Social Studies

When States Falter

Introductory Questions

• How would you define a state? Are nations and states different?
• What purposes do states serve in the world?
• How different would your life be if you had been born in a different state?
• Do “perfect” states exist in the world?
• What are the “best” and “worst” states you can think of? How are you measuring them?
• Are democracies better states than non-democracies?
• What is the difference between a failed state and a fragile state?
• What do failed (and fragile) states have in common?
• How much of state failure can be attributed to politics?
• How much of state failure can be attributed to factors beyond a state’s control?
• Who should be in charge of measuring a state’s success—its citizens, or other states?
• If you were the leader of a failed or fragile state, whom would you ask for help?
• Can there be such a thing as a failed region in a successful state? How about a successful region in a failed state?
• What happens to a state after it fails? What happens to its people?
• Has globalization made states stronger or weaker?
• Do revolutions and uprisings save states, or further doom them?
• Is a failed state a failed society?
• Are some states doomed to failure?
• Is the traditional concept of the state outdated in an age of globalization and the Internet?
• Do your best to understand the current refugee crisis, also sometimes called the "Syrian" refugee crisis. Should all nations open their borders to people in need - or are nations right to reject any, many, or all of them?

Why Do Bad Things Happen to Good States?

• Factors in State Failure: Civil War | Foreign War | Economic Collapse | Natural Disasters | Climate Change | Regime Type | Leadership | Colonialism | Disease | Geography   
• Select Historical Cases: Biafra | Haiti | Weimar Republic | the Roman Empire | Yemen | Libya | Zaire | Colombia | the Soviet Union | Somalia
• Potential Preventative and Restorative Measures

Total Fail? Tools for Measurement

• Human Development Index | Gross Domestic Product
• Polity IV | Freedom House | Social Progress Index
• Failed States Index | Legatum Prosperity Index  

Additional Terms to Learn (Examples)

• Weak state | Fragile state | Collapsed state | Catastrophic success
• Civil Society | Regime Type | Institutions | NGOs
• Development Agencies | Peacebuilding Commission | Post-Conflict Compacts
• Democratization | Authoritarianism | Sovereignty | Social Contract

Selected Readings & Speeches

• The Coming Anarchy – Robert Kaplan
• The Social Contract (Book 1, Chapter 6, Pages 6-7) – Jean-Jacques Rousseau
• The Prince, Chapters 5 & 17 – Machiavelli
• Leviathan, Chapter 13 – Thomas Hobbes
• “Why Do Societies Collapse?” – Jared Diamond
• “How to Rebuild a Broken State” – Ashraf Ghani   
• “New Rules for Rebuilding a Broken Nation” – Paul Collier

Selected Film: The Lego Movie

Additional Questions & Cases to Discuss (Examples)

• Study the Fund for Peace's "Fragile States Index" (formerly the "Failed State Index"). Why do you think the index has been renamed? Are its metrics appropriate? Where does your country fall in their rankings – and do the rankings of any states surprise you?
• How important are institutions to the success or failure of states? Consider the examples of Nogales and of the two Koreas in the book Why Nations Fail, by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson – and then read this assessment of their argument by Jared Diamond.
• Is it the duty of other states to rescue or save failed states?  
• Should Colombia serve as a model for other formerly-failed states?
• Is there a failed state cycle—and, if so, how can a state break out of it?
• Are hermit states more likely to fail?  
• Can NGOs prevent state failure—or help restore failed states? If so, what should the focus of their efforts be?
• What can we learn from fictional failed states such as Gotham and Panem?  
• Consider the case of Greece. Is economics the most critical factor in state failure?
• To what degree can we blame the failure of states on climate change?
• Does terrorism cause states to fail? Or: do failed states spawn terrorism?
• Consider the recent catastrophic cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe. Was it the main reason for the government’s collapse – and did Ebola have a similar impact on countries in West Africa? 
• Explore the Rwandan concept of ubudehe. Could it be applied in other failing states?
• Is Belgium a failed state?
• Myanmar was until recently an example (for some) of a failing state. Should the recent elections there change this perception?
• Is it premature (or too pessimistic) to label post-war Iraq a failed state?
• Consider other recent cases of state failure such as Haiti and the Central African Republic. In rebuilding a failed state, how important are democratic elections?
• In Silicon Valley (and beyond), a conventional wisdom has emerged that it is good for people and companies to “fail fast” in order to succeed sooner. Does the same apply to states?

Q1. How would you define a state? Are nations and states different?

Ans. Nation: A group of people that shares common bonds, such as language and religion. An example is world Jewry.

State: A group of people that exercises some political authority over a larger group. An example is a government and since a government usually speaks on behalf of a people (nation), the word 'state' is often used to represent both 'nation' and 'state'.

So to be technical in using these words, if there is a need to point out a government, the word 'state' should be used, if there is a need to talk about a people, the word 'nation' should be used, and if there is a need to talk about all three elements, the word 'country' should be used.

Q2. What purposes do states serve in the world?

Ans. A state is simply the formalization of the tribe.  It is a group of people who see themselves as similar, either because of a shared language or culture or land area, who wish to be bound together under a common label.  In some cases, a state may expand to include a number of different tribes who see a benefit in being together under some common name, such as the United States.  In earlier times, states were created by some kind of Chief who laid claim to an area of wealth or people and who wished to keep that group or area under his control.  On some level, the people under that group accepted this designation as legitimate and agreed to live in that state and follow the rules it imposed.  This usually came with some benefit to the citizens, such as safety from attack or economic prosperity brought through peace and trade.

Q3. How different would your life be if you had been born in a different state?

Ans. The life in other state depends on the openness of society and culture. It also depends on how much freedom that state provides to the people living there. Like there are some places where people have little or no freedom to live life according to their own choice.

Q4. Do “perfect” states exist in the world?

Ans. No, every State in history proved to be a failure at many levels.

The thing is, you cannot postulate perfection on something “human”, like politics, society, ethics, psychology…

Man is the being most open to change because he is free. You cannot simply decide what State would be ideal to men, because there will always be many complaints of social injustice.

The perfect State would be a justice State, but then, what is justice anyway? There are two justices, and until now, no one can decide which is the true one.

The first justice would be in letting everybody live freely, without restrictions from the State. The latter would just supervise and provide security and rights to individuals. Everybody would have the same rights, but some would be better off in their lives because of predispositions, such as intelligence, wealthy family, etc… leaving poorer people behind. This is what libertarians and right-wingers advocate for.

The second one would be that the State controls most relations between individuals and has a solid hand over the economy. Thus, richer people would pay more taxes, while poorer people would pay less, and therefore the rich would be helping the poor through taxes. Everybody would be equal in terms of wealth, but some would have more rights than others. This will result in an injustice where the poor, who might be less qualified and less useful for society as a whole, would have more freedom than the rich. This is the progressive/socialist/communist and left-wingers vision.

So, in the end, we cannot conceive an ideal State, because, at first, it will not fit everybody, and then, it would emphasize a justice while negating another.

Q5. What are the “best” and “worst” states you can think of? How are you measuring them?

Ans. Best state:

1.     Hawaii - The island state fares well in terms of education, with a slightly higher percentage of women older than 25 holding a bachelor's degree than men. The state comes in third, behind Maine and Washington, for its gender gap in political empowerment; specifically, the number of female lawmakers in Congress and the state legislature.

Worst state

 Delaware - The state falls in the bottom half of all states when it comes to workplace environment, education, and political empowerment.

Q6.  Are democracies better states than non-democracies?

Ans. 1) It provide space for fair and healthy competition - In democracy, every citizen has a fair chance to come to power. Every individual has one vote and every vote has equal value. The say of a slum dweller in deciding the political future of the country is the same as that of a millionaire industrialist. Free and fair elections are held from time to time under the supervision of an independent body. A true democracy is a platform of healthy competition, not subjected to muscle might or power play.

2) Its provide scope to correct one’s mistake - Though in a democracy, people take their own decisions by electing their own representatives, there is no guarantee that decisions taken by the general public at the time of elections prove to be right for the years to come. Sometimes, people may later realize that they made a wrong choice. The best part of democracy is that such mistakes cannot stay hidden for long and there is room for correction. When the representatives we elect turn out to be corrupt or insensitive towards public sentiments, we can always vote for better alternatives in the next general elections. If the rulers do not change their decisions, we can change them. This is not possible in any other form of government.

