:: wikimiki.org ::

Head Of State

Head of state

. When two heads of state meet it is known as a state visit.]] Head of state or chief of state is the generic term for the individual or collective office which serves as the chief public representative of monarchic or republican nation-state, federation, commonwealth or any other political state. His or her role generally includes personifying the continuity and legitimacy of the state and exercising the political powers, functions and duties granted to the head of state in the country's constitution. Charles de Gaulle described the role he envisaged for the French president when he wrote the modern French constitution, a head of state should embody "the spirit of the nation" to the nation itself and to the world: une certaine idée de la France (a certain idea about what France is). Today many countries expect their Head of State to embody national values in a similar fashion.

Constitutional models

Different countries have different executive systems but in essence four major, generalizing categories can be distinguished: the presidential (or imperial) system in which the head of state is also the head of government and actively exercises executive power, the semi-presidential system in which the head of state shares exercise of executive power with a head of government, the parliamentary system in which the head of state possesses theoretical executive power but the exercise of this power is delegated to a head of government, and the non-executive head of state system in which the head of state does not hold any executive power and mainly plays a symbolic role on behalf of the state.

Presidential system

Note: 'presidential' in this context does not automatically imply a president but any head of state –elected, hereditary, or dictatorial– who 'presides'. It is sometimes called the Imperial model, without regard for the monarchic title Emperor, rather referring to the luster. president Some constitutions or fundamental laws provide for a head of state who is not just in theory but in practice chief executive, operating separately from, and independent from, the legislature. This system is sometimes known as a presidential system because the government is answerable solely and exclusively to a 'presiding' activist head of state, and is selected by and on occasion dismissed by the head of state without reference to the legislature. It is notable that some presidential systems, while not providing for collective executive answerability to the legislature, may require legislative approval for individuals prior to their assumption of cabinet office and empower the legislature to remove a president from office (for example, in the United States). In this case the debate centres on the suitability of the individual for office, not a judgment on them when appointed, and does not involve the power to reject or approve proposed cabinet members en bloc so it is not answerability in the sense understood in a parliamentary system. Some presidential systems may also include a prime minister but as with the other ministers they are responsible to the President, not the legislature. In many such instances the office is of minimal political importance, sometimes even held by some administrative technocrat rather than a politician. A prime minister in a presidential system lacks the constitutional and political dominance of a prime minister in a parliamentary system and is often seen as simply a politically junior figure who may run the mechanics of government while allowing the President to set the broad national agenda. One could say that, whereas in parliamentary systems a prime minister may be master of his or her party and the government, prime ministers in presidential systems are usually the servants, with the head of state the master of the government who can hire and fire anyone, including the prime minister, at will. Presidential Systems of Governments are a notable feature of constitutions in the Americas, notably the United States. Though most presidents in the system are selected by democratic means (popular direct or indirect election, etc) the system also encompasses people who become head of state by other means, notably through military dictatorship or coup d'état. Some of the characteristics of a presidential system (i. e, a strong dominant political figure with an executive answerable to them, not the legislature) can also be found among absolute monarchies. It is worth noting that modern presidential systems, most notably the United States, owe their origins to the contemporary eighteenth century British constitutional model in existence at the time of the enactment of the Constitution of the United States, in which the British monarch was still the dominant force and their government was not in a modern sense answerable to the legislature. Thus modern presidential systems are the lineal successors of the Ancien régime governmental systems of eighteenth century Europe, whereas in Europe many states have evolved from a head of state-centred executive system (a presidential system) to a legislature-oriented one (a parliamentary system). In the 1870s in the United States in the aftermath of the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson and his near removal from office it was speculated that the United States too would move from a presidential system to a semi-presidential or even parliamentary one, with the Speaker of the House of Representatives becoming the real centre of government as a quasi-prime minister. This did not happen and the presidency, having been damaged by two late nineteenth century assassinations (Lincoln and Garfield) and one impeachment (Johnson), reasserted its political dominance by the early twentieth century through such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

Semi-presidential systems

Woodrow Wilson Semi-presidential systems combine features of Presidential and Parliamentary systems, notably a requirement that the government be answerable to both the President and the legislature. The Constitution of the current French Fifth Republic provides for a prime minister who is chosen by the President but who nevertheless must be able to gain support in the Chamber of Deputies. Where in France a president is of one side of the political spectrum and the opposition is in control of the legislature, s/he often is forced to select someone from the opposition to become prime minister, a process known as Cohabitation. President François Mitterrand, a socialist, for example was forced to co-habit with the neo-gaullist (right wing) Jacques Chirac, who became his prime minister for a time in the 1980s. In the French system, in the event of co-habitation, the President is often allowed to set the policy agenda in foreign affairs and the Prime Minister run the domestic agenda. Other countries evolve into something akin to a semi-presidential system or indeed a full presidential system. Weimar Germany, for example, in its constitution provided for a popularly elected president with theoretically dominant emergency powers that were only intended to be exercised in emergencies and a cabinet appointed by him from the Reichstag which was expected in normal circumstances to be answerable to the Reichstag. Initially the President was merely a symbolic figure with the Reichstag dominant. However long-term political instability (where governments were collapsing every couple of months) led to a change in the power structure of the Republic, with the President's emergency powers called increasingly into use to prop up governments challenged by critical or even hostile Reichstag votes. By 1932, power had shifted to such an extent that the German President, Paul von Hindenburg was able to dismiss a chancellor and select his own person for the job even though the outgoing chancellor possessed the confidence in the Reichstag while the new chancellor did not. Subsequently President von Hindenburg used his power to appoint Adolf Hitler as Reich chancellor without consulting the Reichstag.

