One can think of the idea of identity in terms of the individual, or the group(s) the individual belongs to and the ‘other(s)’ or the ‘outsider(s)'. So I started simply by brainstorming ideas with a class about various kinds of identity and looking for examples of how they influence or may influence international relations. We also thought about international protocols, conventions, covenants and national legislation that deal with issues of identity.
Some ideas
National identity,
nation states (Woodrow Wilson and a people's right to self-determination) and
the modern international community with organizations based on national
identity. National identity and other identities within a state e.g. minority
ethnic, linguistic, religious and/or cultural groups within a state, their
treatment and possible aspiration to autonomy or independence, e.g. the Scots
and Welsh, Northern Ireland, the Basques and Catalans, the Flemish and
Walloons, the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran, the Palestinians, the
Russian minorities in Ukraine, Georgia and other Eastern European states, the Uyghurs, Mongolians and Tibetans in China / also the German minorities outside Germany in the 1930s and Nazi policy
/ Italy, irredentism and the First World War.
A transnational
identity like a religion, an ideological identity like during the Cold War, an
ethnic group, a linguistic group perhaps, a cultural group?
A supranational
identity in the making like European identity, citizenship and the idea of
multiculturalism in Europe
Samuel
Huntington’s ideas about civilization: ‘People
have levels of identity: a resident of Rome may define himself with varying
degrees of intensity as a Roman, an Italian, a Catholic, a Christian, a
European, a Westerner. The civilization to which he belongs is the broadest
level of identification with which he intensely identifies. People can and do
redefine their identities and, as a result, the composition and boundaries of
civilizations change.’
See the Dropbox for the original article. Or a summary here
https://www.beyondintractability.org/bksum/huntington-clash
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/1993-06-01/clash-civilizations
Then
from the book:The Clash of
Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, 1996, Huntington
In the emerging world of ethnic conflict and civilizational clash,
Western belief in the universality of Western culture suffers three problems:
it is false; it is immoral; and it is dangerous … Imperialism
is the necessary logical consequence of universalism.
Page 310.
To preserve
Western civilization in the face of declining Western power, it is in the
interest of the United States and European countries … to recognize that
Western intervention in the affairs of other civilizations is probably the
single most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict in a
multicivilizational world.
Pages 311–312.
In the emerging era, clashes of civilization are the greatest threat to
world peace, and an international order based on civilizations is the surest
safeguard against world war.
Page 321
Acceptance of these rules and of a
world with greater equality among civilizations will not be easy for the West
or for those civilizations which may aim to supplement or supplant the West in
its dominant role. In such a world, for instance, core states may well view it
as their prerogative to possess nuclear weapons and to deny such weapons to
other members of their civilization. Looking back on his efforts to develop a
"full nuclear capability" for Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto justified
those efforts: "We know that Israel and South Africa have full nuclear
capability. Th e Christian, Jewish and Hindu civilizations have this
capability. Only the Islamic civilization was without it, but that position was
about to change."
One student's question was “In this essay should we
also talk about a state having an 'identity' or should we keep the focus on
people? “I think 'on people' will be easier and nearer to the words of the
essay title, so if you take the state identity line you should explain in your
introduction that this is what you are going to do and justify it (mentioning
other forms of human identity) and then outline the theory of state identity
properly and give clear current examples. However, I think this means taking a
risk and distorting the question. See:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/197279417.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(international_relations)
In contrast there
is the humanist approach: identity with the human race and every individual,
and thus humanitarianism, human rights and a universal identity (reflected in
international law).