Q7. Are some states doomed to failure?

Ans. Some states are geographically doomed, being landlocked and having poor resources, disease and in climate weather which makes it difficult to prosper.

Q8. Has globalization made states stronger or weaker?

Ans. Globalization has helped to lift millions out of poverty and economies to the next level. Globalization has increased competition and put pressure on the developed world to increase performance. In absolute terms, I believe globalization has made many states/economies stronger. However, as markets like China and India or regions like South East Asia have raised the profile the former leading nations are relatively less strong than 30 years ago. Furthermore, today’s states are more interdependent and hence more vulnerable in respect to external shocks. This can be considered as the price for a more inclusive world, where income and wealth is more equally distributed across nations. As we are currently experiencing a strengthening of regions, we are gradually increasing the robustness and resilience of the global system. The income inequality within countries remains a major risk and needs to be addressed.

Q9. Is a failed state a failed society?

Ans. 1) “State failure” is leading to confused policy making. For example, it is causing the military to attempt overly ambitious nation-building and development to approach counter-terrorism, under the unproven assumption that “failed states” produce terrorism.

2) “State failure” has failed to produce any useful academic research in economics.

You would expect a major concept to be the subject of research by economists (as well as by other fields, but I am using economics research as an indicator). While there has been research on state failure, it failed to generate any quality academic publications in economics. A search of the top economics journals¹ reveals that “state failure” (and all related variants like “failed states”) has been mentioned only once EVER. And this article mentions the concept only in passing.

3) “State failure” has no coherent definition.

Different sources have included the following:

a) “Civil war” b) “infant mortality” c) “declining levels of GDP per capita” d) “inflation” ³ e) “unable to provide basic services” f) “state policies and institutions are weak” g) “corruption” h) “lack accountability” ⁴ i) “unwilling to adequately assure the provision of security and basic services to significant portions of their populations” ⁵ (wouldn’t this include the US?) j) “inability to collect taxes” k) “group-based inequality… and environmental decay.” ⁶ l) “wars and other disasters” m) “citizens vulnerable to a whole range of shocks” ⁷

Most of these concepts are clear enough in themselves, and often apply to a large number of countries. But is there any good reason to combine them with arbitrary weights to get some completely unclear concept for a smaller number of countries? “State failure” is like a destructive idea machine that turns individually clear concepts into an aggregate unclear concept.

Q10. Do revolutions and uprisings save states, or further doom them?

Ans. The main thing is that it's impossible to formalize terms "saving a state" or "dooming a state". People have different opinions, views, political beliefs, and, therefore, always evaluate historical situations from their own points of view.

Take the Russian revolution for example: some people treat it as a catastrophy for the country and the nation which ruined Russia's rapidly developing economy and civic society; others view it as triumph of working class and liberation of people from the Tsarist regime. There is no compromise opinion, and, most probably, there never will be.

Different views on countries' political sutiations are the reason revolutions, uprisings and civil wars happen in the first place. Probably only one thing can be said with confidence: a revolution always means radical changes, destruction and, almost always, violence.

Q11.  Is the traditional concept of the state outdated in an age of globalization and the Internet?

Ans. 

Q12. Who should be in charge of measuring a state’s success—its citizens, or other states?

Ans. it should be the citizens who should be in charge of measuring a state's success; as they live and reside in the country and are aware of the happenings in the country and an average of how much the country is earning. Citizens do know the above to some extent, they are also aware of the profits and losses of the state, that is if they are political and care for the economy of their state or just like reading the newspaper. Hence, the citizens should be in charge of measuring a state’s success. But, then again there are many things that are hidden by the government from the citizens so as to not worry the citizens or make a big hype about it. So, it all depends on your opinion.

Q13. Can there be such a thing as a failed region in a successful state? How about a successful region in a failed state?

Ans. Failed region in a successful state:

Yes it happens all the time. A shameful example exists in Canada a successful first world country by all definitions. Far too many first nations communities exist in a reality far removed from the Canada most Canadians recognize. Lacking adequate housing, employment, education, clean and safe drinking water among other issues makes these areas of Canada seem like a 3rd world country conveniently hidden from Canadian conscience. This treatment has been declared a violation of basic human rights by many organizations including the U.N.

Other failed regions in states would be modern ghetto’s and down trodden towns/ cities/ communities, every country has them and often many of them. Some easy examples: U.S Detroit, France minority filled shanty towns, Brazil has favelas and on and on.

Successful regions in failed state:

Yes also happens all the time. It’s usually in areas around where the people in power get their support and live. Easy examples in war torn Syria the place politicians and business people live and vacation even while the country fell apart seemed like a different place, vibrant, relaxed touristy. In Lybia it was Ghadfies home town that had nice infrastructure and a vibrant economy.

The key point: In a failed state or a successful one live among the politicians, business leaders, power brokers and within the majority. Buy a house or rent within the areas that the prominent cultural/ racial majorities live especially if you look and speak differently and as close to the people in power as possible. Even if you are a native and part of the majority do not live in areas too far removed from the countries power leaders/ brokers. When they start to vacate the areas follow them and move where they move.

Why Do Bad Things Happen to good state only?

Factors in State Failure: -

1)Civil war - a civil is basically war between groups of people in the same country or, less commonly, between two countries. The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region or to change government policies.

2) Foreign wars - If one country is fighting with the inhabitants of another, the country whose troops are not on their own territory are fighting a foreign war. This is not conceptually difficult. So, most wars have been foreign wars.

3) Economic Collapse: - A complete breakdown of a national, regional or territorial economy. An economic collapse is essentially a severe version of an economic depression, where an economy is in complete distress for months, years or possibly even decades. 

A total economic collapse is characterized by economic depression, civil unrest and highly increased poverty levels. Hyperinflation, stagflation and financial-market crashes can all be causes. Government intervention is usually necessary to bring an economy back from collapse, but can often be slow to remedy the problem.
The Great Depression in the United States is a prime example of an economic collapse. The 1929 stock market crash brought on a collapse that lasted for many years and saw high levels of poverty. Well-known economist John Maynard Keynes claimed this was from the total lack of government involvement in the economy or the financial markets.
4) Natural Disaster: - A natural disaster is a major adverse event resulting from natural processes of the Earth; examples include floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis, and other geologic processes.
5) Climate change: - Climate change, therefore, is a change in the typical or average weather of a region or city. This could be a change in a region's average annual rainfall, for example. Or it could be a change in a city's average temperature for a given month or season.

6) Regime type: - social group - people sharing some social relation

party, political party - an organization to gain political power; "in 1992 Perot tried to organize a third party atthe national level"

political entity, political unit - a unit with political responsibilities

autocracy, autarchy - a political system governed by a single individual

constitutionalism - a constitutional system of government (usually with a written constitution)

republic, democracy, commonwealth - a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them

diarchy, dyarchy - a form of government having two joint rulers

gerontocracy - a political system governed by old men

gynarchy, gynecocracy - a political system governed by a woman

hegemony - the dominance or leadership of one social group or nation over others; "the hegemony of a singlemember state is not incompatible with a genuine confederation"; "to say they have priority is not to say they havecomplete hegemony"; "the consolidation of the United States' hegemony over a new international economicsystem"

mobocracy, ochlocracy - a political system in which a mob is the source of control; government by themasses

oligarchy - a political system governed by a few people; "one of his cardinal convictions was that Britain wasnot run as a democracy but as an oligarchy"; "the big cities were notoriously in the hands of the oligarchy of local businessmen"

plutocracy - a political system governed by the wealthy people

republic - a form of government whose head of state is not a monarch; "the head of state in a republic isusually a president"

technocracy - a form of government in which scientists and technical experts are in control; "technocracywas described as that society in which those who govern justify themselves by appeal to technical experts whojustify themselves by appeal to scientific forms of knowledge"

theocracy - a political unit governed by a deity (or by officials thought to be divinely guided)

social organisation, social organization, social structure, social system, structure - the people in asociety considered as a system organized by a characteristic pattern of relationships; "the social organization ofEngland and America is very different"; "sociologists have studied the changing structure of the family."

