ABSTRACT
Alongside the power of States, if not in opposition to it, are the private interest or pressure groups whose strength and dynamism have launched them onto the international stage.
4 – No matter how much more organised international life becomes, and irrespective of the strengthening of relations between peoples, the global expansion of trade and the effects of universalist ideologies, the phenomenon of the State remains an absolute contemporary reality. Even the most recent political developments and diplomatic negotiations among the nations of Europe have this as their legal frame of reference. Leaders of revolutionary movements, too, clothe their strivings in the banner of a patriotism or ‘separatism’ inherited from a
won their freedom not only adopt all the usual signs of sovereignty – flag, anthem, currency and embassies – but, before they have even defined their policies and secured the foundations of their independence, they also practise a form of nationalism that today seems excessive, aggressive and outmoded. (see 1866)
The past century confirmed the sometimes explosive strength of ethnic ties: the dissolution of the Soviet Union gave place to the Russian nation, which reappeared in its original form and with its traditional symbols. (see 339)
5 – The newer the nation-state, the more easily it appears to take offence: this is because it derives its legitimacy from the struggle for emancipation, especially in the eyes of the people who had previously been dominated. The difficulties of mere existence are no obstacle: countries must assert their nationalism in order to survive, in the words of Luis Etcheverria, and also in order to grow. Léopold Senghor observed that, to have the strength to assimilate European culture, they must first be true to their own.
