At the dawn of the twentieth century, imperial powers controlled
most of the globe. Within a few decades after World War II, many of
the great empires had dissolved, and more recently, multinational
polities have similarly disbanded. This process of reallocating
patterns of authority, from internal hierarchy to inter-state
relations, proved far more contentious in some cases than in
others. While some governments exited the colonial era without
becoming embroiled in lengthy conflicts, others embarked on courses
that drained their economies, compelled huge sacrifices, and caused
domestic upheaval and revolution. What explains these variations in
territorial policy? More specifically, why do some governments have
greater latitude to alter existing territorial arrangements whereas
others are constrained in their room for maneuver?
In Ending Empire, Hendrik Spruyt argues that the answer lies in
the domestic institutional structures of the central governments.
Fragmented polities provide more opportunities for hard-liners to
veto concessions to nationalist and secessionist demands, thus
making violent conflict more likely. Spruyt examines these dynamics
in the democratic colonial empires of Britain, France, and the
Netherlands. He then turns to the authoritarian Portuguese empire
and the break-up of the Soviet Union. Finally, the author submits
that this theory, which speaks to the political dynamics of
partition, can be applied to other contested territories, including
those at the heart of the Arab Israeli conflict."
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!