11 research outputs found
A critical review of smaller state diplomacy
In The Peloponnesian War, Thucydides (1972: 402) highlights the effects of the general, overall
weakness of smaller states vis-à-vis larger, more powerful ones in a key passage, where the
Athenians remind the Melians that:
“… since you know as well as we do that, as the world goes, right is only in question
between equals in power. Meanwhile, the strong do what they can and the weak suffer
what they must.”
Concerns about the vulnerability of small, weak, isolated states have echoed throughout history:
from Thucydides, through the review by Machiavelli (1985) of the risks of inviting great powers
to intervene in domestic affairs, through 20th century US-led contemporary political science
(Vital, 1971; Handel, 1990) and Commonwealth led scholarship (Commonwealth Secretariat,
1985). In the context of 20th century ‘Balkanization’, the small state could also prove unstable,
even hostile and uncooperative, a situation tempting enough to invite the intrusion of more
powerful neighbours: a combination, according to Brzezinski (1997: 123-124) of a power
vacuum and a corollary power suction2: in the outcome, if the small state is ‘absorbed’, it would
be its fault, and its destiny, in the grand scheme of things. In an excellent review of small states
in the context of the global politics of development, Payne (2004: 623, 634) concludes that
“vulnerabilities rather than opportunities are the most striking consequence of smallness”. It has
been recently claimed that, since they cannot defend or represent themselves adequately, small
states “lack real independence, which makes them suboptimal participants in the international
system” (Hagalin, 2005: 1).
There is however, a less notable and acknowledged but more extraordinary strand of
argumentation that considers ‘the power of powerlessness’, and the ability of small states to
exploit their smaller size in a variety of ways in order to achieve their intended, even if unlikely,
policy outcomes. The pursuance of smaller state goals becomes paradoxically acceptable and
achievable precisely because such smaller states do not have the power to leverage disputants or
pursue their own agenda. A case in point concerns the smallest state of all, the Vatican, whose
powers are both unique and ambiguous, but certainly not insignificant (The Economist, 2007).
Smaller states have “punched above their weight” (e.g. Edis, 1991); and, intermittently, political scientists confront their “amazing intractability” (e.g. Suhrke, 1973: 508). Henry Kissinger
(1982: 172) referred to this stance, with obvious contempt, as “the tyranny of the weak”3.
This paper seeks a safe passage through these two, equally reductionist, propositions. It
deliberately focuses first on a comparative case analysis of two, distinct ‘small state-big state’
contests drawn from the 1970s, seeking to infer and tease out the conditions that enable smaller
‘Lilliputian’ states (whether often or rarely) to beat their respective Goliaths. The discussion is
then taken forward to examine whether similar tactics can work in relation to contemporary
concerns with environmental vulnerability, with a focus on two other, small island states. Before
that, the semiotics of ‘the small state’ need to be explored, since they are suggestive of the
perceptions and expectations that are harboured by decision makers at home and abroad and
which tend towards the self-fulfilling prophecy.peer-reviewe
No effect of Osteoset ® , a bone graft substitute, on bone healing in humans: A prospective randomized double-blind study
How to Organise Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer: Lessons from India and Nigeria
Moral economists, subalterns, new social movements, and the (re‐) emergence of a (post‐) modernized (middle) peasant
Determinants of morbidity and mortality following emergency abdominal surgery in children in low-income and middle-income countries
Background: Child health is a key priority on the global health agenda, yet the provision of essential and emergency surgery in children is patchy in resource-poor regions. This study was aimed to determine the mortality risk for emergency abdominal paediatric surgery in low-income countries globally. Methods: Multicentre, international, prospective, cohort study. Self-selected surgical units performing emergency abdominal surgery submitted prespecified data for consecutive children aged <16 years during a 2-week period between July and December 2014. The United Nation's Human Development Index (HDI) was used to stratify countries. The main outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality, analysed by multilevel logistic regression. Results: This study included 1409 patients from 253 centres in 43 countries; 282 children were under 2 years of age. Among them, 265 (18.8%) were from low-HDI, 450 (31.9%) from middle-HDI and 694 (49.3%) from high-HDI countries. The most common operations performed were appendectomy, small bowel resection, pyloromyotomy and correction of intussusception. After adjustment for patient and hospital risk factors, child mortality at 30 days was significantly higher in low-HDI (adjusted OR 7.14 (95% CI 2.52 to 20.23), p<0.001) and middle-HDI (4.42 (1.44 to 13.56), p=0.009) countries compared with high-HDI countries, translating to 40 excess deaths per 1000 procedures performed. Conclusions: Adjusted mortality in children following emergency abdominal surgery may be as high as 7 times greater in low-HDI and middle-HDI countries compared with high-HDI countries. Effective provision of emergency essential surgery should be a key priority for global child health agendas