Political Geography & Sovereignty

• Antecedent boundary: Drawn BEFORE the cultural landscape developed significantly in the area. The boundary preceded settlement and shaped the development that followed. Example: the U.S.-Canada border along the 49th parallel west of the Lake of the Woods, drawn in 1818 through largely empty land that was then settled afterward according to the new boundary.

• Subsequent boundary: Drawn AFTER and THROUGH a developed cultural landscape, attempting to ACCOMMODATE existing cultural, ethnic, religious, or linguistic groups. Example: the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (1921), drawn to follow the Protestant/Catholic population distribution and create a Protestant majority in Northern Ireland.

• Superimposed boundary: Drawn by an OUTSIDE POWER, often IGNORING the existing cultural landscape. Frequently produces conflict because cultural groups are split or hostile groups forced together. Example: most AFRICAN borders drawn by European colonial powers at the 1884–85 BERLIN CONFERENCE — they split the Ewe across Ghana and Togo, the Yoruba across Nigeria/Benin/Togo, and forced rivals like the Hutu and Tutsi together inside Rwanda. The borders inherited at independence in the 1960s have been a source of conflict ever since.

• Relict boundary: A boundary that NO LONGER FUNCTIONS as a political boundary, but whose effects remain VISIBLE in the cultural, economic, or built landscape. Example: the former EAST-WEST GERMANY border (1949–1990) — even though political reunification happened in 1990, decades of separate development left differences in architecture, infrastructure, voting patterns, and economic conditions that are still visible today. Other examples: the former British Raj boundary in South Asia; Hadrian's Wall in Britain.

A fifth common type, GEOMETRIC boundary, follows mathematical lines (latitude, longitude) — common in colonial Africa and the American West. PHYSICAL boundaries follow natural features (rivers, mountains).

Compact state — example: Poland.

• Roughly circular shape; short distance from center to any border.
• Advantages: Easy to govern; communication and transportation efficient; relatively easy to defend (short borders for the area enclosed); easier to create a unified national identity.
• Challenges: Fewer.
• Other examples: France, Uruguay, Hungary, Kenya.

Elongated state — example: Chile.

• Long and narrow shape (Chile stretches ~4,300 km / 2,700 miles north-south but is only ~180 km / 110 miles wide on average).
• Challenges: Internal transportation is expensive; far-flung regions feel disconnected from the capital; difficult to defend along long borders; climate varies dramatically along the length (Atacama Desert in the north, glaciers in the south); regional economies and cultures diverge.
• Advantages: Access to multiple ecosystems and resources; long coastline for ports.
• Other examples: Norway, Vietnam, Italy, the Gambia.

Fragmented state — example: Indonesia.

• Composed of separate pieces, often islands. Indonesia has ~17,000 islands, of which ~6,000 are inhabited.
• Challenges: Communication and transportation between pieces is expensive (relies on shipping and aviation); separatist movements emerge in distant regions (West Papua, formerly East Timor which became independent in 2002); cultural unity is difficult; defending all pieces strains the military.
• Advantages: Maritime trade access; diverse resources and ecosystems.
• Other examples: Philippines (~7,600 islands), Japan, the United States (with Alaska and Hawaii separated from the contiguous 48).

Landlocked state — example: Bolivia.

• No direct access to the ocean. Bolivia famously LOST its Pacific coast in the War of the Pacific (1879–1883) to Chile and has sought ocean access ever since.
• Challenges: Must depend on neighboring countries for port access (huge economic disadvantage — landlocked countries on average have 30–50% lower trade); shipping costs higher; vulnerable to political tensions with neighbors that control transit routes.
• Advantages: Defended on all sides by other countries (potentially) — though this depends on who those neighbors are.
• Other examples: ~44 landlocked countries total, including Switzerland (relatively prosperous because of central European location), Mongolia, Paraguay, Ethiopia, Mali, Uganda. Many of the world's poorest countries are landlocked, particularly in Africa.

General principle: Compact states have the FEWEST geographic challenges; elongated, fragmented, and landlocked states face structural disadvantages that good policy and infrastructure can mitigate but cannot eliminate. Switzerland's success despite being landlocked demonstrates that geography is destiny only PROBABILISTICALLY — institutions and policy matter enormously.

