“The State is a politically organised people of a definite territory”. Bluntschii STATE CONFUSING AND INEXACT USE OF THE WORD STATE The main concern of Political Science is the State, the greatest of all human associations. The word has often been erroneously employed as a synonym for “nation”, “country”, “society” and “the government.” There isso great a diversity of the uses of the word “State that it ereates confusion, There are diverse notions about the word “State” in Political Science. The word has often been used indiscriminately to express a general tendeeny or an idea. While in common usage wwe speak of the “state” of a man’s health, of his mind or of his economic conditions, In Political Science also it has been used in different shades. It has commonly been ‘employed to express the idea of the collective action of community as distinguished from individual action. The term has also been erroneously employed asa synonym of the word ‘government’. For example, when we speak of “State Regulation”, “State management” and *State aid”, ¢tc., strictly speaking, we use the word ate" for government. While in some countries which have the system of federal government the term “State” has been used to designate the federation as a whole and its constituent units. For example, we make the use of the term “state” for the Federation of the United States of America and at the same time we also use the same term for its constituent units like Hawaii, Alaska, Texas, California, and New York. Similarly, we use the term “state” for the Federal Republic of India and at the same time we also make use of the same term for its constitutent units like Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Rajasthan, etc. If we deal with this problem in detail we shall find that the use of the word “State” for the Federation of the United States of America or for the Federal Republic of India is appropriate but itis inappropriate for the constituent units ‘The use of the word “state” for India is appropriate but itis inappropriate for its constituent units like Alaska, Hawaii, California and New York. In Political Science by the word “State” we mean a “politically organised:people of a definite territory.” If we closely analyse, we shall find that the United States of America or India possesses all the four essential clements of the “State”, i.e., population, territory, government, and sovereignty. But the constituent units of these countries possess population, government but not sovereignty. Therefore, they cannot be called States.POLITICAL THEORY 68 THE TERM “STATE” AND ITS DERIVATION ‘s has already been stated, Political Science deals with the State, the highest of min associations. The Greek used the word “Polis” which corresponds most © the English term “state”. The Greeks used the word “Polie” for “Cary {he term was apy ropriate because at that time there were “city-states” in Political Science”, says Seeley, “was for the Greeks largely municiapl Romans used the term “Civitas” which also means the same. But the term ‘cisites’ employed by Romans implied not merely the idea of citizenship of a city but the notion of public welfare.” The Teutons employed the term “status” which forms only the part of the phrase. The modern term “State” has been derived from the word “status” earlier employed by the Teutons. It was Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) who first of all seems to have employed the term “State” (State) in Political Science. It was he, who first of all introduced this term in the modern literature of Political Science. Thus, it becomes very clear that the term “State” did not become very popular until sixteenth century. The concept of modern state was not known to the people living in a greater part of the Medieval Europe, In the course of time, the word became popular and “acquired the neutral sense of authority pure and simple or constitution whatever its principles or direction.” DEFINITION OF STATE The term “State” has been defined by a number of px their best to let us know what they meant by the term definitions are given below tical thinkers who tired tate”. A few popular (1) | Aristotle defined the state as “a union of families and villages having for its end a perfect and self-sufficing life by which we mean a happy and honourable life."! (2) Cicero defined the state as “a numerous society united by a common sense of right and a mutual participation in advantages."? (3)_ In 1576 Bodin defined the state as “an association of families and their common possessions, governed by supreme power and by reason.” (4) The English writer Holland defines the “State” as “a numerous assemblage of human beings generally occupying a certain territory amongst whom the wil of the majority or class made to prevail against any of their number who ‘oppose it.” (5) _ Burges defines the state as a “particular portion of mankind viewed asan organised unit."