Political unions come and go. The shortest-lived ones (i.e. the United Arab Republic) have lasted little more than a decade while the union between England and Scotland and between the different Spanish kingdoms have lasted hundreds of years. Canada, Australia, South Africa and the United States are examples of lasting unions of former colonies.
Given the title of this series, it’s worth considering the historical context of the break-up of political unions – not so much to draw direct comparisons but to give a general idea of how it tends to turn out. As a few ground rules, the political unions:
- Have to have existed as a multi-national union (in a cultural sense, not necessarily a political sense).
- Ideally have been located in Europe/Western culture.
- Have to have existed as a single recognised sovereign state in international affairs (whether as a unitary state, union state, imperial body or federation etc.).
- Has to be extinct as of 2020.
Date: Kalmar Union (1397-1523), Denmark-Norway (1537-1813), Sweden-Norway (1813-1905)
Successor States: Denmark (1814-), Sweden (1905-), Norway (1905-), Finland (1917-)*, Iceland (1944-)+
* Formerly part of the Kingdom of Sweden, ceded to the Russian Empire in 1809.
+ Formerly under Norwegian, Kalmar and Danish rule. Entered into a formal Act of Union with Denmark in 1918 with a high level of self-government.
How were they formed?
The various Nordic unions existed mainly as personal unions – distinct nations sharing a single monarch as head of state. The unions were, at different times, considered to be necessary to counter regional powers like the Hanseatic League, Poland-Lithuania and Russia.
Why did they collapse?
Whilst having a lot in common – linguistically and culturally – overall, Denmark and Sweden were the most powerful kingdoms and had something of a rivalry (comparable to Scotland and England pre-UK but more evenly-matched), which sparked wars between the two and led to Norway changing hands.
While Sweden moved to dominate the Baltic Sea (including Finland) and became one of the strongest military powers in Europe, Denmark developed a small overseas empire with imperial possessions in Africa, the Caribbean and India, as well as Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Islands.
The kingdoms largely ran their own affairs – Norway retained a great deal of autonomy during its unions with both Denmark and Sweden. So the unions were looser than federal or unitary states, perhaps even confederal. Norway fiercely resisted political amalgamation with Sweden during the 19th Century and the issue of control over foreign policy sparked moves towards independence in 1905.
Sweden attempted to “Swedify” Finland by gradually pushing the Finnish language out as a language of administration and academia. Similar attempts were made by the Russians after they conquered Finland – all of which helped foster a sense of nationalism and eventual Finnish independence.
Iceland was granted self-governing status for a 25-year term by Denmark in 1918 after decades of agitation for independence as part of the romantic nationalist movement sweeping Europe. When Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany during the Second World War, Iceland became fully self-governing by default and its strategic importance resulted in its occupation by the UK. When the self-government agreement expired in 1943, Iceland overwhelmingly voted in favour of full independence as a republic the following year.
What was the outcome?
The Nordic Council was established in 1952 to promote intergovernmental and interparliamentary cooperation between the independent Nordic countries and the associate/self-governing territories. Although pan-Nordic co-operation (such as free movement) predates the EU, some cooperation has been superseded by virtue of all full member states having access to the European single market either as EU members or, in the case of Norway and Iceland, the EFTA.
Greenland and the Faroe Islands remain self-governing territories of Denmark (and outside the EU), but both have influential independence movements and pro-independence parties are part of the Greenlandic and Faroese governments as of 2020.
There have been no formal (but there have been informal) moves to create a new pan-Nordic political union.
Date: 1815-1839
Successor States: Netherlands (1839-), Belgium (1839-), Luxembourg (1839-)*
* In a personal union with the Netherlands until 1890.
How was it formed?
When the Low Countries were liberated from the French during the Napoleonic Wars, the great powers of Europe agreed they should be merged into a single entity ruled by the Dutch royal family.
Why did it collapse?
The Southern Netherlands (what’s now Belgium) was majority Catholic and French-speaking but found itself ruled by a Protestant Dutch-speaking monarch. Additionally, the Belgians felt they were under-represented in the kingdom’s parliament, had taken on an unfair share of Dutch debt and took exception to all of the country’s major institutions being based in the north.
