This research paper presents a critical analysis of Graham E. Fuller's article on nation state weaknesses, discusses its limited vision, and considers nation states in the future in five pages. Three sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: D0_khnatful.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
are redrawn along ethnic lines. Fuller presents an intriguing argument that makes some astute observations about the colonial past of Asia and Africa, and the weaknesses of the current
system. However, the predictions that he formulates on how the national borders will evolve over the next few decades is certainly open to debate. Fuller (1997) begins his vision
of the future of the nation-state system by stating that the present system of nation-states, which consists of nations whose borders were drawn "with barely passing regard for the ethnic
and cultural wishes of their inhabitants," is obsolete (p. 11). However, Fuller does not see this as the end of nationalism, but rather that self-defined ethnic groups will provide the
basic foundation upon which a new international order will be built. In other words, Fuller, sees current nation-states breaking up, but only as a first step in a cycle of
state regeneration (1997). Furthermore, Fuller predicts that these new ethnic states will form new associations with other states and peoples -- "this time as voluntary members of a new association
rather than compulsory members in a losing enterprise" (1997, p. 11). Fuller does not present this as a utopian vision of a new world, or even a positive trend,
as he feels this will cause "endless subdivision of states," possibly doubling, or even tripling the membership of the UN (1997, p. 11). As evidence of this, Fuller points to
the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which immediately gave rise to eleven new ethnic states. This was followed by communist Yugoslavia, which gave birth to five new nations. He goes
on to list over examples, predicting that China will follow the same route. Fuller then turns his attention to the colonial past and argues relative to its inequities, asserting