Nation-state System: Evolution and Challenges
Abstract
The Peace of Westphalia (1648) not only created the modern nation-state system in Europe but also stipulated the basic rules of statecraft. Despite all the criticisms about its Western origins, the concept of state and nation took firm roots in most parts of the world, thanks to colonialism. However, it is now facing an existential challenge from seven different sources.
This article discusses these seven sources and discusses the likely status of nation-states in the evolving global governance structure.
Introduction
The concept of a nation-state is notoriously difficult to define. According to the Constitutive Theory of Statehood, “a state exists exclusively via recognition by other states. The theory splits on whether this recognition requires “diplomatic recognition” or merely “recognition of existence”. No other state grants Sealand official recognition, but it has been argued by Bates that negotiations carried out by Germany constituted “recognition of existence.
On the other hand, in the Declaratory Theory of Statehood, an entity becomes a state as soon as it meets the minimum criteria for statehood. Therefore recognition by other states is purely “declaratory”.
Neither theory of recognition satisfactorily explains modern practice. The declaratory theory assumes that territorial entities can readily, by virtue of their mere existence, be classified as having one particular legal status: it thus, in a way, confuses ‘fact’ with ‘law’.”
(Kindly read about the two theories of statehood namely, Constitutive and Declaratory, here
A state is specifically a political and geopolitical entity, while a nation is a cultural and ethnic one. The term “nation-state” implies that the two coincide, in that a state has chosen to adopt and endorse a specific cultural group associated with it. The concept of a nation-state can be compared with that of the multinational state, city-state, empire, confederation, and other state formations with which it may overlap. The key distinction is the identification of people with a political system in the nation-state.
Origins of the Nation-State
The origins and early history of nation-states are disputed. Two major theoretical questions have been debated.
· First, “Which came first, the nation or the nation-state?”
· Second, “Is the nation-state a modern or an ancient idea?”
Some scholars have advanced the hypothesis that the nation-state was an inadvertent by-product of 15th-century intellectual discoveries in political economy, capitalism, mercantilism, political geography, and geography combined with cartography and advances in map-making technologies.
For others, the nation existed first, then nationalist movements arose for sovereignty, and the nation-state was created to meet that demand. Some “modernization theories” of nationalism see it as a product of government policies to unify and modernize an already existing state. Most theories see the nation-state as a modern European phenomenon, facilitated by developments such as state-mandated education, mass literacy, and mass media (including print). However, others look for the roots of nation-states in ancient times.
Most commonly, the idea of a nation-state was and is associated with the rise of the modern system of states, often called the “Westphalian system” after the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). The balance of power that characterized that system depended on its effectiveness in establishing clearly defined, centrally controlled, independent entities, whether empires or nation-states, that recognized each other’s sovereignty and territory.
Elements of Nation-state
Whether it was the 1648 Peace of Westphalia that created the modern nation-state system or it just endorsed a trend already in vogue, it was the European colonial powers who introduced it all over the world. The nation-state got identified with its four essential elements: Territorial integrity, Sovereignty, Nationalism, and Equality.
- Territorial Integrity: Territorial integrity conceptualized the nation-state as a geographical entity whereby the protection of the people living within its boundaries became its chief responsibility.
- Sovereignty: At the same time, sovereignty, internal and external, came to be regarded as the hallmark of the nation-state. Internally, the state had the right to order the behaviour of all its citizens, and externally, sovereignty implied the right of the state to choose any element to protect its national interest.
- Nationalism: Thirdly, the rise of the nation-state was accompanied by the rise of nationalism, which advocates the identification of the individual with the state in return for obedience to its laws.
- Equality: Finally, international law recognized all states as equal sovereign entities with equal legal status and rights.
The nation-states with all four characteristics became key actors in international relations. Despite all the criticisms about its Western origins, the concept of state and nation has taken firm roots in most parts of the world—not without conflicts and bloodshed. Similarly, it has withstood the challenges posed by greater regionalisation and even the rapidly globalising world. Not only the nation-state as an identity of its own still survive but will also stay with us for the foreseeable future
The Peace of Westphalia not only created the institution of the nation-state but also stipulated the basic rules of statecraft, namely the rule of law, respect for human rights, and democratic governance. These are now universal standards acknowledged in most of the constitutions; the fact that they may be misapplied in practice or under threat in many countries does not change the fact that they remain valid and relevant standards.
The Peace of Westphalia also separated the state from religion in statecraft and made religion the private affair of the people. Secularism is now the cornerstone of modern statecraft
Challenges to a Modern Nation-state
The Peace of Westphalia created the modern nation-state system in Europe, and the colonial powers introduced it all over the world. Despite all the criticisms about its Western origins, the concept of state and nation took firm roots in most parts of the world—not without conflicts and bloodshed. However, it is now facing several challenges emanating from the following seven different sources.
