TYPES OF STATES AND COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY

TYPES OF STATES AND COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY

1. Types of States

1.1 Federal, Unitary, and Confederate States

There are three main types of states, based on the way in which power is

distributed. A federal state is one which power is shared or balanced between the

national government and other subunits such as provinces or cities. A unitary state is

one in which most power rests with the national government. While there may be

subunits, these units only operate with the permission of the national government. The

final type, which is quite uncommon in today’s world, is a confederate state. This state

Swiss national government. Yet, there are many examples of confederacies before the

birth of modern sovereignty. We will explore a case study of such a government in

Student Feature Study: Sovereignty in the Iroquois Confederacy on page 121). With

these important terms considered, we can now more formally consider the many types

of state and regimes that exist today, as well as the ways in which regimes may shift

in form and function over time to either serve the needs or the people or the desires

of the ruling classes.

1.2 Regime Types

The rise of the so-called modern state is usually attributed to the end of the

European Middle Ages, wherein states were critical to the organization and survival of

further military power. Advances in technology helped European states invent, or

improve, the use of gunpowder, weapons, mapmaking, as well as mathematics and

engineering (although many of these technological advancements were found in other

parts of the world such as China and the Islamic Empires). A final benefit for European

states coming out of the Middle Ages was some semblance of political stability for its

inhabitants. When protected by a recognized, and somewhat unified, state, ordinary

people had greater chances for survival. States can vary not only in their strength,

legitimacy, and authority, but in the mechanisms they use to achieve political agendas.

To this end, there are a number of different government types that states have chosen

to achieve their political ends. Here, too, there can be much variation in how states

or “single” and ἄρχων or árkhōn means “ruler” or “chief.” Monarchies are thought to

descend from more ancient forms of tribal leadership, where tribes appointed a special

or sacred individual to lead their interests. Over time, modern monarchies evolved

where leadership was generally vested with a King or Queen. Even within the regime

type of monarchy, there is variation in how the leader may exercise their power. There

are two primary types of monarchy that have been identified throughout history. In an

absolute monarchy, the monarch is wholly responsible for all decisions, and rules the

state with absolute power over all political, economic, and social matters. In a

constitutional monarchy, a monarch must abide by a state-adopted constitution, which

dictates the scope and depth of its power in all state-related activities. In most modern

freedoms. A common form of dictatorship in the 20th and 21st centuries have been

personalist dictatorships, where power lies with a single, charismatic and allpowerful

person who drives all actions of the state. Current examples of these types of dictators

could be Kim Jong-Un of North Korea and Xi Jinping of China. Kim Jong-Un is currently

the Supreme Leader of North Korea, and has served since 2011 when his father, Kim

Jong-il, who was Supreme Leader, passed away. Like his father, Kim Jong-Un has

operated under a cult of personality. A cult of personality occurs when a state leverages

all aspects of a leader’s real and exaggerated traits to solidify the leader’s power.

which endows its leaders with near or equal to God or Godly status. Xi Jinping of China

also has been characterized as a dictator, as he controls all actions and activities of

the state along with elites, whom he personally selects, who assist him in carrying out

vested power with those who were seen as elite and capable of ruling. In modern

terms, oligarchies seem to be a more present-day embodiment of aristocracy.

Oligarchy is similarly defined as a form of government where elites rule, though there

is not necessarily an assumption of nobility.

A junta is a regime type where there is a small, military group of elites who rule

state activities. The term junta derives from its use during the Spanish resistance to

Napoleon’s attempted invasion of Spain in 1808, wherein military groups within Spain

assembled and attempted to stop Napoleon’s attack. Junta means “meeting” or

“committee” in Spanish, though its current affiliations within political science

characterize it as akin to a military oligarchy. Often, juntas tend to form as resistance

or rebellion, and are used in coup d’états. Coup d’états are attempts by elites to

transition. Regime transitions occur when a formal government changes to a different

government leadership, structure or system. Sometimes, a regime will change from a

dictatorship to a democracy through the mobilization of citizens demanding change

from their state operations. Other times, a democracy may backslide into a

dictatorship. While democracies have become the most common and generally

accepted form of government, there have been dozens of examples of a democracy

backsliding into a dictatorship. Consider the example of the rise of Adolf Hitler in

