© Polity Press 2013

This file should be used solely for the purpose of review and must not be otherwise

stored, duplicated, copied or sold

CHAPTER COMMENTARY

Chapter 23 covers nations and nationalism, war and genocide and old and new terrorism.

Teachers should find many links to the previous chapter on political sociology, though it

should be borne in mind that the material covered in this chapter is quite harrowing as it

deals with mass murder, so-called ‘ethnic cleansing’ and human suffering. Students often

find this material difficult and it is to be expected that many will take strong normative

positions, particularly when attributing causes and ‘blame’. Teachers need to be

sympathetic to such emotional involvements and, initially at least, be prepared to accept a

certain reduction in the usual sociological detachment when addressing these topics, before

steering discussions around to sociological theories and explanations of complex geopolitical

phenomena.

The chapter opens with celebratory scenes and an account of the declaration of

independence from Serbia by the Kosovan Parliament on 17th

February 2008 as well as

protests against this statement from opposing groups. A fairly detailed description of events

leading up to this event follows and the example provides an excellent introduction to the

chapter’s key themes: nationalism, national identities, violence, warfare, genocide and

terrorism.

Flowing from the example, the text turns to look at nations and nationalism. Beginning with

Gellner’s idea that nationalism is the product of modernization and industrialization and

hence, demonstrates that national identity is a contingent phenomenon, unrelated to a

deep-seated human nature. Smith takes more of a ‘continuity’ line, making the link between

nations and their much earlier ethnies, or ethnic communities. Norbert Elias’s work on the

civilizing process – the relationship between the formation of nation-states and the

emergence of ideas of ‘civilization’ and ‘civilized conduct’ - is included here as a Classic

Study.

As nations have diverged from earlier ethnies, we are left with the phenomenon of nations

without states, such as the Basques, the Chechnyans and Kashmiris. These tend to relate to

their nation-state hosts in different ways. Guibernau suggests three types:

(a) limited cultural autonomy (e.g., the UK)

(b) regional political autonomy (e.g., Quebec, Flanders)

(c) forcible denial of recognition (e.g., Tibetans, Kurds, Palestinians)

Nations, War and Terrorism

202

A lengthy discussion of Pilkington’s approach to national identity highlights the tensions that

globalization produces between centralization and decentralization. Taking an overview, the

text observes the paradox of an Africa where nations are in their infancy and a West where

nation-states are dying in the face of globalization. While some groups hark back to earlier

local identities to resist globalization, there are a number of groups aspiring to nation-state

status. With the demise of empires and dynasties, the nation-state is actually the only show

in town.

The chapter now turns to a discussion of wars and warfare, which many will see as

inevitably linked to competing nation-states. War is defined as ‘the clash of two organized

armed forces that seek to destroy each other’s power and especially their will to resist,

principally by killing members of the opposing force’ (page 1029). Given the sheer number

of wars over human history and the vast number of people killed in them, it may appear

that such aggression is part of human nature which cannot be altered. However, the text

suggest otherwise. Clausewitz’s ideas are included in Classic Studies Box 23.2 and he argues

that wars are engaged in for political ends, by organized social groups, based on calculated

risks of success and failure. Most of those killed in war have been combatants, which

similarly suggests that war is not simply random killing of the other side.

War and warfare have also changed considerably over time. Until quite recently, wars have

been seen primarily as taking place between nation-states in the struggle for dominance in

the global states system. Since the 1980s however, such inter-state wars have become

much less common. For example, of 80 conflicts between 1989 and 1992, just 3 were inter-

state in nature. Intra-state conflicts or ‘civil wars’ have now become the most common type

of war. Shaw sees ‘risk-transfer wars’ – in which an attempt is made to avoid combatant

deaths to avoid negative media comment and domestic political consequences - as

becoming more common.

Following the break-up of Yugoslavia and associated conflicts and the mass murder of Tutsis

by Hutus in Rwanda, the concept of genocide has been widely adopted as a description of

such targeted violence. Lemkin’s 1944 definition, influenced by the consequences of the

racial policies of German National Socialism, is included as it was adopted by the UN in 1948

and helped frame its subsequent policies. On this definition, genocide involves:

(a) killing members of the group

(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical

destruction in whole or in part;

(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Bauman’s Modernity and the Holocaust tackles such issues and is included in Box 23.2 on

pages 1034-5. Hence, whilst killing in war may be justified, genocide is seen as essentially

unjustifiable in any circumstance. Nonetheless, Shaw rejects this separation of war and

genocide, pointing out that most instances of genocide take place within inter-state and civil

wars, which means that genocide is therefore best seen as a specific form of war in which

entire social groups are seen as the enemy rather than merely armed forces.