In 1830, the Belgians rebelled. While some major powers recognised Belgian independence under a new monarch (Leopold I), the Dutch refused to accept it – going so far as to invade Belgium. The issue was settled via the Treaty of London in 1839, which also created the independent Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. The UK subsequently vowed to protect Belgian independence and neutrality.
What was the outcome?
Belgium and the Netherlands went on to become (or extend their) imperial powers, with Belgium’s Leopold II creating a slave state in Congo. The violation of Belgian independence by Germany in 1914 was the formal reason the British Empire entered the First World War.
Relations between Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands remain close. The Benelux Union – established in 1948 and renewed in 2010 – was seen as a precursor to the EU. All three independent states co-operate on matters such as higher education, broadcasting, policing and transport regulation. Some of the economic elements have been superseded by the EU and the single market. Benelux was recently cited by Plaid Cymru’s Independence Commission as a potential successor model for the UK.
There are internal tensions within Belgium, with increasing polarisation between the wealthier Dutch-speaking Flanders and the more post-industrial French-speaking Wallonia. Both (along with the Brussels city-state) have a great deal of autonomy including some control over international relations. Flemish nationalism has increased, but there’s less appetite for independence within Wallonia.
There’s a small movement supporting greater autonomy for the province of Friesland in the Netherlands too, where there are high proportions of people who speak the Frisian language – which is closely related to English and Scots.
Date: 1801-1922
Successor States: United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland (1922-); Irish Free State (1922-)*
*Later Republic of Ireland.
How was it formed?
From the 16th Century onwards, Ireland was a partially self-governing client state in personal union with the English monarch. Ireland had its own two-chambered parliament which could pass its own laws, though the Catholic majority were suppressed by measures to bolster protestant minority rule – notably the plantation/colonisation of Ulster by Scottish and English protestants from 1606 onwards, the Cromwellian conquest and a ban on non-Anglicans being members of the Irish Parliament.
In 1798, revolutionary Irish republicans sided with France against the UK. Once that was dealt with it was decided the time had come to fully absorb Ireland into the UK in the same manner as the Union between Scotland and England(andWales) around a century earlier.
The Act of Union 1800 was passed by both the British and Irish parliaments despite some early resistance from the latter. Catholic emancipation (which took the best part of 30 years) was enacted as a condition of securing Irish support and Ireland subsequently elected members to the UK House of Commons and had representation in the House of Lords.
Why did it collapse?
Within 50 years of the Act of Union, an organised campaign for Irish Home Rule (going a bit further than modern devolution) started in response to the seeming mismanagement of Ireland by the UK Government – the response to the Great Famine and land reform being examples. There were several unsuccessful attempts to introduce Home Rule Bills for Ireland. The fourth attempt – passed in 1914 – was successful but was halted due to the First World War, in which Irish soldiers volunteered to fight as part of the British Empire’s forces.
While the campaign for Home Rule was being led by moderates (who preferred Ireland to become a crown dominion – largely self-governing but still subject to British decisions on defence and aspects of foreign policy), more radical elements sought a fully independent republic – through force if necessary. Republicans – made up of an alliance of constitutional nationalist, cultural nationalist and socialist groups – launched an armed rebellion in Dublin in Easter 1916 and were quickly dealt with.
The Easter Rising was rejected by the Irish public at first, but the reaction of British authorities was so severe that public opinion shifted against the UK, later aided by UK Government attempts to impose conscription on Ireland in the final months of the First World War. The main political beneficiaries were the republican Sinn Fein party.
In the 1918 UK General Election, Sinn Fein won around three-quarters of Irish seats, ousting the moderate Irish Parliamentary Party and forming a breakaway Dáil Éireann – which declared Irish independence in 1919.
A near three-year war followed pitting the first incarnation of the IRA against the UK administration, the former’s use of guerilla tactics and targeted assassinations proving effective. An increasingly frustrated and mistrusted UK military and Irish police often resorted to brute force through the use of auxiliary units (like the infamous “Black and Tans”) rather than regular soldiers.
Following a stalemate, in 1921 the UK Government agreed to partition Ireland into a majority protestant Northern Ireland (to satisfy growing militant resistance to Home Rule there) and an independent Irish Free State as a crown dominion. The Anglo-Irish Treaty came into effect in 1922.