* (6) According to Bluntschli, “The state is politically organised people of a definite territory."6 (7) Phitlimore goes to the extent of saying that a state for all purposes of international laws is “a people prominently occupying a fixed territory, bound together by common laws, habits and customs into one body politic, exercising through the medium of an organised government, independent sovereignty and contro] over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war Aristotle : “Politics”, Jowett's Translation. Cicero ; “De Republica”, bk. I. p. 25. Bodin : “Six liner de la repubiique”, bk. 1, Ch. 1 Holland : “Elements of Jurisprudence” (6th ed.), p. 40. Burgess : “Political Science and Constitutional Law”, Vol. I, p. 24. Bluntschli : “Allegemcine Staatslchve", Vol. 1, P. 24, @66 STATE and peace and of entering into all international relations with the communites of the plobe.”” (8) According to Woodrow Wilson, “The state is people organised for law within a definite territory.” (9) Professor Laski defined State as “a territorial society devided Bovernment and subjects claiming within its allotted physical area, a supremacy over all other institutions.” (10) Hall, viewing the State primarily asa concept of international law says, “the marks of an independent state are that the community constituting it, is permanently established for a political end, that it possesses a defined territory and that it is independent of external control.”* (11) “The state exists”, says Oppenheim, “when a people is settled in a country under its own sovereign government.” (12) According to Dr. Garner, “State as a concept of political science and Public law, is a community of persons more or less numerous, permanently ‘occupying a definite portion of territory, independent or nearly s0, of external control and possessing an organised Government to which the great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience.” (13) R. M. Maclver believes that the state is “an association which acting through law as promulgated by a government endowed to this end with coercive power maintains within a community territorially demarcated the universal external conditions of social order.” (14) G.D.H. Cole says that the state “is whole community of its members regarded as organised social unit.” (15) According to Marxist opinion, “the state aroseas a result of the division of society into antagonistic classes for the purpose of curbing the exploited majority in the interest of the exploiting majority. The State is the political organisation of the ruling class which uses it for the purpose of suppressing the resistance of its class enemies. It is an organisation for the maintence of the rule of one class over the other classes. To achieve this the state possesses such instruments of power as an army, the courts, a police force, etc. {16] According to Professor Gilchrist : “The State is a concept of Political Science and a moral reality which exists where a number of people living on a definite territory, are unified under a Government which in internal matters is the organ for expressing their sovereignty and in external ‘matters is independent of other Governments”.s Modern Conception of the State, Views of Gabriel Almond and Robert Dahl: Gabriel Almond use the term “Political System” instead of the State According to him Political System is the system of interactions to be found in all independent societies which perform the functions of integration and adaptation’? (both internally and vis-a-vis other societies) by means of the employment, or threat of employment, of more or less legitimate physical compulsion”. “The Political System”, he explains, “is the legitimate, order maintaining or transforming system in the society”.!" 7. Phillimore : “International Law”, (3rd ed.) p. 81. 8. Hall : “International Law”, 3rd. ed., p. 18. 9. Prot. Gilchrist : “Principles of Political Science”. P. 17, 1957. 10. Gabriel, A. Almond and James S. Coleman: “The Politics of Developing Areas", P.7, I. Idem, P. 7. @28 STATE Phillimore and Oppenheim also serve the purpose but the definitions given by Professor Gilchrist and Dr. Garner seem to be better. We have arrived at this conclusion only after having compared all the definitions quoted above, -CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS OF THE STATE A thorough study and a ciose anaiysis of the definitions given above reveal the fact that the modern state is constituted of the following four Constituent elements: (2) Population or the number of people. Q) Fixed Territory or a definite place of residence. (3) Government or an organisation for uniting the people (4) Sovereignty or supremacy in internal matters and independence of extemal control, Of these four constituent elements of the modern state, the first two are physical elements, the third is political and the fourth is spiritual. Now we shall examine these four essential elements of the modern state one by one. (1) Population. There is no denying the fact that the state is a human institution and is the highest of all human associations. Obviously, there can be no state without human beings. A population of some kind is necessary for the existence of the State. No State can exist in an uninhabited land nor can a defi Piece of land without human