The common Criterion for Internal Border Demarcation in the

Federated States
Abdinur Abdirizak Sofe

September 2017

Introduction
The border is a legitimate partitioning line that separates political entities such as sovereign
nations and federated states.1 The notion of its emergence is traced back to the beginning of
nation states and nationalism in Westphalia Treaty in 16482. The features of the border used as a
divisor factor (e.g. Seas, Mountains, or ethnic lines) and its functional role to play both have
important consideration as they have an effect on the future political landscape of a given
country.3 Borders are delineated between the sovereign nations frontiers and the federated states
as well. This discussion focuses on the case of internal borders, particularly, the federated states.

The issue of intra federal border demarcation is almost always contentious challenging task
as the internal boundaries have an impact on access to power, resources, centrifugal or
centripetal forces, autonomy and other range of merits and demerits.4 Border demarcation in
federated states has a crucial role in the future prospect of the country. It is a quandary issue
demanding firm and rigorous decisions. This is because it may put the country in a further
political quagmire thereby can make the federal system a road with no exit, particularly, in the
event that enough concern is not given to balance the national integration and the right of the
regions to be autonomous. Given the imperative thought of this matter, this article gives an
outline of distinctive models taken after by diverse world federal nations and their possible
negative and positive impacts.

Criterion for internal border demarcation

For the reason that, the local contexts of the countries differ their demarcation criteria also
varies. Currently about 25% of world countries practicing federalism few sates follow similar
criteria in local boundaries.2 In spite of local features consideration, many of them also ethnic
interest and political drives dominated in the first times thus deviated from their proper approach.

1
Cabi.org. The Encyclopedia of Sustainavpble Tourism. Carl Cater. Brion Garrod and Tiffany Low. Amazoon, 2015.
2
Lockhart, Paul G.,(2014), Geopolitics, Borders, and Federalism: Challenges for Post-War Iraq,
http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/1443
3 Reisser, 2009. Self-Determination and the Difficulty of Creating Nation-States:
The Transylvania Case. Geographical Review 99

4 Jaap de Visser et.al ( 2012). The Role of Ethnicity in the Demarcation Of Internal Boundaries In South Africa And
Page1

Ethiopia. Annual Conference of the International Association of Centres for Federal Studies, Rome,: University of
the Western Cape), 9.
The following portion of the discussion centers on the most applied approaches, but however is
not all inclusive to it rather is a simple review of the major criterion.

Ethnic based criteria

Ethnic delimitation is a kind of demarcation in which citizens ethnicity is used as an Apparatus
to decide boundaries. In this approach, boundaries are delimitated in respect of the ethnic that
inhabit or dominate the area. It is commonly practiced in multinational countries characterized in
protracted racial division and mistrust. Furthermore, it is used for the attraction of other
autonomous regions that has been out of the federal previously.

Though, the proponents of this approach, e.g. (McGarry 2005) argued it helps autonomy of sub
nationalities and encourages shared governance5, it is not generally recommended approach as it
precipitates the people of specific countries to feel belongings to sub national state. In addition to
that one major challenge of this criteria is the issue of local tyranny as the dominant ethnic group
consider themselves the owners of mother state and treat minority groups like second class
citizens,6 therefore it makes the country prone to ethnic based violence and ethnic division, the
notion of tribalism and racism may become visible in the society and finally may cause the
fragmentation of the country into many small independent nations. According to Selassie (2003)
stated
The Ethno-national federalism is not only a threat to national unity, but its economic
and political performance is marginal. Furthermore, selssaie argues that by deliberately
and openly highlighting ethnic differences... such a system corrals citizens into ethnic
enclaves, encourages aggressive ethnic identification and separatism, and exacerbates
ethnic distrust and social discord.5
In the same way kymlicka (1998) and de silva(1989) strongly argued that ethnic based
federalism serves as a stepping stone to secede for the preferred ethnic groups those their aim is
an independence.7 Brietzke too adds that ethnic delimitation perpetuates disintegration of ethnic
groups themselves.8 The lessons learned from the former ethnic based federation of the SOVIET
UNION which soon after divided into numerous independent countries is also an evident case
revealing some of the adverse effects of this approach.

5
Desta, Aayehgn 2014, Creating Territorial Boundaries to Design the Political Order of Self- rule and Shared-rule of
Federal Units: A Review. San Rafae: Dominican University of California.

6
Haile Abraha 2015. Comparative Constitution and Federalism: module reader Of African institute of governance
and Development.

7
Teshome, D. W. (2008). Federalism in Africa: The Case of Ethnic-based federalism in Ethiopia. International
journal of human science , 10
8
Allen Buchannan, Federalism, Secession and the Morality of Inclusion, Arizona Law Review (Spring 1995): 53-
Page2

63
Language based criteria
In this form, language is used as a divisor factor to demarcate intra federal boundaries. It is
mostly practiced in the federations where the inhabitants of the country are a multilingual
society, particularly; this method is helpful in the countries which the minorities perceive the
domination of elite language to create common ownership. Among some world countries, India
could be an example of this approach where 15 languages determine the borderlines between the
states except Hindi which is the lingua franca in six states.9 Apart from India, Canada and
Denmark are sometimes counted to the linguistic federalism. In fact, albeit, the demarcation of
constituent borders through language bases may be panacea for the dominated groups, yet it may
be a recipe for ethnic conflict. Rationally, this is because the linkage between the language and
ethnic bonds are always analogous.

Religion based criteria

Like the other divisor factors, religion is determinant of borderlines in some countries where
multi-faith societies coexist for instant in Switzerland the catholic canton of jura and protestant
canton of Berne determine the borderlines of the federal states10. Religion delimitation is among
less practiced approaches. Supporters of this criterion argue that demarcating borders through
religion bases is an effective device in stabilizing religion crisis thus facilitating coexistence of
highly distinctive groups. Notwithstanding, the opponents of this notion attest that, as the
religion, its self is natural divisor, the intended use of it as a delimitation criteria will add fuel to
the previous difference.

