Fourth World Faultlines and
the Remaking of International Boundaries

By Richard Griggs and Peter Hocknell

Dr Richard Griggs (University of Cape Town) and Peter Hocknell (International Boundaries Research Unit), in collaboration with the Center for World Indigenous Studies (Olympia, US), are currently setting up a project to identify, map and monitor the Fourth World Nation ‘faultlines which represent the potential international boundaries of the future.
 

The sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of States within the established international system, and the principle of self-determination for peoples, both of great value and importance, must not be permitted to work against each other in the period ahead .

The words of United Nations Secretary-General Beatrice Beatrice-Ghali describe one of the fundamental challenges to the world's existing political geography: the resurgent self-determination of nations. Eritrea, Slovakia, Armenia, and the Federated States of Micronesia are just a few examples of some 127 new states that have emerged with recognised international boundaries and United Nations membership in the post-World War II period. Obviously new land is not being created. Instead states are fragmenting into smaller states, nation-states, and other political structures. When the breaking point comes, states often disintegrate along the faultlines of old nations: geographic areas of nationalist-based tensions.In the light of the resurgence of the role played by self-identifying nations in the destruction and (re)construction of international state boundaries, it is argued that mapped analysis of nation faultlines (inter-national boundaries) can help improve our theoretical understanding of state collapse, aid making informed predictions, and suggest tools for conflict resolution.

Fourth World Geography
Nations once occupied are not necessarily conquered nor assimilated and can persist for centuries beneath the boundaries of states. Many of the world's newest states and nation-states are actually reemergent nations. Table 1 offers eighteen examples of European nations that endured the rise and fall of states to become independent this century. Latvia, for example, lost its independence to the Teutonic Knights in 1242, only to recover it again over 700 years later with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the sixth occupying state.

Table 1.

Former European ‘Fourth World Nations Achieving Independence in the Twentieth Century.

Nation / Former State Occupiers / Year Occupied / Year Independent (prior years)

  • Norway Denmark, Sweden 1397 1905
  • Finland Sweden, Russia 1362 1917
  • Albania Greece, Rome, Byzantium, Normans, Venice, Ottoman Empire 625BC 1912
  • Poland Prussia, Austria, Russia, Germany 1795 1918
  • Ireland England, Britain, UK 1169 1922
  • Iceland Norwegians, Denmark 1262 1944
  • Malta Phoenicia, Carthaginia, Greece, Rome, Byzantium, Arabia, Normans, Swabia, House of Anjou, Aragon, Knights of St John, France, Britainc.1000BC 1964
  • Cyprus Assyria, Egypt, Persia, Greece, Rome, Byzantium, Arabia, France, England, Crusaders, Venice, Ottoman Empire, Britainc.1000 BC1964
  • Estonia Denmark, Teutonic Knights, Sweden, Poland, Russia, USSR 1219 1991 (1920-1940)
  • Latvia Teutonic Knights, Sweden, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, USSR 1242 1991 (1918-1940)
  • Lithuania Poland, Russia, USSR 1386 1991 (1921-1940)
  • Belarus Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Poland, Russia, USSR13921991 (1918)
  • Ukraine Mongolian Empire, Lithuania-Poland, Muscovite Russia, USSR 1237 1991 (1917)
  • Georgia Mongolian Empire, Ottoman Empire, Russia, USSR 1236 1991 (1918-1921)
  • Armenia Persia, Macedonia, Rome, Arabia, Byzantium, Seljuk Turks, Mongolian Empire, Turkey, Russia, USSR 1070 1991 (1918)
  • Croatia Frankish Empire, Byzantium, Magyars, Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hungary, Yugoslavia 768 1992 (1941-1944)
  • Slovenia Frankish Empire, Byzantium, Holy Roman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Italy, Yugoslavia 745 1992
  • Slovakia Magyars, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Czechoslovakia 1001 1993 (1939-1944)

The term coming into common usage for such submerged nations is ‘Fourth World nations. Nation refers to a self-identifying people with claims to a common cultural homeland while Fourth World refers to the lack of international recognition. The term state should not be confused with the term nation as it refers to a populated area within internationally recognised boundaries under the sovereign authority of some form of combined civilian and military bureaucracy. Since there are less than twenty nation-states or states composed of only one nation (see Table 2), most states are multinational. There are between 6,000 and 9,000 nations within 191 recognised states (Table 3).

