Study Guides (238,207)
Canada (115,009)
POLI 212 (69)

POLI 212 Final: Final Study Guide (use in addition to midterm study guide - cumulative exam)

21 Pages
Unlock Document

McGill University
Political Science
POLI 212
Anthony Imbrogno

FINAL STUDY GUIDE Nationalism  Nation: group of people who believe they are ancestrally related, share customs, norms, and language  Nationalism: identification and loyalty to one’s nation expressed politically to support sense of belongingness  Under feudalism: no nations, no states o Instead, complex web of alliances and loyalty  Bitter conflicts over religion led to Peace of Westphalia  State: legitimate use of force and collection of taxes (sovereignty) within defined borders assigned to a single ruler/government  Nation-state: one nation controls state apparatus; nation that corresponds to a country o A nation does not have to correspond to a country  E.g. Scots nation in UK o Nation can stretch across two countries  E.g. Basques across Spain and France  When a nation is not a nation-state, it is an ethnic group  Nation and ethnic groups as sources of identity  Roma = ethnic group with most hapless plight in Europe o Along with Jews, suffered most in Holocaust and still discriminated against today o Some people wrongly think Roma are nomads o France deported more than 10,000 Roma in 2009  Nicolas Sarkozy is most hostile European statesman toward the Roma  Sarkozy deported Roma – gave them 300 euros of “humanitarian reparation” and sent them back to Eastern Europe  Many observers called the deportations “ethnic cleansing”  Strong national and ethnic identities may not be harmful  considered a good thing because it gives a feeling of belongingness to people  Negative consequences of strong national identities may lead to political instability and even violence  Increased migration within and outside Europe has made the ethnic composition of European countries more complex Yugoslavia  Yugoslavia became communist after WWII but kept distance from Soviet Union  Violence broke out in Yugoslavia in 1991  Communist leaders (such as Seb Slobudan Milosevic and Croat Franju Tudjman) turned into fierce nationalists o People suddenly ready to die for ethnicity/nationality  Initially/historically all South Slavs belonged to same ethnic groups o Common origin explains why it’s difficult to distinguish members of the current ethnic groups by their physical appearance  Croats and Slovenes became Roman Catholic  mostly to the west, of Yugoslavia closest to Rome  Serbs and Macedonians became Christian Orthodox  mostly in west of Yugoslavia, under influence of Russian Christian Orthodox Church  Muslims in Yugoslavia were originally Christians living in the central region of Bosnia- Herzegovina o Practiced a controversial kind of Christianity considered heresy by other Christian churches o Manichaens; sometimes called Bosniaks o Sought protection of Ottoman Empire because not backed by a powerful outside religious center  converted to Islam voluntarily or by force  Albanians – ethnically not South Slavs o Dominant group in Kosovo; Serbs are minority in Kosovo  Different ethnic groups has greatly contributed to problems in Kosovo  Cruelty between Muslims and Serbs living together in Bosnia but also friendships across ethnic lines o When Communism was lifted from Bosnia-Herzegovina, old hatreds emerged  19 century – Ottoman Empire began to decay  allowed Serbs to form own kingdom of Serbia and Montenegrins to form own kingdom of Montenegro  Versailles Peace Conference created a very artificial entity called the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes o King was a Serb who established authoritarian regime  Renamed Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1929) o Didn’t consult the people  Other ethnic groups resented dominance of the Serbs o 1934 – a Croat assassinated the king  WWII – power relations changed between Croats and Serbs o Croatia became a puppet regime of Hitler and committed many atrocities against the Serbs  After WWII, Marshal Tito established a communist regime o Believed ethnicity had no place in communism  Organized the country in a way so that political lines didn’t follow ethnic lines  Language did contribute to ethnic divisions o Slovenes and Croats used the Roman alphabet o Other ethnic groups used the Cyrillic script o How people wrote gave a clear indication as to what ethnic group they belonged to  Huge economic inequalities among the ethnic groups o Slovenia had a per capita income 7x higher than in Kosovo and 3x higher than in Macedonia and Montenegro  After 1990 – Slovenia and Croatia attempted to become independent countries o Territorial integrity and self-determination in conflict with