This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
The New World Disorder
It is quite possible that historians of the 2050s, looking back into our now closing century, will pick out, as one deep tectonic movement stretching across more than two centuries, the disintegration of the great polyethnic, polyglot, and often polyreligious monarchical empires built up so painfully in mediaeval and early modern times.2 In most cases the disintegration was accompanied by great violence, and was often followed by decades of civil and interstate wars. In the 1770s the first nation-state was born in North America out of armed resistance to imperial Britain, but it was inwardly so divided that it subsequently endured the bloodiest civil war of the nineteenth century. Out of the prolonged collapse of the Spanish Empire between 1810 and 1830 came the brutal despotisms, rebellions and civil strife that have plagued Latin America until our own time. As a result of the Great War of 1914--1918 the Hohenzollern, Habsburg, Romanov and Ottoman empires blew up, leaving in their wake a congeries of small, weak, and generally unstable nation-states in Central and Eastern Europe and in the Near East.
1 Aleksandr Nevsky defeated the Swedish army on the banks of the Neva in 1240. The success of the Bolshevik Revolution in the very heart of the evaporated Romanov empire permitted Lenin and his associates to reassemble many of the pieces of that empire during the early 1920s. Stalin spoke more broadly of the Germans as ‘a people devoid of conscience and honour. Pushkin. leading to the founding of the Romanov dynasty.’ 4 2 . Meanwhile. Aleksandr Suvorov was Catherine the Great’s outstanding general. Reeling under the ferocious onslaught of Hitler’s armies.’1 Prosperous Europe has today forgotten how much it owes both to Stalin and to Russian nationalism for the destruction of the Nazi empire. it proved implausible to add the communized states of Eastern Europe to the USSR. of Belinsky. Dmitri Donskoi. Seeming to counteract this tectonic movement----which involved. China. during the 1980s. Glinka. . Indeed. Belgium. Stalin and his associates discovered that encouraging nationalism was crucial to the war effort. under the centralized control of a multiethnic and militant Communist Party. Nationalism could be halted. but not permanently restrained or superseded. A historical logic was already visible. as Vietnam invaded Cambodia and China invaded Vietnam. But the Soviet Union did not regard itself as a huge new nation-state. the continuing civil strife in Northern Ireland. Tchaikovsky. Aleksandr Suvorov and Mikhail Kutusov inspire you in this war. the last. Britain. for a time. also in the aftermath of World War II. In a famous speech delivered on 7 November 1941. did not last very long. of Pavlov and Chechinov . But in the war’s aftermath. Dmitri Pozharsky. Kuzma Minin and Dmitri Pozharsky expelled the Poles from Moscow in 1612. the CPSU’S general secretary urged his listeners thus: ‘Let the manly images of our great ancestors Aleksandr Nevsky. Partition in British India. This phase. the Thirty Years War in Vietnam. however. Kuzma Minin. Dmitri Donskoi routed the Mongols on the banks of the Don in 1380. and of Kutusov. the horrors in Uganda and Zaire----all in differing ways can be seen as outcomes of the same long process. the bourgeois colonial empires of France. [who] have the impudence to call for the destruction of the Great Russian Nation. After Eastern Europe came Yugoslavia. Cuba. In 1979 the first. . of Lenin. Laos and Cambodia. Chernychevsky. the bloody collapse of the Ethiopian Empire. and even This text is a revised and expanded version of a talk recorded by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation in Ithaca. if then generally unnoticed. Stalin’s empire was just as surely imploding as Churchill’s had done. Mikhail Kutusov----thanks to Tolstoy’s energetic promotion----was widely regarded as Napoleon’s successful antagonist in 1812. and thus began a pluralization of Communist states bearing national names. it may well be. In another speech of that year. a people with the morals of beasts. wars between Communist states broke out. So that. nationalism was reduced generally to a politically insignificant ‘cultural’ ethnicity. Tolstoy. North Korea.The fall of the Ch’ing Empire in 1911 opened two generations of civil wars in China. and. of course. liberation as much as disintegration----was Communism in its early internationalist form. Holland. NY on 5 December 1991. the Nation of Plekhanov. Gorky and Chekhov. rather as a sort of model for a future in which nationalism as a political principle would be finally superseded. massive interethnic violence in Sri Lanka. and Vietnam.