 

Table 2.

Nation-States of the World

Nation-States / Date Recognised

  • Iceland 1944
  • Ireland 1922
  • Monaco 1297
  • Andorra 1278
  • Luxembourg 1839
  • Liechtenstein 1866
  • San Marino 350
  • Malta 1964
  • Poland 1921
  • Hungary 1920
  • Czech Republic 1993
  • Slovenia 1992
  • Yemen 1918
  • Tonga1970
  • Western Samoa 1962
  • Marshall Islands 1986
  • Tuvalu 1978
  • Seychelles 1976
  • Lesotho1966
  •  

Table 3.

Distribution of Fourth World Nations

Regions / Estimated Number of Nations

  • Arctic 350
  • North America 550
  • Middle America and Caribbean 145
  • South America 485
  • Europe 120
  • Caucasus and Crimea 50
  • Central Asia 250
  • Southwest Asia and North Africa 250
  • South Asia 800
  • South East Asia 1500
  • East Asia 300
  • Sub-Saharan Africa 1500
  • Oceania 1200
  • Total Estimate: 6000-9000

Fourth World geography can be attributed to a history of state expansion. Nations have long been the building blocks of states. They are also the faultlines along which states break apart. Any Fourth World nation which endures with an organised and identifiable struggle to achieve a more sovereign status (autonomy or independence) establishes faultlines, the boundaries along which states may break-up (two or more states emerge from one state) or break-down (various arrangements for territorial autonomy).

For instance, the break-up of theSoviet Union in 1991 saw fifteen nations emerge from a single state, of which five define the borders of the ‘New Europe (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova). Break-down can be illustrated by Figure 1 contrasting Spain's 1492 Kingdoms with the post-Franco construction of seventeen Autonomous Communities. In 1085, the Castilians upon retaking Toledo from the Moors, declared their goal of uniting all of Iberia under one Catholic King. This territorial goal was achieved by 1492 and was followed by a almost 500 years of non-stop efforts to Castilianise all the nations (same language, same customs, same laws). This nation-building policy failed despite monumental efforts that ranged from ethnocide to genocide. For decades the boundaries of the old kingdoms were not even alluded to on maps of a united Spain. Shortly after Franco's death in 1975 the Autonomous Communities finally emerged with a remarkable correspondence to the Fourth World faultlines. Thus, both the historical geography of breakup and breakdown illustrate that the geopolitical pressures asserted by Fourth World nations are significant enough to map and analyse yet few efforts have been made in this direction.

A Shortage of Studies
The shortage of studies from a Fourth World perspective is not surprising. First, this is a new avenue of academic analysis. The ‘Fourth World term was developed during the 1970s as a result of intense indigenous activism, greater sensitivity to human rights, and the growing influence of nongovernmental organisations (NGO's) in galvanising world opinion on the self-determination of peoples. The World Council of Indigenous Peoples was formed in 1975, and this council became the first of eleven NGO's representing indigenous peoples to receive consultative status at the UN by 1987 (Wilmer, 1993: 3). In addition, the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities called for the study of the problems of indigenous peoples, and in 1982 the UN Commission on Human Rights created a Working Group on Indigenous Peoples (which meets yearly). Nowhere have the issues of autonomy, self-management, and self-determination been brought more sharply into focus than here, and in 1991 the Group agreed on drafting a set of principles to be incorporated into a proposed international convention. The gap between indigenous peoples and the international state system - especially the United Nations - has gradually narrowed; unrepresented Fourth World nations have now moved from the realms of domestic jurisdiction onto international agendas.

Secondly, until the break-up of the Soviet Union alerted the world to the enormous geopolitical force of these nations, studies normally focused on the ‘evolution of states and the ‘rise of civilisation. Seldom addressed was the overwhelming history of state failure (Yoffee, 1988: 1). Ninety percent or more of all states that have so far existed ended in collapse. The few explanations that attended to this concentrated on large empires (e.g.,Rome) and often suggested one or two principal factors in explanation (plagues, disease, corruption, climate, over taxation, poor military strategy). Tainter (1988) has attempted a more systematic examination of the general internal contradictions within the expansionist state and only Griggs (1993) has specifically addressed the general role of Fourth World nations instate collapse. The need for more theoretical development has been noted on several occasions by political geographers.