What was the outcome?
Not everyone accepted the Anglo-Irish Treaty – particularly Irish republicans – and there was a short civil war in Ireland which was won by pro-treaty forces. Ironically, the Irish Free State did eventually become a republic as the role of the British monarch was gradually written out of the Irish Constitution over proceeding decades.
The Republic’s early decades were dominated by a fairly small-c conservative, protectionist, agrarian political scene, which had a long-standing problem with emigration caused by waves of economic issues. The Republic joined what is now the EU in 1973 and a series of liberal economic reforms in the late 1980s (the two dominant political parties in the Republic are centre-right) – including the eventual adoption of the euro currency – resulted in an economic boom period known as “the Celtic Tiger”, which led to Ireland consistently having one of the fastest-growing economies in the world until the Great Recession.
Irresponsible banking practices and a property bubble caused the near-collapse of the Irish economy during 2007-08 and the imposition of harsh austerity measures in exchange for a bailout. The Irish economy has, however, gradually recovered (until Covid-19) with significant investment in infrastructure, as well as a (controversial) focus on inward investment. Favourable business taxes have seen major tech companies set up offices in the country.
The establishment of the Common Travel Area in 1923 maintained free movement and some joint social and political rights between the Republic, the UK and crown dependencies. However, Catholics and Irish nationalists who lived in Northern Ireland post-partition found themselves marginalised. In the 1960s, a growing Catholic-Irish nationalist led civil rights movement campaigned for social reform in Northern Ireland – equal access to housing and voting rights being particular issues. However, there was a violent backlash and clashes between different communities (“The Troubles”) peaked during the early 1970s.
Atrocities carried out by both sides bolstered recruitment to rival paramilitary groups. Attempts at finding a political solution failed, not helped by policies such as the internment without trial of suspected paramilitaries (“Operation Demetrius“) and the increasing involvement of the British military (originally welcomed by both communities as a neutral peacekeeping force) and security services.
From the 1980s onwards, the IRA’s campaign in Great Britain expanded, including assassination attempts against both Margaret Thatcher and John Major, the 1993 Warrington bombings, as well as separate truck bombs which destroyed part of Manchester city centre and a chunk of London Docklands in 1996.
With the conflict at a stalemate, a series of ceasefires provided enough time to start negotiations on ending it, which culminated in the Good Friday Agreement (1998) – which dissident republicans attempted to derail with the Omagh bombing – and later St Andrews Agreement (2006). Peace has largely held since.
Relations between the Republic of Ireland and the UK have long been friendly – though the prospect of a hard border after Brexit and a second Scottish independence referendum will likely result in further questions surrounding Northern Ireland’s future.
Date: 1867-1918
Successor States: Austria (1919-1938; 1955-), Yugoslavia (1918-1992), Czechoslovakia (1918-1993), Hungary (1918-)
How was it formed?
Austria used to be a major imperial power in Europe – notably through the Habsburg dynasty – but gradually declined in influence and was snuffed out by the time of the Napoleonic era. Hungary was itself an integral part of the Austrian Empire but unsuccessfully rebelled several times to attempt to regain a measure of autonomy.
Following a major defeat to the Prussians and Italians, Austria realised it couldn’t fight a war on two fronts and a compromise was agreed where there would be two monarchies (Austria and Hungary) within a single state. Each would retain their own parliaments and judicial system, with a joint military and split financing (similar but not identical to the personal union between England and Scotland from 1603-1707). Croatia-Slavonia was later added as an autonomous third kingdom under the Hungarian crown.
Why did it collapse?
Relations between the various ethnolinguistic nationalities within Austria-Hungary were already strained. While all nationalities were technically equal, German and Hungarian were pushed as the primary languages of public life at the expense of the Slavic languages of the national minorities.
Things began to go south when Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia & Herzegovina as part of a wider re-drawing of borders in the former Ottoman Empire-occupied Balkans, largely brought about by a series of relatively short but bloody wars.