There are also individual and minority identities,
aspirations and rights, e.g. gender, age, class, political groupings, sexual
orientation
e.g. women’s rights, including non-discrimination and fair treatment (Iran
and Saudi Arabia for example, but also femicide in France:
https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/gender-equality
https://www.concern.net/news/worst-countries-for-womens-rights
https://iranhumanrights.org/2025/03/gender-apartheid-in-iran-is-crushing-womens-lives-and-futures/
The rights of religious minorities, including respect
for the practice of their religion and non-discrimination (Jews and Muslims in
Europe for example). And atheists in religious countries.
https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3379
https://ccieurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/CCIE-report-2025.pdf
https://fra.europa.eu/en/news/2025/fra-updates-its-anti-muslim-hatred-database
The rights of ethnic minorities,
including non-discrimination and fair treatment and respect for their language
and culture, e.g. the Roma or Romani or Romany people, also known as gypsies,
are Europe’s largest ethnic minority (estimated at 10-12 million across
Europe, 6 million in the EU),
https://www.errc.org/news/look-back-in-anger-roma-rights-news-review-of-2025
https://www.rapportodiritti.it/rom-e-sinti
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/roma-population-by-country
and a little translation practice(!)
The Kurds in
Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran, or the Rwandan genocide of the Tutsi by the Hutu.
As already mentioned, the rights of the Uyghurs, Mongolians and Tibetans in China.
The case of Hong
Kong, a Chinese province with protesters claiming political autonomy and some
form of democratic participation based on the British-Chinese
Joint Declaration of 1984 ('one country two systems'). Is this a kind of
cultural identity?
The rights of
social minorities with specific identities, e.g. gays (and more generally LGBT
and LGBTQ+), single
mothers including non-discrimination and fair treatment (e.g. Iran, Pakistan)
The rights of
minorities that may not be recognized as a group e.g. the disabled in all
countries, including non-discrimination and fair treatment
'About 15% of the world's population lives
with some form of disability, of whom 2-4% experience significant difficulties
in functioning. The global disability prevalence is higher than previous WHO
estimates, which date from the 1970s and suggested a figure of around 10%. This
global estimate for disability is on the rise due to population ageing and the
rapid spread of chronic diseases, as well as improvements in the methodologies
used to measure disability.' From
the World Report on Disability by the WHO
Children as a
minority, the rights of non-adults without power (no voting rights or money and
who may not be physically strong or mentally mature), their right to a
childhood, home and education, lack of self-awareness as a group, easily
exploited, the Nobel Peace Prize winners for 2014, Malala Yousafzai
Attacks on the cultural heritage of one group by
another and the international reaction it may provoke e.g. Islamic State’s
attack on Palmyra and other classical sites, attacks on native tribes and their
habitat in the Amazon Forest
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/5/one-year-after-killings-in-brazils-amazon-tensions-run-high
National
legislation and international protocols and institutions designed to guarantee
the rights of different groups and individuals, or to protect a cultural
identity and its heritage e.g. in the EU, in the UN Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, in the mandate and operation of the International Criminal Court
and the problems involved in concepts like the
Responsibility to Protect
‘Economic
identity’ (?) – this is not how people usually describe themselves in
terms of identity but involves the way the UN calls for the rich developed
countries to help eliminate extreme poverty in the least developed countries
and how this may involve a change in the way we see ourselves and others
(domestically, the homeless, the unemployed, the sick or dying because of
destitution).
That may (or may not) also be a part of what we mean
by European identity and solidarity, which is a concept in evolution in terms
of what Europeans actually feel.
https://www.eunews.it/en/2025/12/11/majority-of-europeans-have-no-confidence-in-the-eu/
https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/451859-do-eu-citizens-feel-less-european
https://www.today.it/opinioni/europa-sondaggio-italiani-2026.html
https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2026/01/27/identita-europea-crisi-ue-futuro-oggi/8269396/
Perceived identity – not necessarily how you see yourself, but how others see you. Many Germans of Jewish descent felt German and often did not have a strong religious identity but were, nevertheless, seen and persecuted as ‘other’ by the Nazis.