Parliamentary system

Adolf Hitler In parliamentary systems the head of state may be merely the nominal chief executive officer of the state, possessing theoretical executive power (hence the description of the United Kingdom monarch's government as Her Majesty's Government, a term indicating that the government is theoretically hers, not parliament's). In reality however, due to a process of constitutional evolution, powers are usually exercised by a cabinet, presided over by a prime minister or President of the Government who is answerable to parliament. This answerability requires that someone be chosen from parliament who has parliament's support (or at least not parliament's opposition - a subtle but important difference). It also gives parliament the right to vote down the government, forcing it either to resign or seek a parliamentary dissolution. Governments are thus said to be responsible (ie, answerable) to parliament, with the government in turn accepting constitutional responsibility for offering constitutional Advice to the head of state. In reality, numerous variants exist to the position of a head of state within a parliamentary system. The older the constitution, the more constitutional leeway may exist for a head of state to exercise greater powers over government, as many older parliamentary system constitutions in fact give heads of state powers and functions akin to presidential or semi-presidential systems, in some cases without containing reference to modern democratic principles of accountability to parliament or even to modern governmental offices. For example, the 1848 constitution of the Kingdom of Italy was sufficiently ambiguous and outdated to give King Victor Emmanuel III leeway to appoint Benito Mussolini to power in controversial circumstances. Some Commonwealth parliamentary systems combine a body of written constitutional law, unwritten constitutional precedent, Orders-in-Council, letters patent, etc that may give a head of state or their representative additional powers in unexpected circumstances (eg, the dismissal of the Australian prime minister, Gough Whitlam by Governor-General Sir John Kerr.) Other examples of heads of state in parliamentary systems using greater powers than normal due either to ambiguous constitutions or unprecedented national emergencies, such as King Léopold III of the Belgians's decision to surrender on behalf of his state to the invading German army in 1940, against the will of His Government. Judging that his responsibility to the nation by virtue of his coronation oath required him to act, he believed that His Government's decision to fight rather than surrender was mistaken and would damage Belgium. (Leopold's decision proved highly controversial. After World War II, Belgium voted on whether to allow him back on the throne. It did so, but because of the ongoing controversy he ultimately abdicated the throne.)

Non-executive heads of state

World War II, an example of a non-executive head of state.]] A final category of head of state which could be loosely called the non-executive head of state model also exists. Its holders are excluded completely from the executive. In other words they do not possess even theoretical executive powers or any role, even formal, within the government. Hence their states' governments are not referred to by the traditional parliamentary model head of state styles of His/Her Majesty's Government or His/Her Excellency's Government. Within this general category, variants in terms of powers and functions may exist. The King of Sweden, since the passage of the modern Swedish constitution, the Instrument of Government in the mid 1970s, no longer has any of the parliamentary system head of state functions that had previously belonged to Swedish kings. But he still receives formal cabinet briefings monthly in the Royal Palace. In contrast the only contact the Irish president has with the Irish government is through a formal briefing session given by the Taoiseach (prime minister) to the President. However she has no access to documentation and all access to ministers goes through the Department of An Taoiseach (prime minister's office). Examples of this category invariably date from the twentieth century. The most notable examples of this category are the
- President of Ireland
- King of Sweden (since 1975)
- President of the Federal Republic of Germany.
- Emperor of Japan (since 1947)

Complications with categorisation

While clear categories do exist, it is sometimes difficult to choose which category some individual heads of state belong to. Constitutional change in Liechtenstein in 2003 gave its head of state, the Prince, unprecedented constitutional powers including a veto over legislation and power in theory to dismiss the cabinet. It could be argued that the strengthening of the Prince's powers vis-a-vis the legislature has moved Liechtenstein in the semi-presidential category. Similarly the original powers given to the Greek President of the Republic under the 1974 Hellenic Republic constitution made Greece more akin to the French semi-presidential model. And the theoretical power of the British monarch to dismiss their government at will would suggest that the United Kingdom should belong to the semi-presidential category also. In reality the category to which each head of state-ship belongs is assessed not by theory but by practice. In practice no British monarch has forced a government from office since the early nineteenth century, while the Greek Republic in reality even before the powers of the President of the Republic were curtailed operated as a standard parliamentary system. Unless and until a Prince of Liechtenstein exercises the theoretical powers they now possess, the principality would still remain categorised as a parliamentary system.

Roles of the head of state

Often depending on which constitutional category (above) a head of state belongs to, they may have some or all of the roles listed below, and various other ones.