Thirdly, there have been problems of explaining and defining ‘nations' and ‘nationalism' . It is argued that the categories belonging to the paradigm of ‘ethnicity' - used far too long as an explanation for nationalism - have associations that are incorrect in describing nationalist assertions such as ties by common ancestry, minority membership and no legitimate claims to territory (Griggs, 1994: 259). The application of the term ethnic group to nationalist claims also conflates two different geographical processes: immigration to a place and territorial annexation by an expansionist state or nation. The term ‘minority' is also poorly defined - in some states Fourth World nations might be a majority (e.g., Peru, Bolivia) and within their own boundaries many Fourth World nations are the majority (e.g., Kurdistan, Quebec). The categories ‘indigenous' , ‘tribal' and ‘aboriginal ' also have associations that limit ‘nationalism' both historically and geographically, while use of the term ‘culture' is seen as too broad - a ‘nation' can be a ‘culture' in that it shares a common culture in relationship to a common landscape (Griggs, 1992: 3), but a ‘culture' can just as legitimately be simply the shared linguistic or religious characteristics of a group. There are also similarities between a nation and the more general category of a ‘people' (which Boutros-Ghali referred to earlier) in that they are both self-defined, but a ‘people' lacks the tie to a territory that is a prerequisite for ‘nationhood .

Fourthly, nationalism has long been described in pejorative terms: as a kind of tribalism that challenges the state but will ultimately succumb to ‘modernising influences'. The failure of this theory is obvious in light of post-Cold War developments and many social scientists now readily admit its inability to explain the many recent examples of state collapse. Some theorists have actually embraced the opposite view that modernisation creates nationalism by producing economic disparities (Hechter, 1975). The failing here is that there is no clear economic pattern to nationalism. Nationalist movements are found in every conceivable economic condition from the wealthiest region in the state (e.g., Catalonia) to rough equivalency (e.g., Scotland), to the poorest (e.g., Sardinia). The popularity of economic theories among peoples not of the Fourth World to define what most Fourth World nations insist is a cultural issue may reveal more about trends in academia than the phenomenon being described.

Lastly, an understanding of the so-called ‘Westphalian period' helps explain why non-state nations are only grudgingly recognised by the world of states. Since the 1648 Peace of Westphalia modern states emerged characterised by mutual recognition, accurate inviolable boundaries, and non-interference in each others ‘domestic affairs'. People's identities have been forced to conform to the boundaries of conquest be fitting an ideology of the nation state rather than creating state boundaries around each nation as befits a true nation-state. As Smith (1993) has argued, state-centric historians then provided a legitimising historical perspective as the basis for this ‘nation-building . Nationalist and minority historians are often set apart, so creating what Smith has called an uneven ethno-history. This imaginary reconstruction of a nation's past is no different from the imaginary representation of its territorial make-up - past and present. Uneven natio-cartography remains the norm as non-state boundaries are ignored; in the established ‘international' (sic) system it has been the boundaries of the most universal mode of political power - the state - that matter.

The irony of the state-biased historical and cartographic representation of identity is that nations on average outlast states. Out of the 191 states, 127 are less than fifty years old. A generous figure for the geographical and political continuity of a modern state may be 347 years dating to the Peace of Westphalia. If we stretch this to include Spain's consolidation in 1492, we might claim 500 years. By contrast, Spanish-claimed Euzkadi may be 10,000 years old and requires archaeology to determine its cultural and linguistic origins.

The non state-centric, Fourth World perspective which has developed describes and maps geography, history, and politics based on the world's ... nations, instead of focusing on states, regions, blocs and superpowers (Nietschmann, 1994: 225). Fourth World analysts thus categorise ‘nations' by their own subjective claims: who they are, where they are, and what they represent. A ‘nation' refers to the geographically bounded territory of a common people as well to the people themselves - a community of self-identifying people who have a common culture and a historically common territory (Nietschmann, 1994: 226). There are therefore three commonalities that bind them: identity, culture and territory. None of these should be seen as static; their identity and culture continues to evolve like any other group, and their boundaries are often more fluid and dynamic than the rigid lines that characterise state-divides. However, what is constant is their unity in these three characteristics.

