermines human rights while enforcing harsh and barbaric punishments at the same time.

9. North Korea

North Korea is next on the list. The internal affairs of North Korea are highly guarded. The country has the worst human rights record in the world.

Kim Jong’s authoritarian regime restricts all essential human rights, including freedom of expression, movement, independent media, and information.

Outside of the country, civilians are not permitted to maintain any contacts. It has a rapidly growing nuclear arsenal, which poses a major threat to the rest of the world.

10. Turkey

Turkey is the next country on the list. Turkish hardline President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s renovation of the Hagia Sophia Church into a mosque has prompted concern among religious sects.

Turkey has been charged with supporting terrorism and transferring jihadist mercenaries to a number of countries.

It has also awarded citizenship and passports to Hamas operatives, establishing a breach with other countries threatened by these terrorist groups.

Turkey’s hatred quotient has risen as a result of its human rights breaches and tense relationship with the United States.

11. Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia is ranked eleventh. Religious prohibitions are known as “Islamic laws,” which include punishments like stoning, lashing, and amputation that govern the country.

Women in this country are not free because they must cover their entire bodies, including their faces, while outside their homes in black clothing, and they may not go anyplace alone because a male relative must escort them.

All of these elements combine to make tourists avoid Saudi Arabia because they believe it is uninteresting, has complicated people.

And does not provide them with the freedom and comfort they require, particularly for women, which is why the country is not well-known as a tourist destination.

12. Nigeria

Nigeria is ranked 12th on the list of the world’s most despised countries. Apart from having Africa’s largest GDP because of its massive oil reserves, Nigeria is also one of the world’s most despised countries.

The Ebola outbreak, the rise of the Boko Haram terrorist group, the government’s attitude toward humanity, rape, and sexual exploitation fuels Nigeria’s standing as one of the world’s most disliked countries.

13. Romania

The next country on the list is Romania, which is the largest of the Balkan countries. Romania has a long history of poor public relations.

Romania is still one of Europe’s most corrupt countries, which doesn’t help matters. Additionally, the country has been chastised for its treatment of the Roma ethnic community.

Romania is seen by many Europeans as a source of illegal immigrants who steal their employment.

In addition, news reports about horse meat being exported from the country’s slaughterhouses inflamed anti-government sentiment. Romanians are also well aware of the country’s previous history as a Communist dictatorship. This is the 13th out of the most hated countries in the world.

14. Qatar

Qatar is the fourteenth most despised country in the world. This country has a “poor” international reputation. Ties between the rich countries and terrorists, according to reports.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Libya, and Yemen were among the six Arab countries that severed ties with Qatar in 2017, citing the government’s ties to terrorist groups.

These countries accuse Qatar of “supporting ISIS, al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Shia insurgents in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.” In addition, Qatar is a country where men outweigh women by a huge percentage, and many workers are abused and exploited.

That concludes the list of the world’s 14 most despised countries in 2022. Tell us which one you despise and why in the section below, please leave a comment.

This article was great for sure. Kindly share massively with your friends on social media.

Countries That Hate Each Other 2022

In the post-Cold War era, developed countries have hesitated to clearly label any nation as an enemy for the sake of peacekeeping efforts. Yet, even in modern times, there are strong tensions between several countries. Religious values, cultural differences, political affiliations, and conflicting economic goals all play a role in how countries view each other.

However, there are still clear conflicts that can be identified in the world, including some that continue to progress with no end in view.

Palestine and Israel

The conflict that developed between Palestine and Israel after World War II has shown little improvement decades later. The United States attempted to encourage previous attempts at peace between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

This effort failed after the Palestinian Authority’s ruling party, the Fatah, united with Hamas. In 2014, a military conflict broke out between the Israeli military and Hamas, culminating with major retaliation by Israel in Gaza. 2,251 Palestinians and 73 Israelis were killed before Egypt brokered a cease-fire.

