| Summary/Abstract |
Responding to a set of wicked problems pertaining to weak or failed states, state-building remains circumscribed by many of the problems it strives to address. Despite the expansion of literature, the challenging task of (re)building states in a postconflict setting is characterized by inadequate intellectual and policy coherence. Engaging with the existing literature, this article seeks to add clarity in ways that relate directly to the agendas of academic research and policy making. Casting into sharper relief what is distinctive and/or familiar in state formation processes in the West and the rest of the world, the analysis highlights the differing impact of nationalism. In considering the critique that contemporary international-led state-building neglects nation-building, the article suggests that the stateness of polities undergoing state-building is intrinsically linked with nationhood. State-building resides in both international and national locations of politics which condition the constitution of national identity via multiple (unequal) exchanges between external and local actors that can be depicted in terms of mimicry. Multiple political locations of state-building notwithstanding, the task of bringing the imagined community into being is more suited to national actors. Ongoing challenges of nation- and state-building require more acknowledgement that the realization of the nation cannot be a primary domain of international actors.
|