The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States

The study of quasi-states has been marred by an unfortunate terminological confusion. Sometimes, this term is taken to mean recognized states that fail to develop the necessary state structures to function as fully fledged, ‘real’ states. At other times, ‘quasi-states’ is a designation given to regions that secede from another state, gain de facto control over the territory they lay claim to, but fail to achieve international recognition. The author proposes that, in order to clear up this confusion, recognized but ineffectual states ought to be referred as ‘failed states’, while the term ‘quasi-states’ ought to be reserved for unrecognized, de facto states. Since quasi-states are not supported by international recognition, they must be sustained by something else. In contrast to researchers who maintain that the majority of these quasi-states are quite strong, this article argues that their modal tendency is weak economy and weak state structures. The main reasons why these states nevertheless have not collapsed seem to be that they have managed to build up internal support from the local population through propaganda and identity-building; channel a disproportionately large part of their meager resources into military defense; enjoy the support of a strong patron; and, in most cases, have seceded from a state that is itself very weak

Il nation-building in Russia: una strategia orientata sui valori

Originariamente pubblicato nel 2004 come introduzione al libro Nation-Building and Common Values in Russia, curato dall’autore, questo saggio analizza come nei primi anni della presidenza Putin la Federazione Russa abbia proseguito sulla strada tracciata da El’cin della costruzione di un’identità nazionale civica panrussa, ma abbia altresì tentato un nuovo approccio (non privo di tensioni e contraddizioni interne), incentrando il processo di nation-building panrusso su dei valori ritenuti comuni a tutta la cittadinanza russa, alcuni dei quali descritti come «universali», altri come «specificamente russi». Basandosi su una indagine condotta in alcune regioni particolarmente rappresentative della Russia, il saggio analizza le precondizioni e lo svolgersi di tale processo di costruzione nazionale, focalizzandosi sulle complesse interazioni tra nation-building statale e regionale, state-building e consolidamento etnico, tenendo conto non solo degli orientamenti delle élite, ma anche della reazione delle masse. Originally published in 2004 as an introduction to the volume Nation-Building and Common Values in Russia, edited by the author himself, this essay analyzes how in the early years of Putin’s presidency the Russian Federation continued towards the construction of a civic, all-Russian national identity along the path traced by Yeltsin, but it also tried a new approach (characterized by internal tensions and contradictions) which centred all-Russian nation-building on some common values allegedly shared by all Russian citizens, some of which were deemed «universal», while some others were described as «Russian». On the basis of a survey carried out in some particularly representative regions of Russia, the essay analyzes the preconditions and the unfolding of this nation-building process, focusing on the complex interactions among state-centred and regional nation-building, state-building and ethnic consolidation, taking into account not only the elites’ attitudes, but also the masses’ responses

Popular Conceptions of Nationhood in Old and New European Member States: Partial Support for the Ethnic-Civic Framework

One of the most influential theories in the study of nationalism has been the ethnic-East/civic-West framework developed by Hans Kohn. Using the 2002 Eurobarometer survey on national identity and building on earlier survey studies, this article examines whether the Kohn framework is valid at the level of popular understandings of nationhood. It scrutinizes the framework both conceptually - do people define nationhood in civic or ethnic terms? - and regionally - is the East indeed more ethnic than the West and the West more civic than the East? It will show that identity markers cluster in a political, a cultural and an ethnic dimension. Respondents do not see these dimensions as competing sources of nationhood, however. The article further lends some support for the regional component of the framework. Lastly, it argues that it is the intensity of national identifications rather than their qualitative nature (ethnic-civic) that correlates with xenophobia. © 2006 Taylor & Francis

Perspektiver på Norges sikkerhet

Den aller første utgaven av IFS Info er en samling av tekster der åtte IFS-forskere presenterer sentrale perspektiver ved sin forskning, basert på mini-foredrag holdt i anledning IFS sitt tiårsjubileum, i november 1990. Hvert innlegg er en smakebit av IFS sine viktigste interesseområder, og belyser bakgrunn, utviklingslinjer og fremtidsperspektiver på norsk sikkerhets- og forsvarspolitikk

Anticipating Demographic Superiority: Kazakh Thinking on Integration and Nation Building.

In the communist period, the Soviet republics could be regarded as a kind of pseudo-states or proto-states, which had some of the trappings of true states, but lacked essential elements such as control of their own territory and economy. Today, the state authorities in the successor states are striving to transform these political contraptions into real, modern states. This a complex and multidimensional process in which the present articles concentrates on the identity aspect of nation-building. In order to make these states functioning entities, it is essential that the people who live in them transfer their political loyalty to the new state. They must develop a sense of belonging in the state and forge a common identity. The ongoing Kazakhstani nation-building debate may be divided into three separate sections. At the ground level of press articles, the polemics include a wide variety of disparate viewpoints. Elevated about shadow boxing at the ground level hover the official statements of Kazakhstani authorities. In between the official and the ground levels we find the academic discourse on nation-building and integration

The new Russian diaspora - an identity of its own? Possible identity trajectories for Russians in the former Soviet republic

The collapse of the unitary Soviet state has plunged its former citizens into a profound identity crisis. Particularly hard hit are the 25 million Russians living in the non-Russian successor states. Formerly members of the dominant nationality of a multinational state they have been turned into a new Russian diaspora. Whether they in time should come to look upon themselves as Latvians (Ukrainians, Georgians, etc) of Russian extraction or as Russians who happen to be living in Latvia, Ukraine, Georgia, etc. will clearly influence political relation both within and among the Soviet successor states. Identity formation is a prolonged process and influenced by a number of factors. The authors attempts to outline a typology of possible identity trajectories of the Russian diaspora and discusses a number of influence factors which are deemed important to the identity formation. These factors work very differently in the various non-Russian successor states, and it is therefore no reason to believe that all Russians living outside the Russian Federation will develop the same identity. There is, however, good reason to expect that in the final outcome a very large number of them will develop an identity which sets them apart from the Russian core group