Unfortunately, attempts at peace have not lasted long in this conflict. Most recently, several days of violence broke out between the Israeli military and Palestinian militant groups in May of 2021. This was the result of a court ruling in favor of evicting the Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah. The subsequent unrest spread to East Jerusalem and ended with both sides using non-lethal and lethal methods of force. At the end of the 11-day period, 250 Palestinians were killed and 2,000 were wounded. Additionally, at least 13 Israelis were killed before Egypt was able to broker another peace deal on May 21, 2021.

Ukraine and Russia

Tensions between Russia and Ukraine have been building since the Ukrainian Revolution of 2014. Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and its support of separatist groups fighting in Ukraine, led to the deaths of more than 13,000 people by early 2020.

Throughout 2021 and early 2022, Russia intensified the situation by building its military presence along the border of Ukraine. On February 24, 2022, Russian President of Vladimir Putin declared a special military operation to “demilitarise and denazify” Ukraine. Shortly after, Ukraine came under heavy fire from missiles and airstrikes.

Most members of the United Nations General Assembly panned the invasion immediately. The United States of America, Germany, and several other countries imposed severe sanctions on Russia and took steps to financially isolate the nation. Additionally, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has received financial support and weapon supplies to help arm civilians.

Ukraine has continued to put up a strong defense, but many areas outside of Kyiv have succumbed to the onslaught of Russian attacks. As the war continues, it has been hard for foreign analysts and media to verify the number of casualties. At this stage of the conflict, current estimates show nearly 64,151 Russian soldiers have been killed and at least 107,663 have been wounded. The Ukrainian losses are estimated to be between 51,032 and 72,589 total soldiers and civilians killed and another 56,803 wounded.

Why Britain and France Hate Each Other

The two countries are more similar than is often acknowledged.

W atching the fallout from the great Anglo-American heist of France’s submarine contract with Australia, you could be forgiven for concluding that London and Paris are polar opposites in every way: whether in their leaders’ personalities, grand strategies, economic models, or social mores. The irony is that the row over the new Australia-U.K.-U.S. defense pact, or AUKUS, reveals how fundamentally similar they really are.

For Paris, the submarine episode is proof of London’s “permanent opportunism” and preference for junior status in a partnership with the United States over any meaningful association with Europe. It is as if nothing has changed since Winston Churchill exploded in frustration at Charles de Gaulle on the eve of D-Day to say that if Britain were ever forced to choose between Europe and the open seas, it would always choose the latter. In the French view, Boris Johnson’s pursuit of a “Global Britain” outside the European Union is merely the latest expression of this deep and undignified national instinct. And for Britain, in turn, Paris’s reaction to AUKUS just exposes France’s latent anti-American chauvinism, its fixation on long-lost grandeur, and its cynical strategy to use the EU as a vehicle for its doomed goal of returning to global relevance. This British view was summarized by Johnson in Washington this week when he said, in a way seemingly designed to further wind up Emmanuel Macron’s government, “Donnez-moi un break.”

Yet you have to pause for only a moment to see that, far from being diametrically opposed, France and Britain are more similar than perhaps any other two countries on Earth. Not only in terms of population, wealth, imperial past, global reach, and democratic tradition, but the deeper stuff too: the sense of exceptionalism, fear of decline, instinct for national independence, desire for respect, and angst over the growing power of others, whether that be the United States, Germany, or China. London and Paris may have chosen different strategies—and there is nothing to say that both are equally meritorious—but the parallels between these two nations are obvious.

Instead of seeing this, however, each country seems to act as a kind of distorting mirror for the other, blocking a reasonable view of its neighbor with an image of itself that looks far more like a collection of its own hopes and fears than anything else.

While France does not seem anywhere near as concerned about Britain as Britain seems about France, the ferocity of the criticism fired across the channel from Paris last week was nevertheless revealing, if only for its striking lack of self-reflection. French Secretary of State for European Affairs Clément Beaune said that, rather than being an example of “Global Britain,” London’s participation in AUKUS signaled “a return to the American fold and a form of accepted vassalization.” French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves le Drian said Britain was just a “fifth wheel” in an American project.

