Are small states beautiful?
Is small beautiful when it comes to the size of states? Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times has an interesting piece , in which he argues: βIf the formation of new countries can be achieved peacefully, it is usually a cause for celebration. This is the age of the small state.β
The context is Kosovo, and its expected impending unilateral declaration of independence. (See my previous blogs about Kosovo here and here.) Many pundits are predicting a crisis in the Balkans, as it, well, Balkanises.
Rachman argues that many of the worldβs happiest and most successful states are (relatively) small, by which he means with populations of less than 10 million. Just because Kosovo would be small, he suggests, doesnβt automatically mean itβd be a disaster.
But is size really a deciding β or even a significant β factor? For every successful small state (Finland, Switzerland, Ireland), I can name an unsuccessful one (East Timor, Eritrea, Equitorial Guinea). I think Iβd be tempted to leave size out of it and look elsewhere when trying to work out what makes some nations work well and others not.
I seem to recall it was a French philosopher who once defined a nation as βa group of people united by a hatred of their neighbours and a mistaken view of their history.β Cynical, perhaps, but it helps to move the focus away from the size of a nation to who lives in it and what is contained beneath its soil.
Is homogeneity a useful attribute? (In which case, what about the US?) Are natural resources essential? (You might think itβs obvious, but what about Singapore? Yes, I know itβs got a harbour, but what else?) Equitorial Guinea has plenty of oil, but meets pretty much all the requirements of a classic failed state.
And anyway, note Rachmanβs all-important qualifier: βif small countries can be formed peacefully β¦β Would an independent Kosovo be born in peace? Would it be born at all, had it not been for NATO warplanes in action over Serbia in 1999? I agree, it would be nice to be able to imagine a peaceful, prosperous, independent Kosovo, born with the good wishes and hosannas of all its neighbours, but I fear it ainβt going to happen like that.
So what would you say makes for a successful and peaceful nation?
Your selection of successful and unsuccessful small states is interesting; perhaps some good advice is not to be a former far-flung European colony, and if possible move to the European continent itself?
Singapore again is an exception, but it really does need to be treated as such. As a colony, its geographical position gave it particular importance for the British Empire, and attracted to it the according investment. It therefore had the benefit of it's historical role as a commercial hub come independence.
True, it's not the most homogenous state one could name, but it must be harder for people to hold "us and them" attitudes in a nation that's one city wide. I would imagine that that fact alone gives the various religious and ethnic groups a sense of solidarity in relation to the outside world. If small states are indeed beautiful, Singapore must be a true vision of gorgeousness.
Complain about this postgreeting,
Complain about this postWhat really makes a nation is people,human resources.They are those who put the physical ones together to make them useful.The physical resources also counts.
Frank and open dialogue between the government and it's people is the starting point.
Then a resolution by that government that they will be servants of the people, not visa versa.
An independant judiciary.
Strict fiscal and monetary policies, at least to begin.
Free medical for those on or under the poverty line, with threshold increases dependant on income.
Challenging Education standards. Including study of all major religious groups.
Effective transport policies that reduces the need for cars.
This is a starting point, and if small countries can indeed persue these policies while keeping corruption in check, within 10 years huge steps will be made.
Live Long and Prosper
Complain about this postI heartily endorse Nader's views . My answer to your final question lies in a few words:' TOLERANCE of one's neighbours'. Nationalism has too often led to strife. Internationalism is demanded.
Complain about this postI heartily endorse Nader's views . My answer to your final question lies in a few words:' TOLERANCE of one's neighbours'. Nationalism has too often led to strife. Internationalism is demanded.
Complain about this post