Serbian nationalists claimed Bosnia as part of their ideal pan-Slavic state in the Balkans, while Austria-Hungary considered this expansionism a threat to their integrity. The heir to the Austro-Hungarian crown, Franz Ferdinand, was assassinated in Sarajevo in June 1914 which, due to a complicated set of alliances between the major imperial powers, eventually sparked the First World War.
The war went badly for Austria-Hungary and within a few years they had become largely subservient to German military strategy. By autumn 1918 the dual monarchy collapsed, several of the national minorities declared independence and Austria-Hungary was gone.
What was the outcome?
Two treaties – the Treaty of Trianon and Treaty of Saint-Germain – reset the borders of Austria, Hungary and established several new successor states. Hungary was reduced to less than a third of the size it was within Austria-Hungary, while Austria lost control of what eventually became Czechoslovakia and also ceded land to Poland.
While the Southern Slavs got their state it perhaps didn’t turn out as they would’ve hoped (understatement). Also, the splitting of the German-speaking population proved to be one of the sparks of the Second World War.
Date: 1938-1945 (as the Greater German Reich)
Successor States: Saar Protectorate (1947-1957), West Germany (1949-1990), East Germany (1945-1990), Germany (1990-) Austria (1955-)
How was it formed?
The break-up of the German and Austro-Hungarian empires after the First World War resulted in German-speaking and German-identifying people being split between different nation-states.
The creation of a single pan-German state was adopted as policy (“Heim ins Reich”) by the German Nazi Party. With the Austrian Empire gone, the idea of a formal alliance or union with an up-and-coming major power was considered potentially beneficial to Austria.
Fascists took control of Austria within a year of the Nazis coming to power in Germany and while the Austrian fascist leadership was willing to follow Germany’s lead, they wanted to maintain their independence. Hitler ignored this and the German army invaded in 1938, after which the question of a political union was put to the people in an absolutely-not-at-all-rigged referendum, which voted in favour of Anschluss by 99.7%. International reaction was muted.
Why did it collapse?
The defeat of the Nazis in 1945 resulted in the former Greater German Reich – including Austria – being occupied by the allied powers, with each occupying power forming protectorates.
What was the outcome?
Austria was treated more like a liberated territory than an instigator of the war and avoided a German-style East-West split when the Allies formally recognised the Austrian government (which included Communists).
In 1955, Austria regained its independence as a neutral country. Its neutrality during the Cold War resulted in Vienna becoming “the spying capital of the world” and a major diplomatic centre. Austria joined the EU in 1995 following a referendum.
Pan-Germanism has fallen out of favour and the Anschluss ended up strengthening Austrian national identity as “Nazi Germany’s first victim”. This could have indirectly played a part in the far-right and right-wing populists having a much stronger presence in Austria than post-war Germany as there’s less of a stigma or lessened sense of collective guilt.
A referendum resulted in the French-administered Saar Protectorate voting in favour of reuniting with West Germany by 67.7%-32.3%. It became the West German state of Saarland in 1957.
West and East Germany reunited in 1990 – though there was some resistance to German reunification from the Western Powers. The Western Powers, Soviet Union and the two German states agreed to a final peace treaty in 1990 which marked the technical end of the Second World War in Europe.
Date: 1922-1991
Successor States: Lithuania (1990-), Armenia (1991-), Estonia (1991-), Latvia (1991-), Ukraine (1991-), Georgia (1991-), Belarus (1991-), Moldova (1991-), Kyrgyzstan (1991-), Uzbekistan (1991-), Tajikistan (1991-), Azerbaijan (1991-), Turkmenistan (1991-), Kazakhstan (1991-), Russia (1991-)
How was it formed?
Following the October Revolution in 1917, a five-year civil war pitted the Russian Empire’s Communists and their allies against Russian monarchists, republicans and conservatives. A third front involved independence movements for nations within the Russian Empire.
The civil war ended with a victory for the Communists and independence movements. The Communists formed the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) made up of modern-day Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and the three Caucasus states. Poland, Finland and the Baltic states became independent.
Within a few years, the Central Asian states joined the Soviet Union, with new internal republics drawn around national minorities.