7) Leadership: - Leadership is the ability of a company's management to set and achieve challenging goals, take swift and decisive action, outperform the competition, and inspire others to perform well. It is tough to place a value on leadership or other qualitative aspects of a company, compared to quantitative metrics that are commonly tracked and much easier to compare between companies. Individuals with strong leadership skills in the business world often rise to executive positions such as CEO, COO, CFO, president and chairman.

8) Colonialism: - the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically.

9) Disease: - a disorder of structure or function in a human, animal, or plant, especially one that produces specific symptoms or that affects a specific location and is not simply a direct result of physical injury.

10) Geography: - the study of the physical features of the earth and its atmosphere, and of human activity as it affects and is affected by these, including the distribution of populations and resources and political and economic activities.

Q1. What are failed states?

Ans. Failed state is a state whose political or economic system has become so weak that the government is no longer in control. In failed states the basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government no longer function properly. 

Q2. Difference between fragile state and Failed state?

Ans. According to Wikipedia, a fragile state is a low-income country characterized by weak state capacity and/or weak state legitimacy leaving citizens vulnerable to a range of shocks. Not only are they falling behind, but the gap with other developing countries is widening.

Whereas a state where the political and economic system is vanished is called failed states.

Q3. What causes a state to fail?

Ans. 1) Inability to provide public services.

        2) Loss of control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical     force therein.

3) Failing of states is also caused due to week central government.

Q4. Why did Haiti fail?

Ans. Haiti is part of a large Caribbean island called Hispaniola. The Dominican Republic is located to the east of Haiti and covers over half of the island.

Cause of the earthquake

Haiti lies right on the boundary of the Caribbean and North American plates. There was slippage along a conservative plate boundary that runs through Haiti.

On 12 January 2010, a magnitude 7 earthquake hit Haiti at 16:53 local time. The earthquake’s epicentre was 25 km west of Port-au-Prince, the capital. Most people, businesses and services were located in the capital.

Social impacts of the earthquake (effects on people)

·        3 million people affected.

·        Over 220,000 deaths.

·        300,000 injured.

·        1.3 million made homeless.

·        Several hospitals collapsed.

Economic impacts of the earthquake (effects on money and jobs)

·        30,000 commercial buildings collapsed.

·        Businesses destroyed.

·        Damage to the main clothing industry.

·        Airport and port damaged.

Many of the effects were immediate or primary, eg injuries from falling buildings. Some secondary effects didn’t happen until many months later, eg cholera outbreaks. The effects of this earthquake were particularly bad because of the following reasons:

·        There were very few earthquake-resistant buildings.

·        Buildings and other structures were poorly built.

·        The epicentre was near to the capital.

·        There were few resources to rescue or treat injured people.

Response to the earthquake

Haiti is a very poor country without the money and resources to redevelop. It is one of the least developed countries in the world with most Haitians living on $2 or less per day, about £1.30.

Because there were few earthquake-resistant buildings, the devastation was massive. Many buildings simply collapsed or were damaged beyond repair.

Primary responses

·        Neighbouring Dominican Republic provided emergency water and medical supplies as well as heavy machinery to help with search and rescue underneath the rubble, but most people were left to dig through the rubble by hand.

·        Emergency rescue teams arrived from a number of countries, eg Iceland.

·        Medical teams began treating the injured – temporary field hospitals were set up by organisations like the International Committee of the Red Cross.

·        GIS was used to provide satellite images and maps of the area, to assist aid organisations.

·        People from around the world watched the news from Haiti on TV and through social networks. Many pledged money over their mobile phones.

·        United Nations troops and police were sent to help distribute aid and keep order.

Secondary responses

·        Money was pledged by organisations and governments to assist in rebuilding, but only slow progress had been made after one year.

·        After one year, there were still 1,300 camps.

·        ‘Cash for work’ programs are paying Haitians to clear rubble.

·        Small farmers are being supported – so crops can be grown.

·        Schools are being rebuilt.

In 1961, Duvalier began violating the provisions of the 1957 constitution: first he replaced the bicameral legislature with a unicameral body. Then he called a new presidential election in which he was the sole candidate, though his term was to expire in 1963 and the constitution prohibited re-election. The election was flagrantly rigged; the official tally showed 1,320,748 “yes” votes for another term for Duvalier, with none opposed. Upon hearing the results, he proclaimed, “I accept the people’s will.... As a revolutionary, I have no right to disregard the will of the people".The New York Times commented, “Latin America has witnessed many fraudulent elections throughout its history but none has been more outrageous than the one which has just taken place in Haiti”. On 14 June 1964, a constitutional referendum made Duvalier “President for Life”, a title previously held by seven Haitian presidents. This referendum was also blatantly rigged; an implausible 99.9% voted in favour, which should have come as no surprise since all the ballots were premarked “yes”. The new document granted Duvalier—or Le Souverain, as he was called—absolute powers as well as the right to name his successor.

Q5. Why did Biafra fail?

Ans. In the history books and the accounts of witnesses it is well known that the Nigerian state was the aggressor in the war. Nigeria with the help of Great Britain, USSR and the Arab nations combined forces and fought dirty to defeat Biafra in 1970. With that said it is true that Biafra lost the War because of the formidable forces that allied themselves against the new nation. Yet, as it is with other complex things in life, if we looked close enough we will see other reasons why Biafrans failed in their justified first attempt at Self Determination and independence. As we go on we will find an uncomfortable lapse on the side of Igbo leaders. We will see that the War was lost not as a result of lack of courage or necessarily because of the seemingly insurmountable odds against Biafra. Biafrans had all the courage they needed because someone said that Biafrans did not just fight hard and well as heroes, he said that heroes fight like Biafrans. Biafrans so demonstrated courage and bravery against odds that today people equate Biafra with, apart from Freedom and Human Dignity; Heroism! Over the years Biafra has become synonymous with those who do heroic things. Today it is believed that whoever that is a Biafran is a hero and does things that befit heroes. But fighting and defending oneself and others as heroes do might sound impressive to some, especially when a vulnerable people come under the threat of total extermination. But when we consider it by a different standard we may be surprised to see that there may not be much in it to be proud of after all. Life force is among the most powerful forces in existence. In summer time, I have seen green grasses grow almost lush in cracks in the middle of busy roads where ten thousand vehicles run on every day. That is an excellent example of the power of the will to survive that is inherent in living things. For grass existence, to endure such harsh and impossible conditions and still survive and maybe thrive is commendable. But here we are talking about human beings with higher intellects than mere grasses. Nature endowed humans with the power of the intellect that enables them to not just exist but determine their existence. Humans have the capacity to, through the power of their mind, determine the quality of their existence here on Earth. This explains the saying; to whom much is given, much is expected.

For Igbo/Biafrans, it is not enough to fight and defend their right to life; they are expected to do more than that. When in the 1980s Nigerian Muslims recommenced the Islamic jihad on the Igbo in Kano and other cities in the North of Nigeria under the name Maitatsine; a variant of today’s Boko Haram, the Igbo after overcoming the initial shock of surprise attack, rose up and defended themselves. The Nigerian government just like today could not defend them. There were Igbo businessmen that had shops in the city that sold guns. They took a quick decision and emptied their stores by distributing the guns to fellow Igbo in Sabon Gari, Kano. Their attackers backed down when their Islamic beheading knives and daggers were matched with Igbo guns and ammunition. We can go on and list other such heroic moments when the Igbo came together and fought as one against a common enemy. Yet, as commendable as the action of self-defence is, for the Igbo to not just survive but become secure and prosperous, they must take it a step further from that basic level. They must shift their attention from fighting survival battles, and learn to come together and fight future battles before they begin.

