I’ve had this ongoing fascination with European micro states. You know, Andorra, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein. I guess I always wondered why a country so small wouldn’t want to be a part of something bigger.
Let’s weigh the pros and cons. Being a citizen of such a small country might give one a feeling of being a part of a very exclusive club. I doubt that people actually think about that when they decide they want their own country. They think that their ethnic identity or shared history deserves its own land. These sorts of countries are called nation-states because they are set up around a common culture, language, history and ethnicity. Plus, perhaps, a small economy and population makes quality of life easier to maintain.
Cons: a small country with limited resources, a small military, and a small citizenry makes a country more susceptible to invasion where said country must either take their chances and hope that doesn’t happen or rely heavily on more powerful neighbors, therefore negating their independent status. Also, a small country has only so many natural resources making their dependence on neighbors and trade partners even stronger.
For example, the U.S. has a large landmass and a large population. Its geography is diverse. In some areas of the country, farmers grow citrus fruits, in others, potatoes, corn, wheat. Some parts of the country, like Pittsburgh, New Jersey, and Detroit are industrial, making cars, raw steel, consumer goods, etc. In New York and San Francisco, money from all over the world is filtered through their markets. In essence, it is theoretically possible (though not the case), that the U.S. could be self-sufficient. Most of our food is exported while most of our consumer goods are imported.
Luxembourg, however, could not pull that off. The European Union, which Luxembourg is a member, probably could though their population density vs. land area is much higher than that of the U.S, making feeding their population more difficult without imports.
There’s a country in Africa called Lesotho. It is completely within the borders of South Africa. It has no coastline; it is completely encircled by South Africa. The reason for this is because in the late 1800’s, a tribal chief defeated another tribe in the power vacuum left by the retreating British, Dutch, and French colonists. At this point, mainly exporting water, hydroelectric power, and marijuana to South Africa supports Lesotho’s economy. One third of its population has AIDS and just this year, 30000 people signed a petition and sent it to the South African parliament asking them to annex the country and make it a part of South Africa as most of them are desperately poor and their economy is nearly totally dependent on South Africa anyway.
I read an online survey that asked residents of Lesotho if they should become a part of South Africa and most of the respondents replied that they should not. They are proud of their separate culture and some of them even referenced the tribal chief that fought for Lesotho’s independence, saying things like, “Chief Moshoeshoe fought for our independence and that’s worth keeping.” Clearly, pride plays a large role in the desire for independence even in the face of poverty, death, disease, and civil disorder.
I was talking to a highly educated German woman I know who had traveled to both Luxembourg and Liechtenstein. She said that Liechtenstein might as well be Swiss. It’s rich and snobby, German-speaking and mountainous. She said Luxembourg could easily be a part of any of the four countries surrounding it as it was a modern, industrial European country, though probably closer to Belgium or France than Germany or The Netherlands.
And here's a fun new development. An ethnic group that occupies Belgium, called the Flemish, are clammoring for their own country. It seems unlikely to happen but if it does it would split up an already fairly small country and compromise the efforts of a country that is desperately trying to gain credibility and power in the European Union.
So what do you think. Just as a hypothetical, would you endorse that, say, Utah became its own country. I mean, they are culturally, historically, and religiously different than the rest of the U.S., right? They have different laws than most of the country when it comes to alcohol and other sinful pleasures. Most of the state is closed on Sunday, etc. A large portion of them think that the way American society and government is handled and the direction it is going is problematic. Does that warrant independence? Or what about Texas? They were their own country for a while and Texans are incredibly proud of their state and their way of life. California could be said to be it’s own nation-state. As could New England, the Dakota’s, and the South. But splitting up the country would leave a power vacuum in the world that is filled at this point by a economically, culturally, and militarily powerful nation.