were constructed. and was given additional force in the late eighteenth century by the American nationalist Alexander Hamilton. which included all of Ireland. and perhaps China’s Turkic and Mongol zones in due course. Unreflecting commentators----on the Left and on the Right ----frequently assume that ‘small’ countries. Tibet may well follow. But one should not forget the history of political fissiparousness among the Han themselves. and thus represented from the start a forlorn attempt to stretch the short. with limited resources in raw materials and labour. creating by the end of the 1970s a United Nations with four times the membership that had made up the pioneering League of Nations half a century earlier. Taiwan is already effectively independent. multireligious. and grows partly out of the first. markets. The first is that what is going on is ‘fragmentation’ and ‘disintegration’----with all the menacing. The second prejudice. and this demographic weight should militate against successful separatisms. Dangerous Fancies In what perspective does it make sense to reflect on all of this? There are. For this language makes us forget the decades or centuries of violence out of which Frankensteinian ‘integrated states’ such as the United Kingdom of 1900. attempted heroically to create a socialist state on imperial foundations. are somehow not ‘real’ countries or are ‘barely’ viable in the face of the industrial giants and the exigencies of the world capitalist economy. has to do with the relationship between capitalism. It is thus quite possible that Mao’s empire too will crumble. and state size. I believe. In the last 150 years China has been much longer divided than unified. tight skin of nationalism over a vast multiethnic. four misconceptions which ought to be discarded from the outset. The last reincarnation of a pre-modern empire is China. taking leaves out of the books of both Stalin and the Sons of Heaven. multilinguistic imperium. But it was named The People’s Republic of China. which still included Algeria as a part of the metropole. and in the mid nineteenth century by the German nationalist Friedrich 2 To be sure.2 There is no reason to think that late empires die more peacefully than their predecessors. 5 . and which fought a horrifically brutal----and futile----war to keep things that way. where Mao Tse-tung. or that the aftermaths of their dying are any less tormented. at least at the edges. One is reminded of France in the 1950s. which is related to. pathological connotations these words bring with them. Should we not really regard such ‘integrations’ as pathological when we see how calmly The Irish Republic and the United Kingdom have coexisted since the former was established in 1921----after decades of often violent repression and resistance? Or when we observe the brutal warfare still continuing in ‘integrated’ Northern Ireland? Behind the language of ‘fragmentation’ lies always a Panglossian conservatism that likes to imagine that every status quo is nicely normal. This kind of thinking goes back to early modern mercantilism.Portugal collapsed. the Han form the vast majority of China’s population.
The fourth prejudice is that there is some inscrutable connection between capitalism and ‘peace’. In turn. while their adversaries stand for ‘narrow’ nationalism. they are dangerous. domestically troubled giants like the United States or India face enormous political difficulties in bending and renovating the national economy in the contemporary environment. as well as hiring Venezuelans and Zambians as local managers. such that the ‘free market’ is instinctively juxtaposed not merely to the command economy but to war. The third fancy is that ‘transnational corporations’ have somehow made nationalism obsolete. making it easier for political and economic leaders to ask for sacrifices without expensive coercion. A simple example is Indonesia’s bloody ‘integration’ of the old Portuguese colony of East Timor. Conversely. or French ‘transnationals’. and can be quite antagonistic to Japanese. which between 1975 and 1980 took the lives of one third of the local population. Both World Wars were instigated by capitalist giants. overlooks the obvious facts that the effective controllers of General Electric are overwhelmingly American citizens. homogeneous countries the sense of national solidarity is especially strong.List. Singapore and Japan. and effectively to seek specialized niches in the international division of labour. This idea flies flatly in the face of all the historical evidence. live in America. Indonesia. No country has fought more wars in the second half of the twentieth century than would-be free-market America. All four fancies are not merely profoundly conservative. in the face of ever bolder resistance to this ‘integration’. Today. by comparison with India. or German. we see General Electric abandoning high-wage America to locate its new plants in labourcheap Venezuela and Zambia. this view encourages them to unleash the preponderant military power at their disposal to make their wishes prevail. and often ‘terrorism’. who argued for ‘big’ nation-states on the grounds that only these had sufficiently large internal markets to permit ‘economic sovereignty’ and a seriously competitive place in an industrializing world. But revisionist students of political economy have for some time been arguing that in a highly interconnected world economy it is quite often small. however. the regime in Jakarta prepares 6 . Sri Lanka or Pakistan. In Asia they refer us to South Korea and Thailand. for they have the cumulative effect of encouraging such people to imagine that they stand for progress and peace. people say. In Europe they point to The Netherlands and Finland. Norway and Austria by comparison with Italy. No country fought more wars in the nineteenth century than ‘free trade’ Britain. France and the United Kingdom. After all. to develop smoother industrial relations. Their indifference to the plight of American workers is not at all new. It is that in such small. are active politically in America. This view. To the extent that powerful leaders in big countries actually believe them. The argument is quite simple at bottom. sectionalism. ethnically and religiously homogeneous countries that do best. and is in fact easier to get away with because of the vast size of the United States.