each other  Territorial integrity = international borders can be changed only by peaceful means and by common agreement  Self-determination = all people who so desire have the right to a sovereign and independent state o International community originally gave preference to territorial integrity  September 27, 1990 – Slovenian parliament decided that Yugoslavia federal law would no longer apply within borders of Slovenia o December 1990 – 89% of Slovenian voters approved independence in a popular referendum  May 1991 – 93% of Croatian voters approved appendence for Croatia in a popular referendum  June 1991 – Yugoslav PM warned Slovenia and Croatia that the Federal Government would use all means to stop their unilateral steps toward independence o Slovenia and Croatia formally declare independence the day after warning is issued  3 days after warning – armed hostilities broke out between the Yugoslav Federal Army and the Slovenian Militia o Hostilities spread to Croatia by early August  Germany pushed for international recognition of Slovenian and Croatian independence o Strong domestic pressure to give Slovenia and Croatia right of self-determination o Linked the issue to the recent German unification o All parties supported self-determination for Yugoslavia crisis o Germany used its strength to impose its will and get other Western Countries (USA, UK, France) to support right of self-determination for Slovenia and Croatia  January 1992 – EU recognizes Slovenia and Croatia as sovereign, independent states o UN recognizes Slovenia and Croatia in May 1992  Slovenia – hostilities were never severe and came to a quick end o Slovenia had advantage of being the most homogenous of the Yugoslav republics  90% Slovenes o Most Westernized and economically most developed o Only former Yugoslav republic to reach some degree of political and economic stability relatively quickly o Joined EU in 2004 – first region of former Yugoslavia to do so  Joined EU currency in 2007  Croatia – substantial minority of Serbs who were concentrated in the region of Krajina (south-center of Croatia) o In old Yugoslavia Krajina Serbs lived with Serbs of Serbian republic within the national borders of Croatia  Serbia has now become a foreign country to them  Situation not accepted by Krajina Serbs  Resistance supported by the Serbian leaders in Belgrade who still controlled the Yugoslav Federal Army  fighting erupted, Yugoslav federal army even attacked Croatian presidential palace in Zagreb o International media made Serbs seem like the aggressor  Croatian-Serbian war – War of Independence vs War of Secession o Perspective of American War of Independence – Croats have all rights on their side  Just as American colonies liberated selves from British domination, Croats liberated selves from Serb domination o Perspective of American War of Secession – US south tried to leave Union, President Lincoln used federal forces to stop them  Not wrong for Yugoslavia to use federal forces to stop Croatia from leaving  Krajina Serbs – did they have a right to self-determination? o They believed so  wished to be independent or join Serbia o Krajina had no common border with Serbia, but could’ve joined Serbia as a Croat enclave o Croatia severely restricted the rights of Krajina Serbs  E.g. replace Serbian road signs in their villages with Croatian signs o Croatian president Franjo Tudjman promised the EU that the Krajina Serbs would be given “special status”  enough for EU to not get involved in issue o Krajina Serbs were considered a minority with the right to autonomy but not to independence o Croatia was considered a territorially defined administrative unit and was entitled to independence  Krajina Serbs were relatively in a well-defined area, why couldn’t they claim this?  Krajina Serbs attempted this by forming the Serbian Republic of Krajina but neither Croatia nor the international community recognized this entity o Krajina region became more and more isolated and economically devastated o June 1993 – Krajina Serbs organizes a referendum where they decided overwhelmingly to join Serbia and the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina in a Greater Serbia  International community didn’t recognize this referendum  Called a “phantom referendum” by a leading newspaper  Bosnia-Herzegovina o Three major groups:  Muslims/Bosniaks – 39%  Only part of former Yugoslavia where they were the largest group  Serbs – 32%  Croats – 18% o March 1992 – 63% of the electorate voted for an independent Bosnia- Herzegovina  indicates opposition by Serbs and Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina o Bosnia-Herzegovina recognized by the EU and UN in May 1992 o Horrendous war broke out – rape of women, killing of children, mass executions, concertation camps, and expulsion of civilians from their homes  Each ethnicity killed the other two  Worst offenders were the Serbs – 1995 massacre in Srebrenica  Serbs separated men from women and children and executed 8,000 men  More than 100,000 people died in Bosnian war  40% of the dead were civilians, many of them children  Security Council of the UN decided and international war tribunal should investigate the crimes and bring the guilty to court st  1 time since the Nazi crimes that the international community established a war tribunal  Macedonia- 4 Yugoslav republic to be granted independence by the UN (April 1993) o Greece opposed to Macedonian independence  Immediately south of Macedonia is a Greek province of the same name  Feared Macedonia would make claims to the province in an attempt to expand into a Greater Macedonia  Had been attempted by Tito in the late 1940s during the Greek civil war o Compromise - gained independence under the name Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia  2004 – shortened name of Republic of Macedonia accepted  Not accepted by Greece  Greece blocked entry of Macedonia into NATO and EU over the name dispute  Kosovo – didn’t get independence for a long time; not a proper republic in former Yugoslavia  merely a province in Serbia o Rule adopted by international community = only republics of the former regime should get independence and not subunits of republics  Played against Krajina and Kosovo o When former Yugoslavia fell apart, Kosovo was 90% Albanian, mostly Muslim  Kosovo Albanians are not South Slav – completely different ethnic group  Claimed they had always lived in this region and wanted and independent Kosovo  Serbs wanted to keep Kosovo – place of their most historic battle (Battle of Kosovo against the Turks, 1389) o 2008 – Kosovo declare independence  Recognized by some countries, not recognized by others Northern Ireland  Nationalism and ethnicity has led to violence and more than 3,000 deaths since the 1960s  2 groups: British Protestants and Irish Catholics  On surface appears to be religious conflict, below surface it’s between 2 ethnic groups (British Unionists and Irish Nationalists) o Struggle between two cultures unwilling to share the same territory  Protestants want to remain in UK  British Unionists  Catholics want to be part of the Irish nation  Irish Nationalists  Irish (Celtic ethnicity) were original to island, then came Scottish settlers in the northern part (British Protestants)  Politically, entire island came under British control  treated the Irish as inferior o Irish wanted independence (called Home Rule) o At end of WWI, Irish got independence from Britain in 1921 after a bloody uprising in Dublin in 1916  Dublin became capital of Republic of Ireland, Britain kept northern provinces  mostly British Protestant, but significant minority of Irish  British in Northern Ireland object to notion that a minority could impose its preference on a majority  When Republic of Ireland got independence, a parliament (Stormont) with extensive powers as established in Belfast (capital of Northern Ireland) o Protestants held a 2-to-1 majority in the country and practiced democracy the British way  majority principle for parliamentary elections and cabinet formation  British easily won election because of numerical dominance and exercised all the governmental power  Local PM and his cabinet members always belonged to the Protestant subculture  led to increasing dissatisfaction among Irish Catholics  1968 – violence broke out (the Troubles) o Irish Republican Army (IRA) began to use terrorist methods o British troops intervened o 1972 – Belfast parliament was dissolved and direct rule by London was imposed  Power sharing to try to restore calm in Northern Ireland o Cabinet of moderate Protestants and Catholics was established o A general strike of Protestant workers ended it within a few months  Large majority of Protestants weren’t willing to change from majoritarian to a power-sharing pattern of decision making  Catholics reacted with more civil strife  Good Friday Agreement (1998) o Restoration of home rule (devolution) o PR elections to Stormont o Ireland gives up claim to Northern Ireland o UK promises to accept majority decisions regarding Northern Ireland’s future o Joint Irish-Northern Ireland Council to share governance on cross-border issues Scotland  Positive example of nationalism  Since 17 century, Scotland has been part of Great Britain  In recent years, Scots have become more conscious of their separate historical roots o Heightened awareness of difference form the English is reinforced when Scots move to London, where