Mapping Nation Faultlines
 Examining this problem of identification from the Fourth World perspective allows one to not only define nations. It allows us, where possible, to map them. Since political boundaries rarely coincide with areas of cultural and regional identity, it is possible for segments of a state population to organise around the theme that they require special territorial representation. Mapping these areas of potential volatility can then serve to identify such areas and therefore predict and mitigate conflict. However, although Gurr has attempted to systematically catalogue all forms of state repression as a means of understanding the formation and distribution of ‘minority peoples' , and Murdock has contributed significant studies on the spatial characteristics of ‘cultural and ‘ethnographic groups (see Figure 2), there remains a need for effective mapping of ‘nation claims'. No map, list, encyclopedia or almanac to date has displayed all the world's nations.

While the criteria or definition for mapping is sound, the method of delimiting nations is clearly problematic. There are historical difficulties in identifying and nations as discussed previously. Furthermore, some nations, like the Tuareg in Niger, are nomadic and perceive themselves more along the lines of an ecosystem than a state-centric, rigid territory; others are unable to identify any more than the heartland of their common area. For example, although few would deny the existence of a discrete area known as Kurdistan, the exact area remains in doubt and its extent is something over which Kurds are unlikely ever to reach agreement with the surrounding states (O'shea, 1991).

There are other difficulties; the debate over what scale of population is ‘proper' to enjoy a government exclusively of its own, and at what level one recognises nations having ‘legitimate' claims to territory, will no doubt continue. The Tamils (60 million population) and the Kurds (20-30 million) could argue that, if a country like Nauru (8,000) has the right to self-determination, surely it must be extended to cohesive groups of tens of millions (Corntassel and Primeau, 1995: 352). Examining this returns us to the quote that opened this article and its historic basis. In 1960 the United Nations adopted the principle that all ‘peoples' had the right of self-determination. It was proclaimed that sovereignty rested with the ‘people' who were thus free to adjust the territorial limits within which they desired this sovereignty to be active. This was seen as a significant development, but there remains confusion over the full implications of this right - in both legal and political terms - and over the ‘people' that it is applicable to, be they ‘national' , ‘indigenous' , ‘ethnic' , ‘cultural' or ‘minority' groups (Anaya, 1991; Corntassel and Primeau, 1995). While the adoption of this principle has placed the states of the Third World on equal footing as participants in the international system, the Fourth World nations fail to enjoy the benefits of decolonisation or international recognition of their right to self-determination.

It is possible to see, however, that once a significant degree of groundwork has been done, the perceived territories and boundaries of nations can be mapped. It is interesting to compare the value of Figure 1 that Griggs (1993) identified in Spain with Figure 3, taken from Price's (1989) examination of the spatial distribution of world ‘cultures , where, in mapping the 45‘cultures he has identified in Europe, no territorial boundaries were depicted. The next Bulletin (Part 2 of this series) will depict Griggs mapping of Fourth World faultlines across Europe providing another point of comparison.

Reading Between the Lines
This process of reading between the established state-lines aids our comprehension of historical boundary changes - from the eradication of 39 self-governing nations in France by the Jacobin state-makers in 1789 (Griggs, 1992: 6), to the end of the Cold War, and the ‘tide' of nationalist forces that remade the map from Germany to Kazakhstan (Gottlieb, 1994:101). We also become aware of the inter-national boundary faultlines of the future. At the global scale it has been calculated that, since the end of World War II, state-versus-nation conflicts have produced the most numerous and longest wars, the greatest number of civilian casualties from state-directed genocide and the greatest number of refugees (Griggs, 1993). Nietschmann estimated in 1987 that of nation groups that were in arms, about 60% were seeking an autonomous territorial and political relationship with the host state, 15% were hovering between autonomy and independence, and 25% wanted full independence (Nietschmann, 1987: 7). At the regional level, Griggs (1995: 80) noted that in March of this year, 80% of Africa's wars were tied to the issue of ethnicity and identity in some manner. Identifying these boundaries allows us to de-construct, redraw, and so reassess the world political map. There are wider implications to consider as well. It is possible to monitor national frontiers in relation to state frontiers, and make more informed commentary on the level of nation group geopolitical activity. This is important for predicting and resolving conflict. In studying the territorial arrangements in Europe, Griggs has categorised nations in terms of sovereign status. Some states have resolved conflicts by creating autonomous political structures for Fourth World nations. Spain and Belgium's ‘Autonomous Communities , Italy's South Tirol, Germany's sixteen Länder, and even Britain's autonomous crown colonies (e.g., Isle of Man, Jersey) provide political models of how national identities and state identities coexist in a decentralised state structure.