Following a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union invaded and occupied the Baltic States and part of Poland – but got into trouble trying to invade Finland. After countering Operation Barbarossa and becoming a major global superpower and economic force in the process, the Soviet Union expanded its influence in Eastern Europe through the formation of the Warsaw Pact and began supplying Communist governments and movements around the world with military and economic aid.
Why did it collapse?
There are multiple reasons, but in shorthand there was a procession of leaders who got into and maintained positions of powers through time-serving and longevity than any real talent.
The Soviet economy stagnated by the 1980s through a pervasive black market, over-reliance on heavy industry, oil price shocks and attempts to keep up with American military technology and expenditure. Elsewhere, an invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was a military and diplomatic disaster.
When Mikhail Gorbachev became Soviet leader in 1985 he started a process of economic and political reform. Private enterprise was permitted and restrictions on freedom of the press and opposition political parties were partially lifted. Additionally, the Soviets withdrew from influencing the internal politics of Warsaw Pact nations which, by the end of the 1980s, saw nearly all Communist governments in Europe collapse.
Ethnic tensions (particularly between Armenia and Azerbaijan) and civic nationalism in Russia and the other Soviet republics grew as the media began to openly document Soviet misrule – notably the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster. With national parliaments working to reassert their sovereignty, these attempts were weakly challenged by the Soviet government who were often left with little option but to “send in the army“. Once Russia – under Boris Yeltsin – assumed its sovereignty it effectively left the Soviet leadership without a state to lead.
One by one, nations began to declare independence. A referendum was held in March 1991 to attempt to keep the Soviet Union together as a looser confederation – and it was approved by 77% – but it wasn’t enough for the conservative Soviet elements, who launched a failed coup against Gorbachev in August.
There was still hope some states would remain in a union, but a major blow came when Ukraine voted for independence in December 1991. Even the most loyal Soviet republics (mainly in Central Asia) signed the Alma-Ata Protocol which dissolved the Soviet Union and replaced it with an intergovernmental body (Commonwealth of Independent States). Gorbachev resigned as President of the USSR on Christmas Day 1991, declaring the office extinct.
What was the outcome?
Russia was declared the successor state to the USSR.
The dissolution had a mixed impact on the post-Soviet states. Some resorted to authoritarianism, hardline nationalism (including a sizable far-right element in Russia) and saw a rapid increase in poverty during their painful switch to a market economy alongside increased political corruption. The Baltic states seemingly fared best, but saw huge unemployment in the years immediately following independence and have since developed a problem with emigration.
There still hasn’t been a resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, while Russia has fought two wars in breakaway Chechnya post-USSR.
Several unrecognised pro-Russian states have been established since the fall of the USSR – namely as either Russian-minority states, or attempts to stem NATO and EU influence along Russia’s border by creating a buffer zone and trying to halt the rise of alternative, less Russia-friendly governments. This sparked a brief, one-sided war between Russia and Georgia in 2008, the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, an ongoing civil war in Ukraine and a developing conflict in Belarus as of 2020.
The Eurasian Economic Union created a free-trade bloc covering five post-Soviet states, though three other states (Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia) have joined the EU. Belarus and Russia co-operate even more closely through a bilateral Union State agreement.
Date: 1918-1992
Successor States: Slovenia (1991-), Croatia (1991-), North Macedonia (1991-), Bosnia Herzegovina (1992-); Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1992-2003), Serbia & Montenegro (2003-2006), Serbia (2006-), Montenegro (2006-), Kosovo (2008-)*
* Limited international recognition, not a UN member.
How was it formed?
Following the conclusion of the First World War, two post-war states – the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs and the Kingdom of Serbia and Montenegro – agreed to a political union as the “Kingdom of Serbs, Croats & Slovenes” which was renamed the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1929.
During the Second World War, Croatia was established as pro-Nazi puppet state run by the fascist Ustaše movement, while the rest of Yugoslavia was occupied by Nazi Germany and Italians. The Communist, pan-Yugoslav Partisan movement successfully helped defeat the Ustaše and force an Axis withdrawal from the Balkans.
The Partisan’s leader, Josip Broz Tito (a Croat), became president-for-life of the newly formed post-war communist Yugoslavia. Despite communist rule, Tito acted independently of the Warsaw Pact and was often open to reform and compromise.