Centripetal forces — forces that BIND people to a state and unify it (think "centripetal = center-seeking"). Examples:

1. Shared national identity — common language, religion, ethnicity, history. Iceland (uniformly Icelandic) holds together easily.
2. Strong central government and rule of law — legitimate institutions provide order and services that bind citizens to the state.
3. External threats — perceived danger from outside unifies internal divisions (the U.S. during WWII).
4. Economic prosperity — shared rising living standards make secession unappealing.
5. National symbols — flag, anthem, founding myths, civic education.
6. Common transportation/communication infrastructure — physically connects regions.

Centrifugal forces — forces that DIVIDE a state and push it apart (think "centrifugal = fleeing the center"). Examples:

1. Ethnic, religious, or linguistic divisions — internal cleavages that compete with national identity.
2. Economic inequality between regions — wealthier regions resent subsidizing poorer ones (Catalonia in Spain, Lombardy in Italy).
3. Weak or corrupt central government — citizens lose faith in national institutions.
4. Geographic fragmentation — distant regions feel disconnected.
5. External support for separatist movements.
6. Historical grievances — memories of past oppression, conquest, or persecution.

Why YUGOSLAVIA broke apart (1991–2008):

Yugoslavia (1918–2003) was a textbook MULTINATIONAL STATE comprising six constituent republics — Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, and Macedonia — and over a dozen ethnic and religious groups (Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks, Slovenes, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Albanians, Hungarians, etc.). It was held together by extraordinarily powerful CENTRIPETAL FORCES under Marshal Tito (1945–1980):

• Strong central authority and the Communist Party.
• Federal structure that gave each republic a sense of autonomy.
• Tito's personal charisma and the unifying memory of the WWII Partisan struggle.
• Economic growth in the 1960s–70s.
• "Brotherhood and unity" national ideology suppressing ethnic identification.

After Tito's death (1980), CENTRIFUGAL FORCES began to dominate:

1. ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS DIVISIONS that had been suppressed re-emerged powerfully. Slovenes (Catholic, German-influenced, prosperous), Croats (Catholic), Serbs (Orthodox), Bosniaks (Muslim), and Albanians (Muslim) all began to identify FIRST by ethnicity, second by Yugoslav citizenship.

2. ECONOMIC INEQUALITY between republics — Slovenia and Croatia were prosperous and resented funding poorer southern republics; Serbia's leaders meanwhile asserted Serbian dominance over the federation.

3. WEAK CENTRAL LEADERSHIP — Tito's successor structure was a rotating presidency that lacked his unifying authority. Slobodan Milošević in Serbia exploited Serbian nationalism to consolidate power, alarming non-Serb republics.

4. HISTORICAL GRIEVANCES — memories of WWII atrocities (Croatian Ustaše killings of Serbs; Serbian Chetnik killings of Muslims and Croats) were revived and weaponized by nationalist politicians.

5. EXTERNAL CHANGES — the collapse of communism across Eastern Europe (1989–91) removed the ideological glue and emboldened nationalist movements.

6. SECESSION AND WAR — Slovenia and Croatia declared independence in 1991, followed by Bosnia (1992) and Macedonia (1991). The wars that followed (Croatian War 1991–95; Bosnian War 1992–95; Kosovo War 1998–99) killed an estimated 130,000+ people and produced the worst atrocities in Europe since WWII (Srebrenica massacre 1995, ethnic cleansing throughout Bosnia).

Final result: by 2008, Yugoslavia had become SEVEN independent states (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Kosovo). Centrifugal forces — ethnic, religious, economic, historical — overwhelmed the centripetal bonds that Tito had maintained for 35 years.

Lesson: Centripetal and centrifugal forces are in CONSTANT TENSION in every multinational state. When centrifugal forces dominate, even apparently stable states can fragment quickly.

South Sudan — successful secession (July 9, 2011):

Sudan after independence (1956) inherited an arbitrary, superimposed colonial border that united the Arab-Muslim NORTH and the African-Christian/animist SOUTH in a single state. The two regions had:

• DIFFERENT ETHNICITIES — Arab vs. Black African groups (Dinka, Nuer, etc.).
• DIFFERENT RELIGIONS — Muslim vs. Christian/animist.
• DIFFERENT COLONIAL EXPERIENCES — the British administered the South separately.
• DIFFERENT ECONOMIC INTERESTS — most oil reserves are in the South, but pipelines and refineries in the North.

