Authors

Discussion

In the huge repositioning of borders after the disintegration of Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, some ethno-nations changed from a position of dominant ethnic groups within larger multinational states and  regions to dominance in a much smaller state, here referred to as ‘shrunken’ state. The obvious examples are Russia and Serbia,  Hungary after the First World Warm and arguably the  Czech Republic. The starting point is that shrinking territory and shrinking regional relevance, as well as dramatically changed intra- and inter-state environment  must impact on the construction of a new  national identity, including foreign policy of the thus diminished state. While kin- state activism partially addresses the issue by seeking to  ‘stretch’  the nation beyond the state boundaries to  territories where co-ethnics live,  it does not explain aggression and violence that is unleashed by attempts at repossession of the lost territory and recovery of the previous political status. I explore classical theories of nationalism which, I argue, are ill equipped to grasp the complexity of the interplay between insecurity and aggression that motivate these attempts. The present contribution will therefore consider several other factors -  collapse of international system, ontological insecurity, the existential nationalism and historical  resentment – to compliment the simplicity of ‘eastern’/ ethnic  nationalism and authoritarian leaders. This contribution is a part of the ongoing project into the dilemma of nationalism in Central and Eastern Europe, publication of which is forthcoming at the end of 2025.