The making of failed states (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Fallacies of the 'Failed State' Concept
The Fallacies of the 'Failed State' Concept 2 Acknowledgement First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to my dissertation supervisor Professor Robert Geyer who with his patience, guidance and most of all outstanding intellect has helped me in the past months tackle a subject I am particularly passionate about. I am forever grateful having him as my tutor, accompanying me on this journey by always promptly answering all my queries. Furthermore, I wish to present my appreciation to the Politics, Philosophy and Religion Department for offering me this fantastic opportunity. The course co-ordinator Doctor Amalendu Misra has provided an excellent framework for organising my dissertation efficiently in terms of time and structure. Finally, I also want to acknowledge Doctor Kunal Mukherjee who has consulted me several times during the academic year on my case study.
Beyond the 'failed state': Toward conceptual alternatives
The article advances conceptual alternatives to the 'failed state.' It provides reasons why the concept is deficient, showing especially how counterproductive it is to aggregate states as diverse as Colombia, Malawi, Somalia, Iraq, Haiti, and Tajikistan. I argue for distinguishing among capacity gaps, security gaps, and legitimacy gaps that states experience. Importantly, I show that these gaps often do not coincide in a given country, and that the logical responses to each of the three gaps diverge in significant ways. I offer brief case examples of the logic of response to the gaps and of the tensions that must be managed among them. The article advances the debate over an important and under-theorized emergent concept in global politics.
Failed States: From the origin to United Nations interventions in the post-Cold War
Coleção Meira Mattos, 2020
The purpose of this article is to deepen the knowledge about the failed states, analyzing this theme from its origin until its use today. Therefore, this article is structured as follows: initially a brief setting on this subject, followed by the exposure of the research objective. Following are the contrary and favorable currents of thought about the failed states. Subsequently, a brief history is made about the evolution of this theme in society. A debate is then held on the concept of failed states and their use. The next section outlines the methodologies adopted by some Think Tanks that set out to measure state failure. The next section discusses the international community’s attempt to rebuild certain states from the fall of the Berlin Wall. In the final part, reflections are made on the usefulness and importance of this theory today.
An Analysis of the Notion of a "Failed States"
In the post-Cold War era, it has become increasingly evident that one of the most important challenges for the world community is that posed by so-called failed states. Many serious problems that contemporary societies face with highly significant international connections are described on the basis of this phenomenon within multiple academic disciplines. On the other hand, there are theoretically developed different definitions on this concept which are usually extremely brief and in some cases even very ideological. This paper, introducing theoretical concepts behind its differing definitions, is trying to analyze the notion of failed states, while also searching for possible sociological standpoints. Keywords: Failed states, international politics, European colonialism, critical approach.
The Fallacy of the ‘Failed State’
Third World Quarterly, 2008
This article examines the origins and evolution of the concepts of 'failed' and 'failing' states, arguing that the terms have come t o be used in such widely divergent and problematic ways that they have lost any utility. The article details six serious problems with the term 'state failure' and related terms like 'fragile' or 'troubled' states, concluding that analysts should abandon these terms. It concludes with a modest attempt to develop alternative concepts and principles for thinking about diverse states that pose varied challenges for academie analysis and policy makers. Since the concept of 'failed states' entered the USA's political lexicon in the early 1990s, it has come to occupy a prominent place in international peace and security. The attacks of 9/11 focused attention on the failure of the Afghan state to prevent the operation of al-Qaeda on its territory. The situation in that country, and subsequent growing concern about other similar states, only intensified concern about the role of 'failed states' in harbouring or aiding terrorism. The US National Security Strategy of 2002 marked this shift from the battlefields of Europe: 'America is now threatened less by conquering states than by failing ones'. Yet the 'failed states' concept-and related terms like 'failing', 'fragile', 'stressed' and 'troubled' states-has become more of a liability than an asset. Foundations and think-tanks have rushed to fund work on 'failing' states, resulting in a proliferation of multiple, divergent and poorly defined uses of the term. Not only does the term 'failing state' reflect the schoolmarm's scorecard according to linear index defined by a univocal Weberian endstate, but it has also grown to encompass states as diverse as
A failed state is a state that can no longer perform its basic security and development functions and that has no effective control over its territory and borders, which bears humanitarian and security consequences. These states pose enormous political, humanitarian and security challenges in the international system. These consequences not only adversely affect only the state but the international sphere as well, undermining the Westphalian system. 1 Among the cost of the failed state to the international community are-influx of refugees to the neighboring states, increase in military and security spending to regulate the border and prevent spillover, affording safe haven for international terrorism threatening global security.
Fragile and Failed States: Critical Perspectives on Conceptual Hybrids
Over the last decade, Western government agencies and international organizations have increasingly turned their attention to the issue of state ‘fragility’ and ‘failure’ in developing countries that are confronted with war, violence and extreme poverty. They have presented this issue as a major international policy challenge in the fields of security and development assistance. Policy analysts and scholars have also played an instrumental role in the dissemination and legitimization of the two concepts. This article disputes the analytical underpinning of this new research agenda. It argues that the concepts of fragile and failed states are confusing, inherently superficial and unstable policy-oriented labels. First, it elaborates five critical ideas concerning the scientific dimension of this literature. Second, it interprets the analytical framework of fragile/failed states as a reactivation of developmentalist theories, primarily driven by a Western conception of the polity. Third, it encourages the rejection of the state-centric approach to security and development in fragile contexts, and advocates combining interest in government institutions with a multidimensional, context-based and historically grounded approach to society-wide vulnerabilities.
Fragile and Failed States in International Relations
International Relations scholars and policy-makers are increasingly paying greater attention to a new category of fragile and failed states across Asia, Africa, the Balkans, the Caucasus, Latin America and the Middle East. While effective policy responses are necessary to strengthen these politically fractured, economically collapsing and socially divided states, the category itself appears to be more politically and ideologically charged and less critically understood in the context of international relations. There is a general tendency to avoid examining how political and economic policies and military actions by the West contributed to the degeneration of these states. This article seeks to re-examine the causes of state fragility and failure, and critically reviews the current US strategies to rebuild the failed states of Afghanistan and Iraq. It argues that the US-led state-building strategies in both countries are based on a wrong diagnosis of the political and social problems, and the solutions offered are also ill-conceived. The article also contends that the Western liberal vision of the state, premised on the Weberian notion, commands less relevance to the fragile and failed states in the non-Western world.