Territoriality: Identity, State and Nation Revisited

Abstract

This chapter evaluates geopolitical inter-relationships between physical and human geography and political-economy, its impact on organization within and between states, and how this effects international politics, law, trade and transnational relations. Each conflict is located in a specific place with its unique geographical characteristics, and in time—including the long-time calendar of geology determining location of resources such as water and minerals, to the long-time periods of social history that imprint on the territory. This is juxtaposed with recent histories and current events. Territoriality relates to a sense of ownership or sovereignty entailing a mosaic of polities and sovereignty with associated visible and invisible boundaries. It seeks control over resources, people and defence of identity and culture. Territorialisation denotes a strategy for direct or indirect territorial control and sometimes enlargement of that space. In this context concepts of ethnicity and culture, the state, nation and nationalism are appraised.

1 Introduction

Human territoriality refers to people living in particular places over long time periods assuring their basic livelihood needs and developing a sense of ownership ( sovereignty especially regarding states) over that area . A mosaic of political units or polities results with the associated borders and boundary lines to avoid conflict and negotiate peace and stability between competing powers over territorial space , and by association maritime and air space. Territoriality seeks control of resources in an area ranging from water and fertile land to oil and diamonds, protection of the territory’s resources and people, and also defence of identity. Territorialisation denotes an active strategy for direct or indirect territorial control and sometimes enlargement of that political space, as illustrated in Fig. 3.1, and in Fig. 3.2 states like China and territorialisation claims over maritime space.

Fig. 3.1

Image by user: Wiz9999 [GFDL] or CC-BY-SA-3.0 license, via Wikimedia Commons

State boundaries.

Fig. 3.2

Image by Voice of America [Public domain US, user: Daduxing/Wikimedia Commons], version 3-Jul-2017

Territorial claims in the South China Sea.

In the 19th century much academic debate was influenced by Charles Darwin’s work on evolution and competition within nature, and impacted on emerging political and social sciences including disciplines like Geography, geopolitics and anthropology. Due to the European colonial adventures, all places in the world became more accessible for Europeans to ‘discover’ and compare differences. Some research emphasized biological or genetic arguments of environmental determinism , or variations with human adaptive responses to various environments. Others stressed the vast possibilities for human development and achievement. Strong interlinkages existed between Physical and Human Geography development and Europe’s colonization and settlement of territories in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Geographers became active stakeholders in the colonial adventures becoming a dynamic resource for physical geographic data, cartography, and political and economic intelligence for colonial governments and financial elites, with the classic examples including the British East India company, and the Dutch East Indies Company approximately corresponding to the modern state of Indonesia. Cartography became a science dedicated toward improving colonial planning, conquest, and administration.

Less Darwinian perspectives emphasized human socio-political constructs stressing aspects of specific cultures, their historical experiences, security, opportunity or political strategy relating to concepts of territoriality, and geographical scales of identity ranging from small micro levels to larger macro scales as with states and empires.

By the early 20th century, observers highlighted the vast changes that had taken place with industrialization and scientific inventions in different areas of the world ushering in modernity, but also the vast complex differences in socio-economic organization revealed to Westerners within Europe and America, and on the global stage, as with the major transitions that had taken place in Japan from the mid-19th century rising from an island state to an empire by the 1930s. Researchers, intellectuals and science fiction writers emphasized the possibilities offered by the environment and human ingenuity.

Possibilism  in cultural geography challenged environmental determinism approaches highlighting that culture is developed in specific social conditions, contexts and constructs. By the 1980s, this perspective included Utopian or ‘imagined or socially constructed’ and post-modernist approaches in placing people at the centre in creating and framing cultural and geopolitical environments. For instance, despite areas of the world having similar Mediterranean type climates and physical environments, including soil type and plants—in regions of Spain, France, Albania, Greece, Turkey, Israel, Tunisia, Morocco, California, south-western Oregon, Western and Southern Australia, south-western South Africa, areas of Central Asia and central Chile—their economic, social and political historical experiences and levels of development are significantly different.

2 Constructing the State

In international law , the historical-geographical evolution of state construction is based on the Westphalian system ; a doctrine named after the Peace of Westphalia (1648) which ended the Thirty Years’ War between the major European states—the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, France, Sweden and Dutch Republic—agreed to respect each other’s territorial integrity. The territorial integrity principle remains at the heart of the concept of sovereignty and international law as embodied in the UN Charter . Today for locational, geopolitical and political economy reasons, the international community discourages the creation of microstates, however historically several have continued to exist, including the smallest microstates in the world—Vatican City with an area of 0.44 km² and population of 800 people; and Monaco, area 2.02 km² and population of 30,500 people.¹

From the 19th century on in Europe, there have been various territorialisation strategies of state elites including the cultivation of state macro-identities with economic-political-military elites forging the nation-state ideal through (re)created and (re)invented meta-narratives or big stories of ‘our people’—the nation and its territorial state. Despite globalisations, territory remains a key conflict issue, and the international system continues to be premised on state sovereignty. In many instances the state is still attempting to set the parameters of ‘national’—individual and social choice in order to maintain its power. Where state sovereignty is based on the willingness of the majority of citizens to accept it, this helps avoid open conflict, socio-political collapse, anarchy and predator groups or states taking over direct or indirect control. So called failed states as with Somalia from the late 1980s on have occasioned massive human rights abuses and humanitarian disasters destabilizing neighbouring countries and regions, and the international community right up to pirate operations being launched from Somalia on international shipping in the Indian Ocean.²

The world political map consists of state units re-drawn over the centuries via centripetal-centrifugal processes. Centripetal factors such as economics, language, religion or a strong will to share culture and live together that help people “to connect” drawing them together—as opposed to centrifugal factors that push people apart which may also include different religion, language, or historical grievances that can impact on a sense of humiliation, fear or hatred, as in a geopolitics of emotions. Getting a balance between centripetal and centrifugal dynamics is crucial in avoiding ‘normal’ conflict turning into violence, war, terrorism and societal collapse as witnessed in Somalia, Sudan and the DRC over recent decades. Democracy aims at providing institutions that facilitate balances and checks. Inter-governmental and trans-state institutions and organisations as with the UN attempt to act as global regulators that encourage avoidance of conflict, while liaising with national and international NGOs.

In traditional top-down geopolitics, defence of the state was the central issue. Since the 1990s modern geopolitics also emphasizes the bottom-up dimensions with the centrality of the citizen especially where Non-Governmental Organizations condemn, lobby or collaborate with Government Organizations. Historically, state economic imperative encouraged imperialisms; territory and control have witnessed shifts in the forms of power especially through capital creation and flows.

In short, multilevel governance is now the international norm referring to the idea that the sovereign nation state today must actively collaborate with political entities operating at much larger scales—supranational organizations—and at smaller scales with local and regional authorities. In contrast to this geopolitical norm, North Korea ranks as the most isolated country in the world and most disconnected with supranational organizations, followed by Somalia.