Symbolic role

Greek President of the Republic, developed a personality cult.]] As the above quote by Charles de Gaulle indicates, one of the most important roles of the modern head of state is being a living national symbol of the nation. In many states an official portraits of the head of state can be found in government offices, courts of law, even airports, libraries, and other public buildings. The idea, sometimes regulated by law, is to use these portraits to make the public aware of the symbolic connection to the government, a practice that dates back to mediaeval times. Sometimes this practice is taken to excess, and the head of state begins to believe that he is the only symbol of the nation. A personality cult thus ensues, where the image of the head of state is the only visual representation of the country, surpassing other symbols such as the flag, constitution, founding fathers, etc. Other common iconic presences, especially of monarchs, are on coins, stamps, banknotes. More discrete variations see them represented by a mention and/or signature. In general the active duties amount to a ceremonial role. Thus in diplomatic affairs, heads of state are often the first person to greet an important foreign visitor. They may also assume a sort of informal "host" role during the VIP's visit, inviting the visitor to a state dinner at his or her mansion or palace, or some other equally hospitable affair. At home, they are expected to render luster to various occasions by their presence, such as assisting to artistic or sports performances or competitions, expositions, celebrations, military parades and remembrances, prominent funerals, visiting parts of the country, enterprises, care facilities etcetera (often in a theatrical honour box, on a platform, on the front row, at the honours table etc.), sometimes performing a symbolic act such as cutting a ribbon or pushing a button at an opening, christening something with champagne, laying the first stone, and so on. Some parts of national life receive their regular attention, often on an annual basis, or even in the form of official patronage. As the potential for such invitations is enormous, such duties are often in part delegated: to a spouse, other members of the dynasty, vice-president etcetera, for whom this is often the core of their public role, or in other cases (possibly as a message, e.g. to distance themselves without giving utter protocollary offence) just a military or other aid.

Chief diplomatic officer

founding fathers from the French ambassador.]]
- The head of state accredits his or her country's ambassadors, through sending formal Letters of Credence to other heads of state. Without that accreditation, ipso facto an ambassador does not take up a role and receive the highest diplomatic status. However there are provisions in international law to perform the same diplomatic functions, or at least part of them, such as accrediting with a lower title with the government, or functioning within
- He or she receives Letters of Credence, sent by other heads of state accrediting his/her ambassador to the state.
- He or she signs international treaties on behalf of the state, or has them signed in his/her name by ministers (government members or diplomats); subsequent ratification, when necessary, usually rests with the legislature. ::Example 1: Article 59 (1) of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany states - :::The Federal President shall represent the Federation in its international relations. He shall conclude treaties with foreign states on behalf of the Federation. He shall accredit and receive envoys. ::Example 2: Section 2, Article 81 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China states - :::The President of the People's Republic of China receives foreign diplomatic representatives on behalf of the People's Republic of China and, in pursuance of decisions of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, appoints and recalls plenipotentiary representatives abroad, and ratifies and abrogates treaties and important agreements concluded with foreign states.

Chief executive officer

In the vast majority of states, whether republics or monarchies, executive authority is vested, at least notionally, in the head of state. In presidential systems the head of state is the actual, de facto chief executive officer. Under parliamentary systems the executive authority is theoretically exercised by the head of state but in practice exercised on the advice of the prime minister or cabinet. This produces such terms as Her Majesty's Government and His Excellency's Government. Examples of parliamentary systems in which the head of state is notional chief executive include Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy and the United Kingdom. The few exceptions include the Republic of Ireland, where executive authority is explicitly vested in the cabinet, and Sweden. The head of state may also be described, although, again, in parliamentary systems this is only a notional designation, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. ::Example 1 (presidential system): Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution states: :::The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. ::Example 2 (Victorian era constitutional monarchy): Under Chapter II, Section 61 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900: :::The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen's representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth. ::Example 3 (mid-20th century constitutional monarchy): According to Section 12 of the Constitution of Denmark 1953: :::Subject to the limitations laid down in this Constitution Act the King shall have the supreme authority in all the affairs of the Realm, and he shall exercise such supreme authority through the Ministers. ::Example 4 (modern republican parliamentary system): According to Article 26 (2) of the 1975 Constitution of Greece: :::The executive power shall be exercised by the President of the Republic and by the government.