Germany during the 1920s. Following World War I, a weak democracy was installed

in Germany. The Weimar Republic was Germany’s democracy following World War I,

but it suffered a number of problems which eventually suppressed the regime and

rally many Germans against the Weimar Republic. Through his use of manipulation

and incendiary speech, Hitler was able to get appointed as the Chancellor of Germany.

He abolished the Constitution, and year after year, eroded the rights and liberties of

the German people until Germany was a fully authoritarian regime led by a single

dictator. At the end of World War II, Germany again experienced a regime transition

back towards democracy. Overall, observing cases of regime transition can be

important to learning the causes and consequences of changing regimes.

2. Comparative Case Study: Botswana and Somalia

Why compare and contrast Botswana and Somalia? Why select these two

countries for consideration when discussing the main focal point of “the state?” The

selection of Botswana and Somalia is interesting to consider when evaluating the

common, and yet the resulting political outcomes have been very different. The

primary difference between these two countries are their forms of legitimate authority.

This case study is also a perfect transition into the next chapter, which is a deeper

consideration of the state as well as theories of why the state emerged.

2.1 Bostwana

Full Country Name : Republic of Botswana

Government : Parliamentary Republic

Official Language : Setswana, English

Economic System : Market-Oriented

GDP : $18.726 billion

GDP per capita : $7,817

Currency : Pula

The Republic of Botswana is located in southern Africa and is a landlocked

country. Botswana is bordered by South Africa to the south, Namibia to the northwest,

and Zimbabwe to the northeast. Botswana has a long history and is credited with

perhaps being the “birthplace” of all modern humans dating back over 200,000 years

ago. Much of what is known about the ancient Botswana region is derived from

archeological and anthropological research, which has traced evidence of human

occurred between the years of 1880 to 1914, with countries like Britain, France,

Belgium, Portugal, Spain, and Italy invading and colonizing much of Africa. Botswana

was dominated by Britain. Under British rule, the region of Botswana was called the

Bechuanaland Protectorate.

Part of the reason the region was called a protectorate was that Britain

annexed, or took over, the region on the basis that they were “protecting” the main

tribes from the Boers. The Boers were descendants of Dutch colonists in Southern

Africa and would frequently attempt to take over the territory of Botswanan tribes. To

protect their economic, military and moral interests in Botswana, Britain permitted the

Bechuanaland Protectorate to operate under its own leadership and rules but supplied

area or nation is dependent in that it relies on the security provided by another state,

but is still allowed, to some extent, to dictate its own local politics and activities.

At the beginning of the 20th century, more and more power was being shared

with the various tribes and councils within Southern Africa. Various proclamations

enabled tribal powers to have some level of power over how they conducted

themselves. Nevertheless, it was not until 1964 that the United Kingdom allowed

Botswana to declare its independence. Botswana was able to hold its first elections in

considered Africa’s oldest and most stable democracies, though it is not without some

number of issues (which will be discussed below). Botswana’s constitution provides

the supreme law of the law and basis for rule. There are components of Botswana’s

constitution that seek to protect the citizens of Botswana and, like the U.S. the

Constitution, provides for certain civil liberties. Civil liberties are defined as individual

rights that are protected by law to ensure the government does not unreasonably

interfere with certain specific individual rights (e.g. like freedom of speech, religion,

assembly, etc.) Botswana is a parliamentary republic, which is a system of government

where the executive branch is given its powers by the legislative branch, in this case,

head of government, and is elected by, and held accountable by Botswana’s

Parliament.