The industrialization of war fundamentally altered the way wars were fought, leading to the

highly destructive ‘total wars’ in which whole populations were mobilized rather than

Nations, War and Terrorism

203

relatively small bands of armed men. Over the last 35 years or so, wars have changed yet

again. The ‘Revolution in Military Affairs’ (RMA) forms the basis for a discussion of ‘old’ and

‘new’ wars. RMA is based on the premise that new information technologies, such as

satellite technology and computers, have moved into the centre of warfare and are

changing military strategy. Kaldor argues that the trend is now towards ‘low-intensity

conflicts’ rather like guerrilla warfare. However, unlike previous localized conflicts the new

forms also make use of transnational connections, organized criminality and a preparedness

to ignore basic human rights. Processes of globalization lie at the heart of such conflicts,

making transnational organization and assistance easier. The long-term consequence may

be a threat to the nation-state’s monopoly of organized violence. Critics are unimpressed by

the claims to novelty of various elements of the old / new war thesis, arguing instead that

the nation-state remains the most powerful player.

There has recently been an increase in sociological interest in peace processes – all of those

official and informal activities aimed at preventing future violence and ensuring fairness and

equitable resource distribution in post-conflict situations. There is an important role for a

sociological perspective here, as sociology offers analyses that look at peace processes as

they are played out across the whole of society. This includes assessing the roles played by

the many groups and organizations that make up civil society, as well as the professional

negotiators, politicians and official initiatives which form the basis of most other studies.

The fact that nationalists of numerous types have often deployed terrorism as a political

weapon acts as a way into the concluding section. This section offers a sober and mature

analysis of the concept of terrorism, tracing its roots in the French Revolution, and briefly

raising awkward issues about the changing status of former terrorists like Mandela or

McGuinness, as well as acknowledging the existence of state terrorism. The text

distinguishes between old-style and new-style terrorism, the former characterized by

limited territorial disputes and limited local organization, the latter by global scope, global

ambitions and global recruitment. Al-Qaeda is used as an illustration of the new-style

terrorism, which the text suggests bears comparison with the new social movements

discussed in Chapter 22. The conclusion poses the recurring question – how to combat the

threats of increasing terrorism and war?

TEACHING TOPICS

1. Nationalism

This topic comprises an examination of the main theories of and explanations for

nationalism. It also reviews the current state of affairs with regard to claims for nationhood

in relation to nations without states.

2. The Changing Face of War

Here, there is an opportunity to assess recent theories of social change and their impact on

the waging of wars. It is also important for students to get to grips with theories of old and

new wars as well as possible criticisms of these.

3. Terrorism and Globalization

This topic focuses on recent terrorism across the world and encourages an assessment of

sociological theories which try to explain it. There is also a chance to think through the

likelihood of success in the so-called ‘war on terror’ announced after the attacks on the USA

in September 2001.

Nations, War and Terrorism

204

ACTIVITIES

Activity 1: Nationalism

A. Read the account of competing ideas about nationalism on pages 1018-20.

1. Try to pick out the key elements of nationhood. Consider the strength of your own

attachment to each principle.

2. Do some research into ‘nations without states’. Choose about a dozen and then try to

list them within the typology suggested in a selection from around the world.

B. Now read the following extract by an influential writer on nationalism, Anthony Smith:

I want to set out briefly three arguments which together suggest both a qualified

defence of the plural order of the nations and the unlikelihood of any early

supersession of nations and nationalism. These arguments are: that nationalism is

politically necessary; that national identity is socially functional; and that the nation

is historically embedded.

… [N]ations and nationalisms remain political necessities because they alone can

ground the interstate order in the principles of popular sovereignty and the will of

the people, however defined. Only nationalism can secure the assent of the

governed to the territorial units to which they have been assigned, through a sense

of collective identification with historic culture-communities in their ‘homelands’.

As long as any global order is based on a balance of competing states, so long will

the principle of nationality provide the only widely acceptable legitimation and

focus of popular mobilization.