However since 2016, the multilateral governance norm and global geopolitical architecture has been seriously challenged necessitating reassessment due to the more unilateralist aspirations of President Trump’s administration in the USA, where his electoral supporters are seeking greater economic independence for themselves and their country from an American-centric perspective, but not catering for the counter challenges of globalization including imports from the NAFTA countries—Mexico and Canada, and also the EU and China, as this is perceived to be penalizing American workers and their jobs and so appeals to some strains of populism. From the same standpoint, of legal versus illegal immigration , discourses have become entwined with the socio-economic malaise, and attitudes to foreigners, feeding into the war on terror psycho-social constructs. In geopolitical terms the economic unilateralist discourses have caused strains among the US and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) allies, particularly regarding funding of the organization and military purchases. Controversial stances have been taken concerning US withdrawal from the international nuclear deal signed in 2015 between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council .³

In 2017, the US cut off its funding for UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and in 2018, serious stresses were witnessed with the withdrawal of US funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA )—a relief and human development agency that supports over 5 million registered Palestinian refugees, and their patrilineal descendants in the Occupied Territories, and refugee camps in Jordan and Lebanon, who fled or were expelled from Israel since 1948. Most of the funding goes to education and health. Among the reasons for this were that in 2012, the UN General Assembly voted, by a majority of 138 to 9 votes, to upgrade Palestine’s status from an ‘observer entity’ at the UN to a ‘non-member observer state’.⁴

Also in 2017, US President Trump announced that the USA would be withdrawing from the Paris Agreement (2015), negotiated within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) starting in 2020. It was negotiated by 196 state parties in 2015 and adopted by consensus. By 2018, 195 members had signed the agreement, and 180 had become party to it. Among President Trump’s arguments were that US application of the UNFCCC would endanger the US economy.⁵

Use of the above examples in recent US policy, is to illustrate the challenges faced by electorates living in their home areas with their everyday lives and realities within a mature democratic system, but now embedded within multilevel governance—local, state, federal, UN and international systems—and the ever-increasing demands of glocalization and globalization . Refrains in the above examples are: ‘Who exactly funds what and why, and why continue to do so’; ‘Are many of these international structures sclerotic, self-perpetuating, box-ticking and not delivering as was they were intended to do when they were first set up—in past historical and economic contexts’—some politicians and commentators may say yes to the above questions, while others lobby for genuine reforms, but advocate not to throw out the achievements gained in multilevel and multilateral governance since 1946, that could plunge the world into greater chaos due to unbridled unilateralism and economic self-protectionism, leading to greater conflict.

Somewhat similarly, Russian president Vladimir Putin has received much electoral support in his quest to regain Russia’s superpower status at home and abroad, with his nationalist and unilateralist actions as epitomized with the annexation of Crimea in 2014, actions in eastern Ukraine and in the Syrian civil war (2015–18). The latter examples of US and Russian geopolitics have sent multiple messages not supporting multilateralism, consensus and peace-building, and the role of force which will not buttress good governance, democracy building and development in many parts of the world.

3 Territory and the State

The state is the product of spatial processes of how territory and people are organised and controlled. Historically, Statehood and its territory necessitated: (bounded) land, and air and maritime space; a permanent resident population; Government without which there can be no state; sovereignty with recognition by a significant number of other states; and state cultivated nationalism personalised the state political units.

The functions of the state are to defend territory and people against external and internal threats, not only armed dangers but also other menaces ranging from disease to illiteracy, and are supported by the UN and its organs such as the World Health Organization and UNESCO. The state remains pervasive and interventionist to varying degrees depending on the type of political regime in power. People and especially groups give up power to the state in return for protection and favours; there is a type of social contract—citizenship with rights and duties—based on custom at the lower end of the spectrum and on constitution at the higher level. The Post-colonial view highlights the inherent violence of the state; that especially witnessed by colonial and imperial regime processes, and often reproduced after independence in the Newly Independent Countries (NICs) by the new governing elites.

However, the state can only exist if people continue to accept its authority. In this context, it’s interesting to note that totalitarianism —the centralized control by an autocratic authority whereby the citizen is expected to be totally subject to that absolute state authority—imploded in the Soviet Union and satellite communist states in 1991 being overwhelmingly brought down by its own citizens. In contrast, the totalitarian Nazi regime in German was militarily defeated by the USA, UK, Russia and allies, in Germany, Austria, Italy and other areas of Europe in 1945. Nonetheless, fascist regimes continued to rule in Spain and Portugal until the transition to democracy in the 1970s.⁶

State power can be central as in the centralized unitary system such as found in Norway, Ireland, France, Egypt, Iran, South Africa, Senegal, Madagascar, Colombia, Honduras, China and Japan; or federal as in Austrian, Germany, USA, Argentina, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Nigeria, Pakistan, Venezuela; or confederal in Canada, Switzerland, Belgium - systems with devolved powers. Variations of these systems exist throughout the world. Local government, especially in the Western countries is rolling back direct state control in many aspects of life. While the above perspectives largely reflect Western historical paradigms, in many post-colonial countries or NICs, embedded customary and historical systems exist at local and regional scales, often not formally written into law or constitution but continue to function in negotiating conflict.

Whatever its drawbacks, and while the state system is constantly undergoing changes with some observers claiming that it is endangered, the state system continues to proliferate. In 1945, the UN had 51 sovereign state members, 76 in 1955, 144 in 1975, 191 in 2005, coming to 193 in 2011 when the newly independent state of the Republic of South Sudan gained UN membership.

3.1 The State, Political Economy and Geopolitics

Max Weber (1864–1920) describes the state as an unavoidable political organization with a centralized government that maintains a monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a certain territory. General categories of state institutions include administrative bureaucracies, tax collection, legal systems, and military, or religious organizations. The Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States (1933) defined a state as a space that possess the following: a permanent population, a defined territory and a government that is capable of maintaining effective control over the corresponding territory and of conducting international relations with other states. The global system of international law on organisation is premised on the concept of the state as codified in the United Nations Charter (1945).⁷

Various political theories of the state, and its characteristics include the pluralist—liberal democracies whereby, the state is a neutral arbiter guaranteeing individual rights; attempts to reconcile liberal positions of non-interference by the state, and guarantees individual freedom, with ideals of popular democracy. Ideological control is bolstered by the state bureaucracies via systems of education, welfare and so on. The state elites deflect opposition to the system and when those controlling states are under threat there are invocations of state nationalism - citizens are asked to support and defend ‘our’ territory.

Characteristics of the elite theories are premised on the existence of the ruling, and the ruled classes. Due to elite(s) the people may have limited choice between various elite strains of power producing democratic elitism. The characteristics of the Marxist theory emphasize the instrumentalist approach of class composition of state controllers with a functionalist attitude to the state serving the needs of capital as with the so-called corporate state or crony capitalism. The Marxist-Leninist approach endorses a centrally planned economy, strict regulation and the centrality of the workers—producers over individualism and the individual in society. The Welfare State undertakes to protect the health and wellbeing of its citizens ‘from cradle to grave’ including those in financial or social need, by means of ‘free access’ to medical care, grants, education, pensions and other benefits as developed in the UK, Germany, France and Western liberal democracies from the 1940s on.