Yet these same discontents have also fired a wide variety of other. had to be made literate to function effectively in factories and their new urban environments. One is that they are the natural creatures of economic discontent and relative deprivation. ‘separatists’ and ‘antiIndonesian elements’. with standardized textbooks. and especially industrial capitalism. for a variety of reasons. The other explanation. standardized curricula. then. social movements----socialist. and none go back further than the last quarter of the eighteenth century. is that they represent deep historical memories and traditional communities. seem today to have lost their ideological power for the time being. industrialized military machines. Up until the nineteenth century the vast majority of the people in even the most advanced states could neither read nor write. liberalism and popular democracy. In the nineteenth century appeared the mass-oriented newspaper. unlike their peasant forebears. and standardized examinations----in the politically dominant vernaculars. typically propounded by the political leaders of nationalist and ethnic movements. and with increasing speed. often competing. In fact. Modern Imaginings What. (Imperialism quickly spread these structures and habits to the colonized territories. such discontents.) In conjunction with the spread of the political doctrines of republicanism. communist. print 7 . where once-staunch Stalinists are turning themselves into strident nationalists. accounts for the driving power of nationalism and its much less respectable younger relation ‘ethnicity’? And how are the two related? Two common types of explanation quite clearly can not stand serious investigation. The truth is that it is precisely their modernity which gives nationalism and ethnicity such contemporary power. however. intensely aware of the educated-manpower needs of capitalism and of their own conscriptbased. We are seeing a good deal of this ‘moving-in’ in today’s Eastern Europe. Everyone sensible knows that all significant violence would cease the minute Jakarta agreed to quit East Timor and leave its wretched and heroic people alone. many of these competitors. later. But capitalism. such movements are distinctly modern imaginings. Nonetheless. changed all this.for more repression against ‘disintegrationists’. who. began developing modern school systems. or exploit. Capitalism linked to the technology of printing had already created in early modern times an impressive production of books in vernacular languages. around the rest of the world. The two most significant factors generating nationalism and ethnicity are both linked closely to the rise of capitalism. millenarian. first in Europe and the Americas. and so forth. religious. It is true that many nationalist and ethnic movements build on. and for the most part lived and died near where their ancestors had lived and died before them. They can be described summarily as mass communications and mass migrations. consumed not merely by the book-reading middle classes but by the growing working classes. Governments. Hence nationalism and ethnicity are very likely to move in to take their place.
in their places of origin. Chinese to California. they carry with them memories and customs. The metropoles thought of them scornfully as ‘creoles’ or ‘colonials’----as it were. As they follow in the wake of grain and gold. Human bodies. Africa. and so many others. In our own time the pace is fast. not back into it. to create the possibility of becoming Mexicans. In the twentieth century. Algerians in France----in their tens. and likely to increase in speed. Filipinos in Italy. Southeast Asia and Oceania. these impulses have been enormously reinforced.and state-induced flow of non-Europeans from continent to continent. are not merely another form of commodity. non-European Europeans----and this imposed. but all modern history shows to be the most deeply subversive institution that we know.capitalism brought into being mass publics who began to imagine. thanks to the train. Southeast Asia and Australia. beliefs and eating habits. but the great majority are ‘pulled’ by exactly that force----the market----which George Bush imagines as a force for peace and order. and still followed European religions. which. And these human characteristics. furthermore. with the development of radio and television. Thais in Japan. followed by Armenians. many are ‘pushed’ by political repression in their homelands. and stretch still further. a new type of community: the nation. however. Africans and Asians. but they were still more or less ‘white’. if not hundreds of thousands. They could not be treated with the full brutality inflicted on Indians. In the nineteenth century there came an extraordinary market. West Indians in England. Indians to South America. rubber and textiles. petrochemicals and silicon chips. which have a colloquial. though caught up in the vortex of the market. still spoke European languages. assume quickly a drastically different salience in the diasporas of modern life. eighteenth and nineteenth centuries millions of minimally free Europeans and millions of enslaved Africans moved across the Atlantic to the Americas. were peculiarly fortunate compared to their successors elsewhere. Such people. To be sure. but who had rarely seen Scotland or Castile. auditory and visual immediacy that print can scarcely match. It is no accident that nationalism’s historical debut occurred in the Americas among the descendants of Scots and Castilians who shared language and religion with Scots and Spaniards in Europe. they were following the market out of the metropole. are usually borne lightly and unselfconsciously. identity eventually fused with attachment to their non-European homes. the bus and the aeroplane: Koreans in Canada. through the media. Mass Migration and the World Market Mass migration also took on a new character in early modern times in that it was stimulated less by disaster and war than by commerce and capitalism’s development of increasingly rapid and safe long-distance transportation. musics and sexual desires. in that their messages are accessible to people who do not have to be very literate in the dominant vernacular----messages. placeless. Arabs. Lebanese. In the Americas they quickly made 8 . Venezuelans and ‘Americans’. Turks in Germany. ‘Debased’ they might be in the eyes of the imperial metropole. Furthermore. Over the seventeenth.