Until Johnson’s mocking response, the British government had been less public in its rebuttal. Officially, London had sought to calm the situation, but privately, it was dismissive of the French complaints, arguing that Paris had spent years reassuring itself that Brexit would be a disaster, and had therefore failed to practice even basic diplomacy to understand how London might seek to protect its influence and standing. One senior British official close to Johnson, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity to describe government deliberations, told me that French diplomats spent so long listening to people in London who agreed with their view—that Brexit would see Britain sidelined in the world—that they failed to recognize what the U.K. would do to remain a central part of the Western alliance. “If all your ambassadors do is read the pages of the FT, don’t be surprised if the ‘fifth wheel’ is actually still attached to the car,” the official said.

The reality is that both sides have a point.

France’s diplomatic effort in London—whether to influence the government, or to better understand its internal strategy—in the years since Britain voted to leave the EU has indeed been lamentable. The country’s ambassador in Britain during the Brexit crisis, Sylvie Bermann, subscribed to “good old-fashioned Anglophobia,” which dripped out of her subsequent book on the crisis, according to the University of Cambridge French-history professor Robert Tombs. Those close to Johnson argue that little has changed with the current French envoy, Catherine Colonna, who has remarkably scant access to those inside the British government, having chosen a strategy of outspoken Twitter criticism rather than quiet diplomacy.

From France’s perspective, the AUKUS announcement represents not just the loss of a “contract of the century” to build submarines, but a major threat to Paris’s aspirations to be an independent power in the Asia-Pacific. Moreover, it was elbowed out of the way by an administration in Washington that was supposed to be instinctively hostile to Brexit Britain and more favorable to Europe. For Britain, AUKUS, in contrast, offers a concrete step to deepen its ties in the region, opening the way to closer relations with Japan, India, and others, and helps smooth the path to membership in the giant Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. It is legitimate to argue that France should have seen this coming.

The French criticism nevertheless stings in Britain because it is clearly partially true. Of course Britain has accepted the position of junior partner to the U.S. at the cost of reduced influence in Europe. Few close to Johnson have any illusions about this. Although Britain will never call itself a “middle power” in public, its recent review of foreign and economic policy was based very much on this assumption. Brexit, in simple terms, was a choice to leave a club in which Britain was one of the three most important members (though often a third wheel because of the Franco-German alliance driving the European project), in favor of being a mid-ranking power in a world where some are far more powerful.

But is France really so different? Of all the mid-ranking countries in the world, it is perhaps the only one—beside Britain—that is able to reasonably claim to be “full-spectrum power,” possessing an effective nuclear-armed military, a far-reaching diplomatic network, a competent intelligence service, and a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Regarding critiques about accepting a “junior status” in a partnership, however, it seems a bit rich for France to be giving lectures to Britain, given that the past 10 years has seen the emergence of Germany as the dominant EU power. Germany now leads the bloc through its economic might, which means it is in some ways able to forge an even more independent diplomatic path than France. “One can imagine a future where Britain is the junior partner of the U.S., France the junior partner of Germany, and Russia the junior partner of China,” Michel Duclos, a former French diplomat, told me.

Whether they are meant to or not, French criticisms of Britain reveal as much about France’s insecurities as Britain’s criticisms of France do about its own, illustrating the wider challenge faced by many smaller countries in the 21st century—being unable to rise to true global leadership in a world likely to be dominated for decades to come by the U.S. and China, but unable to reconcile to subservience.

Britain and France don’t just reveal each other’s insecurities; they illustrate the challenges that much of the world will confront as countries strive to carve out a place where they are sufficiently sovereign to address the concerns of their voters, while remaining prosperous in an economic landscape that demands global rules and global governance.

T here are, of course, real differences between Britain and France. Although it is too simplistic to claim that the former is individualist and Anglo-Saxon, and that the latter is collective and continental—the U.K. has, for example, an entirely socialized health-care system dominating its daily life—the French state is significantly larger than Britain’s, and has greater protections for workers but almost twice the unemployment rate.

