Failed state: Conceptual understanding and misunderstanding
There is no denying the fact that the concept of 'Failed State' has meanwhile drawn attention of all as one of the burning issues of the day and the matter has been fueled, fomented and intensified more acutely after the publication of the book 'Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy' written by the most authoritative American left intellectual Professor Noam Chomsky. In this book, he assertively branded America also as a foremost failed state from the point of view of the immediate past events and, in particular, the recent activities of the Bush administration and American domestic and foreign policy.
The declaration that a state has 'failed' is generally controversial since, when made authoritatively, such assessment may carry significant geopolitical consequences. A state may be said to "succeed" if it maintains a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within its borders. When this is broken (e.g., through the dominant presence of warlords, militias, or terrorism), staking its very existence, state becomes a failed one to many. The difficulty of determining whether a government maintains a monopoly on the "legitimate" use of force (which includes the problems of defining "legitimate") means it is not clear precisely when a state may be said to have "failed."
The term "failed" is also used in the sense of a state that has been rendered ineffective (i.e., has nominal military/police control over its territory) and is not able to enforce its laws uniformly because of high crime rates, extreme political corruption, and extensive informal market, impenetrable bureaucracy, judicial ineffectiveness, military interference in politics, cultural situations in which traditional leaders wield more power than the state over certain areas or a number of other factors.
Crisis States Research Centre
The Crisis States Research Centre defines a "failed state" as a condition of "state collapse" -- e.g. a state that can no longer perform its basic security and development functions and that has no effective control over its territory and borders. A failed state is one that can no longer reproduce the conditions for its own existence. This term is often used in very contradictory ways (for instance, there is a tendency to label a "poorly performing" state as "failed"-- a tendency the Crisis States Research Centre rejects). The opposite of a "failed state" is an "enduring state" and the absolute dividing line between these two conditions is difficult to ascertain at the margins. Even in a failed state, some elements of enduring state, such as local state organizations, might continue to exist.
Foreign Policy magazine, 2005-2007
Since 2005, the United States think-tank, the Fund for Peace and the magazine Foreign Policy, publish an annual index called the Failed States Index. The list only assesses sovereign states (determined by membership in the United Nations). Several territories are excluded until their political status and UN membership are ratified in international law. For example: Taiwan, the Palestinian Territories, Northern Cyprus, Kosovo, and Western Sahara are not included in the list -- even though some are recognized as sovereign states by some nations. Ranking is based on the total scores of the 12 indicators.
Indicators of state vulnerability: The index's ranks are based on twelve indicators of state vulnerability -- four social, two economic and six political. The indicators are not designed to forecast when states may experience violence or collapse. Instead, they are meant to measure a state's vulnerability to collapse or conflict. Countries are categorized based on red, orange and yellow zones. Some in the yellow zone may be failing at a faster rate than those in the more dangerous orange or red zones, and therefore could experience violence sooner. Conversely, some in the red zone, though critical, may exhibit some positive signs of recovery or be deteriorating slowly, giving them time to adopt mitigating strategies.
Social indicators: Demographic pressures including the pressures deriving from high population density relative to food supply and other life-sustaining resources.
Massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples: Forced uprooting of large communities because of random or targeted violence and/or repression, causing food shortages, disease, lack of clean water, land competition, and turmoil that can spiral into larger humanitarian and security problems, both within and between countries.
Legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievance based on recent or past injustices, which could date back centuries, including atrocities committed with impunity against communal groups and/or specific groups singled out by state authorities, or by dominant groups, for persecution or repression.
Chronic and sustained human flight: Both the "brain drain" of professionals, intellectuals and political dissidents and voluntary emigration of "the middle class."
Economic indicators:Uneven economic development along group lines, determined by group-based inequality, or perceived inequality, in education, jobs, and economic status. Also measured by group-based poverty levels, infant mortality rates, education levels.
Sharp and/or severe economic decline measured by a progressive economic decline of the society as a whole (using per capita income, GNP, debt, child mortality rates, poverty levels, business failures). A sudden drop in commodity prices, trade revenue, foreign investment or debt payments. Collapse or devaluation of the national currency and a growth of hidden economies, including the drug trade, smuggling, and capital flight. Failure of the state to pay salaries of government employees and armed forces or to meet other financial obligations to its citizens, such as pension payments.
Political indicators: Criminalisation and/or delegitimisation of the state: Endemic corruption or profiteering by ruling elites and resistance to transparency, accountability and political representation, including any widespread loss of popular confidence in state institutions and processes.
Progressive deterioration of public services: A disappearance of basic state functions that serve the people, including failure to protect citizens from terrorism and violence and to provide essential services, such as health, education, sanitation, public transportation. Also using the state apparatus for agencies that serve the ruling elites, such as the security forces, presidential staff, central bank, diplomatic service, customs and collection agencies.
Widespread violation of human rights: An emergence of authoritarian, dictatorial or military rule in which constitutional and democratic institutions and processes are suspended or manipulated. Outbreaks of politically inspired (as opposed to criminal) violence against innocent civilians. A rising number of political prisoners or dissidents who are denied due process consistent with international norms and practices.
Security apparatus as 'state within a state' : An emergence of elite guards that operate with impunity. Emergence of state-sponsored or state-supported private militias that terrorize political opponents, suspected "enemies," or civilians seen to be sympathetic to the opposition. An "army within an army" that serves the interests of the dominant military or political clique.
Rise of factionalised elites: A fragmentation of ruling elites and state institutions along group lines. Any use of nationalistic political rhetoric by ruling elites, often in terms of communal irredentism or of communal solidarity (e.g., "ethnic cleansing" or "defending the faith").
Intervention of other states or external factors: Military or para-military engagement in the internal affairs of the state at risk by outside armies, states, identity groups or entities that affect the internal balance of power or resolution of the conflict. Intervention by donors, especially if there is a tendency towards over-dependence on foreign aid or peacekeeping missions.
According to the "Failed States Index 2005" of magazine Foreign Policy, 2005 was the first year that the Fund for Peace published the list. 76 states were analyzed, of which 33 were classified as "alert" and 43 as "warning" (ratings beyond "warning" were not done year). The "Failed States Index 2006" of the magazine included 177 states in the list, of which 32 were classified as "alert", 97as "warning", 33 as "moderate" and 15 as "sustainable".
Sinha MA Sayeed is Senior fellow, Centre for Governance Studies, University of Dhaka, Faculty member, Newcastle Law Academy.
Comments