Post-war Yugoslavia was constituted as a federal republic with a measure of autonomy for each of the constituent nations. Following calls for even greater autonomy amidst tensions between the nationalities, a new constitution in 1974 effectively made Yugoslavia a confederation with a collective leadership, while the influence of the central Yugoslav government was reduced.
Why did it collapse?
Where to begin….
From the very start, there were tensions between the different nationalities and ethnoreligious groups within Yugoslavia, with the (Orthodox) Serbs being seen by the other nationalities as running a hegemony. Additionally, during and after World War II, the (Catholic) Croats have had to deal with being labelled as Nazi sympathisers who aided atrocities against the Serbs.
Tito was an undoubted unifying force and despite crimes of his own has been remembered as a benevolent dictator. When he died in 1980, some of his policy decisions and contradictions in the 1974 constitution reignited tensions between the nations – particularlythe high levels of debt. The wealthier republics of Croatia and Slovenia resented having to subsidise Serbia, while the Serbs called for solidarity in a time of public spending cuts.
With (predominantly Muslim) Albanians in the historically-important Kosovo region (within Serbia) pressing for more autonomy themselves, Serbia turned to nationalism with the rise of Slobodan Milosevic, who promised protection for Serbs living in all of the republics following a strike by Albanian miners in Kosovo.
In 1990, Croatia and Slovenia tabled further constitutional reforms to grant even more autonomy to the republics. Meanwhile, Milosovic – as leader of the largest republic – tried to force through reforms of the Communist Party’s voting system to ensure “one person, one vote” would result in outcomes favourable to the Serbs and more powers for the Yugoslav government.
A crisis within the Communist Party gradually became an existential crisis for Yugoslavia. Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia and Bosnia held multi-party elections which were won by nationalists, while Serbia and Montenegro remained Communist-governed.
What was the outcome?
The bloodiest war in Europe since the end of the Second World War, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and the gradual break up of Yugoslavia. The Yugoslav wars are estimated to have killed up to 140,000 and resulted in 4 million forced displacements.
Following NATO airstrikes against the Serbs to protect “safe zones” (after the Srebrenica massacre), the Dayton Accords – signed in 1995 – created an independent federal Bosnia & Herzegovina (one state controlled by Croats and Bosniak Muslims, the other by Bosnian Serbs).
Most of the fighting was over by 1996. However, Kosovan Albanians continued to press for independence. Following reports of excessive Serb/Yugoslav force in Kosovo, a UN resolution resulted in NATO launching more airstrikes against Yugoslav targets in 1999 and eventually a ground operation to keep the two sides apart. Slobodan Milosevic was forced to resign following protests sparked by “irregularities” in the Yugoslav presidential election results of 2000;Â he died during his war crimes trial at The Hague in 2006. Accusations of war crimes have been made against all sides. Kosovo declared independence in 2008, but with limited recognition.
Despite the violence, Macedonia (later re-named North Macedonia) and Montenegro achieved independence peacefully through referendums in 1991 and 2006 respectively. Slovenia and Croatia joined the EU in 2004 and 2013 respectively, with all of the other former Yugoslav republics either applying for EU membership or currently in preliminary negotiations.
Economically, Slovenia and Croatia have arguably fared the best from independence – though it was a painful process adapting to a market economy for all of the republics. Serbia, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo all remain under-developed economically and there are concerns across the region about organised crime, corruption and a slide towards authoritarianism.
Date: 1918-1992
Successor States: Czech Republic/Czechia (1993-), Slovakia (1993-)
How was it formed?
Like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia was formed as part of a redrawing of borders in the former Austro-Hungarian Empire following the First World War. The Czechs and Slovaks are culturally distinct but were politically close in that they shared a history of being subject to rule from more powerful neighbours – Germany in the case of the Czechs, Hungary in the case of the Slovaks.
The many different ethnic groups living in the territory of Czechoslovakia were brought under a single banner. However, the inclusion of the Sudetenland Germans was one cause of the Second World War as the Nazis sought to unite all Germans in a single state.
After the Second World War, the area was occupied by the Soviet Union and the revived Czechoslovakia was reestablished under communist rule – which briefly ended following an uprising in 1968.