France is the inheritor of a great history, distinct from (though deeply intertwined with) that of its neighbor across the channel. For France, this history is revolutionary, all-conquering, exceptional, yet nevertheless prostrate—particularly when it comes to the shame of collaboration during World War II. Britain’s collective memory is also distinct but is more often defined against the French. Also a former empire, the country sees itself as standing for reform over revolt, free-born liberties over abstract rights, and the glory of holding out against Nazism. How both countries see themselves and their place in history continues to shape their instincts to this day.

In the acclaimed television series The Bureau, which follows the twists and turns of life inside France’s foreign-intelligence service, a particularly French worldview is revealed. Throughout the show, French spies exhibit a disdain for and an obsession with the CIA, which is portrayed as a borderline enemy. Perhaps the most telling scene comes early in the series, when a French agent offers to secretly work for the CIA. His American recruiter asks him whether he understands what he is doing, betraying his country. “You’re defecting to the West,” he says.

To the British, such a scene is utterly confounding. It is simply not possible to defect to the Americans or “the West.” From a practical point of view, the U.S. and the U.K. are on the same side, bound up in their “special relationship,” the Five Eyes intelligence partnership, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and now AUKUS. Yet the question of defecting is also one of imagination. Most people in Britain instinctively understand “the West” as encompassing the U.S., Canada, and most of Western Europe—certainly including Britain and France. Paris, however, sees a degree of separation. Although it is part of the West, it is not in the inner core, the English-speaking club.

In many ways, both Britain’s and France’s worldviews were shaped by how the two countries emerged from the Second World War—one relying more and more on the Anglo-American “special relationship,” the other seeking to protect its national independence, and exceptionalism. The difference is that whereas Britain emerged from the war heroic but broke, France had the legacy of collaboration to contend with.

Julian Jackson writes in his biography of Charles de Gaulle, A Certain Idea of France, that the French leader’s great achievement was to create “the necessary myth” that France had united in resistance against the Nazi occupation under his leadership and liberated itself. For France to recover its dignity by telling itself this story was imperative. In peace, Gaullism became the drive to restore grandeur: withdrawing from NATO’s military command, building its own nuclear deterrent, and trying to develop an alternative European sphere of influence to American and Russian power. There is an obvious continuity in its foreign policy, outlook, and strategy. Today, Macron’s stated goal is to build more European “strategic autonomy” for the EU to be able to act independently of the U.S.; he has accused NATO of being “brain dead” and wants Europe to set out policies toward Russia and China distinct from those of America.

Britain’s continuity of approach is similarly clear—partnering with the U.S., ostensibly to better project power. For Johnson, the emergence of an English-speaking alliance is a vindication of Brexit, Global Britain, and British exceptionalism more generally. He told me recently that he thinks the U.K. has always been “a bit different, very different” from other European powers, which made its membership in the EU unstable. In our conversation, he recounted a “very high-powered” dinner he attended in Paris several years ago, after one of his books was translated into French. “We were talking about British membership of the EU, and I was amazed: One of these guys said, ‘You should leave.’”

In Johnson’s telling, his conversational partner was a “massive Anglophile,” but nevertheless believed the U.K. did not fit within the EU. “I was very struck by that,” the prime minister told me. “Sometimes you need others looking at you to understand what is going on in your country.”

T here is a joke with more than an element of truth that says Britain didn’t leave the EU to make Britain great again. It left the EU to be more French.

Among those close to Johnson, there is an admiration for what they would describe as France’s unapologetic defense of national interest and ruthless pursuit of comparative advantage—for French intransigence. Painting Johnson as Britain’s first Gaullist prime minister would be a stretch, but there is certainly some crossover: nationalist, economically interventionist, focused on national sovereignty and national exceptionalism.

Johnson is not the first British leader to admire the tenets of Gaullism. When asked if he regarded de Gaulle as a great man, Churchill replied, “He is selfish, he is arrogant, he believes he is the center of the world … You are quite right. He is a great man.”