All progressive societies around the world at one point in their history confronted this truth and recognized its significance to their success. There is no nation or a group of people that has made any significant progress by remaining at the level of the reactionary. The Igbo nation of today must come to the realization that if she must live successfully in this world, then she must learn to take the initiative in all areas of human endeavours. Igbo people must become offensive and take the fight to the enemy territory rather than lead a carefree existence and only fight back when attacked. The Igbo of this generation must position their nation to begin to take advantage of the works of past generations. Again that is the hallmark of all progressive societies; the ability to stand on the shoulders of past generations rather than let each new generation start from the scratch. It is only lower animals and plants that start afresh at every new season. Even then they have the advantage of their natural instinct and self-adjusting genetic coding capability to compensate for what they lost in their lack of the ability to process complex information and stimuli and make adjustments ahead of events

From available evidences Igbo leaders, politicians and intellectuals failed to fight the Biafra War ten, twenty years before it began. Such lapses on the side of the people in responsible positions in Igbo/Biafra Land are unacceptable and must never happen again. Contrary to Igbo people’s attitude about the country, the others in Nigeria never hid their negative feelings and intentions against the Igbo long before the 1966 Igbo pogrom/genocide that led up to the 1967 to 1970 war. For any careful observer it was not difficult to see how the Hausa, Fulani, Yoruba and others fought their own side of the war long before it began. They won the War not necessarily because of the combined forces of Britain, Soviet Union, Egypt and the Arab League of Nations. (Readers who care to pursue this point further are encouraged to listen to and read what the Ahmadu Bellos and others of Nigeria had to say about Igbo people ten, twenty years before the War). The present generation of Igbo people cannot afford to allow the repeat of that pre-War mistake. The leaders must learn to think and plan ahead while calling the bluff of the frowning faces of demagogues who flaunt before them the catch phrases; “you want to break up the country,” “you want to be rebels”. Igbo leaders, politicians and intellectuals must stop falling victims of the trap of wanting to please these Nigerian browbeaters by recoiling and apologizing for their very existence. They must stop being content with just living for the moment and “safe” so that no one accuses them of “trying to break up the country”. Nigeria should have broken up long before now, anyway. The union should never have been in the first place.

Anyone for that matter, but especially Igbo leaders in any capacity should be concerned about what verdict the next generation would pass on what they did or failed to do. If the present Igbo political leadership and intellectuals failed to see ten, twenty years before now the eventual breakup of Nigeria and emergence of an independent and sovereign Igbo or Biafra nation then something is wrong. By today they ought to have completed all preparations needed to run a successful Igbo/Biafra nation state, separate from Nigeria.

It is gross negligence and irresponsibility on the side of Igbo political, business and intellectual leaders of today to be so concerned about what their neighbours, “the frowning demagogues” will say or just being “conscious” of the feelings of the others who are working only for their own people’s benefits, and fail to work for the improvement of the fortunes of the present and future of Igbo people. We are not stretching the truth when we say that the current Islamic Boko Haram scourge against Igbo/Biafrans would never have happened if Igbo intellectuals and leaders had prepared for it ten to twenty years before it began. If this tide of death and destruction that is continuously unleashed on the Igbo in Nigeria must be turned away, then Igbo leaders and intellectuals must resolve to reverse this collective suicidal trend of only reacting after the heads of their people have been Islamic-ally cut off.

At this point there may still be those who are yet to be convinced and are still bent on finding “solutions” by finding ways through which Igbo people will continue to coexist with the rest of Nigerians in the same country; that is not a problem. It is the duty of the collective Igbo/Biafran leaders and thinkers to patiently work harder still to persuade such persons. No single Igbo or Biafran will be left behind. Igbo opinion leaders, politicians, intellectuals and business people must find a way to patiently educate and persuade every Igbo/Biafra sceptic on why their only option is living independently away from Nigeria. Let them show the people why One-Nigeria is not and can never be an option for Igbo people. Igbo leaders and intellectuals must find the way to convince the residual doubters that the fault or impossibility of a One-Nigerian state is too fundamental and practically irreconcilable. The fault line lies at the centre of the unbridgeable differences in the way of life of the various peoples that make up one-Nigeria. The cultural/religious diversities existing amongst the various ethnic peoples that comprise the Nigerian union are irreconcilable. It is the duty of Igbo leaders to convince the unbelievers among their people that culture and a people’s way of doing things is the very essence of the people’s being and cannot be compromised. Let them know that it is the reason why people everywhere fight to death to preserve the way they do things as distinct from those of others. It is the duty of Igbo leaders to convince their people on the fact that no matter the rhetoric on the contrary, no one will win the war for one-Nigeria. It is an ideological warfare, a cultural/religious browbeating. And to win is to begin by positioning the Igbo nation and showing the people how to fight the next Biafra and all other Igbo/Biafra wars before they begin.

Q6. Why did Weimer Republic fail?

Ans. Weimar Republic is an unofficial designation for the German between 1919 and 1933. The name derives from the city of Weimar, where its assembly first took place. The official name of the state was the Deutsches Reich, continuing the name from the pre-1918 German Empire.

 The Weimar Constitution. Germany’s post-war constitution has shouldered much of the blame for the political instability of the 1920s. The men who drafted the constitution in 1919 attempted to construct a political system not unlike that of the United States, incorporating democracy, federalism, checks and balances and protection of individual rights. Tellingly, they created an executive presidency who had considerable emergency powers, allowing him to bypass or override the elected Reichstag. Some historians suggest the Weimar president – with his seven year term and these hefty emergency powers – was not far removed from the former kaiser. Stalemates in the Reichstag meant the president’s emergency powers were frequently called into action, which only enhanced and worsened political divisions.

Weimar’s electoral system. The proportional voting system used in Weimar Germany was inherently democratic, in that it allocated seats in the Reichstag based on the share of votes each party received. The problem with proportional voting was that it prevented any realistic chance of a majority government, where one party could form government in its own right. Proportional voting filled the Reichstag with a number of smaller parties, many with membership and policies that were wholly sectional or regional. The scattered composition of the Reichstag meant that coalitions were required, and these coalitions were often fractious and fragile. The presence of so many parties and interests hindered debate in the chamber and made passing legislation difficult.

Q7. Why did the roman empire fail?

Ans. The invading army reached the outskirts of Rome, which had been left totally undefended. In 410 C.E., the Visigoths, led by Alaric, breached the walls of Rome and sacked the capital of the Roman Empire.
The Visigoths looted, burned, and pillaged their way through the city, leaving a wake of destruction wherever they went. The plundering continued for three days. For the first time in nearly a millennium, the city of Rome was in the hands of someone other than the Romans. This was the first time that the city of Rome was sacked, but by no means the last.

Constantine and the Rise of Christianity

One of the many factors that contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire was the rise of a new religion, Christianity. The Christian religion, which was monotheistic ran counter to the traditional Roman religion, which was polytheistic (many gods). At different times, the Romans persecuted the Christians because of their beliefs, which were popular among the poor.
In 313 C.E., Roman emperor Constantine the Great ended all persecution and declared toleration for Christianity. Later that century, Christianity became the official state religion of the Empire. This drastic change in policy spread this relatively new religion to every corner of the Empire.
By approving Christianity, the Roman state directly undermined its religious traditions. Finally, by this time, Romans considered their emperor a god. But the Christian belief in one god — who was not the emperor — weakened the authority and credibility of the emperor.
Constantine enacted another change that helped accelerate the fall of the Roman Empire. In 330 C.E., he split the empire into two parts: the western half centered in Rome and the eastern half centered in Constantinople, a city he named after himself.

Why Two Empires?

This map of the Roman Empire in 476 C.E. shows the various people who invaded and how they carved up the Empire.

In 324, Constantine's army defeated the forces of Licinius, the emperor of the east. Constantine became emperor of the entire empire and founded a new capital city in the eastern half at Byzantium. The city was his New Rome and was later named Constantinople (the "city of Constantine").

Constantinople was advantageously situated for two reasons. First, it was on a peninsula that could be fortified and defended easily. Further, because Constantinople was located on the frontiers of the empire, imperial armies could respond more easily to external attacks or threats.

Some scholars also believe that Constantine established a new city in order to provide a place for the young religion of Christianity to grow in an environment purer than that of corrupt Rome.