In political systems analysis, the principal themes include design of the minimalist state, concepts of legitimacy, public accountability in democracy, and potentially the repressive nature of state bureaucratization. Analyses explores: form or how a specific state structure is constituted, and evolves within a given social formation, for example, a neoliberal capitalist society produces a capitalist state. Function pertains to what the state actually does. Structure isolates the links between the state elite and the ruling class. Central to all this is citizenship as the State is a territorially based apparatus of power, and people over whom it exercises power; members of the state are citizens and so the relationship between the state and citizen is crucial. In the 21st century ever-greater emphasis is being placed on good governance and a people-centred politics where citizens’ rights include civil, political, social and environmental agenda.⁸

The political orientation of the state is entwined with economics, and hence the centrality of political economy. In summary, the main schools of theory are:

• (1) Capitalism and iterations of it such as Neoliberalism —which constantly re-adapts to economic opportunities for the accumulation of wealth and is based on concepts relating to: Free market economics; Law of supply and demand; Limited regulation by the state, or self-regulation of producers and Imminent development i.e. change comes about in a ‘natural spontaneous’ or ‘unplanned’ manner. Individualism and entrepreneurship are highly valued. Profits created must be made for the investor, and also to be re-invested in order to create more innovation to generate further production, and this is advanced by advertising and consumption, thus creating a virtuous cycle. Historically this is associated with the USA and Western Europe.

• (2) Structuralism is associated with socialist and communist systems as in Cuba and Vietnam and in its extreme form in the Republic of North Korea, and is based on a centrally-planned economy, premised on intentional or strictly planned development regarding production, consumption and all aspects of life as promoted by the theorists Karl Marx (1818–1883), Vladimir Lenin (1870–1924), and Mao Zedong (1893–1973) among others. Essentially, here the wealth created is managed by the state, within a one party system that uses the wealth to run the state and its organs, and reinvest in the citizens’ welfare. The key principle is that collectivism rather than individualism and entrepreneurship must be directed by the state. The People’s Republic of China with its one party system, and Communist party in power since 1949, officially claims to be communist in order to legitimate the state structure and existing power, but has adapted many aspects of capitalism regarding production, and the creation of wealth including massive exportation strategies as with its trading links with the USA and EU.

• (3) Interventionism : Essentially this pertains to a capitalist standpoint, but with greater state intervention and regulation and is sometimes called the Third Way. In many Western states and especially the EU since the 1990s, the old paradigm of Right and Left, Capitalist versus Socialist has produced very similar political economy policies adapting to economic globalization, but also struggling to maintain their political power.⁹

• (4) The so-called people-centred approach: Here there is a rejection of the grand theories and ideological perspectives associated with the above big political-economy narratives. They often promote sustainable—ecological, economic, cultural and political development at small areal scales that is community centred, as with the Local Participatory Approach promoted by such theorists as Richard Chambers, and Amartya Sen, but also within the lived realities of global contexts. Exemplars of this include Green and ecological movements and NGOs, many of whom dispute the willingness or capacity of states and current economic systems to deliver better conditions for citizens.¹⁰

• Key terms and concepts

• UN HDI (Human Development Index) measures the human progress and quality of life; that is the comparative measure of poverty, literacy and education, and life expectancy. That includes social and economic aspects giving a wider view of development.

• GNP: Economics is central to development and the most traditional measure of this has been the Gross National Product per capita (GNP). The GNP refers to the sum of goods and services bought for private consumption, plus government spending, plus net exports (exports minus imports), plus business investment. GNP per capita measures the amount of GNP in a country divided by the number of people in that country.

• GDP: The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is similar to the GNP but does not take imports and exports into account. However, GNP tells us nothing about the real distribution of wealth amongst people in an economy and it does not include wealth generated in the informal sector. Hence, GNP per capita gives a real measure of economic development at state territorial level, but little information at the individual level. Likewise, social, political and cultural indices are excluded. To counteract this, the Overseas Development Council of the US Government introduced the Physical Quality of Life Index (PQLI) in 1977. The PQLI measures life expectancy, infant mortality rates and literacy levels on a scale from 0 to 100, with 0 being the worst performance in each category in 1950 and 100 referring to the best performance that was expected for the year 2000. The indices are then averaged. UNICEF advocated the use of the death rate of children under 5 years old (per 1000 live births—U5MR) as a key measure of development illustrating the trend relating to child welfare. The focus has been on comparisons between countries, rather than within them (Regan 1996).

• Gini index—income distribution index: is a catalogue of income distribution in an economy, expressed as a fraction that indicates the level of inequality between incomes. The higher the fraction then the greater the inequality of incomes is. The Gini Index gives the broadest view of development levels, combining both social and economic aspects.

• Many development experts agree that the Gini index indicators give the broadest view of development levels, combining both social and economic aspects. Building on such work, endowment-entitlement mapping tools have made great contributions to studies in development.

  Source: Various

Having looked at concepts of territory and states we now focus on the Nation-State which can be defined as an idealised form of state where the boundaries of the nation and the state correspond or are coterminous. Theorists postulate that they are the creation of centripetal-centrifugal balances, namely the forces that unite people, juxtaposed with forces that pull them apart which may include religion, language, history, myths or historical and foundation narratives. Where centrifugal forces outweigh centripetal factors, this may lead to conflict and in some cases secession with people and associated territory withdrawing or breaking away from the existing state as with the Republic of South Sudan from Sudan in 2011 and greater calls for independence in Catalonia and Scotland over the past decade.

4 Nations, States and Nationalisms

As states are agencies with power over citizens, nations have been defined as social collectivities attached to a specific territory where ‘the people’ and political state are closely interconnected. Nationalism pertains to the need for a particular type of economic organisation, in a specific territory, and a sense of national or collective identity cultivated by historical tradition or by state organs such as the educational system or defence forces. All ethnic or cultural groupings do not necessarily wish to form a separate state as witnessed in multi-ethnic states including South Africa. Nonetheless, the association between system of states and ethnic groups—‘nations’ and ‘national communities’ is never static but continuously evolving. By the mid-1980s, there were three times as many ethnic groups as states identified in the world and the number of groups claiming ‘ethnic status’ has continued to increase. The malaise of the territorially based empires especially in Europe from the mid-19^th century on led to issues of minorities contemporaneous with the creation of the European nation-states and its borders and boundaries. Simultaneously, the European powers were superimposing their empires on Africa, Asia and Latin America—while inadvertently laying the foundations for state nationalism in the liberation struggles of the colonized peoples, but within the territorial units and boundaries that the colonizers had carved out for their own respective economic and geopolitical agenda as is particularly evident in the MENA region (Middle East and North Africa), and in West Africa due to British and French geopolitics.¹¹

Nationalism can be seen as a territorial ideology related to people’s attachment to a specific space or place and seeking political independence. From this perspective the territories of the nation and state should have contiguous boundaries. Hence, the nation cannot exist without the state and vice versa. The territorial link to nationalism is a crucial hinge in the power of the nation-state. Until the 1990s following the collapse of the USSR-Russia and ending of the Cold War, many observers postulated that nationalism and ethnic nationalism were spent forces due to modernity, and economic and political globalization. This standpoint has been seriously challenged since the 1990s as witnessed in the ‘nationalist’ Balkan wars (1991–99), conflicts in the former Soviet Republics and ethno-nationalist conflicts and wars in West Africa and Great Lake regions over the past two decades, with the latter being fuelled by bad governance, warlord networks, illicit commerce and unethical international trading. Similarly, in the mature democracies, nationalist narratives have come to the fore in Scotland regarding its place in the UK, and in 2016 with the UK Brexit campaign to leave the EU, while in the US republican party presidential election campaigns and victory of Donald Trump in 2016, there is strong nationalist rhetoric.