Chief appointments officer

- He or she appoints most or all the key officials in the state, including members of the cabinet, the prime minister (if there is one), key judicial figures and all major office holders. In most parliamentary systems the prime minister is appointed with the consent of the legislature, and other figures are appointed on the prime minister's advice. Some countries have exceptions - under Article 4 of the Instrument of Government 1974, the constitution of Sweden grants to the parliamentary speaker the role of formally appointing the prime minister. In practice, this decision is often a formality. The last time a United Kingdom monarch actually had a choice over who to pick to be prime minister occurred in 1963, when Queen Elizabeth II chose Alec Douglas-Home to succeed Harold Macmillan. In presidential systems such as that of the United States, appointments are nominated by the president's sole discretion, and this nomination if often subject to parliamentary confirmation (in the case of the U.S., the U.S. Senate has to approve cabinet nominees and judicial appointments by simple majority).
- He or she may dismiss office-holders. In parliamentary systems, this is only done on the binding advice of another office-holder; for example, members of the Irish cabinet are dismissed by the President of Ireland on the advice of the Taoiseach (prime minister). In some instances, the head of state may be able to dismiss an office holder themselves. Many heads of state or their representatives have the theoretical power to dismiss any office-holder while it is exceptionally rarely used. Its use is sometimes controversial, such as when the Australian Governor-General dismissed the prime minister during the 1975 Australian Constitutional Crisis. In France, while the president cannot force the prime minister to tender the resignation of his government, he in practice can request it if the prime minister is from his own majority. In presidential systems, the president often has the power to fire ministers at his sole discretion. In the U.S., convention calls for cabinet secretaries to resign on their own initiative when called to do so. ::Example 1 (semi-presidential system): Chapter 4, Section 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea states: :::The Prime Minister is appointed by the President with the consent of the National Assembly. ::Example 2 (parliamentary system): Article 13.1.1 of the Constitution of Ireland: :::The President shall, on the nomination of Dáil Éireann [the lower house], appoint the Taoiseach [prime minister].

Legislative roles

Constitution of Ireland can override it.]] Most states require that all bills passed by the house or houses of the legislature are signed into law by the head of state. In some states, such as the United Kingdom, Belgium and the Republic of Ireland, the head of state is in fact formally considered a tier of parliament. In presidential systems the head of state often has power to veto a bill. In most parliamentary systems, however, the head of state cannot refuse to sign a bill, but may, in granting a bill their assent, nevertheless indicate that it was passed in accordance with the correct procedures. The signing of a bill into law is formally known as promulgation. Some Commonwealth of Nations states call this procedure granting the Royal Assent. ::Example 1 (presidential system): Article 1, Section 7 of the United States Constitution states: :::Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States. ::Example 2 (parliamentary system): Section 11.a.1. of the Basic Laws of Israel states: :::The President of the State shall sign every Law, other than a Law relating to its powers. In some parliamentary systems the head of state retains certain powers, in relation to bills, to be exercised at their discretion. They may have authority to:
- Veto a bill until the houses of the legislature have reconsidered it, and approved it a second time.
- Reserve a bill to be signed later, or suspend it indefinitely (generally in states with the Royal Prerogative; this power is rarely is used).
- Refer a bill to the courts to test its constitutionality (e.g. the President of Ireland)
- Refer a bill to the people in a referendum (e.g. the President of Ireland may do so in certain circumstances). If he is also chief executive, he can thus politically control the necesseray executive measures without which a proclaimed law can remain dead letter, sometimes for years or even forever.

Supreme commander of the military

- A head of state is generally the notional or literal commander-in-chief of a state's armed forces, holding the highest office in all military chains of command. chains of command as Colonel-in-Chief of the Coldstream Guards, is nominally Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces in each of her realms.]] Example: Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution states: :::The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.
- In military dictatorships, or governments which have arisen from coups-de-état, this position is obvious, as all authority in such a government derives from the application of military force; occasionally a power vacuum created by war is filled by a head of state stepping beyond its normal constitutional role, as Belgian King Albert I did during World War I.

Summoning and dissolving the legislature

- A head of state is often empowered to summon and dissolve the legislature. In most parliamentary systems, this is done on the advice of the prime minister or cabinet. In some parliamentary systems, and in some presidential systems, the head of state may on their own initiative do so. Some states, however, have fixed term parliaments, with no option of bringing forward elections (e.g. Article II, Section 3, of the U.S. Constitution). In other systems there are fixed terms, but the head of state retains authority to dissolve the legislature in certain circumstances. Where a prime minister has lost the confidence of parliament, some states allow the head of state to refuse a parliamentary dissolution, where one is requested, forcing the prime minister's resignation. ::Example: Article 13.2.2. of the Constitution of Ireland states: :::The President may in absolute discretion refuse to dissolve Dáil Éireann on the advice of a Taoiseach [prime minister] who has ceased to retain the support of a majority in Dáil Éireann

Other prerogatives

- Right of pardon
- Granting nobility, knighthood, various honours

Selection and various types and styles of Heads of state

Various Heads of State use(d) a multitude of different styles and titles, often with many variations in content under diverse constitutions, even in a given state. In numerous cases, two or more of the following peculiar types apply, not counting the primary duo monarchy-republic. In a monarchy, the monarch is the head of state. This is a relatively recent phenomenon; until the last few decades a sovereign was seen as the personal embodiment of the state, and therefore could not be head of themselves (hence many constitutions from the 19th Century and earlier make no mention of a "head of state"). Though some still maintain that calling a monarch head of state is incorrect, it has now become a widespread political convention to attach the label to monarchs. The Emperor (Tennō) of Japan is defined as a symbol, not head, of state by the post-war constitution but is treated as a head of state under diplomatic protocol, in fact second only to the Pope. For the plethora of styles in monarchies, often rendered as King or Emperor, but also many other, see Prince, Princely state and Monarchy. In a republic, the head of state is nowadays usually styled president, but many have or had other titles and even specific constitutional positions (see below), and some have simply used 'Head of State' as their only formal title.

