The idea of building nation-states is getting antiquated and fast giving way to the concept of multi-national states as there are few countries that can genuinely claim to be made up of a single nation, according to an American scholar.

"The claim that all states should grow from a single nation; in other words, all states should be nation-states (mono-national states), is false, "visiting Dr David W. Williams, Professor of law, University of Indiana, told the 30-plus state and federal constitution writers from Burma on 14 August. "Most states are multinational: they contain a number of nations."

Williams, however, was plainly against secession. "First, the globe does not have enough space for every nation to have its own viable state," he said.

"To be viable, a state cannot be too small; otherwise, it cannot stand on its own. It cannot project itself, nor can its economy develop, nor can it pay for the apparatus of a state such as schools, judges, police and regulatory agencies. There are of course some very small states such as San Marin, Andorra and Vatican City. But, in truth, those are not really sovereign nations. We just call them that. They are really part of the surrounding countries, and they retain independence in only limited ways."

Another reason, he said, is that multinational states can exist. "Today, nations can and do live together in a single state," he declared, citing prominent examples like Switzerland, Canada, Belgium, the United States (with its Native American nations), Spain, Italy and even France."

At the same time, he is against one dominant nation of a state imposing its culture on everyone else, instead of trying to create a culture of the whole country. "Different peoples cannot be forced to be the same. When they do, it instead creates hatred and division. They in turn will destroy the whole country. Nations that start excluding people because they do not have the right ancestors pretty soon become rigid, oppressive and inflexible. They will die or explode in civil war."

While he therefore agrees that unity is necessary, "(nation-state advocates) were wrong... in the way they went about the task, by trying to make everyone alike." "A multinational state need not be the alter-ego of one of its nationalities. Instead, it must have an identity that includes all those nations or else comes from somewhere else entirely."

Dr Williams instead suggests constitutions that will guarantee "diversity within unity and unity within diversity". "First, they must allow enough internal diversity; in particular, they must allow their various cultures to govern themselves according to their own ways. But second, they must also find some basis for unity across the various cultures. This unity is necessary to allow people from all parts of the country to participate in state-wide politics, to relate to each other in positive ways and to have some control of the federal government itself. If the nations isolate themselves, then the state will inevitably fall apart."

Simply put, the constitution must allow member nations to come together and still remain different, he concluded. (The end-product of which, Professor Yogendra Yadev from India had likened to "a salad bowl", where each part that forms the whole remains as it was before while the whole becomes better than each of its parts.)

"By and large, Americans are also very individualistic. They cherish the right to be different from those around them, even the people from their own group. Yet despite there differences, America somehow hangs together. Why? Many believe that America's unity is provided by just one thing: the veneration that Americans feel for their constitution."

Meanwhile, he acknowledges that the American constitution is not "the Holy Grail of constitutional theory... Most constitutionalists have denied you can discover a one-size-fits-all constitution. It is true that all around the world, people have much in common. We can learn from each other, and some general constitutional principles (such as equality, liberty, democracy, impartiality and the like) may be important for every one..."

The three-day seminar, the 4th in the series, was organized by Supporting Committee for State Constitutions, chaired by the late Chao Tzang Yawnghwe who, according to Dr Salai Lian Hmong Sakhong, had proposed "state building" instead of "nation-building" and "unity in diversity" instead of "national integration."

Source: Shanland