That said, I believe continued globalization is inevitable—and will result in more “melting pot”, punctuated by periods of “nationalist backlash”.

really ? more than say in the early 20th century ?

RA: I think it’s recognized more now, whereas back in the day we just recognized groups that were ruled by people not of the same nationality and locked on to the concept of “self determination.” The concept of “Identity” is probably better understood today and the debate on the topic is far broader.

I think this depends largely on the history of the people involved. For example, if a particular group has been oppressed, as the chains loosen (be it through the collapse of a regime, or the result of Barnettian connectivity) they will likely seek some measure of autonomy from their former oppressors, if not outright independence. That’s part of what is going on in some parts of Africa, as countries transitioned from dictatorships to democratic governance different groups began to engage in a re-negotiation of the social contract that bound them together, sometimes seeking greater autonomy, others outright independence. Iraq can probably fit in this category as well, since although the turmoil resulted from American led regime change, the end state will likely be something along the lines of Biden-Gelb.

In like manner, countries that have already dealt with these issues centuries earlier, such as Europe with Westphalia, are moving toward integration, even as they debate the future of immigrants in their midst. It is likely that there will be an even stronger nationalist backlash within the EU (more specifically within the older members such as France, England, Germany, etc.) which are trying to cope with processing the immigrant bulge. Although the tendency will initially be toward a nationalist reassertion, due to the porosity of EU borders and the integration that has taken place during the last half-century, the long-term trend will be toward acceptance and assimilation.

If looked at in Barnettian terms, the states that are likely to experience more turmoil and in some cases, disintegration, are likely to be found in the gap, while the states that will assimilate or integrate will be largely found in the core. Iraq is probably the first of many, with Turkey, Iran, Syria and Pakistan following thereafter. This of course, is largely dependent on what the impact Iraq and its enclaves will have on the region as a whole. Already, the Kurdish north is becoming an incubator of Kurdish nationalism and culture, further raising the possibility, of a larger conflagration over the future of a Kurdish state.

really ? more than say in the early 20th century ?