habitation be called a state. The State, being a human institvtion, can never exist without human beings. Nor can living beings other than human constitute the State. A desert without human habitation ora wasteland can never be called a modern state nor can there be state of animals and beasts. Leacock has rightly pointed out, “It goes without saying that an uninhabited portion of the earth, taken in itself, cannot form the State. This does not mean that the State must consist of a certain number of human beings nor can there be a state if there is no population other than a single family. It is true that a family may be the centre Tound which the State grows but the State cannot exist in the absence of a number of families. And at the same time it is impossible to fix definite number of men for astate. Indeed, there cannot bea lower or upper limit for the number of citizens of a state, nor can a dozen of people or $0 living in definite place form a state. Their number should neither be too small to be self-sufficient nor too large to be well- governed. What should be the desirable number of the people and what should be the suitable size of population for an ideal state are the problems with which a number of political thinkers attempted to deal. For example, Plato, the famous Greek Philosopher fixed the number at 5,050 citizens, whereas his disciple— Aristotle—was not willing to be bound by any set figure. He was clearly of the opinion that there ought to be a limit and he laid down the general principle that “the number should be neither too small nor too large; it should be large enough to be self-sufficient and small enough to be well-governed.""*. He believed that ten persons would be too small figure but a hundred thousand would be too large a figure to be well-governed. Both were the extremes. He siruck a via ‘media between too small a figure and too large a number. While giving his opinion in this regard Aristotle had in his view the city-states of Greece which, accordingto him, were self-sufficient and well-governed. These city-states of Greece had a very small size of population and direct democracy was popular in these city-states. The Voters or the citizens used to go to the Assembly Hall and pass the laws. In a populous city-state direct democracy could not function. This is the reason why Aristotle had not recommended too large a number of people to be well-governed. 14. Aristotle: “Polities", Bk. VII 4 (Jowett’s ed., p. 267), “Laws”, V. 737. ® « a a « *p0 th thPOLITICAL THEORY 69 Many centuries after Aristotle, Rousseau the French Philosopher who belonged to eighteenth century when the populous states eixsted- wrote his famous book “Social Contract”, published in 1762, that ten thousand should be the ideal figure of population for an ideal state. According to modern scholars. itis ‘well-nigh impossible to fix a definite igure of population of a modern state. These days there ate many states, the figure of which can be counted in crores. Accosding to the U. S. Census Deptt. the world population stood at 4,721,887,000 in June 1983." in mid-June, 1983 the population of some big countries stood as follows: (1) China 1,059,802,200 (2) India 730,572,000 (3) Soviet Union 27,308,000 (4) USA, 234,193,000 (5) Indonesia 160,932,000 On the other hand, there are small states like San Marino. The population of San Marino was twentythree thousand only in 1985. It does not go beyond five figures. Thus, it is quite clear that the states of today vary greatly in respect of population, “The nearest approach to a safe rule”, says Dr. Garner, “is to say that population must be sufficient to provide a governing body and a number of persons to be governed and, of course, sufficient to support a state organisation’ ‘The modern state gives preference to the big size of population because bigger the size of population, greater will be its manpower. They can fight fora bit longer period of time during the war period. This is the reason why in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy gifts or bounties were given to the mothers of many children. Such mothers were called Heroine Mothers. Impetus was given to the same tendency in Russia and France, But when we look at this problem from a different angle, we draw different conclusions. The size of population is no criterion of statehood. For example, both Monaco and Russia possess the stature of statehood although there is a great difference in the size of their population, Increase or decrease in population makes no difference in its stature of statehood. Aristotle has rightly remarked that a good citizen makes a good stateand a bad citizen a bad state. Good citizens are the health of the state, No particular figure can be fixed for the size of population of an ideal state. The only suggestion that can be given is that the size of the population of a state should be in agreement with its resources 2) Territory. The second essential constituent of the State is territory which, is as important and essential a constituent of the state as many other. The word territory “covers the surface of the land within well-defined boundaries, the sub-soil, lakes and rivers and also air space above the land. Jellinck believes that none of the definitions of the state given prior tonineteenth century mentioned territory as an essential element. He remarks that Lever in 1817 was the first writer to define the state as a society of citizens “having a determinate territory”.'