The western Empire spoke Latin and was Roman Catholic. The eastern Empire spoke Greek and worshipped under the Eastern Orthodox branch of the Christian church. Over time, the east thrived, while the west declined. In fact, after the western part of the Roman Empire fell, the eastern half continued to exist as the Byzantine Empire for hundreds of years. Therefore, the "fall of Rome" really refers only to the fall of the western half of the Empire.
Other fundamental problems contributed to the fall. In the economically ailing west, a decrease in agricultural production led to higher food prices. The western half of the empire had a large trade deficit with the eastern half. The west purchased luxury goods from the east but had nothing to offer in exchange. To make up for the lack of money, the government began producing more coins with less silver content. This led to inflation. Finally, piracy and attacks from Germanic tribes disrupted the flow of trade, especially in the west.
There were political and military difficulties, as well. It didn't help matters that political amateurs were in control of Rome in the years leading up to its fall. Army generals dominated the emperorship, and corruption was rampant. Over time, the military was transformed into a mercenary army with no real loyalty to Rome. As money grew tight, the government hired the cheaper and less reliable Germanic soldiers to fight in Roman armies. By the end, these armies were defending Rome against their fellow Germanic tribesmen. Under these circumstances, the sack of Rome came as no surprise.

Goth Rockers

Wave after wave of Germanic barbarian tribes swept through the Roman Empire. Groups such as the Visigoths, Vandals, Angles, Saxons, Franks, Ostrogoths, and Lombards took turns ravaging the Empire, eventually carving out areas in which to settle down. The Angles and Saxons populated the British Isles, and the Franks ended up in France.
In 476 C.E. Romulus, the last of the Roman emperors in the west, was overthrown by the Germanic leader Odoacer, who became the first Barbarian to rule in Rome. The order that the Roman Empire had brought to western Europe for 1000 years was no more.

Q8. Why did Somalia fail?

Ans. Before becoming a failed state Somalia was ruled by dictator who kept Somalis out political participation.

Some inexperienced, uneducated angry people created opposition groups to overthrow that regime, the regime didn't gave up before the country and its infrastructure was ruined.

Those opposition leaders didn't plan what to do after they overthrow the regime, and we know "if you don't have plan, your plan is to fail".

The regime showed people how to humiliate people, and they practiced the same to each other after the regime left, many people were so angry that they couldn't even say a word, some thought of worse.

When pressure is released their is release of energy be positive or negative, the failure of Somalia was caused by that anger, that pressure, and some evil groups took advantage of the anger and tried to destroy their opposite counterparts.

The people who overthrow the dictator couldn't handle the situation very well because they didn't have plans ahead of their victory.

Clans whose people were suffering from the luck of justice tried to revenge from those who they suspect to have relations with the clan of the former president Siyad Barre.

People thought that public infrastructure belonged to the president's family, and those who were leading these people didn't tell them to stop looting the nation's belongings.

That's the way things started as the first failure, then came the international community's side.

The United Nations sent troops to restore peace, and angry warlord -Mohamed Farah Aidid - thought those troops were helping his opposition - Ali Mahdi Mohamed - and called for "Jihad" against the peacekeepers.

Some people still laugh at you if you call that fight against the peacekeepers was "Jihad", but he just said it was Jihad because he wanted the fund from Arab Countries who wanted this kind of politics and thought the failure of Somalia will benefit them.

Anyway, those peacekeepers were forced to withdraw without any hope for the Somalis, and they left without leaving the peace they were keeping, and the civilians were left with those greedy warlords that were less civilized than apes - if that's too much I apologize, but the way they ruled their territories is much of what I describe them.

A group of Islamic scholars tried to create a way of jurisdiction to take complaints of people who are willing to come and settle their issues peacefully, and this system was called "Islamic Courts".

Islamic Courts got a lot of reputation and some kind of power, and they used that power to fight against the warlords, and they succeeded.

Some foreign Islamist groups took advantage of this and thought they have got a very good hide, to conceal their particular agendas in this system.

They declared war against Ethiopia, and they were chased into the woods afterwards, and started gorilla fight against the bases of Ethiopian troops inside Somalia.

That time Islamist groups had many supporters because the majority of the population disliked the invasion of Ethiopian to Somalia's capital Mogadishu, because of previous historic events.

When Ethiopian troops left the country, the Islamist groups didn't stop their fight and reinforced their attacks against the African Union Mission in Somalia, to force those peacekeepers to leave the country as the United Nations' peacekeepers did in early 1990s.

But the AMISOM didn't give up until today, and they helped the country to its feet again.

The hope of Somali people is in its strongest state now, and people gave up supporting greedy factions (warlords, Islamist groups, and clan fighters) that have vague agendas and have no mercy for the country and its citizens.

Q9. How did Soviet Union fail?

Ans. Lack of Economic Incentives: The state-planned economic system did not provide sufficient incentives to encourage innovation and ambitious productivity.

Excessive Military Focus: The USSR was overly-focused on military build-up, neglecting domestic troubles that would play a major role in bringing down the USSR. This was largely due to the perceived need to keep pace with the massive U.S. military build-up.

Reduced Motivation of Fear: Friendlier relations with the U.S. in the 70s, 80s meant that the general public was no longer completely motivated to strengthen itself against the American threat.

Decentralization: When the Soviet Union did allow individual republics more autonomy, tax revenues were withheld.

Stagnating Economy: The Soviet Union had grown to a size large enough to the point where it became cumbersome to continue state planning. The massive and intricate Soviet economy became too large to manage by state planners, who were unwilling to enable more autonomy at mid-managerial level to remain responsive down to a localized level. This resulted in failed economic policies (failure to respond timely to continuous changes), while thwarting innovation. Managers commonly fudged numbers to show that quotas and goals were being met.

Total Fail? Tools for Measurement

Gross Domestic Product: - The gross domestic product tells us about the health of the country’s economic. Gross domestic product (GDP) is the monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period. Though GDP is usually calculated on an annual basis, it can be calculated on a quarterly basis as well. GDP includes all private and public consumption, government outlays, investments and exports minus imports that occur within a defined territory. Put simply, GDP is a broad measurement of a nation’s overall economic activity. There are three primarily methods by which GDP can be determined. These three approaches are often termed the expenditure approach, the output (or production) approach, and the income approach. The expenditure approach measures the total sum of all products used in developing a finished product for sale. 

Human Development Index: - The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income per capita indicators, which are used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. The HDI was developed by the Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haqworking alongside Indian economist Amartya Sen, often framed in terms of whether people are able to "be" and "do" desirable things in their life, and was published by the United Nations Development Programme. A country scores higher HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, the GDP per capita is higher, the fertility rate is lower, and the inflation rate is lower. The HDI (Human Development Index) is a way to measure well-being within a country. This is mainly a social measurement because it takes into consideration education, which is adult literacy rate and years of schooling, health care which is judged by life expectancy and finally the economic factor of GDP.

The Social Progress Index: - The Social Progress Index (SPI), developed by the Social Progress Imperative, measures the extent to which countries provide for the social and environmental needs of their citizens. Fifty-two indicators in the areas of basic human needs, foundations of well-being, and opportunity show relative performance in order to elevate the quality of discussion on national priorities and to guide social investment decisions. he primary goal of the Social Progress Index is to provide a rigorous tool to benchmark progress and stimulate progress within countries. Social progress depends on the policy choices, investments, and implementation capabilities of multiple stakeholders—government, civil society, and business. By informing and motivating those stakeholders to work together and develop a more holistic approach to development, we are confident that social progress will accelerate.

Two key features of the Social Progress Index are

1.    The complete exclusion of economic variables and

2.    The use of outcome measures rather than inputs

Legatum Prosperity Index: - The Legatum Prosperity Index is an annual ranking of 142 countries, developed by the Legatum Institute, a division of the private investment firm Legatum. The ranking is based on a variety of factors including wealth, economic growth, education, health, personal well-being, and quality of life. In the 2015 rankings, Norway tops the list followed by Switzerland and Denmark. Twenty-seven of the top 30 countries are democracies. The Director of the Prosperity Index is the Danish economist Alexandra Mousavizadeh. The Prosperity Index is reviewed and critiqued by an advisory panel of academics and scholars representing a range of disciplines and includes: Prof Tim Besley(London School of Economics); Dr. Daniel Drezner (Tufts University); Dr. Carol Graham (Brookings Institution); Dr. Edmund Malesky (University of California, San Diego); Dr. Ann Owen (Hamilton College). It is funded by the private investment firm Legatum, which includes Legatum Capital, a portfolio investment fund manager; Legatum Ventures a double bottom line investment fund, the Legatum Foundation, a philanthropic organisation; and the Legatum Center for Development And Entrepreneurship at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a collaboration with MIT that funds graduate student entrepreneurs from developing markets.

