Kin States in Sub-state Diplomacy Conflict Dynamics

Abstract

How and why do diplomatic activities by sub-state units produce conflict with the central government? To answer this question, scholars have focused on multinational states in which at least one administrative unit—Catalonia, for instance—has an identity that is different from the rest of the country. Such noncentral governments (NCGs), the argument goes, are more likely to engage in uncoordinated bypassing activities and in the international projection of their specific identity in a manner that antagonizes central decision makers. That is especially the case if local elites are dissatisfied with the amount of local autonomy and the institutional tools available for identity protection. This article uses insights from the ethnic conflict and nationalism literature to advance sub-state diplomacy scholarship by adding a transnational dimension to the analysis. Three illustrative case studies—France-Canada-Quebec, Austria-Italy–South Tyrol, and Sweden-Finland–the Åland Islands—reveal that kin states can play a variety of roles in the triangular relationship with the kin NCG and the host state and can either exacerbate or dampen conflictual paradiplomacy. More broadly, the article is an effort to conceptualize the role of sovereign states in sub-state diplomacy.

Dynamics of international activity of sub-state regions

“…Activity in the international area is also fostered by the situation in which one or more regions in a given country show a strong ethnic identity separate from the other components of that country and state-creating aspirations based on national, racial, linguistic, religious and other foundations rooted in culture. In such a case, these "other" sub-state entities usually become the centrifugal forces in the home state (see more: [24]), emphasising in particular their own cultural and/or linguistic difference. The policy of regional Quebec authorities in the 20 th century is usually cited as the "flagship" proof of this thesis.…”

How do regional parties influence foreign policy? Insights from multilevel coalitional bargaining in India

“…One major insight coming from this literature is the identification of small spatially concentrated constituencies, which can hold informed and committed preferences—often expressed through the intermediary of regional parties or regional legislatures—over specific foreign policy issues (Plagemann and Destradi, 2015). However, these studies mainly look at under which explicit institutional conditions these subnational authorities can directly develop their own transnational networks, both bilaterally and multilaterally, with other similar political or cultural sub-units in other states (Cantir 2020; Royles, 2017). In most cases, these transnational opportunities for sub-state actors emerge in areas such as education, healthcare, climate change, waste management, culture, and transportation (Emanuel, 2020; Tavares, 2016).…”

“…In parallel, another strand of scholarship, building on the concept of paradiplomacy or sub-state diplomacy, has observed how sub-state actors are increasingly involved in international politics (Aguirre, 1999;Aldecoa and Keating, 1999;Cantir, 2015Cantir, , 2020Curtis, 2011). Paradiplomacy is a phenomenon through which subnational actors-such as regional governments, but also large cities-bypass central governments and promote their own regional interests directly on the international arena.…”