Thoughts on Sovereignty

A recent visit to the beautiful little principality of Liechtenstein - an antithesis to the notion that biggest is best - has evoked some fresh thoughts on the importance of (national/state) sovereignty, and what it really fundamentally means. What is the importance of a state? How does one define a nation, nation state, nationality, foreignness and so forth?

Let's go back to Liechtenstein and start with this basic, universally accepted fact. Liechtenstein is a sovereign nation. She is sandwiched in a valley of the upper Rhine between Swiss and Austrian alpine and nether regions. She is a small country, even in comparison to some other tiddlers such as the EU's Luxembourg (which is about fifteen times larger in both land area and population). One can drive right through Liechtenstein in a few minutes on surface streets - there are no motorways! Eveywhere you turn, around the next block is a sign advising you you're about to leave the country, whether over the unmarked Border into the Swiss canton of St Gallen, or through the Swiss-administered Customs post into Austria.

OK, so the reader is now informed that Switzerland looks after Liechtenstein's Customs affairs. This was mutually agreed between the two countries in 1919. Since Customs & excise duties are considered by some to be an important bastion of national sovereignty, this is worth contemplating. Logically, this agreement may make a lot of sense and indeed seems to have worked well, with seemingly few complaints. More puzzling, however, is the fact that Liechtenstein uses Swiss road signs: identical font and colour conventions to her western neighbour. One would think that a small country might want to assert her independent identity aggressively in these visible, cost-free and harmless ways.

Liechtenstein does exhibit other important facets of statehood: police, flag, anthem (same tune as God Save The Queen!) and of course the Post Office (a favourite among philatelists). So what does this all mean? Clearly, you don't have to be a big country to be sovereign, neutralizing similar claims by EU fanatics about needing the EU to be significant on the global stage. Sovereignty concerns a state or its people governing their own affairs without accounting to any higher authority. To that end, EU states have lost sovereignty because they are bound by the instructions from the "man in Brussels". Contradictory fudges by the German Constitutional Court make matters worse, not better, IMO. The only vestige left is that they could probably still dissolve the EU (cherish the thought!) without said man being able to do too much about it, at least not without assistance of Eurogendfor plc (just watch out). The Swiss-Liechtensteinish unmanned Border proves that friendship, co-operation and freedom of travel are perfectly possible without needing to build transnational empires. The corollary is that even in an empire or former empire (such as the British one), freedom of movement is not guaranteed. Many dependent territories impose immigration restrictions even upon their mother country's nationals to this day.

Even as recently as the 1950s and '60s Britain was a sovereign nation state called the United Kingdom. The world has never been remotely close to perfect (we're all a bunch of miserable, evil sinners after all), but weren't those better days?