Seminal work on the postmodern intellectual trajectory regarding nationalism was produced by the Irish-British historian, political scientist, and polyglot Benedict Anderson as in his thought-provoking research with: Imagined Communities : Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (1983, 1991, and 2006).¹² Essentially his ‘imagined’ concept attempted to capture the idea of the Utopian process—the conception, creation and development of a ‘better’ harmonious life in a geographical location due to socio-political organization. Sometimes, Anderson’s core ‘imagined’ thesis, has been over compressed, equating the ‘imagined’ with pure fantasy, self or group delusion. However, more to the point he illustrated the role of elitist —political, economic, bureaucratic, military or religious—to develop the nation-state project. Other salient thinkers include Ernest André Gellner, the British-Czech philosopher and social anthropologist with Nations and Nationalism (1983); Postmodernism, Reason and Religion (1992); Liberalism in Modern Times: Essays in Honour of José G. Merquior (1996) and Nationalism (1997). Likewise, the historian Eric Hobsbawm, who was educated in Austria, Germany and England, juxtaposed orthodoxies and the ‘invention of tradition’ with prominent works being On History (1997) and Globalisation, Democracy and Terrorism (2007).¹³

Though much contested, and at times with dogmatic critiques of his work and methodology, the major value of Samuel P. Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations (1993) is that it provoked much debate.¹⁴

Essentially Huntington’s hypothesis is that people’s cultural and religious identities would be the prime source of conflict in the post-Cold War (1991) world. Among his many detractors was Edward Said’s response in his 2001 article: The Clash of Ignorance ¹⁵ arguing that Huntington’s categorization of the worlds fixed ‘civilizations’ omits the dynamic interdependency and interaction of culture and that the clash thesis is an example of “the purest invidious racism, a sort of parody of Hitlerian science directed today against Arabs and Muslims”. Noam Chomsky criticized the concept as just being a new justification for the USA ‘for any atrocities that they wanted to carry out’. But despite Huntington’s perceived over schematic framing of arguments, supposed cultural determinism viewpoints and over-labelling, his attempts to discuss the continuing presence, iterations and lasting imprint of root-cultural, nationalist and foundation myths and metanarrative emotions and values cannot be lightly dismissed without running the risk of overarching binary interpretation frameworks and narratives—Right versus Left, conservative versus liberal, structuralist versus post-modernist, politically correct versus non-correct and so forth, as witnessed over two decades later in the extremely aggressive politics, social discontent and violence seen in the USA and Europe.

Categorizing or trying to place and frame the ‘others’ is an integral part of cultural dynamics within any community as is ‘framing self’ and ‘framing us-ourselves’ and hence nationalism. Social and political scientific works including those of Noam Chomsky (2002, 2015), Edward Said (1978), Michel Foucault (1966, 2009), Jacques Derrida (1930–2004) and Derek Gregory (2004) have researched this from various perspectives—power narratives and the attempted ‘manufacture of consent’. This helped to deconstruct geographical, cultural and political orthodoxies—the authorized or generally accepted theories, doctrine, or practices. However, it could be argued that such a postmodernist approach has created research frameworks and associated concepts and lexicon or vocabulary including, PC—political correctness, that have become the new or counter dogma, and orthodoxies targeting to establish the ‘new norm’. Nonetheless, this has contributed greatly to diverse understandings of crucial conflict issues like nationalism within and between societies, and time, historical and human rights challenges and issues whose narratives were once the preserve of ‘public’ funded state institutions or media.

4.1 Patriotism

On 11th November 2018, during the WWI Armistice Day centennial commemorations, addressing over 70 heads of state and the public, French President, Emmanuel Macron argued that true patriotism , real love for one’s country and society did not espouse any form of aggressive nationalism nor promotion of populisms . Such leads to social discord, conflict, destruction and war. In order to counteract this, inclusive democracy is imperative, and multilateral collaboration between states in international and global affairs.¹⁶

So how can patriotism be defined; a love of, and for, one’s own country along with support, allegiance and loyalty to that country. It could also be argued than an often overlooked iteration of this may be an existential love for the actual landscapes, icons and landmarks of that country. Until recent decades, this was seen as something quite natural and a positive quality in individuals. However, exaggerated or aggressive patriotism may lead to political chauvinism . In its very extreme form, it can be interpreted as a sense of superiority over other countries and their associated populations, and is sometimes used in everyday language as a synonym for extreme nationalism, often linked with xenophobia or fear or hatred of real or imagined foreigners. This is in contrast to xenophilia or an attraction, openness or love of other people, cultures and countries that are different to one’s own which entails a high level of empathy. Chauvinism and xenophobia can be exploited by demagogues or political leaders who seek power by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument: appeals may be made to the region, ‘race’, ethnic group or nation, gods and iterations of these. ‘You (us) are wonderful because you (we) are X, Y or Z’ but why do you (us) have problems? It’s the fault of ‘them’ others—othering frames those that you perceive as different to you within your country and beyond your place and space. Jingoism enhances extreme patriotism, especially in the form of aggressive or warlike language and foreign policy.

Due to the excesses witnessed in wars and genocides , especially WWII and the holocaust , or Shoah—the term preferred by many Jewish commentators, and again in the Balkan wars of the 1990s, or during the colonial and liberation wars, the term patriotism, like nationalism, became almost pejorative for many people. Once again in the ‘othering’ processes, some individuals and groups, labelled anyone who displayed a love of their country and culture as possibly dangerous, or too ‘right-wing’ or prone to extremes of xenophobia and so forth. In short, displaying any form of patriotism or nationalism was interpreted in many circles as being non-politically correct. It could be argued that this in itself may have prompted frustration and anger in individuals and groups helping to fuel the rise of extremist parties such as UKIP (UK Independence Party) and NF (National Front) in the UK, AfD (Alternative for Germany) in Germany, and NF (National Front) in France, and in 2011, the murderous actions and hate literature and websites offered by Anders Behring Breivik causing mass murder in Norway.¹⁷

Regarding the latter example, Breivik faced trial for multiple counts of murder, following his gun and bomb attacks resulting in mass killing of adults and children. He admitted planning and carrying out the killings, and is on record as saying that they were necessary to start a revolution aimed at preventing Norway from accepting further numbers of foreign immigrants, and especially Muslims. In 2012, in a unanimous decision, the Oslo District Court convicted Breivik of the murder of 77 people in the streets of central Oslo and on the island of Utoya in July 2011. His legal team argued that his actions were due to psychiatric problems; he insisted that he was sane and stood by his ideological stance.¹⁸ There was no evidence of self-hatred or shame, salient factors in some mental disorders, especially conditions that involve a perceived defect of oneself (e.g. body dysmorphic disorder). Self-hatred is also a symptom of many personality disorders, including borderline personality disorder, as well as depression. However, Breivik’s actions could not be explained away in the usual conventional terms.

Such acts carried out by citizens at home in the mature democracies are increasing, as in 2017 in the USA, where a man was charged with murder after a car rammed into a group of people peacefully protesting against a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, killing one person and injuring 19 others.¹⁹ In the latter examples, the boundaries between imagined racial, ethnic, or nationalist ideologies, and nihilism is not evident, except in so far as the perpetrators didn’t commit suicide as is more common in the Jihadi attacks carried out by people in their home places and abroad causing indiscriminate murder and mayhem ranging from Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan, Indonesia, Somalia, Nigeria and Mali to France, UK and USA.