Legitimacy & Accession

- Force is often the trough origin of power, but to keep the victor’s right, formal legitimacy must be found, even if by ficticious claim of continuity such as forged descent or legacy from a previous dynasty
- There have also been true cases of granting sovereignty, e.g. dynastic splits (not just by laws of succession, also by deliberate acts); this is usually in fact forced, such as self-determination granted after nationalist revolts, or the last Attalid king of hellenistic Pergamon by testament leaving his realm to Rome (to avoid a desastrous conquest)
- Under theocracy, divine status (as the Pharaoh's; compare divus) or 'heavenly mandate' (as in imperial China) can render earthly authority under divine law, i.e. theoretically unchallengable; on the other hand, it can take the form of supreme divine authority above the state's, giving the priesthood that voices and interpretes it a tool for political influence, control or even dominance (thus Pharaoh Echnaton's reforms were undone by the Amun-priesthood after his death, possibly even elimination); often there is no clear model, so over time power can be disputed, as between Pope and Emperor in the Investiture conflict, as the temporal power seeks to guarantee its legitimation, including a formal ceremony during the coronation (such as unction; often crucial for popular support), by controling key nominations in the clergy
- The notion of a social contract holds that the nation (the whole people, or just the electorate...) gives a mandate, as trough acclamation or election Individual Heads of state may acquire their position in a number of constitutional ways:
- The position of a monarch is usually hereditary, but often with constitutional restrictions, or even considerable liberty for the incumbent or some body convening after his demise to chose from eligable members of the ruling house, often limited to legal descendents of the state religion or even parliamentary permission. There are rare exceptions to this, such as the Popes, who nominate the cardinals which constitute the electors for every new absolute head of the Catholic church and of its Vatican City State.
- Election usually is the constitutional way to choose the head of state of a republic, and somemonarchies, either:
- Directly: through popular election; this can be made a fiction under the formula of popular acclamation; the electorate can be very selective, such as the patrician families and/or the professional corporations of a city state, or by the warriors in the case of a 'tribal' type war chief or a Roman general proclaimed by his legions.
- Indirectly: by members of the legislature or of a special college of electors, either as an expression of general suffrage (as in the USA) or an exclusive prerogative (as the heads of states of constitutive monarchies in two modern federations: the UAE and Malaysia).
- the a head of states can be entitled to designate his successor, such as Lord Protector of the Commonwealth Oliver Cromwell (succeeded by his son Richard ) A head of state may however seize power by force or revolution. This is not to be confused with the notion of an authoritarian or other totalitarian ruler, which rather concerns the oppressive nature of power once aquired, and therefore only applies if he is the true chief executive. Dictators often use democratic titles, though some proclaim themselves monarchs. Examples of the latter include Emperor Napoleon III of France and King Zog of Albania. Francisco Franco, who adopted the formal title Jefe del Estado, or Chief of State, and established himself as regent for a vacant monarchy. Idi Amin was one of several which made themself President for Life. Another type of extraconstitutional imposition, often also changing the constitution, is by a foreign power (state or alliance), either benign or, more often, rather for its own interest, such as establishing a branch of the own or a friendly dynasty.

Absent and Substitute heads of state

Interim

Whenever a head of state is not available for any reason, constitutional provisions may allow the role to fall temporarily to an assigned person or collective body. In a monarchy this is usually a regent or collegial regency, in a republic rather a vice-president, the legislature or its presiding officer, the chief of government.

Delegation

regent, hanging in a Canadian courthouse. Every British Monarch is a multiple head of state of the United Kingdom, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands, Australia, Canada, Jamaica, New Zealand, eleven other states and all the colonies and crown territories]]. In some cases, where one person is head of state of multiple sovereign countries, they may be need to be permanently represented (except at home) by a governor-general. Examples are Canada, Australia and New Zealand, where the British Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, resides in another of the crown's kingdoms, the United Kingdom, and so is represented in the others by a governor-general. The presently 16 member-states of the Commonwealth of Nations which share the Sovereign from the house of Windsor, including the United Kingdom, are known as Commonwealth Realms. The Governor-General may fulfill many of the roles of a head of state, but is not legally the head of state, rather an appointed representative of the head of state that may act in her place in her absence from the state. Some governors-general are considered de facto heads of state because, though not the de jure (juridical or legal) head of state, they function – i.e., in actuality – like a head of state in most or all jurisdictions. In diplomatic situations, governors-general, if treated as de facto heads of state, are sometimes accorded a status akin to a head of state, but that is by tradition and on a case by case and person by person basis, not automatic. At state banquets, for example, toasts are made to the head of state, (eg, "Her Majesty the Queen of Australia"), never a governor-general, except in so far as a personal toast may be proposed subsequently to "Governor-General and Mrs Smith" as hosts of, or guests at, the banquet. Similarly, Letters of Credence contain the name of the head of state, not the governor-general, even if it is the latter who signs and receives them. In 2005, Canada changed its policy and now all Letters of Credence are directed to the Governor General of Canada herself, not Queen Elizabeth II. This caused controversy but is now the accepted pratice.
- As a colony or other dependent state or territory lacks the authority to vest in a true head of state of its own, it either has no comparable office, simply receiving those roles exercised by the paramount power's (in person or, most of the time, trough an appointed representative, often styled (lieutenant-)governor, but also various other titles, on the Cook islands even simply KIng/Queen's Representative) or has one, such as a formerly sovereign dynasty, but under a form of metropolitan guardianship, such as protection, vassal or tributary status.