Freedom House: - Freedom House is an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom in the world. Freedom is possible only in democratic political systems in which the governments are accountable to their own people; the rule of law prevails; and freedoms of expression, association, and belief, as well as respect for the rights of minorities and women, are guaranteed. The organisation's annual Freedom in the World report, which assesses each country's degree of political freedoms and civil liberties, is frequently cited by political scientists, journalists, and policymakers. Freedom of the Press and Freedom of the Net, which monitor censorship, intimidation and violence against journalists, and public access to information, are among its other signature reports. The Freedom on the Net reports provide analytical reports and numerical ratings regarding the state of Internet freedom for countries worldwide. The countries surveyed represent a sample with a broad range of geographical diversity and levels of economic development, as well as varying levels of political and media freedom. 

Failed States Index: - The Failed States Index (FSI) is an annual report by The Fund for Peace (FfP) that measures the pressures on states, which if not addressed or managed can lead to internal conflict or instability. The FSI is intended to help policymakers, analysts, and others, such as those making development investment decisions, to better understand the underlying causes of state weakness, failure, and internal conflict, as well as areas that need to be addressed to prevent such problems. The FSI is not a forecasting tool. It does not imply that there will be conflict within a particular country within a particular time. It does not suggest that all the indicators are equally important in every country for increasing conflict risk. Rather, it is a tool that provides an understanding of the deeper context in which governments and states operate. The list aims to assess states' vulnerability to conflict or collapse, ranking all sovereign states with membership in the United Nations where there is enough data available for analysis. Taiwan, the Palestinian Territories, Northern Cyprus, Kosovo and Western Sahara are not ranked, despite being recognized as sovereign by one or more other nations.

Polity IV: - http://www3.nd.edu/~mcoppedg/crd/PolityIVUsersManualv2002.pdf

Major Links

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/06/18/10-reasons-countries-fall-apart/

http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/socialcontract/section3.rhtml

http://www.ushistory.org/civ/6f.asp

Additional Terms to Learn (Examples)

Weak state: - Weak states are not intrinsically weak, or weak because
of geography or colonialism; they are weak because they supply lesser or less-than-adequate quantities of political goods, or poorer-quality political goods, or both. Weak states range from Fiji, with its many coups but its well-educated and prosperous population, westward through the fractious Solomon Islands and the violently corrupt Papua New Guinea to Laos, Bangladesh, many of the Central
Asian polities, Lebanon, many of the Balkan polities, and across the Atlantic to much of Central America (barring Costa Rica) and parts of South America (Ecuador, Paraguay), or south to Africa, where nearly all of the sub-Saharan countries are
classified as weak. Weak States contain ethnic, religious, linguistic, or other tensions that limit or decrease its ability to deliver political goods. These conflicts are on the edge of exploding into open conflict. GDP per capita has fallen or falling. Interestingly, the privatization of education and health care is a sign of state weakness. Corruption is common. The rule of law is weakly applied. Despots rule. Examples: Iraq (under Saddam), Belarus, N. Korea, and Libya.

Failed States provide very little political goods. The forfeit the distribution of political goods to warlords or non-state actors (i.e. Hamas). Security is non-existent in all but the major cities (if that). The economic infrastructure has failed, the health care system is in decline, and the educational system is in shambles. GDP per capita is in a precipitous decline, inflation soars, corruption flourishes, and food shortages are frequent. Failed states often have a very rich minority that take advantage of the failed system. Examples: Nepal, Congo, Liberia, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

Collapsed States are failed states with a complete vacuum of authority (rare). They are black holes in regards to all indicators of health. Collapsed states can become failed states with intervention. Historical examples: Lebanon, Tajikistan, and Sierra Leone.

catastrophic success:- An event or product that attracts so much interest and attention that it exceeds its own sustaining capacity, resulting in the inability of the organization to respond to demand. the new product was such a hit that the store ran out, resulting in angry crowds destroying the mall. it was a catastrophic success for the company.

A civil society is comprised of groups or organizations working in the interest of the citizens but operating outside of the governmental and for-profit sectors. Organizations and institutions that make up civil society include labour unions, non-profit organizations, churches, and other service agencies that provide an important service to society but generally ask for very little in return. Civil society is sometimes referred to as the civil sector, a term that is used to differentiate it from other sectors that comprise a functioning society. For example, the United States is made up of three sectors: the public sector, which is the government and its branches; the private sector, which includes businesses and corporations; and the civil sector, which includes the organizations that act in the public's interest but are not motivated by profit or government.

The word regime refers to a set of conditions, most often of a political nature, such as a government. A wide variety of regime types exist. For example, the United Kingdom has a constitutional monarchy, in which Queen Elizabeth holds a limited amount of power. Theoretically, the queen is the English head of state, but over time the English monarchy has become largely ceremonial. Real governmental power now rests with the Parliament, the legislative, law making body. In contrast, the Third Reich of World War II was a totalitarian dictatorship. Adolf Hitler controlled the government and the citizens of Nazi Germany.

Institution:an organization, establishment, foundation, society, or the like, devoted to the promotion of a particular cause or program, especiallyone of a public, or educational. The term "institution" commonly applies to both informal institutions such as customs or behaviour pattern important to a society, and to particular formal institutions created by entities such as the government and public services. Primary or meta-institutions are institutions such as the family that are broad enough to encompass other institutions. As structures and mechanisms of social order, institutions are a principal object of study in social sciences such as political science, anthropology, economics, and sociology.

A non-governmental organization (NGO) is a not-for-profit organization that is independent from states and international governmental organizations. They are usually funded by donations but some avoid formal funding altogether and are run primarily by volunteers. NGOs are highly diverse groups of organizations engaged in a wide range of activities, and take different forms in different parts of the world. Some may have charitable status, while others may be registered for tax exemption based on recognition of social purposes. Others may be fronts for political, religious, or other interests. The number of NGOs in the United States is estimated at 1.5 million. Russia has 277,000 NGOs. India is estimated to have had around 2 million NGOs in 2009, just over one NGO per 600 Indians, and many times the number of primary schools and primary health centres in India.

The Peacebuilding Commission was established in December 2005 by the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council acting concurrently. It is an inter-governmental advisory body, in order to provide recommendations in post-conflict peace building, recovery, reconstruction and development, as well as serve as a coordination and exchange of experiences forum on issues regarding peacebuilding. The Commission is composed of 31 member states, which gather in two main fora: An Organizational Committee, and specific Configurations, one for each country that currently is part of the PBC’s agenda.

http://graduateinstitute.ch/files/live/sites/iheid/files/shared/iheid/800/biersteker/UNPBC_Disarmament_Forumpdf-art2630%255B1%255D.pdf

Democratization is the transition to a more democratic political regime. It may be the transition from an authoritarian regime to a full democracy, a transition from an authoritarian political system to a semi-democracy or transition from a semi-authoritarian political system to a democratic political system. The outcome may be consolidated (as it was for example in the United Kingdom) or democratization may face frequent reversals (as it has faced for example in Argentina). Different patterns of democratization are often used to explain other political phenomena, such as whether a country goes to a war or whether its economy grows. Democratization itself is influenced by various factors, including economic development, history, and civil society. The ideal result from democratization is to ensure that the people have the right to vote and have a voice in their political system.

A great many things, including economics, culture, and history, have been cited as impacting on the process. Some of the more frequently mentioned factors are:

Foreign trade. A 2016 study found that preferential trade agreements "encourage the democratization of a country, in particular if the PTA partners are themselves democracies."

International cooperation. A 2002 study found that membership in international organizations "is correlated with transitions to democracy during the period from 1950 to 1992."

Democracy protests. Research indicates that democracy protests are associated with democratization. A 2016 study found that about a quarter of all cases of democracy protests between 1989-2011 lead to democratization.

Threat of conflict. Research suggests that the threat of civil conflict encourages regimes to make democratic concessions. A 2016 study found that drought-induced riots in Sub-Saharan Africa lead regimes, fearing conflict, to make democratic concessions.

Dictatorship type. Research suggests that some forms of dictatorships are more likely to democratize than others. Military dictatorships are more likely to transition to democracy than non-military dictatorships.

http://www.un.org/fr/events/democracyday/pdf/An_agenda_for_democratization.pdf

Sovereignty is the quality or state of being sovereign, or of having supreme power of authority.

