The announcement of the week long vote held in January drew cheers from a crowd of thousands that gathered in Juba. Southern Sudan will now be able to declare independence in July, though border demarcation, oil rights and status of the contested region of Abyei still have to be negotiated. With its independence the count of the number of countries is surely going to increase by one, but can we answer to what??
What is the present count?? What makes a geographical region a country?? What effect can the count have on the planet we live on?? What does the secession of a region guarantees to its citizens?? And many more are the questions which are extremely difficult to be answered.
Apply online for visa-free entry to the United States and the Department for Homeland Security offers 251 choices for “country where you live”. The wide but rum selection includes Bouvet Island, an uninhabitable icy knoll belonging to Norway in the South Atlantic; South Yemen (which stopped being a state in 1990); and the “Neutral Zone”—a diamond-shaped bit of desert between Saudi Arabia and Iraq that vanished after the 1991 Gulf war. That is the trouble with such lists. Places that are not real states at all end up on them. And places that approximate a bit more closely to countries (at least in their own eyes) may be absent. America’s list, for example, excludes Abkhazia and South Ossetia, self-proclaimed states that broke away from Georgia with Russian backing. Just three other countries—Nicaragua, Venezuela and the islet of Nauru—recognise those breakaway statelets as independent.
Private-sector lists are just as odd as those compiled by governments. Hotmail offers 242 “countries/territories” from which you can register an e-mail account. Web-savvy penguins may be pleased that Bouvet Island is on the list. But human beings in Kosovo (recognised by 65 states) and Western Sahara (more than 80) will search in vain for their homeland.
Any attempt to find a clear definition of a country soon runs into a thicket of exceptions and anomalies. Diplomatic recognition is clearly not much guide to real life. In the early years of the cold war most countries recognised the Chinese regime in Taiwan (“Free China”) while the mainland communists (“Red China”) were isolated. Now the absurdity is the other way round. The number of countries with formal diplomatic ties to Taiwan has shrivelled to just 23—mostly small, cash-strapped islands. Yet Taiwan is not just a country, but a rather important one. Under mainland-pleasing names such as “Chinese Taipei” it is a member of the Asian Development Bank and the World Trade Organisation, and an observer at some OECD panels. It has nearly 100 “trade offices” around the world.
If diplomatic recognition is not the main thing that marks out a country, what does? Is it the ability to issue passports that are of some use to the holder, or simply actual control of a stretch of land? Again, the picture is cloudy. Legitimacy, physical control and the capacity to issue documents that other people accept don’t always coincide. For example, lots of countries that do not recognise Kosovo accept travellers bearing its passports. The Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a do-gooding outfit with crusader roots, issues not only passports but postage stamps (and has diplomatic relations with over 100 countries). Its territory is just two nice buildings in Rome. Vatican City, an enclave of just 44 hectares in the middle of Italy’s capital, is only a little bigger—but it very much sees itself as a sovereign state . Yet the Vatican’s diplomats serve the papacy—the Holy See—rather than the state where it is based. And the See, not the statelet, is an observer at the United Nations.
In reality, UN membership is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for functioning statehood. Being outside the UN means that Kosovo is still waiting for its own internet domain name, phone prefix and chance to play international football. But Taiwan, recognised by even fewer countries, manages to have all three.
Max Weber, defined statehood as “the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence”. That may be a practical approach but it doesn’t end the confusion. Chaotic Somalia spectacularly fails to meet this criterion, yet still counts as a sovereign state. Yet its northern bit, Somaliland, has met this standard with increasing impressiveness since it declared independence in 1991. It has a currency, car registrations and even biometric passports. But only private firms such as DHL, a courier company, link it to the outside world. International postal service requires membership of the Universal Postal Union, which for non-members of the UN need approval by at least two-thirds of that body’s members. The African Union refuses to recognise Somaliland’s independence because it dislikes changing any African borders.
The world has so far seen a lot of births. Since 1988 when I was born, I have seen the disintegration of USSR, freedom of Namibia, Kosovo’s independence and a few more with Southern Sudan being the latest and from all these one thing is clear and that is-“these nations are born but they have not yet matured enough to call themselves as ‘independent’”. On the other hand the unification of Germany caused the growth rate of not only the two separate German states but the entire EU to increase. A lot of such examples can be observed but we simply choose to ignore them and keep on demanding the secessions (like in Kashmir) just for political benefits. Why can’t we accept the reality that in this era of Globalization the boundaries doesn’t matter, what matters is the cordial relations with the other fellow nations which can only guarantee the progress of the entire world. It is an era of 'one world and one market' and boundaries are useless like the term independence.
We should accept the reality that world is nothing but an organisation. According to Chester Barnard-“Individual human being possesses limited power of choice and is constraint by the factors of total situation for cooperation, the most important limiting factors being the biological, physical and social limitations. The most effective method of overcoming these limitations according to him is cooperative social action.” So why can’t we stick to the reality and stop fighting for boundaries and start contributing whatever we can for the progress of the world as a whole. In today’s world 'Patriotism relates with the world not the nation'.
Stop Terrorism, promote harmony and social cooperation
Jai Hind!!
No comments:
Post a Comment