It is important not only to map the possible boundaries of the future, but what they may and may not enclose or divide - natural and strategic resources, manufacturing infrastructure, population concentrations, drug-producing regions or nuclear arsenal, for example.

Conclusion
The many recent territorial changes that we have witnessed are not the signal for the complete undermining of the state and its territorial sovereignty. In terms of human history, both unification and fragmentation of territory have been persistent thrusts, and we should fully expect territorial changes to continue. Since Fourth World nations have been both the cultural faultlines along which states break apart and the building blocks for their eventual reconstruction, this geopolitical force, and its indisputable potential for remoulding the world political map, deserves greater consideration not only from Boutros-Ghali and the United Nations but from boundary scholars too.

References
  • Anaya, S.J. (1991) ‘The Capacity of International Law to Advance Ethnic or Nationality Rights Claims Human
  • Rights Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 403-411, The John Hopkins University Press.
  • Corntassel, J.J. and Primeau, T.H. (1995) ‘Indigenous ‘Sovereignty and International Law: Revised Strategies for Pursuing ‘Self-Determination , Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 343-365.
  • Esman, M.J. (1995) ‘Ethnic Actors in International Politics , Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, Vol. 1, No. 1, Spring 1995, pp. 111-125, Frank Cass, London.
  • Gottlieb, G. (1994) ‘Nations Without States , Foreign Affairs, Vol. 73, No. 3, May/June, pp. 100-112.
  • Griggs, R.A. (1992) ‘The Meaning of Nation and State in the Fourth World , Occasional Paper #18, Center for World Indigenous Studies, May 1992.
  • Griggs, R.A. (1993) ‘The Role of Fourth World Nations and Synchronous Geopolitical Factors in the Breakdown of States , PhD Dissertation, Berkeley.
  • Griggs, R.A. (1994) ‘Ethnicity Vs Nationalism - the European Nations , Research and Exploration, 10 (3): pp. 259-265, National Geographic.
  • Griggs, R.A. (1995) ‘Boundaries and War in Africa in 1995 , Boundary and Security Bulletin, 3, 1:77-80, April, International Boundaries Research Unit: Durham.
  • Hechter, M. (1975), Internal Colonialism: The Celtic Fringe in British National Development 1536-1966, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  • Knight, D.B (1982) ‘Identity and Territory: Geographical Perspectives on Nationalism and Regionalism , Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 72 No.4, pp. 514-531.
  • Manning, C.A.W (1972) The Legal Framework in a World of Change, The Aberystwyth Papers: International Politics, 1919-1969, OUP: London.
  • Nietschmann, B. (1987) ‘The Third World War , Cultural Survival Quarterly, 11, 3.
  • Nietschmann, B. (1994) ‘The Fourth World: Nations Versus States , in Demko, G.J. and Wood, W.B. (eds.) Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspectives on the 21st Century, Westview.
  • O Shea, M.T. (1991) Greater Kurdistan: The Mapping of a Myth?, School of Oriental and African Studies: London, April 1991.
  • Parekh, B. (1995) ‘Ethnocentricity of the Nationalist Discourse , Nations and Nationalism, Vol. 1, Part 1, CUP, Cambridge.
  • Price, D.H. (1989) Atlas of World Cultures: A Geographical Guide to Ethnographic Literature, Sage: London.
  • Smith, A.D. (1993) ‘A Europe of Nations - or the Nation of Europe? , Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 129-135, referred to in Conversi, D. (1995) ‘ReassessingCurrent Theories of Nationalism: Nationalism as Boundary maintenance and Creation Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, Vol. 1, No. 1, Spring 1995: 74.
  • Tainter, J.A. (1988), The Collapse of Complex Societies, Cambridge University Press.
  • Wilmer, F. (1993) The Indigenous Voice in World Politics: Since Time Immemorial, Sage: London.
  • Yoffee, N. and Cowgill, G.L. (1988) The Collapse of Ancient States and Civilisations, Tucson: University of Arizona Press

© SSF

Back
Main