… National identity, as opposed to other kinds of collective identity, is pre-

eminently functional for modernity, being suited to the needs of a wide variety of

social groups and individuals in the modern epoch … [B]y rehearsing the rites of

fraternity in a political community in its homeland at periodic intervals, the nation

communes with and worships itself, making its citizens feel the power and warmth

of their collective identification and inducing in them a heightened self-awareness

and social reflexivity. … Moreover, the sense of national identity is often powerful

enough to engender a spirit of self-sacrifice on behalf of the nation in many, if not

most, of its citizens. This is especially true of crises and wartime. … Such self-

sacrifice on this scale is unimaginable for any other kind of collective cultural

identity and community in our epoch, except perhaps for a few religious

communities, and it is the singular power of the nation in eliciting mass sacrifice

that has made it so often the object of unscrupulous demagogues.

… [I]t is not simply the embeddedness of the nation as it is known today that is at

issue; its destiny too owes its meaning and direction to successive interpretations

of the ethnic past. It is this linking of ethno-history with national destiny that works

most powerfully to uphold and preserve a world of nations. The modern nation has

become what ethno-religious communities were in the past: communities of

history and destiny that confer on mortals a sense of immortality through the

judgement of posterity, rather than through divine judgement in an afterlife.

Nations, War and Terrorism

205

(Anthony Smith, Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era, Cambridge: Polity, 1995,

pp. 153–9)

1. Smith seems to be arguing that ‘the nation’ is very much an ongoing project, despite the

onset of globalization. Where are the gaps in global culture that nationalism fills?

2. These extracts constitute a defence of nations and nationalism. Try to construct an

equally compelling case for the prosecution.

Activity 2: The Changing Face of War

A. Read pages 1029-39 of the text (‘The changing nature of war’ and ‘Old and new wars’).

1. Do a little research from within and outside the textbook. List 5 conflicts from different

regions of the world between 1980 and 2012. What similarities are there across all or

most of these with regard to: a) involvement of groups and organizations from outside

the immediate geographical region of the conflict, b) the involvement of organized

crime, c) the role played by multinational peacekeepers and c) human rights abuses of

civilians.

2. Which of the conflicts above would you describe as ‘new wars’ and why? Draw up a list

of causal factors for each conflict; which of these is related to the politics of particular

nation-states?

3. Finally, taking a lead from Shaw’s account of ‘risk transfer wars’ on page 1029-30,

research this concept and note down its main features. Which of the 5 conflicts you

listed in A1 above could be described as a ‘risk transfer war’? What can be done to

prevent the proliferation of risk transfer wars in the future? .

B. Read the extract below, which is from a book by Paul Hirst on issues of war and power.

It is widely believed that we are in a period of revolutionary change in warfare,

called by its proponents, ‘the revolution in military affairs’ (RMA). Military

technology, the organization of the armed forces, and the nature and purposes of

war are possibly in the process of being rapidly transformed … Some of the claims

made for the RMA, that it will eliminate the ‘fog’ of war and that it will cement the

permanent dominance of the offensive over the defensive are so sweeping that it is

necessary to place them in context. Revolutions in military affairs are neither new

nor does the present one seem to be unprecedented in scale, despite the claims of

some of its advocates …

The gunpowder revolution of the sixteenth century that coincided with the

formation of the modern sovereign territorial state is the first major military

revolution. The application of the industrial revolution to war that began in the mid-

nineteenth century is the second. This latter revolution led to the total wars that

dominated the first half of the twentieth century and that have shaped to a

considerable degree the institutions and the balance of power in the world we now

inhabit …

The causes, courses and effects of these two major revolutions have much to teach

us, in particular what rapid change in military technology does to create pressures

for change in armed forces, societies and interstate relations. Technological change

Nations, War and Terrorism

206

emerges from a set of social conditions and social pressures for new technological

adaptations. It is itself caused and is not a pure exogenous force.

(Paul Hirst, War and Power in the Twenty-First Century: The State, Military Conflict

and the International System, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp: 7-8)

1. Hirst sets out the preliminary case for a critique of present RMA theory. What makes the

two revolutions he identifies different in kind from the present one described in this

chapter of Sociology?

2. If ‘technological change emerges from a set of social conditions’ which have therefore

‘caused’ it, then what are those ‘social conditions’ that have led to the current use of

information technology in strategies of warfare?

Activity 3: Terrorism and Globalization

A. Read pages 1041-6 on ‘Terrorism’, then address the questions below.

1. Drawing upon material in the text, draw up two lists – one containing old-style terrorist

organizations and the other, new-style ones. Think about why some causes are more

suited to the new methods of operation. What are the main benefits and drawbacks of

new style methods for achieving the terrorists’ aims?