® All the modern thinkers and writers are of the opinion that territory forms an essential element of the State, Bluntschli believes that “as the state has its personal basis in the people, so it has its material basis in the land. The people do not become state until they have acquired a territory”."” Owing to this reason, the state is different from other human institutions, Territory is one of the basic requirements of the state whereas other human institutions do not 15. Indian Express, Chandigarh 1.7.83 also Tribune, Punjab 2.7.83. 16, Jellink: “Richt des Modernén Syates”, (1905), Bk. [11, Ch. IIL, p. 19. 17, Blunischli: “Theory of the State”, p. 231 ©—e_ TT 70 STATE jndispensably require territory. The state operates on national basis whereas other human institutions may operate on international basis also. “Tho co-existence of {wo or more states on the same territory would”, remarks Jellinck, produce a continual state of war by reason of the conflicts of interests and jurisdiction”. But exceptions are there. For example, a joint sovereign had been excercising its supremacy over Schleswing-Holstein, (Germany), Austria, Prussia (formerly a State in Germany) from 1864 to 1868. Austria and Hungary hed been Gyeteising their sovereignty over Harzigonia and Bosania. After the First World War (1914-1918) the English and the French had been exercising their joint Sovereignty over Sudan. Leaving these exceptions aside, a state exercises its sovereignty over its definite territory The foregoing discussion maxes it very clear that territory is one of the four essential elements-of the State. Without territory a modern state cannot exist. For example, the Jews could not form a staie until they definitely settled in Palestine ‘The Huns of Attila, in spite of their-prowess and their leadership, broke up because they had no fixed territory. Nomadic tribes, wandering from one part ofthe country to the other, could not ffm a state. Some European scholars also believe, rightly or wrongly, that the Aryans at one time were wandering in different directions from their tative land situated somewhere in central Asia. During their wandering they could not form their state. These days states exist with areas varying from cight square miles, as Monaco, to about nine million square miles as Russia. Small tates have advantages and disadvantages. The advantage of the small states is that they femain compact and well-governed. But at the same time they are at a great disadvantage as in the matters of defence and natural resources, But no principle can be laid down for determining the size of a state. Size is no index of greatness For example, Tzarist Russia ruled by depots remained in the background in international politics, while Great Britain in spite of its small size could become a world power in the 19th and Ist half of 20th century. But the modern age is definitely of large territorial states because alarge state can mobilise al its resources for the economic and social welfage and defence. Large states try to dominate the small states. For example, Hitler trampled Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and Belgium in no time. Japan with its great military might during the 2nd World War conquered many small states of South East Asia. Recent opinion, therefore, is invariably in favour of bigger States. G) Government: The third essential constituent of the State is the government. Like other essential constituents of the State the government is also indispensable element of the State because no state can exist in the absence of the government. For the existence of a State, Government is indispensable, An aggregation of people permanently settled in a fixed territory cannot constitute a state in the absence of the government. Government is the political organisation through which the collective will of the people is formulated, expressed and executed. As a matter of fact, the state operates through the governmental machinery. Its the agency through which society is politically organised, common policies are determined and by which common affairs are regulated and common interests are promoted. In the absence of the government an aggregation of people, Permanently settled in a fixed territory, would be incoherent, unorganised, anarchic mass with no means of collectiveaction. No particular type of government 's essential. It may vary in kind and complexity. It isthe only political organisation, namely, the government that makes an attempt to see whether the essential relationship between command and obedience has been well-established. The government functions through its three agencies, i.e, the Executive, the Legislature, the Judiciary, The ao rules over the country and enforces the t e tv