Study Note: State Building le Nation Building Kong

There is much confusion over the terms ‘state-building’ and ‘nation-building’ (Hippler 2004, Goldsmith 2007). Some authors use the terms interchangeably, some with completely different meanings. In general, most people use ‘state-building’ to refer to interventionist strategies to restore and rebuild the institutions and apparatus of the state, for example, the bureaucracy. In contrast, ‘nation-building’ also refers to the creation of a cultural identity that relates to the particular territory of the state. Most theorists agree that a well-functioning state is a requirement for the development of a nation, and therefore most would also agree that state-building is a necessary component of nation-building. Several authors argue that while state-building is something external actors can engage in, the development of a cultural nation is inherently something only the emerging society can shape itself. Using this line of thinking, it seems most appropriate for development actors to limit themselves to using state-building terminology. However, although ‘state-building’ is possibly a less controversial term than ‘nation-building’ for external actors to use to describe their interventions, there has, in recent years, been a tendency for the difference between the two terms to become less marked and for them to be used interchangeably by many in the international community.

This is most common in non-academic circles, particularly the media, donors, NGOs, think tanks, etc. This has probably largely been influenced by the Bush administration’s (and, as a result, the media’s) tendency to use the term ‘nation-building’ for its interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. As a result, the 4 terms ‘nation-building’ is increasingly being used for activities that could more accurately be described as ‘state-building’. Whilst current foreign policy and popular culture tend to conflate the two terms, it is also possible to argue that state-building and nation-building are opposing forces (Ottaway 1999). Whilst state-building focuses on creating a homogenous nation-state, a ‘nation-building’ approach emphasizes the importance of cultural identity which may ultimately lead to calls for self-determination. Finally, another possible reason for the lack of distinction between state- and nation-building may be that the literature neglects the ‘building a cultural identity’ aspects of nation-building, focusing instead on the more technical aspects of building state capacity.

The logic that the absence and/or weakness of liberal institutions is the main cause of underdevelopment and insecurity driving armed conflicts in the global era, mainstream scholarship has defined state-building as ‘the creation of new governmental institutions and the strengthening of existing ones’ (Fukuyama 2004,17; Paris and Sisk 2009,8; Ottaway 2002,1004). In this narrow institutional understanding of state-building, the onus on external actors is to assist in putting in place institutional architecture across a broad spectrum encompassing representative democracy (e.g., elections; constitution, media, judiciary, rule of law), and a private market-based economy (e.g. private property, fiscal and monetary institutions, open competition rules)

Nation building, according to Fritz and Menocal (2007, 15), is a process of constructing a shared sense of identity and common destiny, usually in order to overcome ethnic, sectarian, or communal differences and to counter alternative sources of identity and loyalty. A nation is a group of people with a common language, history, culture, and (usually) geographic territory. A state is an association of people characterized by formal institutions of government, including laws; permanent territorial boundaries; and sovereignty (political independence). A state may comprise one or more nations (as did the Roman Empire and Austria-Hungary), and a nation may be represented in (or ruled by) one or more (usually contiguous) states, as in the early modern principalities of Germany. (Britannica). The OECD defines nation-building as: Actions are undertaken, usually by national actors, to forge a sense of common nationhood, usually in order to overcome ethnic, sectarian or communal differences; usually to counter alternate sources of identity and loyalty; and usually to mobilize a population behind a parallel state-building project.

The World Bank, acknowledging that it has no formal definition for nation-building, describes state-building as ‘the centrality of efforts to build state capacity and accountability, including strong attention to the most basic state administrative and delivery systems, complementing capacity investments with robust efforts to improve accountability, and balancing state capacity-building efforts with support for civil society and the private sector. Hipper identifies three interrelated aspects in the overarching process of nation-building; (a) the creation of an integration ideology, integrated society, and a functioning state apparatus. René Grotenhuis identifies Peacemaking, nation-building, and state-building start out from the recognition of shared interest, even if this shared aspect is minimal or even negatively formulated: Sometimes there is no more basis than the acknowledgment that it is impossible to defeat the other groups and that therefore one has to find a solution for living together.  But for a state to become viable and flourishing, shared interests have to transform into trust.

ICNCC Talk show Note:

1. Nation le State cu aa dang. State building timi cu ram ser a si; constitution le law tbk...ser kha                 a si. Nation building timi cu identity (culture, literature, tbk) aa khatmi kha fonh or ser kha a                    si. Nation sinak ding ah State (ram), territory, mipi tbk ahau. Nain, holh ca le adangdang ah                    unity kan hau lio cang khi a si.

2.      Insitution a thami aherh ngaingai. A tha le a fekmi institution kan ngeih ahcun unity ca ah                      hlawknak tampi a kan pek lai i, CNB kan kalpi kho deuh lai.

3.      Resources chambau ruang ah nation building i a herhmi unity a ngah lo. Chin mipi vialte fon                   khomi structure aherh ngaingai ko.

4.      Nation building tuah tikah a tuahtu nih an i that hnemmi kha fakpi in ruah ahau.


Book Recommendation