A. Challenges of State Building
B. Challenge of Nation-Building
Challenges of Democratic Development
D. Challenges of Economic Growth
E. Challenge of Gradual Loss of Sovereignty
F. Challenges of Globalisation
G. Challenges of Localisation
H. Challenge of Sub-nationalism and Self-determination
I. Challenges of Regional Groupings
A. Challenges of State Building
State building refers to the creation of new institutions such as parliament, judiciary, armed forces, bureaucracy, law enforcement agencies, service departments, etc., and their strengthening if they are already in existence.
State building and institutional strengthening are not much of a challenge for developed countries, but almost all post-colonial states, particularly those in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, have been facing them since they got independence from their erstwhile colonial masters.
While ex-colonies of the British Empire were lucky to some extent that they inherited some well-functioning institutions, those who were under the possession of other colonial powers had to start their state-building from a rudimentary stage. Although they have made much progress, they are still suffering from this capacity deficit in their institutions; their institutions are not delivering effectively, efficiently, and equitably. It has led to the loss of writ of the state in some countries, while in others it results in frequent violent uprisings
B. Challenge of Nation-Building
The second challenge almost all post-colonial states are facing is the unification of the people within the state so that it remains politically stable and viable in the long run.
This challenge is again an offshoot of their colonial past; when departing, colonial powers created states by drawing arbitrary borders within which they clubbed different nationalities. Thus, most post-colonial states are multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic, and multi-cultural entities
Thus, the biggest challenge for these nation-states is how to build a nation with a vision of common destiny out of a multitude of culturally distinct nationalities with years of rich heritage, languages, and culture into a nation that is at peace within and at peace without.
Nation-building is a long, painful process that needs sagacious leadership to steer it successfully. Otherwise, any nation-state is prone to destabilization, and the rise of sub-nationalistic centrifugal forces, leading to even disintegration. Think pre-1971 Pakistan.
C. Challenges of Democratic Development
The third challenge modern nation-states face relates to democratic development and people's empowerment while maintaining their territorial integrity. Think of the Soviet Union. It broke into pieces as it could not respond properly to this challenge
Thus, a modern nation-state has to ensure that, while increasing the participation of people in policymaking and implementation at all levels of governance by improving democratic structures, processes, and political culture, it does not break into pieces itself. Think India!
D. Challenges of Economic Growth
The fourth challenge a modern nation-state faces is how to accelerate the rate of growth of its economy to raise the standard of living of its citizens over a long period with all attendant structural changes, besides ensuring its sustainability.
Like the above-mentioned challenges, this also has its roots in the colonial past of modern nation-states. Colonialism, despite all the claims of its beneficial spin-offs, was exploitative; it left its colonies in far poorer states than they were when they were colonized.
Thus, to survive as a viable entity, every modern nation-state is striving hard to not only grow rapidly but also ensure that the fruits of its economic growth are shared equitably by all sections of society and all regions of the nation-state.
E. Gradual Erosion of Sovereignty
Two cardinal principles agreed upon during the Peace of Westphalia were the territorial integrity of a modern nation-state and its sovereignty, internal as well as external. While the first is still intact, the second is under attack by 3 forces.
1. Global Power Politics: While small, poor, and weak countries have always been prone to bend under pressure from big-power countries, modern nation-states are particularly vulnerable to global power politics due to the inherent logic of the Cold War. Consequently, these countries must compromise on their sovereignty as the rivalry between the big powers becomes intense. And they may let go of their sovereignty by design for some monetary aid (Pakistan in the 1950s) or they must do it under pressure (Pakistan during War on Terror)
2. Supra-state Actors.: All modern nation-states, old or post-colonial, big or small, are gradually surrendering their sovereignty to supra-state actors like the UNO, WB, IMF, and WTO. Look how UNO forced the big powers to agree on its recommendations during COP27! While the big countries are less prone to this erosion of their sovereignty, poor nation-states have no choice. They are helplessly witnessing their power to formulate policies being taken over by these world institutions. Think Pakistan vs IMF.
3. Global NGOs: While the political sovereignty of a modern nation-state is under threat by supra-state actors and their economic sovereignty is threatened by MNCs, even global NGOs are encroaching upon their right to formulate social development policies. These global NGOs are now so powerful that they can dictate to poor nation-states on any issue they like, be it anti-corruption legislation or women's empowerment policies. You just name any social action policy, and you will see the footprints of one or two global NGOs.
F. Challenges of Globalisation
Nothing has challenged the core foundations of the nation-state other than the emergence of globalization which has superseded the governmental ability of the nation-state in many ways. The integration of commerce, finance, trade, and technology is gradually making the nation-state almost redundant. No longer is the nation-state the conduit by which MNCs, Diplomats, NGOs, and Supranational organizations must filter through to operate in and around its geographical sphere.
As an inevitable offshoot of rapid globalization, modern nation-states are losing their right to formulate economic policies as per their respective national interests. Instead, they have to take into account the interests of global MNCs to ensure FDI and access to markets. Globalization has completely altered the way nations govern, communicate, negotiate, and interact with each other.