But where is the place of the individual in society in all this? In historical and legal terms, treason is construed as the opposite to patriotism, and is the crime of betraying one’s country or state, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign government, or intentionally damaging the state, for instance, vis-à-vis other states. While a very valid concept, it has been much abused throughout history by individual rulers, governments and corrupt regimes to implement actions and laws protecting their own vested interests as exemplified during the colonial period and the Apart-hide era in South Africa.

4.2 Patriotism and Nationalism

Patriotism and nationalism are often perceived, and framed as something bad in the ‘others’, yet it is approved and applauded in various iterations by many people as in Olympic sports competitions, Eurovision Song Contests, international ‘Beauty’ competitions, and poignantly in rugby and soccer matches with politicians, presidents and monarchs attending, and the playing of national anthems and flag waving. However, the enjoyment, fun and banter aspects of such events, can be marred by viciousness and even death when there is an excess of emotions and hatred as demonstrated with football ‘hooliganism’ and especially, that within Britain between football teams associated with specific cities or regions, and also abroad with international matches between the 1970s and 1990s. While the violence of some groups of fans and supporters is denounced by the respective club managers, media and politicians, the excesses are often blamed on ‘small groups of trouble makers’ or in the international press on ‘skinheads’ or ‘neo-Nazis’; such an explanation must be seen as an oversimplification. In recent years, sporting organizations at national and international levels have tried to challenge racism and gay-bashing or homophobia, both on the field and among supporters also. This phenomenon is not unique to any single country, as witnessed in Turkey, and in Prague in 2017.²⁰

In certain ways some cultural, or especially sports competitions, such as football can be seen as symbolic or substitute battles or conflicts with a designated territoriality in the football pitch, and with sets of rules and regulations to avoid overt bloodshed. Some positive emotions for sharing empathy, solidarity and identity-building and promoting peace have also been exemplified by sports as illustrated in the John Carlin’s book Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Made a Nation, about the events in South Africa before and during the 1995 Rugby World Cup, and presented in the 2009 movie, Invictus.²¹ In international rugby, the Ireland national rugby union team represents the island of Ireland—both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland—in Rugby Union, and the team competes annually in the Six Nations Championship, which they have won twelve times outright and shared eight times. The team also competes every four years in the Rugby World Cup.²² In matches outside the Republic, “Ireland’s Call” is the only anthem used in recognition of the need for a unifying anthem, and so avoid the playing of either the Irish or British anthems. The latter two examples are closely observed by policy makers and international organizations regarding conflict areas and strategies for creating peace, not only at ‘national’ scales, but also regarding socio-economic disadvantaged areas and hotspots in several areas of the world including countries in Latin America, Africa and MENA.²³ Here must be noted the role of sports in détente or easing of hostility and strained relations between the Republics of North and South Korea, with joint teams participating in international sports events such as the Olympics.²⁴

In conclusion, despite the multifaceted aspects of emotions, psychology, patriotism and nationalism, and sometimes ambivalent attitudes of ruling elites to displays of nationalism, such is reinforced and normalized in the armed forces of the state, as with the USA, UK, France and many other countries. Their military and police are honoured by the state, with medals for their actions, bravery, or death, and ‘sacrifice for their country’ in campaigns such as those in Iraq or Afghanistan. While the gamut of patriotism and nationalism is large and nebulous, just simply negatively framing and labelling it all as bad, runs the risk of alienating larger numbers of citizens who want to identify with their country, and are not extremist; over-labelling such emotional displays may eventually cause a violent backlash. Suffice to say, that all people who voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential US elections, or all those who voted for the UK exit from the EU for a myriad of reasons cannot be simply labelled negatively, and many displayed what they believed to be positive patriotism and nationalism as opposed to the extremists in the respective electorates. Hence the importance and professional responsibility of the media in presenting a balanced viewpoint.

5 Defining Nationalisms

Due to the complex nature of nationalism and its long history and specific geographical contexts, there are various approaches to defining it.

The Association of American Geographers (AAG) Centre for Global Geography Education offers an online module that: “examines the geographic characteristics of national identity and the interplay of culture, politics, and place. The conceptual framework introduces some of the theories and ideas used by geographers to analyse national identity, emphasizing concepts such as nationalism, landscape, and public space. Each case study explores a geographic question about migration in the context of a particular region or country. The module’s collaborative projects offer opportunities for students to discuss the case studies and engage in geographic learning with students in different countries”.²⁵

Attempted classifications of nationalism include²⁶:

Ethnic nationalism: this is based on beliefs in ethnicity, descent, ancestors, heredity, culture, homeland and iterations thereof (Johann Gottfried Herder, 1774–1803) and concepts of the Volk, as propounded by Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814) and is often associated with German nationalism and its extreme forms especially between 1870 and 1945, and more recently with the AfD (Alternative for Germany) party. Here the nation is associated with what’s called ‘jus sanguinis’, or right of blood or genetic heritage, and in the evolution of the concept of citizenship being linked to nationality. Both terms nationality and citizenship are often used interchangeably, hence the ‘right to nationality (citizenship)’ through one’s ancestors, for instance having at least one grandparent that was born in Poland, Germany, Italy, Ireland or India entitles an individual to the nationality or citizenship of that particular state, even if the individual and parents were born and raised outside that state.

In contrast to ‘jus sanguinis’—the concept of ‘Jus soli’ or “right of the soil”, i.e. birth-right citizenship, is the right of anyone born in a territory of a state to obtain that nationality, and was historically, the predominant rule in France and in the Americas from the late 18th century on. Currently approximately 30 of the world’s 194 countries grant citizenship at birth to the children of ‘foreigners’ and also undocumented foreign residents. In the development of international law especially from the late 18th century on, the birth-right citizenship or ‘right of soil’ was promoted by the ideals expressed in the US (1776) and French (1789) revolutions.

Different combinations of the historic concepts of the right of blood and right of soil concepts exist today in ‘national’ and international law regarding nationality or citizenship. Some states do accept dual or multiple citizenship, not requiring that the individual renounce their existing nationality in order to gain another citizenship. Naturalization can be based on request including those from refugees, with terms and conditions, length of residency requirements, through marriage and other means depending on circumstances.

Civic nationalism: here the state derives political legitimacy from active participation of its citizenry, representing the “will of the people” and is often associated with Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s social consensus theories articulated in The Social Contract (1762) with reciprocal rights and duties between the individual, society and the state, based on the traditions of rationalism and liberalism. Membership of the civic nation is considered voluntary; this greatly influenced the development of representative democracy in states such as the United States, Australia, France and the EU countries.

Expansionist nationalism: is a radical form of imperialism incorporating patriotic sentiments with a belief in expansionism. It is closely associated with ideologies including National Socialism (Fascism and Nazism) and has commonalities with the American Manifest Destiny concepts and Neo-conservatism. Observers indicate this type of expansionist nationalism regarding the cultural Sinification of regions of China and strategic use of the Han ethnic group, especially regarding Tibet since 1959. Iterations of such policies can also be witnessed in the Western Sahara, which Morocco annexed in 1975 following the withdrawal of the former colonial power Spain from the territory. Historically, the Kurds in Turkey and Syria faced routine harassment and discrimination from their respective states regarding their citizenship, and similarly for the Rohingya of Rakhine state in Myanmar.

