The term refers to the division of the Balkan peninsula, formerly ruled almost entirely by the Ottoman

Empire, into a number of smaller states between 1817 and 1912.[3] It was coined in the early 19th
century and has a strong negative connotation.[4] The term however came into common use in the
immediate aftermath of the First World War, with reference to the numerous new states that arose
from the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire.
The larger countries within Europe, often being the result of the union of several historical regions or
nations, have faced the perceived issue of Balkanisation. The Iberian
Peninsula and Spain especially has from the time of Al-Andalus had to come to terms with
Balkanisation,[5] with several separatist movements existing today including the Basque
Country and Catalan independentism.
Canada is a stable country but does harbor separatist movements, the strongest of which is
the Quebec sovereignty movement which seeks to create a nation-state that would encompass the
majority of Canada's French-Canadianpopulation. Two referendums have been held to decide this
question, one in 1980 and the last one in 1995 being lost by the separatist side by a small margin.
Less mainstream, smaller movements also exist in the western provinces, namely Alberta, to protest
what is seen as a domination by Quebec and Ontario of Canadian
politics. Saskatchewan premier Roy Romanow had also considered separation from Canada if the
1995 Quebec independence referendum had succeeded; which would have led to the balkanisation
of Canada.
Quebec has been the scene of a small but vociferous partition movement from the part
of anglophone activist groups opposed to the idea of Independence of Quebec, as such a country
would be dominated by francophones on the order of 80%. One such project is the Proposal for the
Province of Montreal, which wishes for the establishment of a separate province from Quebec from
Montreal's strongly anglophone and immigrant communities.
In January 2007, regarding the growing support for Scottish independence, the then-Chancellor of
the Exchequer of the United Kingdom, and later Prime Minister, Gordon Brown talked of a
"Balkanisation of Britain".[6] Independence movements within Great Britain also exist
in England, Wales, Cornwall, and Northern Ireland.

Balkanization in Africa[edit]
As Bates, Coatsworth & Williamson would argue, Balkanization was observed to a great extent
in Africa. During the 1960s, countries in the Communauté Financière Africaine started to opt for
"autonomy within the French community" in this post-colonial era.
Countries within the CFA zone were allowed to impose tariffs, regulate trade and manage transport
services. Zambia, Malawi, Uganda and Tanzania achieved independence in the post-colonial era.
This period also saw the break down of the Federation of the Rhodesias and Nyasaland as well as
the East African High Commission. Balkanization was a result of the movement towards a closed
economy. Countries were adopting antitrade and anti-market policies. Tariff rates were 15% higher
than OECD countries during the 1970s and 1980s.[7] Furthermore, countries took approaches to
subsidize their own local industries yet the market within the country was small-scale. Transport
networks were fragmented; regulations on labor and capital flow were more regulated; prices were
under control. Between 1960 and 1990, balkanisation led to disastrous results. The GDP of these
regions were one-tenth of OECD countries.[7] Balkanisation also resulted in what van de Valle called
"typically fairly overvalued exchanged rates" in Africa. Balkanization contributed to what Bates,
Coatsworth & Williamson claimed to be a lost decade in Africa.
Economic situations only took a turn during the mid-1990s. Countries within the region started to
input more stabilization policies. What was originally a high exchange rate eventually fell to a more
reasonable exchange rate after devaluations in 1994. Eighteen countries had an exchange rate 50%
higher than the official exchange rate, by 1994, the number of countries that had such exchange rate
was decreased to four.[8] However, there is still limited progress in improving trade policies within the
region according to van de Walle. In addition, the post-independent countries still rely heavily on
donors for development plans. Balkanization still has an impact on today's Africa.