Sunday, February 28, 2010
A State Is As a State Does?
Here is an interesting piece that relates to our discussions on constructivism. This piece from Foreign Policy discusses regions of states that, not being able to win their independence from the states of which they are a part, just start behaving in many ways like states, issuing passports and currency and such. This brings up the question of what makes a state a state? Do you have to be recognized by the UN and other states, field teams in the Olympics, etc, to be considered a state? (Recognition by other states and the UN is usually considered to be what legitimizes a would-be state as a state). Is it, in realist (and Weberian terms), the possession of a monopoly over the legitimate means of violence in a given territory? Or something else entirely?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYes, I do feel that a state without recognition cannot be considered a state at all. In order to have sovereignty, other states must believe it has that power or they would not respect it. This cannot occur if the neighboring states feel that the quasi-state's citizens are simply morons who do not realize what state they are a part of. Furthermore, a group of individuals cannot simply declare that they are the founders of a new nation, as the real states nearby would probably have some claim to the land these individuals usurped. As such these angered countries would simply send in some troops to take back their land and send the wayward and incredibly confused individuals back to second grade to learn which country they lived in. That is if they did not consider them traitors and execute them.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI find myself in agreement with Katie Bridson: in order to be considered a sovereign state you must receive recognition from the majority of other sovereign states.
ReplyDeleteAs Katie points out, if I were to decide that I lived in my own, new state, called Tatiananica and thus (as the Queen and sole member of this state) granted myself the power make my own laws and live by them, I doubt my state would gain much international recognition, I doubt the UN would invite me to contribute to their sessions, and I doubt the United States would take well to me simply stealing their land and declaring it as my own. More so, my own laws wouldn’t carry any clout and, alas, I would still be forced to pay taxes to the U.S. government and drive the speed limit. Here we see again the need for recognition.
Finnemore also points out that states ARE states only when they have control over force within their territory.
ReplyDelete