Benyamin Neuberger

National self-determination: A theoretical discussion

ISSN 0090-5992 print; ISSN 1465-3923 online/01/030391-28

The African Concept of Balkanisation

In modern African political literature there is a recurrent reference to the dangers of ‘balkanisation’. Already during the 1920s the Gold Coast nationalist Kobina Sekyi compared Africa with the Balkans, and warned not to follow the ways of ‘balkanisation’ Later Kwame Nkrumah, Leopold Sedar Senghor, Sekou Toure, and other anti-colonial leaders continued to employ the term which rapidly became a basic part of the phraseology of modern African nationalism. I shall attempt to analyse the concept, and to show its use, definition, ambivalence, and implications.

Ethnic Groups and the State in Africa

Contemporary Africa abounds with problems related to ethnicity or ‘tribalism’ (‘if one disapproves of the phenomenon it is tribalism and if one is less judgemental it is ethnicity’1). Throughout Africa — in Angola, Ethiopia, Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi, Liberia, Chad and Niger -ethnic wars are waged. In nearly all African states that are multi-ethnic we see ethnic politics in action — ethnic governments and coalitions, ethnic coups d’etats, ethnic parties and elections. Lately, mainly in the 1990s, the age of democratization with its successes and failures, an old debate has been revived in Africa. Does multi-ethnicity constitute a solid base or an obstacle for liberal democracy? Can ethnic groups become building stones of a pluralist society?

The Arab Minority in Israeli Politics: Between ‘Ethnic Democracy’ and ‘Democratic Integration’

‘I am sure the world will judge the Jewish state according to how it will behave towards the Arabs.’ — Chaim Weizman, Israel’s first president, 1947 — a year before the foundation of the state.

Has the Single-Party State Failed in Africa?

Before analysing the success or failure of the single-party state in Africa, it is necessary to define the terms of success and failure of a political system. First, it must be emphasized that the prolonged existence of a regime does not prove its success nor that its overthrow is necessarily a result of its failure. Sometimes cruel, corrupt, and inefficient governments survive for decades while reform-minded, popular governments are overthrown within months. Francos Spain, for example, has achieved little success in the realm of social and economic progress, although it has succeeded in surviving for more than thirty years. Dubceks Czechoslovakia, although of short duration, is not necessarily a failure when viewed in historical perspective. If, then, the longevity of a regime has no bearing on its success or failure, what criteria can be employed in making an evaluation of one-party states in Africa? The three criteria which seem relevant for such an evaluation are those of stability, economic development, and nation-building. This paper, therefore, will be devoted to a comparison of the single-party state with Western-style multiparty systems and with military dictatorships , focusing on the three criteria mentioned above. At the same time, the paper will attempt to answer the question: does a single-party state succeed or fail in its performance because of its single-party structure?