The Faroe Islands are a group of islands between the Norwegian Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean, roughly equidistant between Iceland, Scotland, and Norway. The islands used to be part of Norway, but were detached in 1814. Since 1948 they have been an autonomous province of Denmark.
Over recent years, the Faroese people have increasingly taken control over their own affairs. At this point they have control over most matters except defence, foreign affairs and the legal system, which remain the responsibility of Denmark. Yet the 34 municipalities of the island, with a population of just 48,470 people have a simple economy that is wholly dependent on fishing.
A century ago, a major theme of international politics was nationalism. Nations created a broad and universal definition of the country, allowing many states to bring together the diverse communities found within their borders to strengthen the nation. This worked to create countries such as Britain, Russia, Turkey, the United States, and many others that were, up until the 19th century, diverse in language, history and culture. Today, countries such as China are following the same path as Beijing tries to create a strong national identity. Other countries such as Pakistan and Afghanistan wish they had experienced a period of nationalism that could have allowed them to conquer the balkanization of its regional tribes that plague it today.
Many countries moved on from nationalism to embrace a broader communities that went beyond nationalism, reaping primarily economic but also defense and cultural benefits of globalization. But with globalization comes the dilemma of tribalization. The fierce demand for independence by local communities has become the natural flipside of globalization and is a dilemma for countries such as Denmark and communities such as the Faroese Islands. And it isn’t just within one nation—the Faroese have also explicitley opted out of EU membership.
Does this help or hurt the Faroese, and does it help or hurt Denmark? As long as the Danes are wealthy, they seem happy enough to entertain the Faroese pretending to be independent. But we have to wonder what will happen when economic times go tough. If push comes to shove, the Faroese, Denmark, and even the EU, may have to choose one way or the other.
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « Back from Tunisia
- » The Principles of War: 9. Co-operation
COMMENTS / 6 COMMENTS
von Kaufman-Turkestansky added these pithy words on 01 Jul 08 at 9:01 pm“Tribal”-style breakups are not necessarily conflicted even in poor economic situations – Czechoslovakia was not a rich country at the time of the Velvet Divorce in 1993. The 2006 break up of Serbia and Montenegro went relatively smoothly too. The USSR didn’t break up smoothly, but considering its size, history and complexity, one has to wonder if things could not have gone much worse than they did in the event.
This points to a missing element to create conflict in this kind of breakup. Even in an economic downturn, I doubt that this special ingredient is there in the Denmark/Faroe Islands case.
Finally, regarding help or hurting the countries: ultimately the reasons for “tribal” breakups are not economic, even though economics can be cited. Slovakia and the Czech republic were probably not dragging each other down, even though this argument was used at the time. They just didn’t want to be one country, even if later they joined one European Union.
Oliver added these pithy words on 02 Jul 08 at 9:00 amTribalization is made possible primarily by the absence of imperialism. If defense were a valid concern they’d never choose to break away from the motherland.
Joe Jones added these pithy words on 02 Jul 08 at 9:52 amBy “one way or the other,” you mean nationalism or globalization? Why not go the Singaporean route and pick both? If people are really better off together it shouldn’t be a stretch for them to forge some sort of common national identity, especially if the government gives the minority language and culture enough concessions to survive.
Curzon added these pithy words on 02 Jul 08 at 10:07 pmvK-T, without denying anything you said, I wonder on a side note if the Czech-Slovak break would have been so easy had the European Community not have been so developed? I think that in principle, most of Europe had already embraced European community, and the imminent future of the EU has made the peaceful break-ups we’ve seen in Europe all the more easier. Notice that similar communities trying to separate in places such as China, Thailand, Pakistan, etc., and other nations that are still in the “Nationalism” stage are putting down insurrections with violence.
von Kaufman-Turkestansky added these pithy words on 03 Jul 08 at 10:08 pmCurzon, of course you have hit upon what is probably part of the “missing ingredients” I referred to, although it may be more than that also. The Czech-Slovak break happened in the context of an integrating Europe; and that backdrop is probably part of what made Montenegro go as easily as it seems; although in the somewhat “velvety” Serbia and Montenegro case there is something else at play so I think the problem is still open.
Michael added these pithy words on 12 Jul 08 at 12:41 amYou didn’t mention what Denmark and the Faeroe’s economic relationship is. If the latter is dependent on the former, tough times may drive the Danes to take the Faeroese pretensions of independence seriously and give them the real thing.
SPEAK / ADD YOUR COMMENT
Comments are moderated.