Gaullist appreciation is not new for the current British prime minister, either. In a 2003 anthology of his columns, Johnson writes in glowing terms about what he sees as France’s successful pursuit of its national interest through the EU. “The European Community, alas,” he argues, “is ruled by France.” In particular, he is full of praise for French civil servants and their “chess-like genius for thinking ahead, and dressing up French national interest as the European dream.”

In Johnson’s mind, Britain had been outmaneuvered by the French inside the EU. “There is no British counter-network,” he writes in the same article. “With their shy grins and corrugated-soled shoes, [British officials] are no match for the intellectual brutality” of their French counterparts. It does not take much of a leap of imagination to see that Johnson would like Britain to take a leaf out of the French playbook. This is the essential point of his joke in Washington that France needed to “get a grip” over its continued criticism of AUKUS. In effect, Johnson believes France would have done the same.

One senior official at 10 Downing Street agreed with this assessment, at least backhandedly. In Johnson’s view, this official said, Britain now had a chance to define its role in the world independent of the EU, “and to be more creative and more confident around who we choose to back and how we choose to do it.” He then added: “And if that feels more French, then so be it.” Another British official said that although the comparison was not exact, parallels could certainly be found between Britain’s strategy and France’s, particularly in both countries’ sense of exceptionalism. As Duclos, the former French diplomat, put it, the problem between Britain and France at the moment could be read as “a clash of Gaullism.”

The two countries may have adopted different strategies to sustain their power, relevance, and independence, but both amount to an attempt to remain great. For Paris, the vision is of a Global France empowered through the EU; for London, it is of a Global Britain outside the EU. Both are reasonable; both have obvious limitations rooted in their relationship with the rest of the continent. France has lost its European leadership role to Germany, while Britain has given up trying to lead in Europe altogether and has yet to settle on what kind of relationship it does want with its closest neighbors.

When you step back, it is hard to avoid concluding that there are as many similarities between Britain and France as there are differences. The mirror they provide for each other has long projected back an image they wish to see, obscuring the reality of the challenge they both face.

Which Country Do You HATE The Most UKRAINE

03:24 4.47 MB 1.4M

Countries That Hate Russia

16 359.38 KB 22.3K

Countries That Hate USA

13 291.99 KB 14.3K

Why I Hate My Country

13:46 18.12 MB 183.5K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most TUNISIA

08:28 11.14 MB 188.8K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most LITHUANIA

05:16 6.93 MB 305.8K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most AZERBAIJAN

05:38 7.41 MB 302.9K

Countries That Hate Russia

17 381.84 KB 52.2K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most CHAD

05:23 7.08 MB 8.2K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most ISTANBUL TURKEY

06:01 7.92 MB 2.2M

Which Country Do You HATE The Most DUBLIN IRELAND

Which Country Do You HATE The Most NORWAY

04:47 6.30 MB 513.3K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most IRAQI KURDISTAN

05:00 6.58 MB 154.2K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most POLAND

03:25 4.50 MB 753K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most SCOTLAND

03:49 5.02 MB 1.6M

Which Country Do You HATE The Most BANGLADESH

08:05 10.64 MB 376.9K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most SLOVAKIA

08:04 10.62 MB 133.7K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most ESTONIA

04:01 5.29 MB 352.5K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most HAMBURG GERMANY

03:31 4.63 MB 1.7M

Love Hate Story Of Pakistan 2022 Independence Day Spacial

01:23 1.82 MB 180

Why You Ll HATE Living In JAPAN

15:08 19.92 MB 7.2M

Which Country Do You HATE The Most MAURITIUS

08:25 11.08 MB 56.1K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most EGYPT

04:41 6.16 MB 421.8K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most BULGARIA

07:32 9.91 MB 758.3K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most KOSOVO

05:05 6.69 MB 626.7K

NEW COUNTRY Do I Really Hate Travelling

06:15 8.23 MB 2.3K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most NORTH MACEDONIA

