How is it possible for very small, very rich, yet militarily weak countries to retain their independence? If the world is as dog-eat-dog as realists depict, why are these states still in business?

Stephen M. Walt, professor of international relations at Harvard University, in a Foreign Policy article questioning why Qatar, the UAE and other tiny wealthy countries are not gobbled up by their “greedy” neighbors.

His theories include:

  • “It turned out to be easier to let local elites run these societies, instead of turning them into sullen and resentful colonies.”
  • “The absence of a regional great power with the capacity to absorb the others… makes it possible for balance-of-power politics to work.”
  • “Once a country’s government and borders have been recognized by others, the status quo takes on a life of its own and efforts to overturn it face an uphill fight.”
  • “Small countries.. enhance their security by making themselves more valuable to others as independent entities than they would be as colonies.”

Thoughts?

Credit: Photo by Pepe Pont

Please read our Comments Policy before joining the discussion. By commenting, you agree to abide by it.

Some comments may not be automatically published. This is not action taken by us, but instead, depending on whether or not you have verified your email address, or if your post triggers automatic flags.