capitalism paradoxically also held them. Neo-Nazis and skinheads behind the recent outrages in United Germany. in German. in a way unimaginable in earlier centuries. by the same ships. finally. In all later market migrations. In the face of bewilderingly alien environments it was only to be expected that the migrants would turn to each other for moral and economic support----and so they clustered in ghettoes small or large----in Detroit. This Lufthansa Parthenon is transparently not a real memory for the melancholy worker. the telephone and the post office encouraged them to keep ‘in touch’.themselves masters of the indigenous populations. Berlin. Huddersfield. the mass appearance. of thousands of immigrants. (Following independence from the metropoles. He has put it on his wall because he can read it as sign for ‘Greece’. fail to produce its own ethnicizations. easily go home. encouraging the gazer to take a Holiday in Sunny Greece. Italian. Le Pen’s neofascist movement in France finds its strongest support among two once visibly antagonistic groups: workers who used to be faithful supporters of the French Communist Party but whose rundown neighbourhoods are exactly where the poor immigrants are compelled to cluster. 9 . We may recall the famous photograph of a Peloponnesian Gastarbeiter sitting mournfully in his tiny room in some anonymous German industrial town----Stuttgart perhaps? The pitiful little room is bare of any decoration except a travel poster of the Parthenon. feel themselves more than ever French. and----in his Stuttgart misery----for an ‘ethnicity’ that only Stuttgart has encouraged him to imagine. buses and aeroplanes that had vacuumed them out of those homes in the first place. and former pied-noir (putatively ‘white’ colonial) elements who fled free Algeria in 1962. they had no choice but to be subordinated. with a subscription. they encouraged huge new immigrations from non-British and non-Spanish Europe to consolidate this domination and to promote accumulation in a labour-scarce environment). Spanish and Levantine ancestries. But it was not only local and familial memories that they brought with them. they could. Canada and South Africa could their example be followed. São Paolo. in principle. Hence many of them dreamed of circulatory migration rather than of finding a new permanent home. did not. Capitalism had its own way of helping them imagine a more mediated identity. The telex. For one thing. and will not. More serious still. and who despite their Maltese. Afterwards. and they were never regarded even as ‘debased Europeans’. produced en masse by Lufthansa. trains. even if that was what. they found themselves stuck with. in strange ways. New Zealand. ‘White Power’ extremists in the United States---who advertize themselves ‘ethnically’ as the real Germans. On the other side. only in Australia. in settled communities. or Marseilles. The scale and speed of these modern market-driven migrations made any traditional form of gradual assimilation to the new environments very difficult. people moved away from the periphery towards more inward centres. in their homelands’ grip. English or Americans----are also in part responses to the labour flows created on a mass scale by contemporary world capitalism. the National Front in the United Kingdom.