Extraordinary arrangements

In exceptional situations, such as war, occupation, revolution or a coup d'état, constitutional institutions, including the symbolically crucial head of state, may be reduced to a lesser role (legitimating the power taken over behind the throne) or be suspended in favor of an emergency office (such as the original Roman Dictator) or eliminated by of new 'provisionary' regime (sincere or clinging to power), often a collective of the junta type, with endlessly varying names and composition, or simply find itself under military authority as imposed by an occupying force, such as a military governor (an early example being the Spartan Harmost)

Theocratic, Ecclesiastic and other Religious states

In Roman Catholicism, and in some cases continued when become protestant:
- The Pope as Sovereign Pontiff, first of the politically important Papal States, after the Italian reunification ultimately just over Vatican City
- various lower clerics qualified as prince of the church (see there, e.g. prince-bishop); one case of a grand master of a sovereign order remains, but it has been vested ex officio in the pope The ancient (now orthodox) monastic state known as Athonian republic doesn't have a Head of state In Islam
- Caliphs were the spiritual and temporal, absolute successors of the Prophet, but lost political power
- Imam of rare theocratic states known as imamates
- Sheikh
- e.g. of the Sunni Sanusi order in Cyrenaica since 1843, styled Emir since 25 Oct 1920
- in Iran the Supreme Leader (at present Ali Khamenei ) and a council of guardians, all shiah clerics, hold perhaps the highest offices, but the only formal head of state is the elected president. In Buddhism
- the Dalai lama was the god-king of Tibet before its annexation by the PR of China
- Mongolia, the former homeland of the imperial Genghis Khan-dynasty, was another lamaist theocracy since 1585, sing various styles in several languages, see Khutughtu, replaced 20 May 1924 by a communist republic (which asigned the head of state role to chairmanships)

City states and crowned republics

- Both the polis in Antiquity (actual Greek and many parallels, e.g. Italic) and the equivalent city states in the feudal era (many in Italy, the rest of the Holy Roman Empire, the Moorish taifa, essentially tribal-type but urbanized regions troughout the world in in the Mayan civilization etc.), and in some cases even much later, offer a wide spectrum of styles, either monarchic (mostly identical to homonyms in larger states) or republican, see Chief magistrate
- Doges were elected by their Italian aristocratic republics from a patrician nobility, but 'reigned' as sovereign dukes The paradoxical term crowned republic (see there) refers to various state arrangements that combine 'republican' and 'monarchic' characteristics
- The Netherlands historical had officials called stadholders, stadholders-general

Multiple or collective Heads of State

stadholders-general, far right in gray)]]
- in republics (internal complexity): e.g. nominal triumvirates, Directoire, and even to date Switzerland (seven-member Federal Council, each acting in turn as ceremonial chief of state); Bosnia and Herzegovina (three member presidium, from three different nations); San Marino (two "Captains-regent");
- condominium (external shared sovereignty): monarchic as in Andorra (president of France and bishop of Urgell, Spain, co-princes), mixed as the former Anglo-French New Hebrides (each's Head of state represented by a High Commissioner).