07:19 9.63 MB 608.8K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most YEMEN

05:14 6.89 MB 539.4K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most HUNGARY

03:52 5.09 MB 594.9K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most MAURITANIA

08:05 10.64 MB 45.3K

Which Countries Hate The United States

03:15 4.28 MB 2.4M

Conner Smith I Hate Alabama

03:37 4.76 MB 621.6K

Tenille Arts I Hate This Acoustic Performance CMT Next Women Of Country Class Of 2021

03:17 4.32 MB 1.9K

Why You Ll HATE Living In JAPAN Part 2

12:38 16.63 MB 330.7K

10 Things I Hate About Living In Sweden

08:50 11.63 MB 123.6K

Countries That Hate India Countries That Hate India

16 359.38 KB 0.9K

Stereotypes Indians Hate About INDIA

21 471.68 KB 1.2M

25 000 March Against Islam Hate In Europe

09:19 12.26 MB 1.1M

Post Malone Love Hate Letter To Alcohol Live On Saturday Night Live Ft Fleet Foxes

03:17 4.32 MB 1.7M

Sri Lanka S Extremist Monks When Buddhism Spreads Hate In Bad Faith Part 3 CNA Documentary

47:54 63.04 MB 43K

Teacher Reacts To Stereotypes You Hate About Your Country

07:48 10.27 MB 4.7K

Do Greeks Really Hate Turks Easy Greek 129

14:18 18.82 MB 428.4K

G Eazy Hate The Way Official Video Ft Blackbear

04:37 6.08 MB 33.5M

Which Country Do You HATE The Most ETHIOPIA

06:08 8.07 MB 134.9K

Why You Ll Hate Living In Finland 7 Reasons

10:17 13.53 MB 113.9K

Which Country Do You HATE The Most ROMANIA

05:25 7.13 MB 1.2M

Which Country Do You HATE The Most ITALY

05:17 6.95 MB 2.1M

Anti Flag Hate Conquers All

02:49 3.71 MB 1.2M

Tulsi Gabbard There Is No Turning Back

02:17 3.01 MB 622K

Marjorie Taylor Greene S Hate During Pride Don Jr S Hypocrisy Laura Ingraham Blames Pot Not Guns

12:15 16.12 MB 2.6M

Для вашего поискового запроса Hate The New Country мы нашли 50 песен, соответствующие вашему запросу. Теперь мы рекомендуем загрузить первый результат Which Country Do You HATE The Most UKRAINE который загружен Gus1thego размером 4.47 MB, длительностью 3 мин и 24 сек и битрейтом 192 Kbps.

4 пары стран, у которых очень плохие отношения друг с другом

Восемь стран ненавидящих друг друга.

Отношения между странами складываются по-разному. Они могут быть традиционно дружественными, иногда переходить от дружбы к вражде и наоборот. Это зависит от того, какие режимы правят в настоящий момент, как сложились традиции и какие были исторические события или какие амбиции овладевают правящими элитами. Но есть такие взаимоотношения между государствами, которые нельзя назвать иначе, как крайне враждебные. Эти страны пропитаны ненавистью и ни при каких условиях не желают сгладить конфликт.

Наша редакция 1Gai.Ru предлагает сегодня ознакомиться с четырьмя парами таких стран, в настоящее время относящихся друг к другу в высшей степени враждебно. Скажем спасибо, что не все они ведут войны из-за своих плохих отношений.

Индия и Китай

Отношения между Индией и Китаем были нестабильными на протяжении десятилетий из-за пограничных проблем и ненависти обеих стран к союзникам друг друга. Несмотря на то что более одной трети населения мира проживает в этих странах, торговля между ними оставляет желать лучшего. Их общий товарооборот составляет около 85 млрд долларов, что вдвое меньше, чем между Китаем и Австралией. Этот факт наилучшим образом определяет их «добрососедские» отношения.

