Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict

Nationalism & Ethnic Conflict

Nationalism and the Modern Nation State: Two Critical Readings

In Umut Ozkirimli's work, entitled Theories of Nationalism: A Critical Introduction, the author attempts to come to grips with the idea of how ethnicity functions in the construction of modern nation states. In early, primordial history, nationality and nationhood could be taken as virtually synonymous. However, with the increasingly complex global and geo-political reality, ethnicity has become one of the most complex yet core claim of any particular new nation's defense of its right to exist. Ozkirimli discusses the importance of "ethno-symbolism," suggesting that ethnicity is often of an equally symbolic importance as it is of practical importance in creating a functional nation. (167)

In his chapter on the subject, Ozkirimli quotes the theorist John Armstrong, who suggests that the idea that particular group people inherently form an ethnic unit should not necessarily be taken as an historical fact. Modern racial and ethnic categories are often socially constructed in a particular moment of history. A group of people that can be traced back to a 'perfect past' -- for instance, the idea of 'the Slavs' or 'the Arabs' or 'The Serbs' or 'The British' -- encompass within an ideological framework, many national and religious groups that were once just as contentious as the may seem harmonious in their desire to constitute a uniform ethnicity. (170) Even the British were once torn apart by divisions between Anglos and Saxons a thousand years ago. Although, because of geography, existing nations may indeed appear ethnic "origins" or contain similarities within their borders relating to ethnic customs and concerns, this does not mean that ethnicity can be easily equated with a pre-existing national identity.

The concept of "ethno-symbolism" in creating a nation is particular vexed in recent years, given that an individual, such as a terrorist, may identify him or herself as part of a particular ethnic movement to construct a nation, such as a Palestinian state, but in fact bear the national passport of another nation, or identify him or herself with a larger cause of Islamic liberation that extends far beyond that of establishing any particular nation's borders. Even the notion of a Palestinian as a Muslim or a Christian makes competing claims to a theological framework that extends to the entire Arab world, or one might say, to issues pertaining to the Judeo-Christian world as a whole. What does a Christian Palestinian reared in Europe have in common, ethnically, with a Palestinian on the West Bank? This pairing of polar existences challenges the notion of ethnicity, yet clearly these individuals may lay claims to sharing a common historical 'plight.' Both are stateless, yet a commonality of culture and religion is not evident -- nor more, though, than two potential United States citizens, born in that nation, one might argue.

The overview present in Umut Ozkirimli's analysis is a warning not to dismiss the importance of nationalism, and also a caution not to accept certain groups' claims to nationhood wholesale and at their face value, as the concept of what constitutes ethnicity shifts and changes, depending on individual's particular political alliances in a particular historical context. Ozkirimili's work has a far more dispassionate tone, in contrast, to Stuart J. Kaufman's Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War.

Kaufman's work, in contrast to Ozkirimli, is more stridently prescriptive in nature. However, Kaufman is also more rigorous in his use of international political theoretical frameworks to justify his suggestions to policymakers