cheaper lines of goods on the world market.Dangerous Convergences There is still another way in which the market is making a special contribution to the new world disorder. precisely because the two powers were terrified by the prospect of a nuclear war between themselves. We recall American operations against Soviet-influenced Afghanistan. such as Saudi Arabia. agrarian nation-states. On the one hand. agrarian states proliferated. But by the 1880s. They typically had but a single customer. Thus British and American arms flowed to the recently independent states of South America. for example Armstrong in Britain and Krupp in Germany. as technological innovation picked up further speed. which had the purchasing power to acquire ‘firstclass’ arms from the industrial cores. Iran and Iraq. tanks and poison gas were all born. The logic behind these developments only deepened its thrust after World War II. Angola and 10 . Habsburg. military-assistance programmes on a vast scale developed. Hence the massive arms races of the 1960s. had broken out of the state’s monopsonistic grip. usually surrounded with a wall of secrecy. and as the number of weak. above all in zones where the rival superpower was hegemonic. the world saw for the first time immensely rich weak. submarines. and East Asia. But two new conditions substantially aggravated the situation. Ottoman. this process picked up increasing speed after World War I. these conglomerates’ free-market customers were weak. The character of superpower competition in the periphery also encouraged both sides to sell or grant quite sophisticated weapons to customer-clients who were not the leaderships of nationstates: guerrillas. and even Africa. because of imperial rivalries. and the proliferation in the debris of a host of new. The great munitions industries were now in the business of supplying their core customers with the most advanced and expensive war machinery possible. Characteristically. weak. aeroplanes. On the other hand. peripheral and agrarian states which were incapable of constructing the high-tech metallurgical and chemical plants necessary for making modern weapons of their own on a mass scale. agrarian states. also completely incapable of self-armament. terrorists and counter-terrorists. In the early days of industrialism. aircraft carriers. produced commodities to customer specifications. The second was the new speed with which weapons systems were becoming obsolete as the pace of invention accelerated: in one generation. in that their beneficiaries’ bills were often paid for by the superpowers themselves. Southeast. As a matter of state policy. and it intersects frequently with the upheavals sketched out above. as a result of the oil crisis of 1973. largely outside the international market. German weapons primarily to Eastern Europe and the Ottoman Empire. some of these munitions giants. and were building an infant world arms market. Hohenzollern and Ch’ing empires. Latin America. 1970s and 1980s in the Near East. The first was the collapse of the Romanov. and were. rebels. South. charged administered prices. the state. For two basic reasons. the onset of the Cold War pitted two superpowers in a global struggle fought largely through proxies in the periphery. the munitions industries in the advanced Western states operated largely outside the market. but also selling off obsolescent.
and barely industrial states which enjoyed special relations with a superpower. Roland Oliver. India. based as this culture was on an idea of popular sovereignty. which will powerfully resist attempts to curb their reach. Some at least of these states have been attempting to go nuclear despite the efforts of the existing nuclear club to maintain its exclusive membership. it is plausible to argue that the end of the Cold War and the implosion of the Soviet Union may to some extent reduce the flow of munitions around the world. nineteenth. such as Israel. But Moscow’s contribution to the flow was always substantially smaller than that of Washington. have proved quite ready to divert arms received or bought from the cores to friendly opposition groups in neighbouring states with which they have serious bones to pick (for example. In a substantial number of such cases. within iron colonial cages. to a greater or lesser degree. in that the drive to sell may be less inhibited by large strategic and/or moral considerations.’ 11 . Arms production itself has spread quite rapidly outside the old cores----to Brazil and Argentina. and for which the world arms market----with its substantial new customers in Eastern Europe----remains an irresistible magnet. and Soviet operations against American-influenced South Africa and various parts of Latin America. however. Up to a point. describes the ‘partition’ of the continent in the last quarter of the nineteenth century as ‘a ruthless act of political amalgamation. superpower military support was provided to subgroups which. Tanzania’s military support of the opponents of Idi Amin. defined themselves in nationalist. even places like Thailand and Indonesia. half a century of Cold War has created huge military-industrial complexes in the West.and early-twentieth-century imperialisms had forcibly ‘integrated’. incapable of producing sophisticated armaments themselves. or India’s arming of the early Bengali rebellion against Old Pakistan). ethnic or racial terms.) The example of the superpowers was quickly followed by intermediary powers: small industrial countries such as France and Britain. or surplus wealth. a substantial number of Third World states. these national armies soon played a central role in domestic 3 The eminent historian of Africa. It may even be that the decline in world fears of a major nuclear war will further stimulate the working of the market. it was accepted a priori that one central guarantor of the reality of that sovereignty was a national army. From the beginnings of nationalism. China. ethnolinguistic groups and religious communities. France and Japan. At the same time. Finally. let alone of the West as a whole.Cuba. it was largely statedirected and outside the market. (The temptations were particularly great in Asia and Africa.3 The independent successor-states born after World War II were thus peculiarly vulnerable to external manipulation of ethnic sentiments. such as Iran. Even in such core industrial polities as Germany. whereby something on the order of ten thousand units was reduced to a mere forty. Furthermore. a huge variety of older polities. Israel. There.
