(Estimated Pub Date) the Challenge of Ethnic Conflict to National and International Order in the 1990S: Geographic Perspectives- October 1995

Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268
Ethnic Conflict: A Comparative
Examination
Thomas M. Poulsen
Professor of Geography
Portland State University
The conventional political map of the world displays
170 political geographic features that properly are
termed sovereign states. They constitute the habitual
framework for contemplating international affairs.
Unfortunately, the conventional map can be a most
misleading instmment in presenting the political
geography of the world. The map depicts relative sizes
and shapes of countries and the locations of their capi-
tal cities, but these are among their least significant
qualities. Indeed, it should be noted that traditional
political maps of the world typically distort the size of
states because their customary Mercator projection
creates great area disparities between tropical and
polar regions. Although Greenland is about one-sev-
enth the size of South America, it actually appears
larger on most political maps.
Among features of a state critical to governmental
functioning that are ignored on political maps are:
~ The territory really under effective control ofthe
state’s government.
- The area of the state actually settled and productive.
- The degree of centralization of govemmental deci-
sionmaking and authority within the state.
~ The dependence of the given state upon another
state.
~ Whether the state is a nation-state or a multination
state. The last-named is the most pivotal.
Nations
A key element in understanding the modem world is
to appreciate the fact that occupying space concur-
rently with states are more than 250 mutually exclu-
sive nations, and these have few outer limits that are
coextensive with state boundaries. The term nation is
a useful generalizing concept that can be applied to a
variety of human groupings. At the simplest level,
nations may be viewed as collective, subjective states
of mind in which individuals habitually segregate
other persons into “our folks" and “foreigners.” Many
of the world’s ills are the result of conflicting national
identities. However, nations can also be appreciated
for some positive effects, including providing legiti-
macy to governmental actions and facilitating eco-
nomic interdependence through a climate of trust.
The concept of nation is questioned by some because
of the great diversity of circumstances the notion
embraces, with resulting difficulties in definition and
measurement. Unfortunately, although most national
groups share a number of elements in common, each
nation, like each state (and virtually every other phe-
nomenon studied by geography), ultimately is a
unique entity. Questionnaires and other techniques
that may effectively identify members of a nation in
one region may prove inappropriate or erroneous
when applied to groups in another area. The great
diversity among nations does not make the concept
any the less useful, however. Although some individu-
als may have a problem with the subjective quality of
the abstraction, this does not mean that idea is errone-
ous or that nations do not exist because they cannot be
measured.
The advantage of thinking in terms of nations rather
than the more diffuse “ethnic groups” is the political
dimension inherent in the concept. The most impor-
tant common denominators distinguishing nations
from tribes, castes, and other human groupings are
collective self-awareness and a consensual political
agenda. Members of a nation are conscious of that
identity, and most believe that their interests are best
served by having a state of their own.
Numerous ethnic groups throughout the world do not
satisfy these two criteria. Although anthropologists
and other social scientists may identify common ele-
ments that stamp a given population group as distinc-
tive from its neighbors, a lack of group awareness of
individuals beyond extended kinship patterns or
166
Approved for Release: 2018/06/01 C00123268