Following the defeat of the uprising, a federal set-up with self-governing Czech and Slovak parliaments and separate citizenship was established, but ultimately most decisions were taken at the federal level.
The communist government was overthrown in 1989 (Velvet Revolution) and free elections took place in 1990.
Why did it collapse?
While both the Czechs and Slovaks united to bring an end to communist rule, within a year of free elections the political and economic differences started to pull the two apart.
Fiscal transfers from the wealthier Czechs to the Slovaks stopped in 1991. While there was a desire to create a federal or even confederal Czechoslovakia, Slovak nationalists joined a governing coalition in 1992 and, politically, the two nations were almost completely distinct.
Negotiations on a new constitutional arrangement began, but in July 1992 the Slovak Parliament approved a motion on independence. The Czech and Slovak governments agreed to a separation, forcing the resignation of the Czechoslovakian President.
By the end of 1992, negotiations had concluded. Despite there being sizable support for independence on both sides (around 35%) it wasn’t majority support. However, despite the lack of a referendum, the separation was entirely peaceful and became known as the “Velvet Divorce”. On 1st January 1993, Czechoslovakia was formally dissolved.
What was the outcome?
The Czechs thought that without having to carry the Slovaks economically they would thrive, while the Slovaks thought independence would provide them with the necessary tools to grow their economy.
While both took an economic hit, it wasn’t as bad as expected. The two briefly maintained a joint currency and customs union. The customs union became redundant when both joined the EU in 2004, while Slovakia opted to join the euro in 2009.
Slovakia has since caught up – but not quite matched – the Czechs economically, said to be partly down to internal market reforms and joining the euro to attract investment and boost European trade. Slovakia is also the slightly more politically-stable of the two. The Czechs and Slovaks co-operate closely with each other in terms of bilateral relations and as part of the regional Visegrad Group. Any disputes – namely division of former assets and setting a permanent border – have been resolved amicably through negotiation.
Despite this, independence still doesn’t enjoy majority support – and there is/was a movement seeking a formal referendum – though it’s largely accepted now as a fact of life.
Conclusions
You can draw your own conclusions and a lot of the above isn’t directly comparable to the UK, but some of the things that stand out:
- Minority nationalities usually have the last word – Once the cracks in a political union start to appear, without an appropriate resolution and compromise it becomes inevitable that parts will secede – though it happens at different speeds. It’s seemingly very difficult to completely turn back the tide once national minorities gain momentum for independence or greater self-governance/looser relationship (such as Quebec).
- Secession usually happens after a major political or economic crisis – Nearly of the secessions listed above have happened in the wake of a major political or economic shock, usually (but not always) a war or – more peacefully – some sort of political polarisation (i.e. different nations persistently having different governing parties without the constitutional means to reflect it, such as more powerful federal/confederal settlements).
- Lop-sided constitutions don’t strengthen political unions – Dissolutions happen when the power between the national/federal/imperial government and the constituent states/nationalities is believed to be imbalanced. The spark of the break-up is usually when the central government doesn’t consider subsidiarity to be important and tries to take back powers for itself (or even abolish self-government), or when the ruling central government attempts to favour one nationality/nation over the others or adopts policies which pit subject nationalities against each other.
- Unions where one state is significantly larger than the others will likely find it more difficult to last – In almost every case above, one or two constituent states were bigger than the others. There are examples around the world of federal subjects being much larger than others (Texas in the US; Catalonia, Madrid and Andalucia in Spain; Sao Paulo in Brazil), but they usually don’t make up the majority of the population in the union, or there’s some other mechanism to compensate for this (i.e. equal representation from each region in an upper chamber, generous self-government powers).
- There isn’t always a referendum and independence sometimes happens without popular support or even by force – In many of the examples above, independence has happened to at least some of the constituent nations almost by accident, for political necessity or to maintain peace – not necessarily due to a popular drive for independence (i.e. the Central Asian republics were largely in favour of maintaining the Soviet Union but ended up independent anyway). Mishandling of independence movements by the central government seems to be one of the main causal factors – though modern international law and realpolitik make unilateral declarations of independence much less acceptable than they once were.
Up next: “What needs to happen to save the UK?“