Two devastating civil wars (1955–1972, 1983–2005) killed an estimated 2 MILLION people. After the second war, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005) granted the South autonomy and a referendum on independence after six years.

In the 2011 referendum, 98.83% voted for independence. Key factors that ENABLED success:

1. Treaty-recognized right to vote on independence — secession was AGREED in advance by both sides.
2. International support — the U.S., UN, and African Union all endorsed the process.
3. Sudanese government acquiesced (under intense international pressure) rather than fight a third war.
4. Clear territorial boundaries existed (the autonomous region's lines).
5. Overwhelming popular support within the seceding territory.

South Sudan became the world's newest UN member state on July 14, 2011. (It has subsequently descended into its own civil war — independence solved one problem and created others.)

Catalonia — failed secession attempt (October 1, 2017):

Catalonia is an autonomous region of Spain with its own LANGUAGE (Catalan), distinct CULTURE, history of independence (medieval Crown of Aragon), and ~7.5 million people including ~16% of Spain's GDP.

Catalan nationalism intensified after the 2008 financial crisis (resentment that wealthier Catalonia was subsidizing poorer regions) and after the Spanish Constitutional Court struck down parts of a 2006 statute giving Catalonia greater autonomy.

On October 1, 2017, the Catalan regional government held an INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM ruled illegal by Spain. Spanish national police suppressed polling stations using force, injuring over 1,000 people. Of votes cast, 92% were for independence — but turnout was only ~43% because most opponents BOYCOTTED the illegal vote. On October 27, the Catalan parliament declared independence.

Spain responded by:

1. Suspending Catalan autonomy under Article 155 of the Spanish Constitution.
2. Arresting and prosecuting Catalan leaders (Carles Puigdemont fled to Belgium).
3. Calling regional elections that produced no decisive resolution.
4. Refusing to negotiate terms of independence.

International response: the European Union explicitly REFUSED to recognize Catalan independence and supported Spanish constitutional order. NO COUNTRY recognized Catalonia.

Why Catalonia failed:

1. Spanish constitutional opposition — the central state actively REFUSED to permit secession.
2. No prior agreement for a legal referendum — unlike South Sudan, secession was not pre-approved.
3. No international support — the EU prioritized state stability and refused to intervene.
4. Internal division — only ~50% of Catalans supported independence; many wanted greater autonomy but not full secession.
5. No willingness to use force — neither side fought a war to settle the question.

What does this reveal about 21st-century secession?

1. CONSENT MATTERS — both internal and external. South Sudan's independence was negotiated and internationally sanctioned. Catalonia's was unilateral and rejected.

2. STATES DON'T LOSE TERRITORY VOLUNTARILY — when a state actively opposes secession, secession only succeeds through war (Bangladesh from Pakistan 1971), state collapse (Yugoslavia, USSR), or international intervention (Kosovo from Serbia, partially recognized).

3. INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION IS NEARLY DETERMINATIVE — the EU's refusal to recognize Catalonia made secession unworkable. South Sudan's recognition by the UN, AU, and Western powers made it a fact.

4. THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER FAVORS STABLE BORDERS. The post-1945 international system has a strong PRESUMPTION against altering borders, codified in the UN Charter and African Union's respect for colonial boundaries. Secession is permitted only in exceptional cases (clear self-determination claim, prior agreement, state collapse).

5. REFERENDA ALONE ARE NOT ENOUGH. A vote without legal authorization or international support is a political statement, not a legal act of independence.

6. DEMOCRATIC STATES ARE NOT IMMUNE to secessionist pressures (UK with Scotland, Spain with Catalonia, Canada with Quebec, Belgium with Flanders), but their constitutional and democratic processes generally CONTAIN such pressures rather than producing breakup.

Other recent cases: Crimea (2014) was annexed by Russia after a referendum widely viewed as illegitimate; only Russia and a handful of allies recognize Russian sovereignty. East Timor achieved independence (2002) through a UN-supervised process after Indonesian withdrawal. Kosovo (2008) is recognized by ~100 of 193 UN member states — partial success.

Conclusion: In the 21st century, successful secession requires a RARE COMBINATION of internal popular support, the parent state's consent (or its collapse), and international recognition. South Sudan had all three; Catalonia had only the first.