The transfer of sovereignty therefore often created a fundamental and dangerous antagonism between an ethnic minority in control of the most powerful domestic organization. and favouring creoles and mestizos from the middle and upper classes. Small wonder then that militaries have been extensively used in the periphery to maintain power structures which. despite nationalist rhetoric. mythologization of militaries as sine qua non symbols and guarantors of national sovereignty. over which political leaderships even in advanced. Belfast is less than 500 kilometres from London. militaries were too important for the new national governments not to attempt to seize control of recruitment into the officer corps. In the first place. Still less wonder that discontent and rebellion against such status quos should have also disposed themselves along ethnic. In other cases. In the weak peripheral states. perhaps. militaries largely armed and trained from the outside were even more likely to turn inwards. dangerous convergences that were already born in the last century show every sign of continuing to develop: market-led proliferation of weapons-systems. Karens in Burma. Under the best of conditions----that is. the processes of decolonization itself. especially in the ex-colonial periphery. and majorities or pluralities that claimed state power on the basis of popular elections and representative government. were destined to be deployed only in British Burma and against domestic Burmese resistance to British rule. weak. as the nineteenth-century experience of Latin America shows. Berbers in Algeria. As the crow flies. for obvious political reasons. characteristically favouring backward and/or Christian minorities: ‘Martial Races’ in India. where some genuine conception of national representation in the military was adhered to----majoritarianism usually threatened the hitherto powerful minorities inside the military with the long-term erosion of their ascendancy. quasi-ethnic. generally excluding ‘Indians’. Even where coups did not rapidly ensue. The world today is full of national armies that have never fought an external enemy. they trained them for purposes of domestic control. Among the many reasons for this introversion have been. but continue to torment their own fellow-citizens. Ambonese in the Dutch Indies. social and cultural forces at work here. The Emergence of the Long-Distance Nationalist? There are profoundly deep economic. such as in Latin America. To sense these forces one does not need to go outside Old Europe itself. they recruited on a heavily ethnicized basis. Hence. Ibos in Nigeria. or racial lines. when the imperial powers began creating local militaries in the colonies. despite the end of the Cold War. their ability to help their fellow ethnics in time of trouble. for example. and. as well as the temptations posed by the general absence of countervailing domestic powers in poor. recruitment to the officer corps was heavily biased on class and ethnic-racial lines. ‘democratic’ states have only tangential control. In the second place. The Burma Rifles. have been profoundly ethnicized. and still heavily agrarian nations. and ethnicization of officer corps. and so forth. but has been an armed 12 .politics.
any way but voting) in the conflicts of his imagined Heimat----now only fax-time away. or pay the price of. Rather. What these instances show is not at all that nationalism is obsolete. Croats in Sydney. He is also easy prey for shrewd political manipulators in his Heimat. Jews in New York. but because it has gained political and financial support in the United States and inside England. despite British use of the most sophisticated urban counter-insurgency methods against the IRA. weapons on the international arms market.camp for the past twenty-five years. have profoundly disrupted a once seemingly ‘natural’ coincidence of national sentiment with lifelong residence in fatherland or motherland. capital of the most powerful state in Europe and hub of the European Community. but to which he may feel little attachment. he finds it tempting to play identity politics by participating (via propaganda. But Berlin. This is why some of the most strongly ‘Irish nationalist’ supporters of the IRA live out their lives as ‘ethnic Irish’ in the United States. Tamils in Melbourne. But this citizenshipless participation is inevitably non-responsible----our hero will not have to answer for. weapons. the long-distance politics he undertakes. as well as war and political oppression. The same goes for many Ukrainians settled in Toronto. Croat politicians.000 kilometres from Berlin. but which are today also linked to such nationalisms in complex and often explosive ways. the vast migrations produced over the past 150 years by the market. Vietnamese in Los Angeles. and Turks in Berlin. Jamaicans in London. and training and intelligence from Libya and in the Near East. on the other hand. money. and despite British leaders as aggressive as Margaret Thatcher. 13 . The IRA survives not only because of its local nationalist appeal and its ruthless methods. 4 ‘Him’ because this type of politics seems to attract males more than females. It may well be that we are faced here with a new type of nationalist: the ‘long-distance nationalist’ one might perhaps call him. have been highly active on the world arms market. In this process ‘ethnicities’ have been engendered which follow nationalisms in historical order. Belgrade is less than 1. and draw substantial resources from emigrant Croat communities in various countries around the world. the Community and the United States seem largely impotent in the face of the civil war destroying Old Yugoslavia.4 For while technically a citizen of the state in which he comfortably lives. Belgrade is the headquarters of a putatively ‘national’ army which was and is disproportionately Serbian and is now being used for Serbian rather than Yugoslavian ends.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.