their Scottish identity often increases o Rebirth of Scottish identity among both older generation and younger, highly educated people  Politically, the new Scottish nationalism has gained importance o Scotland has gotten its own local parliament o Increased importance hasn’t led to any animosities against the English or any violence Other Aspects of Nationalism and Ethnicity  Strong ethnic identity does not always lead to hostile feelings or violent actions against other ethnic groups  Important that an identity is not only exclusive but also allows the existence of other identities  Multiple identities have positive consequences for political stability and cooperation  Signs of a multilevel order emerging in Europe o Citizens sill having a national identity but also European and regional identities  Concept of nation-state not more than 400 years old o Created in Western Europe  France as the prototypical example th o 16 century – concept of national sovereignty became relevant with the beginning of absolutism  Within a specific territorial borders a single ruler took over all political power  Ruler established a common national identity among subjects to consolidate power  Imposition of a common language  Concept of nation-state based on an exclusively defined national identity can lead to catastrophic wars  Temptation is great for a nation-state to expand its borders and thus its sovereignty  National interests risk clashing with each other at any time  Idea for a more stable and cooperative European order is to redefine the concept of sovereignty in less national terms o Sovereignty would no longer belong exclusively to nation-states; instead be divided up among the European, national, and regional levels o Nation-state would continue to exist and exercise important power, but some power would be transferred up to the European level and some down to the regional level o EU made efforts to this  Process of regionalization and of supranational integration o New order would need regional units that can cut across national borders o Politics turned into positive-sum game  Overall gains are higher than overall losses  A gain for one side does not necessarily mean a loss for another side Immigration  Within countries in the EU, it has become easy and unproblematic to move from one country to another o Not the case outside EU, especially from former Yugoslavia, Turkey, or Africa  Many people from these countries try to find work in these countries  Many refugees try to come to Europe o Line between refugee and immigrant worker is often blurred  makes it hard for European authorities to decide who to reject and who to accept Power Sharing  Consociationalism o National homogeneity does not have to be a prerequisite for political stability o Formal requirement for all/most sides to share power o Must have:  Cabinet representatives  Some veto power  Share appointments and public funding  Autonomy in some affairs, especially when differences are reinforcing (segmented autonomy) o E.g. Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland  Switzerland – 26 cantons that are highly autonomous  Religious and linguistic diversity spread out amongst the cantons and don’t overlap o One canton won’t always be opposed to another o Different cantons support different cantons on different issues  No dominant capital  Cantons consulted on federal legislation o Culturally fragmented countries could hope to attain democratic stability through consociationalism rather than competitive decision-making o Application of consociational devices is necessary particularly when the cleavage structure society is reinforcing of cultural divisions rather than cross-cutting  Consociationalism problems o Can cement differences for all time o Demographics and economics changed so power sharing changed o Can cause us to forces on overstate differences o Linguistic diversity vs linguistic fragmentation  E.g. Switzerland  Fragmentation – need representation in some formal arrangement  Diversity – voices will be heard without formal arrangement o Elite accommodation  Elites agree to share power but do voters?  Can leaders convince next generation to accept power sharing deal/norms  How should political parties form or change? End of “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland  Majoritarian didn’t work, neither did direct rule  30 years of violence and political conflict – work against any type of settlement  Emergence of Good Friday Agreement (1998) o Omagh bombing galvanized opinion o Leadership from “mother societies”  Tony Blair (Labor) government  Bertie Ahern (Finna Fail) government
More Less

Related notes for POLI 212

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.