2. What reasons can you identify to explain why many people are more accepting of the

use of terrorism in certain situations – for example, the struggle against apartheid in

South Africa – than in others – for example, anti-abortion extremists in the USA. Imagine

you are drafting a statement of human rights, think about the circumstances in which

you would allow citizens to use violence to achieve their ends.

B. Read the discussion of al-Qaeda on pages 1044-6. Think about the modus operandi of al-

Qaeda and the way they communicate their message.

1. Research the history of al-Qaeda and note down the major turning points which changed

this group into a terrorist organization capable of carrying out major acts of destruction

against Western targets. Why have al-Qaeda’s acts of extreme violence proved to be so

influential in gaining adherents and activists to their cause?

2. Research al-Qaeda’s ideology and objectives using online sources. What does al-Qaeda

want to achieve? Are its goals legitimate political ones (‘war is the continuation of

politics by other means’) or is it purely an organization bent on killing Western ‘infidels’

because of their lack of religion?

REFLECTION & DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Nationalism

Does any group claiming a common past have the right to ring-fenced territory and

political self-determination?

How does a nation-state maintain both its ‘state-ness’ and its ‘nation-ness’?

Are all nationalisms really recent inventions?

Nations, War and Terrorism

207

2. The Changing Face of War

In which specific ways has information technology changed military strategy in

wars?

Under what circumstances could we see the return of inter-state wars in Europe?

Is the mass media to blame for the civilian deaths associated with risk-transfer

wars?

3. Terrorism and Globalization

Is the recourse to terrorism always and everywhere illegitimate?

Is al-Qaeda a ‘new social movement’?

If the goals of new terrorism are global in character, could they ever achieve them?

If not, is terrorism now a ‘normal’ feature of life in the twenty-first century?

ESSAY QUESTIONS

1. ‘Nationalist feeling is rooted in deep-seated sentiments associated with ancient human

communities’. To what extent does the available evidence support this statement?

2. How likely is it that existing instances of ‘nations without states’ will become nation-

states in their own right in the twenty-first century?

3. ‘War is the continuation of political intercourse by other means’. Is this statement

equally applicable to new as well as old wars?

4. ‘One person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter’. Discuss this contention in relation

to the activities and aims of al-Qaeda.

MAKING CONNECTIONS

1. Nationalism

The link between nationalism and ethnicity can be explored further in chapter 16. The

paradox of nationhood amidst globalization connects to the outlook of chapter 4. Nations

and nationhood can also be read alongside the discussion of national politics in Chapter 22.

2. The Changing Nature of War

There are links between war and genocide here and the discussion of ethnicity and ethnic

hatred and conflict in Chapter 16. New wars and new terrorism should be linked back to

Chapter 4 on globalization.

3. Terrorism and Globalization

Terrorist organizations have some similarities with social movements outlined in Chapter 22.

Theories of global inequality are relevant to the study of terrorist motivations and therefore

Chapter 14 contains useful links. Contemporary terrorism makes much use of modern

technologies to convey its messages and Chapter 18 on Media covers these. Chapter 19 also

includes theories of networks and therefore has close ties to the loose organizational forms

of some terrorist groups.

Nations, War and Terrorism

208

SAMPLE SESSION

Nationalism

Aims: To offer an overview of the issues concerned with notions of nationalism and

statehood.

Outcome: By the end of the session students will be able to:

1. Identify the main features of a ‘nation’.

2. Assess the relative merits of some theories of nation-state formation in Europe.

3. Distinguish between the nation-state and the EU as types of political unit.

Preparatory tasks

Read the relevant sections of Sociology and then make preparatory notes for classroom

tasks 1 and 2.

Classroom tasks

1. Tutor to ask students for definition of a nation. Each component to be written up on a

board or flip-chart for the duration of the session. (5 minutes)

2. Student brainstorm exercise on groups within the EU that might be regarded as

‘nations without states’. Student responses worked into table or set of lists by the

tutor. (10 minutes)

3. Select a single case study from the many in (2) above. Split the class into two groups.

Ask one group to prepare a brief submission to the Council of Ministers requesting

recognition as a nation-state. Ask the other group to present a case for retaining the

status quo on behalf of the ‘host nation-state’. (15 minutes)

4. Each group makes a short presentation to the tutor, outlining their case. This may feed

into a wider discussion about the merits of the case. At the end of the session the tutor

acts as arbiter and ‘decides’ whether or not to accept the claim for recognition. (20

minutes)

Assessment task

Essay: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the ‘plural nation-state order’ as a model

for political stability and mutual tolerance.