Romantic nationalism: is closely allied with ethnic nationalism, and emphasizes historical ethnic culture, including legends, folklore, music, art and symbolic landscapes appealing to the emotions and individualism as well as glorification of the past and nature. This was a major force in Poland, the Czech territories and many European countries including Ireland from the mid-19th century on. Closely related to this is cultural nationalism that defines the nation as having a shared culture—a broad range of phenomena that are transmitted through social learning. This concept has often been used regarding Catalonia, Flanders and Quebec. From the 1880s on in Ireland, the so called Literary Revival played a significant role in the nationalist movement, and continued in different iterations during the independence struggle, and afterwards, in helping to define post-colonial Ireland.

Liberation nationalism: this is associated with the struggle of colonized people for self-determination and independence from foreign control and imperial rule. This was especially witnessed in Europe from 1848 on within the old land empires such as Austro-Hungary, Russia, Germany and UK, leading to the creation of many new states after WWI ranging from Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Albania to Ireland. Similar liberation nationalism processes became particularly evident after WWII with the shared experiences of the independence struggles in Asia and Africa, and were seminal in the creation of India, Pakistan, Indonesia and breakup of the so called French Indo-China with the bloodiest experience being that in the creation of Vietnam. Almost all of the African countries experienced traumatic liberation struggles with that of Kenya and Algeria being among the bloodiest, and both winning independence in the early 1960s, while the demise of Portuguese rule in its African colonies with Angola and Mozambique, and subsequent liberation wars continued into the 1970s.

Post-colonial nationalism: this is especially associated with the so called ‘Third World’ countries or NICs (Newly Independent States), and their experience of struggle against imperialism. Resistance forms part of their nationalism as in the wave of conflict and decolonization after WWII in Africa and the Muslim world. Besides the geographical specificities of the NICs, ‘pan’ Africa, Pan-Arab, Pan-Indian, Pan-Chinese nationalisms developed. In the Latin American countries, the anti-colonial ideals of Simón Bolívar, the 19th-century Venezuelan liberator from Spanish rule throughout much of South America left a lasting legacy with Bolivarianism relating to pan-American, socialist, and democratic ideals focussed on dismantling the injustices of imperialism, inequality, and corruption. This is particularly evident in recent decades in the ideology of Venezuelan Presidents Hugo Chavez who died in 2013, and continued with his successor Nicolás Maduro.

Socialist or Left-wing nationalism: refers to a combination of socialist ideologies—drawing on the ideas of Marx, Lenin and others including Mao, and Che Guevara, and other types of nationalism, as witnessed in Cuba since 1959 under the Castro regime; and also espoused by political parties such as Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland, and Labour Zionism in Israel, and the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa.

Liberal nationalism: promotes the ideals of liberal democracy and liberal economics, and individualism, that is non-racist and non-xenophobic, arguing that there must be nationalist ideals in order for society and the state to function at its best.

National conservatism: this is associated with social conservatism, and is mostly linked with European political parties, promoting the traditional family and social stability, being anti-immigration, and with a ‘We first’ approach as with UKIP in Britain during the 2016 Brexit campaign and other Eurosceptic parties in the EU including the AfD in Germany, the Vlaams Belang in Belgium, Sweden Democrats, Jobbik in Hungary, Freedom Party in Austria, Golden Dawn in Greece and the People’s Party—Our Slovakia (LSNS). Iterations of this have come to the fore in the USA under the Trump administration (2016) and certain groups that support him, and his refrain ‘America First’ and ‘Make America Great Again’.

Schools of anarchism that acknowledge nationalism, argue that the nation is first and foremost the people, and that the state is parasitic on the people. They promote a radical political system based on local control, free federation, and mutual aid.

Religious nationalism : pertains to the linking of the nation to a particular religion or affiliation, with religion and politics blended creating a sense of identity and unity, where state laws can be passed to reinforce religious observance. Iterations of this are found in Israel and Iran, and also in Ireland and Spain up until the 1970s, as well as Poland at different periods in its history, and at least eight nationalist Hindu parties in India.

With the Russian Revolution (1917) and subsequent creation of the USSR, the communists legislated for state-led atheism to replace religion, and especially to break the power of the Russian Orthodox Church that had been so integral to the absolutist monarchist regime. From a Marxian stance, religion was seen as the opium of the people, dispensed by the ruling elites to control the masses and so to maintain their own power and privilege. Significantly, since the demise of the USSR (1991), the Russian Orthodox Church with the Moscow Patriarchate at its core, has remerged as a powerful actor allied to the new Russian nationalism and ruling regime. Significantly, since the 17th century the Moscow Patriarchate held power over the Orthodox Church and clergy in Ukraine, but this is being seriously challenged by the rising independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church under the Kiev Patriarchate, especially since 2014 and the ongoing conflict with Russia. Many of the twelve other Christian Orthodox Patriarchates support the Ukrainian stance, and Kiev became independent of Moscow in January 2019.

The Russian Orthodox Church claims 150 million followers, approximately 50% of the estimated 300 million Orthodox worldwide. There are 12,000 parishes in Ukraine constituting about a third of all parishes in the Russian Orthodox Church. An independent church there would radically shrink the Russian church and undermine its longstanding claim to lead all of Orthodoxy due to its size, despite the fact that the head patriarch is located in Constantinople (Istanbul) since the great schism in Christianity in the 11th century. Also it would lose influence over many symbolic spaces in Ukraine, including the locational paradox that Ukraine’s capital, Kiev is seen as the historical birth place of the Russian Orthodox Church.²⁷

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded by Hassan al-Banna (1906–49), an Egyptian schoolteacher and imam, and architect of one of the largest and most influential Islamic revivalist organizations ever seen that continues to have much political force within and outside the Muslim world. For al-Banna, all those who follow Islam are part of the nation or Ummah. His work greatly influenced the writings of Syed Abul A’la Maududi (1903–79) brought up in Hyderabad state, India. Both thinkers rejected all forms of secularism, including the concept that the people, state, government or constitution could be based on human-made laws that were not subject to God’s religious law as embodied in Sharia—Islamic law. Such a concept of the ‘nation of god’ was common in Europe until the Age of Enlightenment (16th–18th centuries) and the demise of the Christian—Holy Roman Empire.

Pan-nationalism: is associated with ethnic and cultural nationalism, and affects groups beyond their specific state boundaries, as with Pan-Slavic and Pan-German nationalism, and Pan-Arab nationalism as promoted by Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt especially between 1952 and 1970, and by Muammar Gaddafi in Libya between 1969 and 2011.

Diaspora nationalism: refers to the dispersal, spread or scattering of any people from their original homeland, but who feel some sense of connection or identity throughout the generations with ‘the old home country’ as with many Jews throughout the world in relation to Israel, and Irish in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Latin America and UK. Included here are also the Lebanese in Africa and USA; Armenians in Europe and North America; Nigerians in Europe and North America; Indians and Pakistanis in Europe, USA and Canada, Australia, Eastern and Southern African countries; and Chinese on all continents.

Top-down and bottom-up theories of nationalism include that: it is a mobilizing tool for states to achieve their aims, hegemony and legitimacy; with proto-nationalism the state preceded the nation, and the nation preceded nationalism; while separation-nationalism, like liberation-nationalism, often associated with the Newly Independent States refers to disintegration of existing political systems including empires and is often bottom-up driven. Regarding nationalism, place and nation-building, analysts suggest that nationalism is to support territorial claims; that the crisis in the nation reflects that of the state and vice versa; the nation is a social entity attached to the state; and the nation is politically necessary to anchor the existing multi-state system upon the principle of popular sovereignty—“We the People”—echoing the 18th century ideals in the Preamble to the United States Constitution and “Liberté, Fraternité, Egalité” as in the French Constitution.