Given all the
above-mentioned points, you could
start an essay with:
the idea that the
international community is (mainly) based on nation states (e.g. at the UN or
in the EU) which are based on the idea of national identity (and
self-determination) as a valid idea. Nationality involves a shared identity,
usually reinforced by education, based on some, any, or all of the following:
culture, history,
language, ethnicity (real or perceived, i.e. false ideas about 'race'),
religion, connection with a specific geographical area, an awareness of the
state and affection for it. However, this is often the product of basic
education and can be dangerous since national identities and uncritical
patriotism (jingoism) have been, and still are, a contributory cause of wars
between states. Some historians argue that this is a factor that governments have
often exploited to build support for war (e.g. European history 1700-1945,
particularly at the end of the 19th century and World War I/II
through universal education and newspapers) National identity, as indicated
above in the quote from Huntington, is of course only one level of identity
that people feel, but a powerful one in terms of its effect on international
relations.
However, the idea
of national identity is also open to challenges both internally and externally.
Internally –
almost every state contains at least one ethnic minority with a strong
identity. In some countries this minority may be a majority within a particular
area, perhaps one which it is linked to historically (French-speaking Quebec).
Smaller groups within a state may assert their own sense of national identity
and aim at a greater degree of autonomy or recognition as a separate culture
(Wales) or national independence (e.g. Scotland, Catalonia). These tensions may
be productive (multiculturalism, with different groups learning from each other
and contributing different things to a society) and contained democratically
(Walloons and Flemings in Belgium), Britain (so far), Canada (so far), Spain
(so far), resolved peacefully by separation (Czechoslovakia, the Czech Republic
and Slovakia) or lead to conflict, secession and the violent break-up of the
state (former Yugoslavia (where between June 1991
and April 1992, four republics declared independence, while only Serbia and
Montenegro remained federated) and the successor states.
Externally – How
does this affect foreign relations? Perhaps we should consider Russian-speaking
minorities in Georgia and Ukraine and Russia’s declared intention to protect these
groups militarily if necessary (the war in Ukraine). Though the comparison is
probably unjust to Russia, we might also consider Nazi foreign policy in the
1930s and its insistence on ‘defending Germans’ living outside the Reich.
Many, if not most,
of the world’s problems today are global, e.g. environmental challenges,
security threats, economic problems, migration, trade questions, international
crime, medical emergencies etc… States cannot effectively deal with these
questions at a purely national level and as a result cooperate in many areas
(the WTO, the IMF, NATO etc..) and thus, to some extent give up part of their
sovereignty in favor of a wider identity within a responsible, rule-based
humane international community.
The European Union
is the best example of a highly evolved supranational organization where states
cooperate in order to achieve shared goals. Legally we now have shared European
citizenship and new responsibilities for EU diplomats towards all European citizens,
not just to those of their nation state. So a commonly asked question is ‘To
what extent do we now have a genuine European identity and feel ourselves to be
Europeans?’ After all, thanks to the EU today we have the right to travel to,
reside in and work in any EU member state we choose. In most polls and surveys European citizens
still describe themselves primarily in terms of national identity, and
opposition to the EU institutions has risen recently. However, that opposition
may be largely due to economic difficulties and fears about jobs and rising
non-EU immigration. People want someone to blame and have generally blamed
their national governments as well as the EU institutions.
