THE LEGACY OF EMPIRE IN INTERNATIONAL-RELATIONS

In the aftermath of the cold war, not only have many nationalist dispu tes persisted, but many more have erupted, especially in and around th e former Soviet Union. Is this nationalist conflict a temporary phenom enon that is likely to disappear, or is it a deep-seated problem that will persist and possibly grow worse? The working hypothesis that this study will examine is that, aside from continued fighting, there are only three alternative outcomes to ethnic conflict occurring within na tions: (1) the development of peaceful, multiethnic societies within e xisting nations, in which ethnic distinctions become unimportant; (2) maintenance of the status quo by force, in which dissatisfied groups a re unable to achieve their goals; and (3) the breakdown of existing na tions and the proliferation of small, more ethnically homogenous state s. This study will argue that unless governments can bring about the f irst outcome (development of a peaceful multiethnic society), it will be extremely difficult in the post-cold war era for them to achieve th e second outcome (maintenance of the status quo by force). Achieving t he first outcome will also be difficult; although many regimes have th e stated goal of building a society in which ethnic distinctions becom e unimportant, they act to preserve existing patterns of ethnic domina nce. The third outcome (the proliferation of small, ethnically homogen ous states) is often regarded as the most difficult to achieve, but it may be the most likely outcome if larger nations cannot be held toget her on either a voluntary or involuntary basis.