The nation state system is under stress from both bottom-up and top-down forces. The main bottom-up factors include internal divisions within states often along cultural fault-lines—conflicting national identities, identity politics, religion, culture, socio- economic and spatial inequalities, and sub-state nationalism associated with secessionist movements. State and people boundary mismatches are also found as in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Mauritania. Similarly, economic core-periphery differences found within and between states where people in the peripheries view the state core regions as over-profiting from their resources and reinforcing their underdevelopment as in Sudan with Khartoum’s dominance regarding the rest of the country, and also the Tripoli region regarding the rest of Libya. The same core-periphery frameworks can also be applied to the industrialized states, as with Catalonia in Spain and Lombardy in Italy.

Major top-down impacts on the state and its citizens comes from economic globalisation as with the effects of Transnational Corporations on many aspects of life including employment, and intensification of flows of capital, finance, FDI (Foreign Direct Investment), trade, resources, products, environmental factors and immigration-labour and refugees, between states. Many citizens feel that the scales of government and International Governmental Organizations are too distant and removed from their everyday existence and livelihoods, including the UN, WTO (World Trade Organization), World Bank, International Monetary Fund, EU, OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), Arab League, OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference), ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), OAS (Organization of American States) and so forth. The increasing concentration of wealth and economic-power in fewer hands within, and between countries is undermining citizen’s belief in the state and the political elites or traditional parties to protect them. This combined with terrorist attacks targeting civilians, and not just state forces and symbols, has led to a malaise being exploited by populist politicians and parties, even in the mature democracies as was witnessed especially since 2016 including the defeat of the proposition to change the ‘Italian Constitutional’ referendum. Similar populisms are evident in countries ranging from Venezuela, to Hungary, Poland and Sweden.

The NGO , Oxfam stated that analysing current trends suggests that by 2016, 1% of the world’s population owned more wealth that the other 99%.²⁸ People throughout the world now can see the resultant images of this, and also get information about such due to the digital revolution in communications technology, and are putting increasing pressure on their respective states to change their socio-political situation as witnessed especially with the Arab Spring revolutions which started in 2010 in Tunisia. While media images of the Arab Spring revolutions show young disaffected citizens in the respective states, in the mature Western liberal democracies and elsewhere, the recession starting in 2007 occasioned by the subprime financial collapse in the USA causing negative ripple effects throughout the world, has shown a culture of corruption and white collar crime that is endemic in many core democracies, and the limits of the neoliberal stance on ‘self-regulation’ of financial and associated institutions.²⁹ Over the past decade strong protest groups at the annual Davos—World Economic Forum—and associated meetings elsewhere, have sent strong anti-establishment messages, and prompted robust state security responses funded by the tax payers. The Occupy Wall Street protests started in 2011, and similarly, the anti-austerity movement mobilized street protests and grassroots campaigns across many countries, and especially in Europe ranging from Greece to Ireland. The issues involved in these protests have to be vigorously addressed by government, in order to renew belief in democracy and associated political systems.

Besides scandals in the political and economic elites and business class, in popular culture, shockwaves were sent out by sporting organisations such as the FIFA (International Federation of Association Football) corruption scandals in 2015, and in 2016 with reference to the Olympics held in Brazil. Comparable questionable practices and scandals in certain NGOs has undermined citizen confidence in countries ranging from Ireland, UK and France to Uganda and Haiti. In February 2018, media brought the alleged sex scandals of some Oxfam workers in Haiti to international attention; the Haitian President stated that the story may be but the tip of the iceberg regarding NGO workers.³⁰

Transparency, along with greater regulation and its application, with justice being seen to have been done at all levels is imperative, in order to avoid pent-up grievance, social rancour, injustice and conflict turning into violence and armed conflict.

6 Continuing Territorialisation and Outer Space

Due to state leadership and intense competition between the USA and USSR, exploration of outer space from the 1950s on became priority and especially after 1957, when the USSR successfully launched Sputnik 1, the world’s first artificial satellite in space, followed in 1969 when an American walked on the moon and symbolically planted the US flag. In order to avoid a ‘space or planet grab’, conflict and war, and unilateral sovereignty claims, as historically witnessed in many parts of planet Earth, the UN and global community developed the Outer Space Treaty in 1967, and subsequent other treaty regulations, establishing international rules which essentially prohibit states from issuing unilateral claims to sovereignty on other planets. Nonetheless, the Superpower Space Race —especially 1955–72, and competition for missile development was intense, occasioning much fear for the possible use of outer space and other planets for war. Culturally this impacted on the production of fiction as with the release of the first Star Wars movie in 1977. Since then, with state-led exploration of resources on other planets including the Moon and Mars, and private commercial sector investment, and even space tourism developing, science fiction writers have been suggesting various scenarios. To date, in space exploration , other forms of human life have not been discovered; however, as found in colonization science fiction, the colonies in space whether human or android usually established their independence from the rulers on Earth, and develop their own geopolitics. ³¹

Jules Verne’s novel—From the Earth to the Moon (1865) was applauded by science fiction enthusiasts, but sniggered at by many detractors, yet just over a hundred years later, Neil Armstrong walked on the moon in 1969 and some 369 satellites were launched into outer space in 2017. In 2018, according to the Index of Objects Launched into Outer Space maintained by the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), there are 4857 satellites orbiting the planet, and this number increases year on year.³² If these were removed, it’s hard to imagine a world without GPS, mobile phones, the internet and the rest; surely the narrative of such a scenario would become dystopian science fiction itself. Space technology and especially satellites have offered humanity incredible opportunities in such fields as communications and time-space compression, scientific research, earth observation for weather forecasting and early warning systems, monitoring pollution and the environment, and battle against the Narco-cartels—illegal drug production areas, transportation routes and hub distribution networks, jihadist terrorism and so forth. While the potential beneficial resources on other planets are dreamed of.

The power of a state is greater when this power is projected in outer space. It is literally ‘over other countries’—to know exactly what’s below with a myriad of data gathering, along with listening capabilities, for analysis of situations, in order to direct and act with satellite precision. Managing operations is facilitated by space satellites.