Curiosa and residual cases

In some nationalistic regimes (usually republics), the leader adopts, formally or de facto, a unique style simply meaning "leader" in the national language, such as nazi Germany's single party chief and Head of state and government Adolf Hitler Führer (see that article for equivalents). When former crown colony Singapore ceased in 1959 to have the British crown as Monarch, represented by a Governor, it adopted the Malay style yang di-pertuan negara, compare the Malaysian paramount ruler Yang Dipertuan Agong; the second and last incumbent kept the style at the 31 Aug 1963 first independence and after the 18 Sep 1963 accession to federal Malaysia (so now as a constitutive part of the federation, a non-sovereign level); after withdrawing from Malaysia 22 Dec 1965, it became a republic within the Commonwealth, this time independent for good, and installed the same person as its first President. There are also a few nations in which the exact title and definition of the office of Head of State is vague. Following the downfall of Liu Shaoqi, who was Chairman of the People's Republic of China, no successor was named, so the duties of the head of state were transferred collectively to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. In North Korea, Kim Il-sung was named "eternal president" following his death and the presidency was abolished. As a result, the duties of the head of state are constitutionally delegated to the Supreme People's Assembly whose chairman is "head of state for foreign affairs" and performs some of the roles of a head of state, such as accrediting foreign ambassadors. However, the symbolic role of a head of state is generally performed by Kim Jong-il, who as the leader of the party and military, is the most powerful person in North Korea. In some states the office of head of state is not expressed in a specific title reflecting that role, but constitutionally awarded to a post of another formal nature. Thus in March 1979 colonel Muammar al-Qaddafi, who kept absolute power (still known as "Guide of the Revolution"), after ten years as combined Head of state and - of government of the Libyan Jamahiriya ("state of the masses"), styled Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, formally transferred both qualities, to the General secretaries of the General People's Congress (comparable to a Speaker) respectvely to a Prime Minister, in political reality both his creatures. In certain cases a special style is needed to accomodate the imperfect statehood, e.g. the long de facto embodiment of Palestianian aspiration to independent statehood, PLO leader Yasser was styled 5 Jul 1994 the first "President of the Palestinian National Authority" after an agreement with the military occupying power Israel allowed a Palestinian National Authority as a transitional status including Palestinian interim self-governing and a phased transfer of powers and territories (towns and areas of the West Bank), still awaiting the outcome of bumpy negotiations -he was repeatedly put under a form of Israeli arrest while in office- on its permanent status, which could end in a Palestinian State. Some statistics
- World's longest serving current Head of State: King Rama IX of Thailand (since June 9, 1946)
- World's longest serving current republican Head of State: President Omar Bongo of Gabon (since November 28, 1967)
- Oldest head of state elected in a popular election: Éamon de Valera, re-elected President of Ireland aged 84 in 1966.

Former heads of state

1966, abdicated from the throne in 1912, but was allowed to keep his titles and palace until 1924. He worked as a gardener in his later life as an ordinary Chinese citizen in Communist China.]] A monarch may retain his style and certain prergatives after abdication, as King Leopold III of Belgium who left the throne to his son after winning (but not in both lingustic commonities of the country) a referendum retained a full royal household but no constitutional or representative role at all. In the case of Napoleon I Bonaparte, the Italian principality of Elba, chosen for his luxurious emprisonment after the survivors of his Grande Armée after the disastrous Russian campaign had finally been defeated in 1814, was transformed into a miniature version of his First Empire, with most trappings of a sovereign monarchy, until his Cent Jours ('100 days' escape and reseizure of power in France) convinced the allies, reconvening the Vienna Congress, in 1815 to revoke those gratious privileges and send him to die on barren St.Helena. By tradition a deposed monarch who has not freely abdicated, though no longer head of state, is allowed to use their monarchical title as a courtesy title for their lifetime. Hence, though he ceased to be Greek king in 1973 (in a disputed referendum during the Regime of the Colonels), or in 1974 (in a referendum after the reestablishment of democracy), it is still standard to refer to the deposed king as Constantine II of Greece. However none of his descendants will be entitled to be called King of the Hellenes (not King of Greece) after his death. Some states dispute the international acceptance of the right of their deposed monarchs to be referred to by their former title. It remains however the generally accepted formula, with most states declining to get involved in disputes between governments and deposed monarchs and simply stating that they are doing no more than recognising tradition, not supporting claims to a defunct throne. Other states have no problem with deposed monarchs being so referred to by former title, and even allow them to travel internationally on the state's diplomatic passport. See also political pensioners

Sources, References and External links

- Pauly-Wissowa in German, on Antiquity
- [http://www.rulers.org/ Rulers.org] List of rulers throughout time and places
- [http://4dw.net/royalark/ RoyalArk] quite elaborate on many non-European monarchies
- [http://www.worldstatesmen.org/ WorldStatesmen] History and incumbents of states and minor polities worldwide
- Westermann, Großer Atlas zur Weltgeschichte in German

Nation-state

:This article is about the political concept. For the Internet game, see Jennifer Government: NationStates. A nation-state is a specific form of state (a political entity), which exists to provide a sovereign territory for a particular nation (a cultural entity), and derives its legitimacy from that function. The compact OED defines it as: "a sovereign state of which most of the citizens or subjects are united also by factors which define a nation, such as language or common descent." Typically it is a unitary state with a single system of law and government. It is almost by definition a sovereign state, meaning that there is no external authority above the state itself. Dependent territories of any kind are not considered nation-states, until they achieve independence. The nation-state implies the parallel occurrence of a state and a nation. In the ideal nation-state, the population consists of the nation and only of the nation: the state not only houses it, but protects it and its national identity, that is they coincide exactly: every member of the nation is a permanent resident of the nation-state, and no member of the nation permanently resides outside it. There are no ideal nation-states, however examples of near ideal nation-states would be Japan and Iceland. This ideal has influenced almost all existing sovereign states, and they can not be understood without reference to that model. It also explains how they are different from their predecessor states. Thus, the term nation-state is also used, imprecisely, for a state that attempts to promote a single national identity, often beginning with a single national language, for example France or Germany or Italy. These nation-states did not always exist, and most of the present nation-states are located on territory that once belonged to another, non-national, state, for example, in the case of much of western Europe, the original state was the Roman Empire. They came into existence at least partly as a result of political campaigns by nationalists. The establishment of a nation-state can be considered the central demand of any nationalist movement.