Geographic based criteria

In this procedural of sitting internal borders the main focus is how regions are connected in
terms of physical geography like climate and environment topography. Geographic delimitation
is mostly recommended when the entire nation landslide is diverse it also practiced when the
most of the society is egalitarian. In some cases it may be compulsorily used where other
alternative is minimal or when there is a main infrastructural barrier such as harsh deserts, non-
navigable rivers or high mountains.11

However this doesnt mean that this approach is employed only in the federation which their
interior boundaries are separated by land substantial hampers rather it means that this is general
approach which can be engaged without having like this land attributes, in some countries the

9
Ashutosh, V. (2013). How has Indian Federalism Done? Studies in Indian Politics , 49.

10 Matteo Nicolini,(2015). Regional Demarcation, Territorial Alteration, and

Accommodation of Divided
Societies. UNED. Revista de Derecho Poltico.
Page3

11
Asayehgn, D. (2015). Beyond the Usual: Re-thinking Ethiopias Ethnic Federalism for the 21st Century.
aim can be to protect a possible perceived threat to state nationhood for instantce Nepal In 2012,
the constituted assembly of the country decided to drow the state border formation along the
lines of geography by refusing any ethnic priorities, this was to protect ethnic conflict in the
country. The assembly restructured the former Hindu monarchy into 11 federal states through
geographic consideration, meaning not just one ethnic bunch, would live in a single undivided
state instead the geography will be an unequivocal measurement in the formation of the state
borders12.

The opponents of this approach argue the method overlooks Cultural differences in this manner
values may lose and separation of kinships may too happen. Others propose that it is a good model as
the approach does help protecting ethnic consciousness and Public accountability since the
People protest based on perceived governments bad performances but not because of ethnic
demand and tribal drives.

Other uncommon criterion

In some countries when there is priority to protect the risk of disintegration , historical socio-
economic connection of the regions and the financial affordability of the country are considered
in drawing interior borders and the number of constituent states too, for instance South Africa in
1993 when it decided to set federal internal boundaries the historical economic linkage of the
regions and budget consideration were among 10 options given to the 15 members commission
those were entrusted in the task to implement the regional delimitation.13

Like Geographic based approach, supporters of method assert that using this criteria is merely
ignoring social contrasts; this probably leads to losing cultural values separating kinships.
However, others contest that, it prevents the ethnic consciousness and preserve the feeling of
being single nation sharing and affecting by similar problems, thereby it helps community to
seek their common interest rather than ethnic enthusiasm.

Conclusion

The lessons learned from worlds federalism history reveal that the criterion of border
demarcation followed has played major role in the federalism implementation. It is worth noting,
that many states failed to stand on their feet properly, e.g. Soviet Union, Yugoslavia,
Czechoslovakia, and former Nigerias. This is conceivably because their model choice was not in
line with their specific matter; others flourished as their approach made a difference to unravel
the pressing problem e.g. South Africa, Malaysia and latter Nigeria federal. Noticeably,

12
IRIN. (2012). Nepal dividing over federalism. KATHMANDU: www.irinnews.org.

13
Jaap de Visser et.al ( 2012). The Role of Ethnicity in the Demarcation Of Internal Boundaries In South Africa And
Page4

Ethiopia.
reflecting on the aforementioned federals, the failed once had commonalities in term of the
criteria applied, for instance, they share ethnic approach, this may in some extent imply that
ethnic delimitation should not be considered in first line options during the border demarcation
when possible.

However, though, one option may be more advantageous than the other one, there is no single
approach that best fits in every countrys circumstance, this means in any country the approach
of the demarcation ought to be based on its nationhood priorities. Therefore, one applied criteria
should not be taken as universal remedy. In other words, as the primary objective of choosing
federalism and designing intrastate borders is to fathom particular issue of a country the
underlying condition of the preferred nation has to be taken into account, thus any initiative
should not ignore the local context which enticed the demand earlier.

Page5
Bibliography
Allen Buchannan, Federalism, Secession and the Morality of Inclusion, Arizona Law Review
(Spring 1995): 53-63

Ashutosh, V. (2013). How has Indian Federalism Done? Studies in Indian Politics, 49.

Cabi.org. The Encyclopedia of Sustainavpble Tourism. Carl Cater. Brion Garrod and Tiffany
Low. Amazoon , 2015

Desta, A. (May, 12, 2014). Creating Territorial Boundaries to Design the Political Order of. San
Rafae: Dominican University of California.

IRIN. (2012). Nepal dividing over federalism. KATHMANDU: www.irinnews.org.

Jaap de Visser, Nico Steytler and Yonatan Fessha, ( 20-21 September 2012). The Role of
Ethnicity in the Demarcation of Internal Boundaries in South Africa and Ethiopia.
Annual Conference of the International Association of Centres for Federal Studies (p. 9).
Rome,: University of the Western Cape).

Matteo Nicolini,(2015). Regional Demarcation, Territorial Alteration, and

Accommodation of Divided
Societies. UNED. Revista de Derecho Poltico.

Professor Asayehgn, D. (2015, September 6). Beyond the Usual: Re-thinking Ethiopias Ethnic
Federalism for the 21st Century. Retrieved January 5, 2016, from Tigrionline:
http://www.tigraionline.com

Teshome, D. W. (2008). Federalism in Africa: The Case of Ethnic-based federalism in Ethiopia.

International journal of human science , 10.

Reisser, W.J. 2009. Self-Determination and the Difficulty of Creating Nation-States:

The Transylvania Case. Geographical Review 99

Page6