While the territorialisation, polity or sovereignty aspect of outer space has been catered for by international treaty, indirect territorialisation of outer space is expressed in various forms. Historically, the main outer space powers or actors were states such as the USA and Russia, followed to a certain extent by the European Space Agency, however China is now emerging as the third space power in the so called New Space. Significantly, the number of private sector actors has increased in the past decade.³³

In 2017, the governments of Luxembourg and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) agreed to cooperate on space activities. Within its economic development SpaceResources.lu initiative, Luxembourg offers commercial companies an overall framework for space resource exploration and usage-related activities—or type of permits, including but not limited to a legal regime. Luxembourg is the first European country to offer a legal and regulatory framework addressing the capability of ownership of space resources and laying down the regulations for authorization and supervision of such space missions. Focussing on exploration of resources, the cooperation agreement covers the exchange of information and expertise between Luxembourg and UAE space sectors in areas of science and technology, human capital development and space policy, law and regulation. Both countries consult on questions of international governance of space and aspire to reach common positions in relevant international fora such as the UN.³⁴

Playing catch-up with the USA and Russia, in 2003 the world witnessed China’s first crewed mission in space, in orbit for 21 h, making it the third country to launch a human into orbit. In 2008, the first Chinese astronauts spent 15 min on the moon, and symbolically waved the PRC flag. Chinese outer space travel and related-activities have been achieved in record time and at less financial cost than the other major outer space actors. Currently, the China Space Program has 200,000 space scientists, and the state also subsides the rapidly emerging private sector development in space science. China has planned for the creation of a space station operational by 2022, on its future travel trajectory to Mars by 2040. The current International Space Station (ISS) based on international cooperation since 2000, will remain operational up to 2024, after which its funding will run out. US policy forbids outer space collaboration of NASA with China, most likely due to fear of the militarization of space. The level of space science cooperation between China and Russia remains unclear.³⁵

Outer space including the moon is not militarized in the sense of hosting arms, despite the history and possibility of usage of intercontinental ballistic missiles. However, usage of satellites for information gathering is directly linked to many aspects of weaponry and logistics on earth as with satellite imagery and precision bombing missions. The nexus between the outer space and cyber industries , and military-tech and intelligence sectors has led to much speculation about future cyberwars , or targeting in a battle or war context of computers, networks and control systems, involving both offensive and defensive operations regarding threats of cyberattacks, espionage and sabotage.

With the history of missiles in mind, one can imagine future killer satellites that may be created to kill other satellites. A satellite is capable of travelling alongside another satellites to observe, monitor or spy, and that may lead to kamikaze satellites in the future. Updated international treaty agreement is needed now more than ever to monitor any attempts at militarization of outer space. Without presenting much clarification, in August 2018, the US Trump administration announced plans to create a Space Force by 2020, a new branch of the US military dedicated to fighting wars in space.³⁶

New outer space actors have emerged from the private, fantasy, dream and business sectors, as with entrepreneurial multi-billionaires. Jeff Bezos is promoting and financing moon tourism as is Richard Branson of Virgin fame. Elon Musk sent his iconic car into space for advertising purposes, and was also responsible for the technology that his Falcon rocket can return to earth and stand on land intact rendering the rocket reusable. Musk has also provided travel for transporting supplies to the International Space Station (ISS0. His rockets are less expensive than others, and in 2017 his space budget was double that of NASA and triple that of the ESA, and he is working on a project to colonize Mars. Private companies within China are battling it out for the space market and commercial satellites. Following historical trends in other areas of technological innovation such as the airline industry, the private sector will push for a reduction in production and operational costs in the outer space industry. Nonetheless, while the private sector is rapidly developing, it is often supported by the state in various ways as with Musk and transport of provisions to ISS.³⁷

7 Conclusions

Key concepts in understanding conflict include geopolitics , space, place and time. As geopolitics deals with the study of inter-relationships between physical and human geography and political-economy, its impact on people and organization within and between states, this effects international politics and law, trade and transnational relations. Each conflict and emergency is located in a specific place with its unique geographical characteristics, and time of course—including the long-time calendar of geology and geomorphology determining location of essential resources such as water, and minerals, oil and gas; to the long-time periods of human and social history that imprint on the territory, environment and organization; this is juxtaposed with very recent histories and the current situation.

Human territoriality relates to people living in specific places assuring their basic livelihood needs and developing a sense of ownership or sovereignty over the area where a mosaic of political units or polities results with the associated visible and invisible boundaries to avoid conflict and negotiate stability. Territoriality seeks control over resources ranging from water and food to oil and minerals, protection of these resources and people is central, as is often the defence of identity and culture. Territorialisation denotes a strategy for direct or indirect territorial control and sometimes enlargement of that space.

The state provides a powerful examples of territoriality, and is the product of historical spatial processes of how territory and people are organised and controlled. Statehood and associated territory necessitates: bordered land, and air and maritime space; a permanent resident population; with Government , without which there can be no state; sovereignty with recognition by a significant number of other states; and state cultivated nationalism that personalises the state political unit.

Politics and economics are intrinsically entwined at every scale, and especially in a globalized world, hence political economy is at the core area of geopolitical understanding and analyses, which is key to development . While almost all experts including the UN, and essentially most people, agree that human and social development is necessary at all scales, and that this needs to be financed, with the creation of profit from industry, in the largest sense of the word, what they don’t agree on is how the wealth generated by industry should be redistributed. There are various schools of thought on this as witnessed over the centuries. Broadly these can be categorized into: Capitalism and variations including Neoliberalism that emphasizes free market economics and limited regulation by the state along with individualism and entrepreneurship. Profits created must be re-invested in order to create further innovation, production and consumption. Capitalism has adapted itself to the changing opportunities offered by technology over the centuries.

Structuralism is associated with socialist and communist systems as in Cuba and Vietnam and is based on a centrally-planned economy , premised on intentional development relating to production, consumption and all aspects of life. The wealth created is managed by the state, within a one party political system promoting collectivism.

Interventionism blends capitalist perspectives, but with greater state intervention and regulation and is sometimes called the Third Way. In many Western states since the 1990s, the old paradigm of Right and Left, Capitalist versus Socialist politics has produced very similar political economy policies adapting to economic globalization, but also struggling to maintain their political power, and satisfy their electorates. Noteworthy here is the People’s Republic of China that claims to be communist in order to legitimate the state structure and power, but has adapted many aspects of capitalism especially regarding production, creation of wealth and consumerism.

The people-centred approach advocates a rejection of the big ideological perspectives associated with the above political-economy theories and prioritizes sustainable development at small areal scales that are community centred , but also linked in with ‘ordinary people’ globally, as with the Green and ecological movements, and anti-austerity groups and NGOs that dispute the willingness or capacity of states and current economic systems to deliver better conditions for citizens.

Just as there are many iterations on the politics of identity with its centripetal or binding forces that unite people of common interests and intent, this also engenders centrifugal forces that push people away as with ‘othering’. Similarly, there are variations on nationalism that can be viewed from a range of standpoints. In the EU, this became particularly evident with Spain’s Catalan independence crisis 2017–18, and also with the jingoism and murder of a member of the UK parliament leading up to the Brexit referendum in 2016, while in many EU countries ranging from France and the Netherlands to Germany, Sweden, Hungry, Poland and Slovakia there has been a sharp rise in extremist rhetoric and politics in recent years and such extremism has marred the political landscape of the USA since 2016.³⁸ Russian nationalism is reasserting itself at home, regionally and globally looking to regain its super power status that was lost with the collapse of the Soviet Union (1991). The root reasons for such conflict challenges are further compounded in the former colonies or Newly Independent States due to poverty and underdevelopment, weak state structures and often bad governance .

In order to mitigate the negative effects of conflict, there has developed a system of multi-level governance globally especially since 1945, and this is premised on the nation state model as laid down in the UN Charter and international law. Nevertheless, this state system is seriously challenged to balance citizens’ rights and economic entitlements with the increasing power of economic globalization, and transnational companies and multinational corporations, and the democracy ideals blended with the American-consumer dream. Many socio-economic groups and cultures trying to cope with internal divisions within states, sometimes along old cultural faultlines such as conflicting identities, religious beliefs (including re-found or re-invented iterations of the religion), or sub-state nationalisms are borrowing from cultural discourses and older or re-invented ideologies. In the following chapter the major reasons for conflict are discussed, namely those of a material nature, and those regarding the non-material—existential or imagined.