Social contract -  The agreement with which a person enters into civil society. The contract essentially binds people into a community that exists for mutual preservation. In entering into civil society, people sacrifice the physical freedom of being able to do whatever they please, but they gain the civil freedom of being able to think and act rationally and morally. Rousseau believes that only by entering into the social contract can we become fully human.

Authoritarianism is a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)

Development Agencies - In the United Kingdom regional development agencies (RDAs) were nine non-departmental public bodies established for the purpose of development, primarily economic, of England's Government Office regions between 1998 and 2000. There was one RDA for each of the NUTS level 1 regions of England.

Post – Conflict compacts - https://pesd.princeton.edu/?q=node/260

Selected Readings & Speeches

·        The Coming Anarchy – Robert Kaplan -- The Coming Anarchy: How scarcity, crime, overpopulation, tribalism, and disease are rapidly destroying the social fabric of our planet is an influential article written by journalist Robert D. Kaplan, which was first published in the February 1994 edition of The Atlantic Monthly. It is considered to be one of the fundamental theses on the state of current world affairs in the post-Cold War era, and is ranked on the same level of doctrinal importance as Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations and Francis Fukuyama's The End of History and the Last Man theses. U.S. President Bill Clinton reportedly recommended the article to White House staff. It has also been criticized as a Malthusian reading of the world, for blaming the situation on its victims and for overlooking alleged political and economical causes such as neoliberal policy.  

Summary: - The end of the Cold War in the late 1980’s produced a wave of optimism throughout most of the Western world. Despite the fierce regional conflicts that scarred the 1990’s, that optimism seemed to endure in the American public consciousness. The way forward, it appeared, was clear: The worldwide growth of democracy and free trade would ensure peace and prosperity for all; democratic capitalism had proved itself to be the best way for human societies, on the cusp of the twenty-first century, to organize themselves.

Put like this, the naïveté and complacency of such notions are easily apparent. They demonstrate the human tendency to see one’s own way as the only way and to underestimate the lessons of history. Robert D. Kaplan, however, is determined to blow a hole in the current optimism about the direction of global affairs in the twenty-first century. He is like the biblical Jeremiah pointing grimly to realities that most people are either unaware of or simply choose not to think about.

All but one of the nine essays in this volume were published in magazines between 1994 and 1998. The first and longest essay, which supplies the provocative title of the volume, was published in The Atlantic Monthly, where it attracted considerable comment.

Kaplan takes as his focus the disintegrating social and political conditions in West Africa, including such nations as Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast, and suggests they are the way of the future for most of the planet:

Disease, overpopulation, unprovoked crime, scarcity of resources, refugee migrations, the increasing erosion of nation-states and international borders, and the empowerment of private armies, security firms, and international drug cartels are now most tellingly demonstrated through a West African prism.

Kaplan points out that Sierra Leone is a nation-state in which the government no longer controls much of its own territory (which has fallen back into the hands of tribal chieftains). Diseases such as malaria are rampant because deforestation has led to soil erosion and flooding and hence more mosquitoes which carry the disease. AIDS spreads unchecked, and war is a constant reality. Kaplan’s conclusion is that West Africa is slipping back to conditions that prevailed in the nineteenth century, in which contact with the outside world was limited to a few disease-ridden coastal trading posts, while the vast interior remained impenetrable. Kaplan sees this as a map of the future because the trend everywhere is toward the weakening of the nation-state, and this is tied in with critical levels of environmental and demographic stress. According to this argument, the world is rapidly heading back to a situation that resembles medieval Europe before the rise of the nation-state.

Kaplan identifies four areas through which the future of the planet can be glimpsed. The first is environmental scarcity, which he claims will become the preeminent national security issue of the early twenty-first century. He cites elements such as soaring population growth (over the next fifty years, world population will rise from 5.5 billion to 9 billion); spreading disease; deforestation leading to soil erosion; water depletion (including in the southwestern United States); air pollution; and possibly rising sea levels in places such as the Nile Delta and Bangladesh, which will produce mass migrations and result in social conflict.

As a result of such environmental pressures, only a small minority of the world’s population will live in the security of cities and suburbs where the environment has been mastered. The rest will be involved in a fight for survival. Kaplan quotes the scholar Thomas Fraser Homer-Dixon, who gives a vivid if disturbing picture of this planetary future:

Think of a stretch limo in the potholed streets of New York City, where homeless beggars live. Inside the limo are the air-conditioned postindustrial regions of North America, Europe, the emerging Pacific Rim, and a few other isolated places, with their trade summitry and computer-information highways. Outside is the rest of mankind, going in a completely different direction.

Environmental crises will aggravate cultural and racial clashes. These will replace the former bases of conflict, which were between competing nation-states and competing ideologies. Citing Samuel P. Huntington of Harvard’s Olin Institute for Strategic Studies, Kaplan points to emerging conflicts between Hindu, Muslim, Slavic Orthodox, Western, Japanese, Confucian, and Latin American cultures, which are likely to become more intense and socially disruptive over the next few decades. These clashes will be felt even in the United States, Kaplan points out, where African Americans already “find themselves besieged by an influx of competing Latinos.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1994/02/the-coming-anarchy/304670/

·       
The Social Contract (Book 1, Chapter 6, Pages 6-7) – Jean-Jacques Rousseau

·        The Prince, Chapters 5 & 17 – Machiavelli

CHAPTER V

Concerning The Way to Govern Cities Or Principalities Which Lived Under Their Own Laws Before They Were Annexed

Summary: - How to govern cities and states that were previously self-governing

• Now let's talk about conquering places used to governing themselves, like republics or democracies.
• There are three ways to do this: (1) burn it all down, (2) go live there, and (3) basically leave them alone but make them pay taxes and create a small government.
• Got it? Now forget the last two, because those aren't going to work. You need to destroy these places.
• Republics are too feisty, and they don't seem to like the idea of being conquered by kings, oddly enough. If you don't burn it all down, they'll come back to bite you when you least expect it, even 100 years later.

FULL CHAPTER -

WHENEVER those states which have been acquired as stated have been accustomed to live under their own laws and in freedom, there are three courses for those who wish to hold them: the first is to ruin them, the next is to reside there in person, the third is to permit them to live under their own laws, drawing a tribute, and establishing within it an oligarchy which will keep it friendly to you. Because such a government, being created by the prince, knows that it cannot stand without his friendship and interest, and does its utmost to support him; and therefore he who would keep a city accustomed to freedom will hold it more easily by the means of its own citizens than in any other way.

There are, for example, the Spartans and the Romans. The Spartans held Athens and Thebes, establishing there an oligarchy, nevertheless they lost them. The Romans, in order to hold Capua, Carthage, and Numantia, dismantled them, and did not lose them. They wished to hold Greece as the Spartans held it, making it free and permitting its laws, and did not succeed. So to hold it they were compelled to dismantle many cities in the country, for in truth there is no safe way to retain them otherwise than by ruining them. And he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed by it, for in rebellion it has always the watch-word of liberty and its ancient privileges as a rallying point, which neither time nor benefits will ever cause it to forget. And whatever you may do or provide against, they never forget that name or their privileges unless they are disunited or dispersed but at every chance they immediately rally to them, as Pisa after the hundred years she had been held in bondage by the Florentines.

But when cities or countries are accustomed to live under a prince, and his family is exterminated, they, being on the one hand accustomed to obey and on the other hand not having the old prince, cannot agree in making one from amongst themselves, and they do not know how to govern themselves. For this reason, they are very slow to take up arms, and a prince can gain them to himself and secure them much more easily. But in republics there is more vitality, greater hatred, and more desire for vengeance, which will never permit them to allow the memory of their former liberty to rest; so that the safest way is to destroy them or to reside there.

