Independence and State Building in the Postcolonial Period

Independence and State Building in the Postcolonial Period

Explanations for Independence

  • Unrest and Failure of Reform:
    • Colonized people demand equal rights.
    • Rejection of demands leads to frustration and protest movements.
    • Emphasizes principles of equality.
  • International Politics:
    • World War I disrupted empires.
    • Weakened imperial powers (e.g., France during World War II).
    • Metropoles lacked manpower and military power to maintain colonies.
  • Changing Norms:
    • Post-World War II emphasis on independence and self-determination.
    • Principle of self-determination became prevalent.
  • Politics in Colonial Metropoles:
    • Colonies became costly to maintain.
    • Extraction of resources often insufficient to justify costs.
    • Domestic populations unwilling to bear costs of maintaining colonies.
    • Tensions arose between colonists (e.g., Pied Noir in Algeria) and domestic populations.

Processes of Independence

  • Negotiated Transfer of Power:
    • Slower, more peaceful process.
    • National leaders negotiate with colonial power for gradual transfer of power.
  • War:
    • Violent form of independence (e.g., Algerian War of Independence).
  • Expulsion:
    • May follow negotiated transfer of power.
    • Military coup or other coup brings in anti-colonial leaders.
    • Rapid expulsion of colonial administrators.
    • Less violent than war, less peaceful than negotiated settlement.

Examples of Independence Processes

  • Tunisia:
    • Negotiated transfer of sovereignty.
    • Habib Bourguiba negotiated control over domestic politics, then foreign policy.
  • Egypt:
    • 1922: Nominal independence, but British controlled foreign affairs and Suez Canal.
    • 1950s: Military coup against monarchy.
    • 1954: Gamal Abdel Nasser took control, demanded British withdrawal.
    • 1956: British forced to withdraw after Suez Crisis due to US and Soviet intervention.
  • Iraq:
    • 1932: Nominal independence from British.
    • 1950s: Military coup led by Colonel Qasem, end of monarchy.
    • 1958: Full independence with expulsion of British.
    • Series of military coups until Saddam Hussein took power in 1968.

Forms of Independence

  • Expulsion:
    • Gamal Abdel Nasser expelling British from Egypt (1954-1956).
  • War:
    • Algerian War of Independence (1954-1962):
      • Brutal war with approximately 500,000 Algerians killed.
      • Over 25,000 French soldiers and 3,000 European civilians killed.
  • Negotiated Transfers of Power:
    • Tunisia - independence negotiated during 1950's.
    • Lebanon:
      • 1943: Independence declared.
      • 1945: UN ended French mandate.
      • 1946: French troops withdrew.

Weberian Definition of a State

  • A state is a compulsory political association with continuous organization whose administrative staff successfully upholds a claim on the monopoly of legitimate use of force in the enforcement of its order within a given territorial area.

  • Key Components:

    • Monopoly of legitimate use of force: State has coercive apparatus.
    • Given territorial area: Well-defined borders.

Legacies of State Building Prior to Independence

  • Defensive Modernization:
    • Centralizing the state and modernizing key institutions (military, schools, taxation) under Ottoman rule.
    • Ottomans modernized in response to European incursions.
    • Modernization occurred quickly and was imposed top-down.
  • Colonialism:
    • Colonial administration built on existing institutions or undermined them.
    • Impact depended on whether colonial state strengthened or undermined Ottoman institutions.
    • Lisa Anderson's comparison of Tunisia and Libya:
      • Italian colonizers in Libya dismantled Ottoman state, negatively affecting state strength.
      • French in Tunisia built on Ottoman institutions, leading to higher state strength.
    • Urban areas had more state capacity than rural areas.

Early State Building

  • Post-World War I borders largely maintained.
  • Reliance on European model of nation-state.
  • Modeled state institutions and laws after European states.
  • Emphasis on molding citizens through national education systems.
  • Adoption of national education policies.
  • Inherited institutions from colonial powers (militaries, police forces, schools, railroads).
  • Pursued state-led economic development.
  • Large public sector with state investment in industries.

