So long, dont bump into the door on the way out

[Bozo Erectus]

How about if every nationalist, independence movement in the world was allowed to secede and become an independent nation? The Basques, Tamil Tigers, Kurds, Uigers, blah blah and all the rest. Do you think as a result there would be less warfare and strife in the world, or more?

 

[Xanikk999]

Nah because then groups within those groups would form over little arguments (Example being the anglican church (church of england?) thus the cycle would never end.

 

[The Last Conformist]

They'd start fighting over the mixed territories.

 

[Abaddon]

allowed? by who? everyone?

 

[Sidhe]

A very complicated question since Basque separatists only demand is for a country of their own in that case no, but putting terrorists solely in control of new nations in many regions would simply serve to increase division, particualrly if said countries were militant in their outlook which with most terrorist organisation is pretty much a given.

It depends on who your advocating giving a country to, what the politics of the region are and a variety of other diplomatic factors. I'd say I'd think no it would not decrease war, Some terrorists like Bush already have a country as well

 

[Till]

How about if every nationalist, independence movement in the world was allowed to secede and become an independent nation? The Basques, Tamil Tigers, Kurds, Uigers, blah blah and all the rest. Do you think as a result there would be less warfare and strife in the world, or more?

You'd end up with all your neighbours founding their own nations. The road will be divided amongst them and you'll have to ask for a visa from each in order to get to work.

 

[happy_Alex]

If boundaries were drawn along lines of ethnicity (as opposed to, say, 19th century imperialists drawing them on a map according to their own needs and preferences), were enforced by internation cooperation, and democratic representation at a national and international level, then I think we would have a good chance of eradicating war and conflict altogether.

 

[Xanikk999]

If boundaries were drawn along lines of ethnicity (as opposed to, say, 19th century imperialists drawing them on a map according to their own needs and preferences), were enforced by internation cooperation, and democratic representation at a national and international level, then I think we would have a good chance of eradicating war and conflict altogether.

Thats an idealist theory. I think the chances of war would actually increase because competition for resources would increase alot.

Because the groups would splinter even further if we were to allow every faction to have thier own country. Some countries couldnt even support themselves.

So if a bigger country existed they might see this as an oppurtunity to invade.

 

[happy_Alex]

Thats an idealist theory. I think the chances of war would actually increase because competition for resources would increase alot.

Because the groups would splinter even further if we were to allow every faction to have thier own country. Some countries couldnt even support themselves.

So if a bigger country existed they might see this as an oppurtunity to invade.

Yes, I am an idealist. But I am buoyed by the fact that no two democracies have resorted to armed conflict and international conflict, where it violates international law, results in UN resoloutions and international reaction (as in Kuwait).

Conflict today seems to be where national boundaries cross ethnic fault lines resulting in one ethnic group having control over another.

 

[Xanikk999]

Yes, I am an idealist. But I am buoyed by the fact that no two democracies have resorted to armed conflict and international conflict, where it violates international law, results in UN resoloutions and international reaction (as in Kuwait).

UN laws dont mean anything to a highly self suffecient, prosperous, and strong country. Take the U.S for example, what good is it going to do if the U.N imposes sanctions on us?

Not to mention we have alot of power in the U.N.

But my example still stands because the different factions splintering would create a large imbalance of power. Some countries would be better off and stronger then other countries. Surely they might use this to thier advantage?

 

[happy_Alex]

UN laws dont mean anything to a highly self suffecient, prosperous, and strong country. Take the U.S for example, what good is it going to do if the U.N imposes sanctions on us?

Not to mention we have alot of power in the U.N.

But my example still stands because the different factions splintering would create a large imbalance of power. Some countries would be better off and stronger then other countries. Surely they might use this to thier advantage?

a) The US is strong, prosperous etc partly because it is democratic and ergo respectful of international law.

b) If US decided to invade, say Canada (sorry!), you think the rest of the international community could not muster enough diplomatic and military power to reverse it?

I sort of take your point, though, but the fact remains that international conflict is relatively rare.

 

[Sidhe]

UN laws dont mean anything to a highly self suffecient, prosperous, and strong country. Take the U.S for example, what good is it going to do if the U.N imposes sanctions on us?

Not to mention we have alot of power in the U.N.

But my example still stands because the different factions splintering would create a large imbalance of power. Some countries would be better off and stronger then other countries. Surely they might use this to thier advantage?

Can someone say that the UN has no power and that it should be devolved ASAP, I never feel like it's a political thread untill some US citizen has established that the UN cannot actually do anything and is in fact incompetent.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

There would still be conflicts, but I think overall, there would be a net decrease. Most of the conflicts that I can think of are about independence movements, either based on ethnicity or religion, or both. If for example, the Hutus and the Tutsis each had their own country, the Hutus would never have felt compelled to hack all the Tutsis to death with machetes because their noses are shaped differently.

 

[happy_Alex]

Didn't I just say that?

 

[jamiethearcher]

dont forget the quebecois!

 

[Bozo Erectus]

allowed? by who? everyone?

The UN I presume.

Can someone say that the UN has no power and that it should be devolved ASAP, I never feel like it's a political thread untill some US citizen has established that the UN cannot actually do anything and is in fact incompetent.

You can get your fill of that in my facacta steam engine thread.

Didn't I just say that?

Yes but now its official

Last, lets say god uses cheat codes and every disputed region gets its independence too, like Kashmir.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Well, considering that nations up people cannot easily be divided into logical territorial units (eastern Europen 1919 anyone?), TLC is right in saying they would just end up fighting over the mixed group areas.

There are very few "nation-states" (where a nation perfectly aligns with a political state territorially). Iceland comes to mind. Poland and Japan are close.

 

[Xanikk999]

Japan definitly was not a single state throughout most of its history though.

I dont know about poland but i do know germany wasnt unified until 19th century.

 

[happy_Alex]

Yes but now its official

Ta daa!

 

[silver 2039]

No, tiny little splinter countries. What a horrible thought. There are far too many countries already we don't need every idiot who thinks they have some greivance founding their own. Many countries that exist right now should be amalgmated into other countries to form larger states.
Furthermore dividing states along ethic lines would be extrmemly problematic, there are large portions of Iraq that are mixed, Sunni, Shia, and Kurd, and Kashmir has large Hindu and Buddhist minorities and so on. What would happen would be factionilzation and fightining resulting in ethic cleansing and genocide.

Furthermore what constitutes an ethnic group or legitmate cause? Can the Californian sepratists form their own country? Or the Jews in Mizoram? And so on...

The idea would result in absoloute chaos.