Корень напряженных отношений Китая и Индии – пограничный спор на территории Кашмира в Ладакхе. Военное столкновение между двумя странами в 1962 году дало толчок их проблемам, которые сохраняются и по сей день. Эксперты в обеих странах приходят к выводу, что отношения между Индией и Китаем не могут улучшиться, если не будет решен пограничный вопрос.

Враждебность этих стран отражается почти на каждом секторе их экономик. Начиная от туризма и до прямых рейсов между странами, Китай и Индия проявляют себя как непримиримые недруги. Вот забавный факт, который позволяет взглянуть на вещи в перспективе: в 2013 году только 175 000 китайцев посетили Индию в качестве туристов. Для сравнения: Таиланд в туристических целях посетили более 4,6 миллиона китайцев. Для таких любителей путешествовать по миру, как жители КНР, и для страны, которая находится по соседству, эта статистика кажется по меньшей мере странной.

Кроме того, правые китайцы начали писать в социальной сети Weiboо обращения премьер-министру Индии Нарендре Моди, с энтузиазмом высказывая мнение о том, что Южный Тибет будет возвращен силой. Общение с премьер-министром Индии стало возможным после того, как тот присоединился к Weibo – китайской альтернативе Twitter. Впрочем, в прошлом году Моди покинул Weibo после того, как Индия запретила более 50 китайских приложений.

Связи Индии и Китая не становятся лучше из-за дружбы одной страны с врагом другой. Это становится очевидным, если посмотреть на дружеские отношения Китая с Пакистаном. Дело в том, что между Индией и Пакистаном возникли разногласия еще с тех пор, как они были разделены в 1947 году после раздела Британской Индии (и даже до этого).

Вот еще одно свидетельство «дружеских отношений»: визит председателя Си в Нью-Дели в 2014 году оказался первым визитом китайского премьера в Индию за восемь лет! Однако во время визита глава Китая объявил лишь о жалких 20 млрд долларов инвестиций в экономику Индии. Напротив, в то же время Си Цзиньпин объявил об инвестиционном плане в размере 46 млрд долларов в Пакистане.

Только в прошлом году в разгар пандемии две страны снова столкнулись в кровавом конфликте на спорных границах. В столкновениях были убиты 20 индийских солдат, что с новой силой всколыхнуло взаимную ненависть Китая и Индии. Эти стычки были кульминацией их отношений, и с введением в уравнение третьего члена – Пакистана, нет никаких сомнений в том, что враждебность между Пекином и Нью-Дели способна только усиливаться.

Саудовская Аравия и Иран

Саудовская Аравия и Иран – две близкие друг к другу страны, разделенные лишь водной полосой, называемой Персидским заливом, что практически делает их соседями. Однако, несмотря на территориальную близость, эти две страны не могут быть более отдаленными друг от друга, с их разнящимися религиозными, политическими и культурными идеологиями. Напряженность между Королевством Саудовская Аравия и Ираном определялась войной, которая продолжается и сегодня в форме прокси-конфликта. Эти сражения каждая из стран ведет в Йемене за господство и контроль на Ближнем Востоке. Несмотря на то что в 1920-х годах дипломатическое будущее Саудовской Аравии и Ирана выглядело блестящим, эти две страны пришли к напряженным и безрадостным обстоятельствам, которые подталкивают их к затяжным конфликтам.

В 1960-х годах в Саудовской Аравии нарастал консервативный ваххабизм, шедший вразрез с быстрой модернизацией в Иране. Эта модернизация, похоже, сильно беспокоила саудитов. Письмо шаха Ирана правительству Саудовской Аравии, в котором он призвал аравийцев быть более современными, было встречено насмешками и суровым ответом Саудовской Аравии. Саудиты напомнили шаху, что Иран является мусульманской страной с мусульманским населением.

