Why nationalists hardly ever anticipate nationalist retaliation
Nationalism is surging at an alarming rate in many parts of the world. Conflict researcher Lars-Erik Cederman explains the paradoxical impact of nationalists’ repeated underestimation of the nationalism of others. This could also hold true in the attack on Iran.
Opponents of nationalism often underestimate its power. The list of such cases is long, ranging from the Austrian Prince Klemens von Metternich, who was forced to step down in 1848, through to Mikhail Gorbachev, the last president of the Soviet Union. Even more surprising, however, is that nationalists themselves were often caught by surprise by the nationalist backlashes they triggered.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s government was totally unprepared when waves of Hamas fighters invaded southern Israel on 7 October 2023 and unleashed a bloodbath that resulted in the deadliest attack against the Jews since the Holocaust. After the Netanyahu government had contained Hamas through repeated “steamroller operations,” it believed it had Palestinian nationalism under control, which allowed the rapid advance of the occupation of the West Bank.
Likewise, the Russian forces invading Ukraine in 2022 expected to bring Kiev to its knees within a matter of a few days. But Putin’s plans for conquest have been thwarted by the determined resistance of the Ukrainian people. Even a nationalist politician like US President Donald Trump, who puts his country first, would appear to be blind to nationalism outside his country’s borders, calling for Canada to be incorporated into the United States and thereby ushering in the election of the liberal Mark Carney.
About
Lars-Erik Cederman is a professor of international conflict research. Among other topics, he focuses intensively on the impacts and repercussions of nationalist and imperialist politics.
Why are nationalists susceptible to such surprises? The main reason is rooted in their exclusive focus on their own interests. But there is an even more heedless and reckless aspect to nationalism, especially when it interacts with imperialism. While nationalism and imperialism are often perceived as opposites, nationalist aspirations may very well coexist with an imperialist mindset – albeit often awkwardly and ultimately unsustainably.
It was precisely this ideological tension that characterised the major European powers in the 19th and 20th centuries, summed up by the expression: “Nationalism at home and imperialism in the colonies.” Although they were polar opposites otherwise, Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill were both ardent nationalists and imperialists at the same time. Reviewing this peculiar synchronistic lockstep, they appear to have virtually anticipated the worldview of today’s most influential “strongmen,” including Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, and probably Donald Trump as well.
Denial of minorities as a strategy
Although most nationalists strive for a perfect accordance between state and nation, imperialist nationalists generally tolerate other ethnic groups. But only if they do not interfere with the glorious plans of the master race. Denying the existence of such minorities is an effective way of justifying the dominance of the stronger. The imperialist Metternich is known to have described Italy as a “mere geographical expression”. This denial of an independent identity is also at the heart of the radical Zionist refusal to recognise the Palestinians as a people of an independent nation.
Putin’s essay dating from the summer of 2021 is also notorious, in which he described not only Ukraine but also Ukrainian identity as “artificial”. In fact, Canadians take Trump’s attempt to question Canadian sovereignty so seriously that they ironically called on King Charles III to open their parliamentary sessions at the end of May.
Targeting regime change in Iran
This admixture of nationalism and imperialism becomes particularly detrimental when it underlines revisionist foreign policies that, in extreme cases, aim at wars of aggression and annexation. In actual fact, it is becoming increasingly clear that Israel’s attack on Iran was not only aimed at eliminating that country’s nuclear programme, but also at bringing about regime change. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Iranian people directly, calling on them to liberate themselves from the rule of the Ayatollahs.
“Even a nationalist politician like President Donald Trump, who puts his country first, would appear to be blind to nationalism outside his country’s borders.”Lars-Erik Cederman
This intervention in Iranian affairs is reminiscent of efforts to bring about regime change in Iraq, which were implemented in connection with the US invasion of 2003 and accompanied by attempts to reinstate the Hashemite royal family in Iraq. Today, proponents of regime change in Iran have made contact with the descendants of the late Shah’s family in order to prepare for such a change.
Intervention rarely succeeds in the era of nationalism
The record of past imperialist campaigns aiming for violent regime change, however, remains decidedly sombre. Neither the Russians nor the Americans were welcomed as liberators when they invaded Ukraine and Iraq. Netanyahu’s call on Iranians to overthrow their own government is more likely to strengthen nationalist resistance than weaken it. Although imperialist arrogance is doomed to failure in times when nationalism holds sway, nationalist rulers around the world seem peculiarly unwilling to learn from history. Their geopolitical adventures will continue to precipitate death and destruction.
Ironically, however, nationalism may be our salvation from imperialist nationalism. Meanwhile, the first cracks in Trump’s nationalist platform are becoming visible. His very consideration of intervention in Israel’s war of aggression against Iran has sparked protests among his nationalist “MAGA” base, which believes his pacifist campaign promises and is determined to bring American military involvement in the Middle East to an end.
There is hope that the advocates of risky military interventions and political interventions will fail due to their self-centred nationalism. Likewise, Trump’s nationalist backlash will undermine imperialist efforts to revive the Monroe Doctrine in Panama, Greenland or Canada. Ultimately, imperialist nationalism is beset with internal contradictions that will accelerate its final demise.