Globalization has improved and expanded global commerce, brought more Foreign Direct Investment to developing countries, built infrastructure, advanced literacy, inspired democratic movements via social networks, and created emerging middle classes all over the world without much assistance from the nation-state. At the same time, globalization has been disrupting the social and moral fabric of a nation-state, which in turn causes unrest, financial meltdown, poverty, hunger, dissension, and interstate wars between ethnic, tribal, and religious groups. The nation-state seems helpless due to the inability of the current structure to effectively harness its destructive elements.
G. Challenges of Localisation
While the nation-state is facing the above-mentioned challenges from the outside, it is also under attack from the inside; rising demand for greater decentralisation by its federating units and even by the mega-cities under its jurisdiction.
After the 19th-century triumph of the nation-state in Europe, regional identity was usually subordinate to national identity. No more. It is now common for provinces, states, and cities to deal directly with other nation-states, corporations, and other big cities
Consequently, this direct dealing by the big cities and provinces with other supra-state/non-state actors, or even other nation-states, bypassing the central government, is another big challenge for the nation-state.
H. Challenges of Sub-Nationalism and Self-determination
Most modern nation-states are artificial creations, the results of the dissolution of empires or the end of colonialism. The most obvious impact of the nation-state is the creation of a uniform national culture through state policy. The model of the nation-state implies that its population constitutes a nation, united by common descent, a common language, and many forms of shared culture. When implied unity was absent, the nation-state often tried to create it. The creation of national systems of compulsory primary education is usually linked with the popularization of nationalist narratives.
However, that is being challenged. Being multi-ethnic entities, nation-states are under pressure from emerging sub-nationalism in their areas of jurisdiction. With the gradual withdrawal of religion as a source of cohesion in a society, there is emerging a wide legitimacy gap for keeping the people together; and creating a solid foundation of unity that religion used to do in the old times.
I. Challenges of Regional Groupings
Increased business activities due to expansion in areas and peaceful conditions within the jurisdiction of a nation-state, led to the emergence of the capitalist-industrialist class as an extremely powerful stakeholder.
This capitalist-industrialist class needs bigger areas of operation, which are only possible within bigger units of administration. Hence the formation of the European Union, which has greatly dented the concept of the nation-state as was envisaged by the Peace of Westphalia
Thus, both, capitalism as the dominant mode of production at the global level and outsourcing as a universally accepted form of business organisation, is helping the formation of regional trading blocks, challenging nation-states everywhere
What is the future of the Nation-state?
No doubt the institution of the nation-state, despite being a Western European construct, imposed on their colonies, has weathered many storms and survived. However, keeping in view the inexorable march of history, it is but one more stage towards a world government.
It all started with the establishment of tribal settlements when human beings came out of cave dwellings and started living together in the form of tribal settlements. There was peace within the limits of these respective settlements, but every tribal settlement was invariably at war with neighbouring units for control of resources. There was practically no state apparatus and minimal trade activity, mostly through barter.
Over centuries, these tribal settlements started merging due to population pressures and became villages accommodating multiple tribes within their respective jurisdictions. Now there was not only a rudimentary state but also a specialized class structure, including a specialist trading class.
Although there was peace within these villages, these multi-tribe villages were constantly fighting with one another for the same reason-control of resources. It adversely affected the business of the newly emerging commercial classes, resulting in fewer resources for the state through taxes
Hence, these villages first became towns and then converted into city-states. An increased area of operation, more population, and greater specialization resulted in improved trade and commerce, resulting in peace treaties among these city-states for the protection of trade.
This immensely benefitted the commercial classes, who started gaining greater influence in statecraft. Consequently, their desire to increase the area of their commercial activities was one of the main reasons, not the only one, of course—for the Peace of Westphalia and the emergence of the nation-states.
Increased business activities due to expansion in areas and peaceful conditions within the jurisdiction of a nation-state, led to the emergence of the capitalist-industrialist class, which wanted colonies to obtain resources as well as markets for selling their products. It led to the scramble for colonies, which inevitably resulted in greater warfare.
The commercial classes, who had now become extremely powerful stakeholders, started clamouring for peace, which was only possible within bigger units of administration. Hence the formation of the European Union
Emboldened by the success of this administrative re-engineering, other nation-states started experimenting with similar models, which are continuing. These regional groupings are just another milestone in our slow but steady journey towards the formation of a world government—the endpoint of the march of history.
Within the next two centuries, all the current state borders will be abolished, and nation-states will be replaced by continent-sized units of governance, with maximum devolution and decentralization for the provision of basic services to the people.
While UNO will act as the world Parliament to formulate global policies, its constituent units such as UNICEF, WHO, etc will act like global ministries with the World Bank as the central bank English will be recognised as the universal language with input from different languages towards its vocabulary.
