This article provides a critique of the discourse of ‘failed states’, and outlines an alternative approach. It is argued that by taking the model of the modern state for granted, and by analysing all states in terms of their degree of correspondence with or deviation from this ideal, this discourse does not help us understand the nature of the states in question, or the processes that lead to strong or weak states. Instead, the idea of the state should be treated as a category of practice and not as a category of analysis. Post-colonial state formation could then be analysed by focusing on the inter-relationship between the idea of the state and actual state practices, and on the ways that states have become linked to domestic society on the one hand and their relations with the external world on the other.
This article analyses state formation in Botswana and Rhodesia/Zimbabwe in the light of general theories of state formation. It seeks to explain why Botswana became a strong state, while state power in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe has eroded. Three main arguments are made. First, Zimbabwe’s experience shows that security threats and compulsion to collect revenue are not sufficient conditions for establishing a strong state. Second, the Botswana case indicates that the formation of a strong state may be possible even in the absence of such compulsions. Third, both cases reveal that patterns of state formation ultimately depend on the interests of ruling regimes, and on their ability to promote those interests. The creation of a strong state requires that regimes must have an interest in a strong state as well as the power to carry out a project of state building. This depends on the relationship between regimes and their constituencies. The article concludes by pointing out the need for expanding the framework described by security-based and fiscal theories, to include considerations about how state formation is related to the underlying social forces on which state power is based.
This article discusses the prospects of state building in contemporary weak states. It seeks to address the following question: what are the conditions of state formation in the contemporary world? Against the background of theories of state formation, the author discusses how regime interests and struggles for political survival determine political developments in weak states. More than anything else, it is argued that the prospect of state formation depends on the nature of domestic power relations. What makes state building so difficult is that regimes in weak states may not have an interest in creating a stronger state. Moreover, the particular combination of internal power relations and external constraints faced by weak states makes the task extremely difficult. Given the class structure of most existing weak states (weak bourgeoisie, weak working class, informal economy, peasant societies), the very sections of society with whom regimes might align themselves to build a stronger state have nothing to gain from the neoliberal state model that seems to be the only alternative on offer.Cet article porte sur les perspectives de construction d'un Etat dans des Etats contemporains faibles. Il cherche à répondre à la question suivante: Quelles sont les conditions de formation d'un Etat dans le monde contemporain? Dans le contexte des théories de la formation de l'Etat, l'auteur montre comment les intérêts des régimes en place et les luttes pour la survie politique déterminent les évolutions politiques dans les Etats faibles. Mais surtout, il défend l'idée selon laquelle la perspective de formation d'un Etat repose sur la nature des relations de pouvoir au niveau local. Ce qui rend la construction de l'Etat particulièrement difficile c'est que les régimes qui reposent sur un Etat faible n'ont pas forcément intérêt à créer un Etat plus fort. Ce processus se complique davantage encore si des contraintes externes viennent s'ajouter aux conflits induits par les relations de pouvoir internes. Etant donné la structure des classes dans la plupart des Etats faibles (une
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.