Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction: international relations theory and the common good
- 2 International protection regimes in an international order
- 3 The national state and the protection of ethnic minorities
- 4 The liberal state and the protection of European citizens
- 5 The multicultural state and the protection of ethnic communities
- 6 The nation-state and the protection of refugees
- 7 Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
- CAMBRIDGE STUDIES IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
5 - The multicultural state and the protection of ethnic communities
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction: international relations theory and the common good
- 2 International protection regimes in an international order
- 3 The national state and the protection of ethnic minorities
- 4 The liberal state and the protection of European citizens
- 5 The multicultural state and the protection of ethnic communities
- 6 The nation-state and the protection of refugees
- 7 Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
- CAMBRIDGE STUDIES IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Summary
As we saw in Chapter 4, the political order that was established after World War II enabled West European leaders to build a cohesive community of liberal democratic states in which citizenship was defined in secular terms. The end of the Cold War raised expectations among political leaders that this community could be expanded to include the former communist states of Eastern Europe and Eurasia. This expansion would involve extending Western institutions eastward and building a shared commitment to the values underlying these institutions. It was the prevailing belief that democratization, economic cooperation, and a commitment to protect human rights within the new and reorganized states of Eastern Europe would facilitate the integration of the continent. In short, the initial goal of the post-Cold War leadership was to build a new integrated European order based on the liberal state.
However, soon after initiating this strategy, European and North American leaders realized that the integration of Europe would require the resolution of internal tensions that stemmed from competing definitions of “state,” “nation,” and “citizenry.” In this effort, the adoption of democratic institutions alone would be insufficient. The political geography of Eastern Europe had been established at Versailles seventy years earlier. Since both blocs agreed not to allow any significant border changes after World War II, the Versailles settlement remained frozen in time. As a result, the external borders and internal administrative boundaries of most East European and Eurasian states reflected the values and priorities of the post-World War I era.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Institutions for the Common GoodInternational Protection Regimes in International Society, pp. 118 - 151Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2003