Однако, несмотря на то что обе эти страны исповедуют ислам, они очень далеки по своей идеологии. Это еще одна причина, почему между этими двумя государствами существует большая напряженность. В Саудовской Аравии среди населения большинство ваххабитов, являющихся ветвью суннитского учения, в то время как в Иране проживает большинство шиитов, при этом почти половина всего шиитского населения мира проживает в этой стране. Это стало важным фактором в их отношениях, когда шах Ирана был свергнут в 1979 году, а ультраконсервативный шиитский лидер аятолла Хомейни взял под контроль страну. Новый иранский режим открыто осудил суннитскую Саудовскую Аравию и их теплые отношения с США.

Напряженность между двумя государствами достигла рекордно высокого уровня после того, как Саудовская Аравия в 1980 году поддержала Ирак в его войне с Ираном, которая длилась около восьми лет, после чего дипломатические отношения Ирана и КСА испортились. После того как Иран поддержал Башара Асада против саудитов и США в сирийском кризисе, положение стало еще хуже. Вся эта напряженность накалилась, что привело к войне в Йемене, где обе эти страны и по сей день пытаются укрепить свое господство. Но не для того, чтобы захватить территории, а чтобы низвергнуть идеологию друг друга и получить контроль над Ближним Востоком как в политическом, так и в религиозном плане.

Греция и Турция

Конфликт между Турцией и Грецией восходит к глубинам веков – походам Александра Великого и его завоеванию Персидской империи. В те древние времена идеологии Греции и Древнего Востока столкнулись, что вылилось в беспощадные религиозные, культурные и территориальные войны во времена Османской империи. Несколько войн, споров о ресурсах и проблем с членством в ЕС за долгие годы оставили горький привкус как в Греции, так и в Турции.

Истинная ненависть между странами заключается в исторических событиях, которые сформировали их отношения. Греция обрела независимость только после кровопролитной войны с Османской империей в 19 веке. Эта волна свободы была вызвана националистическими настроениями и потребностью в территориальном отделении в сочетании со становлением прохристианского государства, свободного от исламского правления.

В случае с Турцией современная республика также образовалась после окончания османского владычества во время Первой мировой войны, когда Турция в основном вела войны против Греции и успешно завоевала достаточно земель для создания государства. Мустафа Кемаль Ататюрк возглавил это движение, в результате чего с этих территорий было изгнано большинство греков, а это привело к этнической чистке с обеих сторон.

И без того испорченные отношения между Грецией и Турцией начинают только ухудшаться после кипрской проблемы 1960-х и 1970-х годов, которая вылилась в споры по поводу разведки ресурсов в прибрежных водах Кипра. Обе страны смотрели друг на друга с неприязнью и заявляли, что одна из сторон пытается уничтожить другую. Турецкая сторона утверждала, что морские исследования были важным шагом к тому, чтобы Турция стала самодостаточным государством в энергетическом секторе. С другой стороны, Греция настаивала, что это был лишь очередной враждебный шаг Турции, которая пыталась восстановить Османскую империю и связанные с ней страдания народов. И по сей день Кипр, как и отношения между Турцией и Грецией, разделен без каких-либо возможностей для воссоединения.

США и Северная Корея

Соперничество между некоторыми странами можно рассматривать как отношения «любовь-ненависть», но когда дело доходит до взаимоотношений Северной Кореи и США, нет никаких сомнений в том, что обе эти страны ненавидят и презирают друг друга. Ежедневно и ежеминутно Северная Корея напоминает своим гражданам о том, что Соединенные Штаты являются империалистической агрессивной страной, которая уничтожает все, к чему прикасается. В США все знают об этой ненависти и живут в вечном страхе перед Северной Кореей с ее постоянными угрозами нанести ядерные ракетные удары и уничтожить крупнейшие города США.

С другой стороны, у Америки более чем достаточно причин ненавидеть Северную Корею. Из-за постоянно растущей угрозы тотальной ядерной войны, похищения гражданского и военного персонала США и массовых нарушений прав человека отношения были испорчены надолго. Сейчас ситуация не меняется и остается напряженной. Несмотря на попытки американцев наладить отношения с Северной Кореей, чтобы положить конец многолетней вражде, похоже, что Пхеньян не готов забыть ужасы Корейской войны.