| Review of: | After Independence: Making and Protecting the Nation in Postcolonial and Postcommunist States edited by Lowell W. Barrington |
|---|---|
| Reviewed By: | Connor Dilleen |
| Reviewed in: | Nations and Nationalism |
| Date accepted online: | 02/11/2007 |
| Published in print: | Volume 13, Issue 03, Pages 539-559 |
Book Reviews
In his introduction to this collection of essays on the role and evolution of nationalism as a political force in post-colonial and post-communist states, Lowell Barrington asks several pertinent questions about what happens to nationalism after a 'nation' obtains independence. First, Barrington asks: how do the ideas and movements of nationalism change? Second, he asks: how do nationalists maintain mass support when they have achieved their ultimate goal? What follows is a selection of essays targeted at scholars of nationalism that Barrington claims answers these questions, and in the process tells us a 'great deal about nationalism itself and about how nationalism is likely to evolve, or die out in other newly independent states in the future'.
Barrington has set himself some ambitious goals by seeking to address some of the more problematic questions on the nature of nationalism. However, his selection of contributors to this discussion certainly provided him with some significant firepower, and he gets the discussion off to a good start by establishing a useful theoretical framework within which the subsequent case studies are evaluated. In his introduction, Barrington identifies five post-independence variants of nationalism and associated causal factors. In the process, he challenges some of the more accepted doctrines on the meaning of the nation and nationalism, revisiting arguments originally presented by him in a journal article in 1997.
The seven case studies and two thematic reviews that follow provide appropriate contexts within which the pertinence of Barrington's 'variants' are considered. Postcolonial nationalism is considered within the context of the relatively successful case of Malaysia (in a chapter contributed by Diane Mauzy) and the not so successful examples of Rwanda (John Clark) and Somalia (Peter Schraeder). The focus of the discussion then moves to nationalism in postcommunist states, with chapters on postcommunist nationalism in Lithuania (Terry Clark), Ukraine (Taras Kuzio), Armenia (Razmik Panossian) and Georgia (Stephen Jones). The conclusion is provided by Ronald Suny. Each of the contributors possesses well-established credentials in their area of study, and their subject matter expertise lends considerable weight to this volume.
One of the key strengths of Barrington's book is that the authors of the case studies go to some effort to test the applicability of Barrington's variants of nationalism to their case studies. In doing so, it becomes clear that while it is rare for a particular occurrence of nationalism to correspond entirely with one of Barrington's variants, as identified by Ronald Suny in the book's conclusion (p. 291), it is not only likely that two or more of the variants with be present in the same case at the same time, but that post-independence nationalism will typically progress from one variant to another.
Two key themes emerge during the book. The first is that it is rare for nationalism, regardless of its form, to remain static, as it will typically evolve into different forms or variants during its existence: 'The very content of what a particular nation is, what it ought to mean to its citizens, can never be taken for granted or permanently fixed' (p. 292). This process was apparent in the Malaysian case study, where a narrow interpretation of the 'nation' at independence evolved into a more inclusive, or 'civic', form of nationalism.
The second theme is that elites, political elites in particular, play a critical role in determining what form nationalism will evolve into post independence. Although modern nations are typically built on 'prior associations, communities and identities' (p. 280), there is merit in both the instrumentalist and constructivist approaches to nationalism. Failures in state-building typically occurred not because the state was constructed on flawed foundations, but because political elites were unable or unwilling to assist the forms of nationalism that underpinned the independence movement evolve into more civic or inclusive variants. When nationalism is not allowed to develop into anything more than a philosophy of opposition to the 'other', as in the Rwandan example, it becomes a destructive rather than constructive force.
Barrington's book is not without its flaws. He goes to some length to downplay the role of ethnicity in determining the nation. This is surprising, given that even proponents of the ethnic/civic nation divide (including Kuzio in this volume), from whom one would expect Barrington would draw evidence, accept that civic nations contain something of an ethnic core. Suny, in the conclusion, goes further in stating that the nation is more often both civic and ethnic than one or the other exclusively (p. 281). Furthermore, by insisting on territoriality as the feature that differentiates the nation from the ethnic group, Barrington is effectively debasing the emerging debate on non-territorial solutions (such as national cultural autonomy) to issues confronting minority nations within multinational states. Additionally, the value of dividing the book into sections addressing postcolonial and postcommunist states is convenient but not entirely logical. It is increasingly agreed, including by contributors to this volume, that postcommunist states are postcolonial. It may have proven more useful to compare nationalism in states where it contributed to independence with nationalism in states where it emerged only after independence (as with the post-Soviet Central Asian republics).
However, these are minor issues, and Barrington is largely successful in achieving his stated objectives. In doing so, he has also demonstrated the need for a revitalisation of debate on nationalism as a political force. And while new forms of nationalism may emerge to defy categorisation by Barrington's variant model, Barrington and his contributors have provided something of real and practical value to scholars not only of nationalism but of politics generally.