CHAPTER XVII

Concerning Cruelty and Clemency, And Whether It Is Better to Be Loved Than Feared

Summary: - Cruelty and compassion. Whether it is better to be feared or loved

• So generosity was a no-go. And compassion? Well, you guessed it: compassion isn't really conducive to the sort of warlike ruler Machiavelli advocates and might actually destroy a nation.
• Just like it's better to be a little mean than nice for the sake of the nation, it's better to be feared than loved because people seem to react better to punishment than love.
• Again, Machiavelli keeps telling us not to become hated, which is easy enough if you lay off people's families and lands.
• In Machiavelli's example section, he tells us how Hannibal was super awesome because he was insanely cruel. We mean, there's a reason why that scary dude from Silence of the Lambs was named Hannibal.
• Guess who almost wasn't awesome? This guy called Scipio who was all mushy touchy feely and didn't want to punish people. Lucky for him, other people covered up his namby-pamby nature. But everyone is not so lucky.
• Anyway, in the end, since the people choose if they like you or not, don't worry about it. Just make sure that they don't hate you.

FULL CHAPTER -

COMING now to the other qualities mentioned above, I say that every prince ought to desire to be considered clement and not cruel. Nevertheless, he ought to take care not to misuse this clemency. Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; notwithstanding, his cruelty reconciled the Romagna, unified it, and restored it to peace and loyalty. And if this be rightly considered, he will be seen to have been much more merciful than the Florentine people, who, to avoid a reputation for cruelty, permitted Pistoia to be destroyed. Therefore, a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for these are wont to injure the whole people, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only.

And of all princes, it is impossible for the new prince to avoid the imputation of cruelty, owing to new states being full of dangers. Hence Virgil, through the mouth of Dido, excuses the inhumanity of her reign owing to its being new, saying:

Res dura, et regni novitas me talia cogunt
Moliri, et late fines custode tueri. ¹

Nevertheless, he ought to be slow to believe and to act, nor should he himself show fear, but proceed in a temperate manner with prudence and humanity, so that too much confidence may not make him incautious and too much distrust renders him intolerable.

Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.

·        Leviathan, Chapter 13 – Thomas Hobbes

https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hobbes/thomas/h68l/chapter13.html

·        “Why Do Societies Collapse?” – Jared Diamond

·        “How to Rebuild a Broken State” – Ashraf Ghani   

“New Rules for Rebuilding a Broken Nation” – Paul Collier

Presenter: Paul Collier is an economist, a professor at Oxford University and the author of The Bottom Billion, a book about creating opportunities for the world’s most impoverished people.  His work focuses on the poorest countries, and what can be done to develop their economies.

Key Points – The talk discusses post-conflict recovery.  Collier talks about the system currently in place after a conflict has occurred and the problems with it   He then proposes a new solution that he thinks would make the country less likely to fall back into civil war.

Interesting Stat – 40% of all post-conflict situations are back in conflict within a decade (and account for half of all civil war)

Summary

§  3 principles traditionally used (not successful) … but there is no quick fix.

§  The politics matter most (build a new politics first)

§  It’s only dangerous for a short time (only peacekeeping for a short time)

§  Have an election for an accountable government (so peacekeepers can leave)

§  Election produces a winner and a loser 

§  Easier to do politics later (after security and economic development) – people think economy is a zero sum game (because it was during war) so needs to shift to cooperation and prosperity

§  New steps that might work

§  Recognize interdependence of 3 actors (long-term)

§  Security council (provides peacekeepers) – it does work but needs to be long term (a decade)

§  Donors – Provide post-conflict aid (usually tapers off after a few years, but process is much slower than that) – again, a decade

§  Post-conflict government – economic reform and inclusion

§  The United Nations Peace Building Commissioner should broker the contracts in these situations (mutual commitments)

§  Economic recovery is the true exit strategy

§  Can’t just look at all needs (because everything is needed but money is tight)

§  Three things are critical (jobs, health and clean government)

§  Jobs for young men are important (they need something to do – so construction is perfect because it produces jobs and fixes the infrastructure – and doesn’t worry as much about export and international companies)

§  However, it should not be jobs in the civil sector, it should be private companies (expand construction sector) – need skills, access to land, new local firms, etc.

§  Improve basic social services (rebuild an effective state – but how do we do that?) – can’t just give money to government or NGOs

§  Policy should stay with the ministry, delivery should be by anything that works (churches, NGOs, community groups, etc.)

§  Public agency should funnel the money appropriately 

§  NGOs become part of the local government system (makes everyone accountable – competing for resources)

§  Services are co-branded with the new government (some trust is restored)

§  Clean government (follow the money)

§  Needs donor money for life-support in core budget (but no systems with integrity to make sure it’s well spent)

§  We empower crooks otherwise

§  Provide a lot of scrutiny and technical assistance (that follows the money – “accountants without borders”)

§  Goal – After 10 years:

§  focus on construction sector = jobs + security (people are happy because they have jobs) + improved infrastructure

§  Focus on social services = basic services rescued and working + give ordinary people a sense of a useful government + squeeze out political crooks (by using honest accounting)

§  Politics of plunder —> politics of hope

Final Thoughts – I think that this talk is a really interesting one. I always find that governments try to rush into an election right after a war, and it always seems like such a bad idea. You can’t have an election and say there is now a great democracy, and it often causes more problems than it solves. I like his idea of jump-starting the economy first, and I definitely think that the presence of peacekeepers over the long term would be ideal. I hope that in at least one case this idea is implemented, and I feel that it might just work better than the prevailing strategies in place now. Obviously the problems are more complex then they seem in a short talk, but I think the priorities are definitely in order.

About these ads

Additional Questions & Cases to Discuss (Examples)

·        Study the Fund for Peace's "Fragile States Index" (formerly the "Failed State Index"). Why do you think the index has been renamed? Are its metrics appropriate? Where does your country fall in their rankings – and do the rankings of any states surprise you?

Ans. When the Failed States Index (FSI) was first published in 2005, the use of the term ‘”failed state” was designed to highlight and draw attention to the very real risk that people faced if their state failed to address the factors and conditions that we were measuring. While we all agreed that the term “failed state” was fraught with issues, mainly that we were not calling any country on the list failed, we knew it would likely get attention. And it did. Despite this, almost every year, we would revisit the name and think about whether we could change it finally. We had the attention and we knew people used the Index and waited eagerly for its release. Surely they would seek it out even if we changed the name? Yet the argument remained that if we wanted to get attention for all people who live in harsh conditions so that the international community, national governments, and local actors could work to improve those conditions, we had to keep people’s attention.

In the last few years, however, we found that we ended up having more conversations about terminology than substance. The name also was being cleverly used by politicians in conflict-affected countries to try to dismiss the Index altogether as well as their responsibility to address the issues that it highlighted. Our primary purpose in creating the Index is to enable people to use it as a platform to discuss what is happening in their own countries. We also create it to encourage government responsibility, set priorities, and identify resources to face challenges. We didn’t publish it every year to discuss what defined a “failed state;” we created it every year to help prevent the conditions that led to them. Overall our goal has always been to help improve human security in countries all over the world. So while the term certainly gained people’s attention, it also became a distraction from the point of the Index, which is to encourage discussions that support an increase in human security and improved livelihoods.

Some of the issues highlighted in the Index are not easy topics to discuss. Some governments have failed their people catastrophically and some have done it intentionally and violently. Sometimes countries with very strong governments are the most repressive. Often, those are governments who choose to not have a social contract with the whole of their population and continue to choose their own interests, or the interests of a few, over the good of all. It is critical to call attention to those governments and the way they operate.

Other governments have weakness and pressures that, if they work with their populations, and with assistance from the international community, they can improve. They can fight and reduce corruption of all kinds. They can improve the delivery of public services and infrastructure. They can improve their tax systems and investment climates. They can investigate and prosecute human rights abuses. They can provide adequate training and civilian control of security forces so abuses are prevented. But they cannot do all this immediately and alone. Government is responsible to its people and for all of the issues just mentioned, but it needs a responsible and free media, a strong civil society, and an active business sector to help with all of this heavy lifting.

Over the last year, we had serious discussions with lots of people over the way the name was negatively impacting our ability to get the right kind of attention for the FSI. We work closely with governments in countries struggling under harsh conditions and lots of pressures, and it is not our intention to shame them. We want to be a partner for those governments who face some of the most pressures and help alleviate the conditions that can lead to violent conflict.

So, we are changing the name of the Index to make sure we can be a part of addressing those challenges and that the Index can be used, as one tool of many, to guide the development of priorities and measure improvements and unfortunately also when things get worse.