However, perhaps
we should not confuse the idea of European identity with the EU institutions,
or their popularity or lack of popularity. After all, a person may have little
respect for his government but still be a patriot with real affection for his
country. Similarly, one could argue that most Europeans (inside or outside the
EU) actually already share an identity as Europeans, a strong set of shared
values and common expectations (with a shared historical evolution), but may
not be consciously aware of it. I would argue that when we travel around Europe,
certainly Western Europe, we no
longer have the sense of being abroad that people in the 1930s or even 1950s
would have felt. We are aware of language differences but we also experience
much that is familiar and shared – democracy, a welfare state, an open society,
an increasingly secular state, common norms and expectations in terms of the
rules governing work and social behavior, the role of women, education, as well
as how we use our free time and the kinds of entertainment we enjoy. Moreover,
a military conflict between, say Italy and Spain, is now inconceivable. Some of
this is no doubt the result of the work done by the EU and programs like
Erasmus, but much is also the product of prosperity, and the opportunities
provided by the advances in transport and communications systems. Where once
only the rich traveled, this possibility is available at very low costs and
vast number of Europeans travel to other European countries for holidays, for
work or to study. # Contrast this with the experience of traveling to many
areas outside Europe. Here we may genuinely experience culture shock. This may
take many forms when we find ourselves confronted with widespread poverty, the
lack of basic medical services, a lack of democracy, clear legal rights and
personal security, real limits on women’s rights, the powerful role of religion
within some societies and conservative values that to Europeans may seem 19th
century, the lack of a welfare state, and a lack of political and social debate.
This may make us more aware of our European identity.
Many states today
are multicultural societies and need to find a balance that accommodates
different identities within them. This is not a new phenomenon (the problems of
the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the 19th
century for example). After all, the Jews and the Roma (the gypsies) are
examples of transnational identities with long European histories and the
discrimination they faced (and still face as far as the Roma are concerned) is
a lesson for us today regarding both the need for and the difficulty in achieving
real toleration and acceptance of identities different from that of the
majority. Similarly, the Kurdish question is one of the key questions in
assessing Turkey's application to join the EU.
Today there remains
widespread concern if not actual fear in the West regarding Islamist terrorism,
the re-emergence of extremist religious groups as a transnational force, able
to recruit followers (though statistically few) from among Muslims in Europe
and radicalize them in the name of a religion which exerts a primary claim,
above that of any national state or set of secular values. Islamist terrorists
reject the secular state and Western values and thus also the universal values
of the UN, built upon the equality and dignity of all human beings. They reject
equality between Muslims and non-believers and they often also see sectarian
divisions within Islam as a basis for violence e.g. Sunni or Shia or other groupings
However, according to French sociologists many of
those of Arab origin living as citizens or residents in France today (perhaps 5.7
to 6 million, or 10% of France’s population) are non-practicing Muslims, just
as most of their Catholic counterparts are largely non-practicing Christians.
They argue that most French men and women of Arab descent share the same
European secular values as other French citizens. Radicalized Muslims and
jihadists were estimated at 17,000 by French authorities in 2018 and support for
radical Islamism may be in the tens of thousands, but this is still a small
proportion of the total (and the proportion who actively take part in acts of
violence is much smaller). Moreover, although Islamic radicalism has some
powerful support in the Arab and wider Islamic world, it is far from clear that
radical Islamism has widespread popular support anywhere. Islamic State lost
control of the areas it had in Iraq and Syria and although it remains a
presence and has spread to other Muslim countries, mainly in Africa, its
ability to gain followers seems to be matched by the way those who come under
its rule do not want to repeat the experience.
https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/violent-extremism-sahel
Syria’s future after a terrible civil war now seems to
depend on
rebuilding a shared national identity and advancing inclusive, decentralized
governance through dialogue.
https://www.lugarit.com/commentary/commentary-national-identity-and-power-sharing-in-syria
Meanwhile, in the West there does seem to be growing tension between those
who would like to maintain and strengthen the purely secular nature of the
state (atheists, agnostics and many religious moderates) and those who wish to
see laws to protect religious belief itself in some way. This is reflected in
the more serious debate that arose about the Charlie Hebdo attack in Jan. 2015
and then after the terrorist attacks in Paris in November of that year. It
includes issues like blasphemy, censorship, education and dress, and identity
issues like gay rights (a question of social or individual identity), the
protection of, and space given to minority religious cultures within a national
culture and the nature and exercise of women’s rights.
In fact, gender
identity and the position of women and children in society are other issues
that raise debate both within societies with traditions that place power and
education mainly in the hands of men and between these societies and liberal
democracies. The Nobel Peace Prize (2014) was awarded jointly to Kailash
Satyarthi and Malala Yousafzai "for
their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the
right of all children to education" (especially girls). This is an
indication of growing awareness at the international level of this problem.
