5- Federations WITH Nation-State: a problem of control

Why is Nation State so important that makes the comparison between present and past so difficult?

In a previous post I said that Nation-State is 1 nation/ethnic group1 = 1 state. The equation can be read in two ways: the idea that every nation is entitled to have “its” own state (self determination) and the idea that every state is legitimated to govern over “its” nation (state sovereignty).

Let's make an easy example: Argentinians are a nation as recognized in the preamble of Argentinian Constitution:

“We, the representatives of the people of the Argentine Nation...”

At the same time the Argentine State is sovereign over Argentine territory and people. This means that it has the right to govern Argentinian Nation recognized internally and internationally:

“in order to form a national union, guarantee justice, secure domestic peace, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves, to our posterity, and to all men of the world who wish to dwell on Argentine soil “ Argentina Constitution.

And all this is so convenient and neat. We have Italians in Italy, Germans in Germany, and so on until we create a map of countries very well defined with mono-color people inside.

But we also have the Palestine Nation that claims to have the right to govern Palestinians in what they call Palestinian territories in the same way Argentinians govern Argentina. And we also have right wing coalition that governs Israel that claims to have the right to govern over Israeli (not Palestinians) in what they claim to be “its” territory. And here, the issue becomes complicated because the territory Israel and Palestina claim are the same and the people is very much mixed in many areas. By legitimating both claims Nation-State contributes to conflict.

In the past, this problem has been solved in very different ways. Some Nation- States were first States and then the Nation was a result (I can think of France or Russia), in other cases a self-defined Nation took the State machinery (I can think of Germany and Spain). In others States and Nation were the result of the same process (I can think of many decolonization countries).

These Nation-State creation processes had very much success but now it face 3 types of problems: 

1- Mass killing and slavery are not longer tolerated.

2- Some territories are inhabited by more than one nation and no one has the legitimacy to govern the whole territory.

3- Nations (like ethnicity) are very flexible concepts. And in practical terms it means that we may feel to have a homogeneous country at one moment but after a while some parts of it start feeling different. Let's take Spain: until 1975 and for 36 years Franco was the head of a State that did all the necessary (including killing and oppressing) to build a homogeneous Spain. In the 80s Spain was populated by what was perceived as 5 nations. In the 2000s Spain seemed to find a peaceful agreement and a Spanish essence was arising out of the previous fragmentation but at the end of 2010s new conflict over nationality developed again. The same State change national configuration many times in few years. And when I say few years I mean over a generation. We can say something similar of Italy*

Therefore I think that in modern times "Federalism as a tool of ethnic conflict resolution" came to solve the problems of legitimacy that were originated by the application of the concept of Nation- State in real societies. 

"There is a number of federal and decentralized states in the post-Cold War era, and territorial autonomy, including the use of federal structures, has become part and parcel of teh international community's toolbox in addressing comples intra-state ethnic conflicts (Caspersen, 2017; Lapidoth, 1997), which are often fought over access to resources, including key positions in the state bureaucracy and its political institutions."  (Keil and Alber 2020)

If at some point of history we find ourselves having several self-perceived nations within the territory of one state, then, to prevent violence (civil wars, mass killings or slavery), we will need to "cut" the state at some level. Federations helps us with that.

 Let's go back to the original question: why is Nation State so important that makes the comparison between present and past so difficult? Because Nation-State creates some specific conflict that did not exit before it.

*It is possible to argue that Spain is in fact formed by different nations and at time they can express and sometimes they are oppressed but I don't think is so simple.

Keil and Alber (2020) "Introduction: Federalism as a Tool of Conflict Resolution" Ethnopolitics, 19:4.