Suchergebnisse

Nationalist claims of the Kurdish minority in Iraq.

In recent years, claims for autonomy & self-government have conditioned the politics of the so-called multinational democracies. In such democracies, national minorities have obtained one form or another of self-government thanks to various kinds of federal frameworks. Such important political processes have significantly contributed toward the renewed interest in federalism. In particular, a number of scholars have pointed out the need to formulate a specific variety of federalism to meet the needs of national minorities: asymmetric federalism. Thus, unlike scholars such as Carl Friedrich, Daniel Elazar, & Kenneth Wheare, who thought that traditional, symmetrical federal institutions could be used to manage nationalist claims thanks to their intrinsic capability of dealing with unity & diversity, many contemporary political scientists (eg, Alfred Stepan, Alain Gagnon, Ferran Requeio, Michael Burgess, & others) have analyzed the relationship between nationalism & federalism through the concept of asymmetric federalism. Focusing on the different dimensions of the concept & analyzing such a literature -- its results, suggestions, & limits, constitute the aim of this paper. 2 Tables, 45 References. Adapted from the source document.

Summary in English.

During the 20th century intervention with respect to economic & productive activity became a normal practice for nearly all states. While, in the nineteenth century, laissez-faire liberalism generally prevailed, & the defence of private property was considered the fundamental role of the state, the twentieth century saw the affirmation in some countries of Marxist-Leninist theories, which assigned the state property rights in the means of production, the arrival on the world scene of the new Keynesian approach, which assigned the state the role of promoting & stabilizing economic & social development, &, lastly, the great world revolution consisting in colonial emancipation, which, though a political phenomenon, constituted an implicit move towards economic independence. All of these factors brought about an upheaval in the situation that had been consolidated since the second half of the 19th century -- a century that saw the consolidation of a hegemony of the most developed countries which exercised control over the natural resources of less developed countries, above all of the colonies conquered by European states in the period of imperialist expansion. The problem of nationalizations, or international expropriations, arose out of the conflict that developed between countries exporting capital, which tended to protect the property of their citizens abroad, & countries importing capital, which decided without warning to take over full responsibility for their own economic resources. It is crucial to note, in this connection, the presence, on the one hand of states with a long liberal tradition, which have often suffered losses in terms of the property of their own citizens &, on the other hand, of international actors exhibiting a socialist state structure or of recent liberal tradition, which claim sovereignty over their own resources. For this reason, international nationalizations need to be re-examined in the light of the ideological, political & economic structure of the single states. They concern, in other words, national sovereignty, general political economy choices, the position held within the international community & relations with various other international state-actors, aiming, in the last analysis, to take account of the role adopted, since the 1960s, by the main international organization, the United Nations. Adapted from the source document.