Individual and social identities and related rights include groups such as the
young, the old, the disabled, the unemployed, the poor, travelers, the
homeless, drop-outs, drug-addicts and HIV/AIDS sufferers for example, all of
whom may be discriminated against on the basis of who they are, or are thought
to be, or the way they live or the danger they are seen as representing.
Beyond all this
there is the concept of universal identity, enshrined in international law and
embedded in the foundations of all the major institutions from the UN down (see
‘The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights’), which sees all human beings – regardless of their
nationality, culture, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation – as
equal and entitled to the protection of their rights as such. This is not a
claim accepted by Islamist extremists or cultural supremacists of other types (e.g. neo-Nazis) but it is the basis of every charity appeal when we
are faced with a natural or man-made disaster, and it is the product of a
struggle going back to the Enlightenment, the American and French Revolutions
and Thomas Paine’s ‘The Rights of Man’.
Empathy, or our ability to identify as human beings with other human beings is
an essential part of our nature and the basis of humanism, humanitarianism and
much of our art. One can also argue that human solidarity requires a growing
awareness of our identity as members of a single human community with
responsibilities towards its weakest members, those in extreme poverty or
caught in violent conflict or the victims of discrimination or persecution, or
refugees from a wide range of humanitarian disasters and, with global
population growth and the human impact on the environment, towards those who
are now called environmental refugees too. (And greater concern for other
species too?). Given the globalized nature of many of humanity’s challenges
some political commentators argue we are in the process of developing a
'global' identity'.
Finally, there is
the role of the diplomat to consider. A key part of his job is to represent his
country by promoting a positive image of his nation and correcting any negative
perceptions or stereotypes. This means molding how an identity is seen by projecting
a particular image through cultural and economic diplomacy as well as diplomacy
in its narrower political sense. It also means that the diplomat must
demonstrate an interest in and a respect for other cultures and identities.
European identity - unity in diversity?
https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/european-issues/0466-europe-and-the-identity-challenge-who-are-we
# a personal view– Modern multiculturalism has a
history which has become a growing part of our education system. Where once
schools had a program of studies that emphasized the nation and its
achievements, the last 50 years have seen a growing trend towards a ‘European’,
and more recently towards a ‘global’ view. Who today would deny that any
serious academic program in a European country about classical music, art
history and, above all, the history of science would have to be European-based
and would make little sense in purely national terms? Mozart, Beethoven,
Leonardo da Vinci, Van Gogh, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton,
Einstein, Fermi, all of these people may or may not have thought of themselves
in nationalist terms but were clearly open to ideas at a European level and
contributed at that level. I would argue that it is not very useful to think of
Shakespeare as essentially English, while his roots as a European are very
clear. In the same way, I would argue that thinking of Mozart as an Austrian is
very limiting and I feel he belongs as much to me, someone of British origin
living in Italy, as he does to an Austrian. I would also argue that this is
instinctively what Europeans feel today. Put Shakespeare or Jane Austen's works into
modern dress in a film, dub the film into Italian and I don’t think most
Italians will feel they are watching something fundamentally foreign, though
they will, of course, recognize it is not contemporary if the Shakespearean
text has not been updated. Put it into a completely contemporary setting and
current language and even this barrier disappears. Of course, this kind of
shared cultural heritage can become multicultural. Here is an entertaining
Bollywood adaptation of Jane Austen!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53W6yV7i5zo&list=PLySYrn1mG-gAK6h_7HNitoD1oVBDGbYly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VlUWfMS69M
and Shakespeare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VBsi0VxiLg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mV9IRAKtV8A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z-baD9r7ak
brilliant!
also interesting on the idea of identity:
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento
Nota. Solo i membri di questo blog possono postare un commento.