Although Botswana’s government has three branches of government with

defined powers according to their constitution, and even though free elections do

occur, there is some question as to how free Botswana actually is. The Freedom in the

World Index categorizes Botswana’s democracy as free, but a number of global

indexes for democracy, including the Democracy Index, have categorized Botswana

as having a flawed democracy. Chapter 6: Democracy will discuss the various

manifestations of democracy worldwide, but it is worth noting that not all democracies

are categorized as fully democratic. Instead, there are characteristics which are

time again. This could be an indication of a lack of fair competition. Another area of

concern is Botswana’s freedom of speech. Botswana is said to not have full freedom

of speech, and freedom of the media is constantly under threat. Another cautionary

issue is how Botswana’s government treats migrants, refugees, and the LGBTQIA+

community. All of these groups face constant discrimination under the law.

Botswana’s current situation is a mixed bag. On the one hand, Botswana does

have the oldest and one of the most stable democracies in Africa. According to most

acknowledged, it bears noting that many of the countries in Africa have struggled with

government authority, the basis of legitimacy of leadership, and the practice of

democracy. Compared to other countries in Africa, Botswana does seem to be a

leader. In comparing Botswana globally, its flawed democracy does rank it lower in

terms of democracies worldwide. An interesting question to pose, considering the

current state of Botswana’s democracy, is why has Botswana’s government been

reasonably successful in light of the many failed or failing governments in Africa?

Indeed, Botswana is often called the “African Exception.” One of the answers to this

question is often attributed to culture, and to some extent, luck. At the time of

and undisturbed. There was a clear changing of the seasons, which led to predictable

crops and management of agriculture. As agriculture was the dominant economic

activity of the time, life in Botswana was pretty stable. In addition, prior to the move to

formal independence and the creation and adoption of a constitution, the protectorates

and the loose agreements with the United Kingdom, seemed to have prepared the

people of Botswana for a hierarchical power dynamic where tribal decisions were

based on the consensus and agreement of the tribes. From this, there was already

sort of an informal democracy in place. The combined hierarchy of power, combined

with the tradition of gathering consent of the people, may have made a difference for

overall adoption of a democratic form of government. A saying in Setswana seems to

Kingdom had been interested in other locations within Africa, so many other countries

in Africa became exploited. Interestingly, Botswana was largely left alone, and was not

victims of exploitation on account of their geographical resources. Instead, many in

Botswana actually felt abandoned by the government of the United Kingdom. It’s been

said that a government official in Botswana quipped, “The British left us with nothing!”

He then paused, thoughtfully, and added, “On the other hand, the British left us with

nothing” (Lewis, 2020). To this end, it may have been helpful that the British left

In this way, Botswana was largely left to fend for itself, developing its own institutions

and governmental practices, which were able to transition from previous practices

with, relative to other countries, a level of ease.

2.2 Somalia

Full Country Name : Federal Republic of Somalia

Head of State : President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud

Head of Government : Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre

Official Language : Somali, Arabic

Economic System : Informal

Location : Eastern Africa

Capital : Mogadishu

Total land size : 637657 sq km; 246,201 sq. miles

Population : 15,893,219

GDP : $5.218 billion

GDP per capita : $348

Currency : Somali Shilling

civilizations and outside influences given its location for trade. Somalia was a stopping

point that enabled profitable trade to occur between what is now the Middle East,

connecting trading pathways with India and China. In the 9th century, Islam was

introduced to the region of present-day Somalia. Muslims fleeing persecution came to

Somalia and introduced the Islamic faith. Over time, Islam grew to be the main religion

of Somalia.

Somalia, like Botswana, was a target within the Scramble for Africa, though the

control, while Somalia was partially dominated by Britain, and partially dominated by

Italy. The two colonial powers fought for control over Somali territory, to the detriment

of the Somalians. In World War I, Italy, which had turned fascist under the rule of Benito

Mussolini, sought to annex Ethiopia. Italian troops, along with some Somali troops,

were able to take back parts of Somalia formerly dominated by the British. Years later,

during World War II, Britain was able to successfully take back its former Somali

territory, as well as those parts that were held by Italian forces. The battle between

Britain and Italy to dominate Somalia often put the Somalians in difficult positions

where they had to side with one or the other.