Challenges to State Building

  • Fit of the European Model:
    • Nations without a state (e.g., Palestinian and Kurdish populations).
    • Historical examples challenging territorial state (e.g., United Arab Republic).
    • New borders were costly to police and bisected communities (e.g., Kurdish population).
    • Sectarianism undermined creation of national identity.
  • Economic Challenges:
    • Unmet expectations for economic growth and social change.
    • Limited access to resources.
    • British control of Suez Canal impacted Egypt's economic independence.
    • Reliance on consumer subsidies.
    • Limited tax revenue due to access to non-tax revenue (oil, gas, foreign aid, remittances).
  • Conflict:
    • War often has a negative relationship with state capacity in The Middle East.
    • Conflict with Israel negatively impacted infrastructure investments.
    • Conflict used as a distraction from domestic political demands.
    • Conflict gave rise to non-state actors undermining state authority (e.g., civil war in Lebanon).
    • Discrimination in militaries favoring particular regions, sects, or social classes.

State Building Efforts: Turkey and Iran

  • Turkey (Kemal Ataturk):
    • Inherited centralized administration from Ottoman Empire.
    • Kemalism emphasized building a modern secular state.
    • Limited influence of religion:
      • Abolished caliphate.
      • Eliminated Sharia.
      • Updated legal code to align with European code.
    • Policies aimed at changing position of women (extended suffrage, mandated not wearing veils on state property)
    • Transformed Turkish language and culture (Latin alphabet).
    • Eliminated social divisions by undermining regional/ethnic identities (banned traditional dress/languages).
  • Iran (Reza Khan):
    • Military officer viewed as having nationalist credentials.
    • Modernizing state-building project similar to Ataturk.
    • Built national army to extend power.
    • Engaged in legal reforms limiting role of religion.
    • Tried to Persianize the language.
    • Pursued policies of limited state feminism (limiting wearing of veil).

Comparison of State Building Projects

  • Reza Khan set himself up as elite leader, unlike Ataturk's populist appeal.
  • Ataturk emphasized republicanism and establishing republican institutions.
  • Reza Khan did not emphasize republican values or build republican institutions in the same way.

State Building in Later Periods

  • Failure of state-led economic development led to privatization and neoliberal reforms.
  • Reliance on domestic population for resources decreased after discovery of oil.
  • Nationalism gave way to religious identities and growing Islamism after the early colonial administrations focused on building secular nation states.

Why State Building Matters

  • Develops a sense of national identity or national unity.
  • Determines economic relationships (size of public administration, tax institutions).
  • Has consequences for state capacity (military strength, taxation institutions).

Defining State Capacity

  • Charles Tilly:
    • State strength measured by military recruitment and capacity for taxation.
  • Joel Migdal:
    • State capacity to penetrate society, regulate social relationships, extract and use resources.
  • Hendrix:
    • Military capacity (personnel/spending per capita).
    • Bureaucratic administrative capacity (ability to monitor population and control economic relationships).
    • Quality coherence of political institutions (ability to accommodate demands or repress them).

Case Studies: Lebanon and Qatar

  • Lebanon:
    • Weak governance, held hostage by those with administrative or military capacity; low state capacity.
    • Access to administrative or military capacity conditional on connections to political parties or local militias.
    • Does not have a monopoly over the use of force within its territory
  • Qatar:
    • High state capacity.
    • State has managed to expand and deepen its ties with important social actors through lucrative financial ties, bringing them into its orbit.
    • State is able to influence and bring under its control important local actors.
    • Retains the monopoly over the use of force within its territory.

Notable context: Both states seek alliance with powerful domestic actors but, in Qatar, the state is a major stakeholder in the relationship and, in Lebanon, the state is a less powerful partner and lacks autonomy.