Characteristics

A nation-state is associated with a particular group of people, the nation, and derives its claim to legitimate existence from them. This in contrast to some monarchies, which derived their legitimacy from the ruling dynasty, or ancient land grants to its ancestors. The nation-state is in a sense the historical vehicle of that nation, and tries to ensure its survival as a nation. Almost always, it has an explicit policy to protect the national culture. A nation-state is one of a class of similar states. To distinguish itself, and also to express a shared identity of its own population, it has national symbols, above all a national flag and a national anthem, often a wide range of national emblems. In fact, nation states have promoted a national identity in almost every area of human social and cultural life, from the national library to the national airline to the national language. Nation-states attempt to create and maintain national unity, and at least a minimal internal uniformity. Nation states have a cultural policy and a language policy for this purpose, and the educational system is often subordinated to this goal. That always meant some compulsion, and in some cases brutal repression of minorities and xenophobic campaigns against non-national influences. The desire for uniformity is said to have positive economic effects, because nation-states generally try to reduce internal disparities in income and regional GDP. Most have a regional policy for that purpose.

What states existed before nation-states?

regional policy In Europe, before 1850, the classic non-national state was a multi-ethnic empire. It was a monarchy ruled by a king or emperor, or in the case of the Ottoman Empire, by a Sultan. The population belonged to many ethnic groups and they spoke many languages. The empire was dominated by one ethnic group, and their language was usually the language of public administration. The ruling dynasty was usually, but not always, from that group. This type of state is not specifically European: such empires existed on all continents. Some of the smaller European states were not so ethnically diverse, but were also dynastic states, ruled by a royal house. Their territory could expand by royal marriage, or merge with another state when the dynasty merged. In some parts of Europe, notably Germany, very small territorial units existed. They were recognised by their neighbours as independent, and had their own government and laws. Some were ruled by princes or other hereditary rulers, some were governed by bishops or abbots. Because they were so small, however, they had no separate language or culture: the inhabitants shared the language of the surrounding region. In some cases these states were simply overthrown by nationalist uprisings, which were inspired by the so-called ideal of the nation-state, meaning a state with a uniform state sponsored national identity. In other cases a nation state seems to have grown by accretion of smaller entities. Some grew to unification by trade and political integration. Some were unified by force. The transition was complex, but this so-called nation-state became the standard ideal in Europe, and in the rest of the world because of European dominance of the world. This so-called nation-state, at least in theory, has a uniform population, language and culture. It stops where the nation stops, and it does not swap territory with other states simply, for example, because the king’s daughter got married. For example, at least in theory, there is a uniform French identity which is different from a supposed uniform German identity, despite the fact that the French-German state border is not the French-German ethnic border and there are some who would consider themselves of German ethnicity on the French side of the border and vice versa. The so-called ideal of the nation-state is actually a state which has attempted to define a national identity which justifies its existence, internally and externally; this process is often ironically called nation-building. By this model, non-national entities have survived in Europe: the dependent principalities of Liechtenstein, Andorra, and Monaco, the republic of San Marino, and the Vatican City.

Examples of nation-states

Oddly, the confederation of cantons and former city-states known in English as Switzerland is often called a nation-state, despite having no dominant ethnic group, no national identity, and several national languages, see also Culture_of_Switzerland. This is odd because Switzerland's primary Raison d'être is to protect against a state, internal or external, attempting to enforce a statewide national identity. A classic nation-state, by definition, is inhabited by one ethnic group, who speak one language, have one culture, and share one religion. The population, in other words, is homogeneous. This group is referred to as ‘the nation’ or ‘the people’. They all live inside the border of the nation-state. No other ethnic or cultural group lives there. It is often said that island states are the best place to find something like this, and Iceland is often cited as the best example of a nation-state. Although the inhabitants are ethnically related to other Scandinavian groups, the national culture and language are found only in Iceland. There are no cross-border minorities, the nearest land is too far away. Japan, see also Japan#Demographics and Ethnic issues in Japan, is traditionally seen as a good example, although it includes minorities of ethnically distinct Ryukyuans in the south, Koreans, Chinese, Taiwanese, Filipinos and Brazilians, and in the north, the indigenous Aino minority of Hokkaido. The Republic of Ireland was until recently inhabited almost entirely by ethnic Irish, but the national territory is not considered complete by nationalists because it does not include Northern Ireland. Very few others approach the ideal model of the nation-state: the border does not correspond to the distribution of the national group. Sometimes that is impossible, because population is ethnically mixed, down to the level of individual streets or buildings. Where part of the national group lives in a neighbouring nation-state, it is usually called a national minority. In some cases states have reciprocal national minorities, for instance the Slovaks in Hungary and the Hungarian in Slovakia. National minorities should not be confused with a national diaspora, which is typically located far from the national border. Most modern diasporas result from economic migration. The existence of an Irish diaspora does not make the Republic of Ireland any less a nation-state, and does not affect Northern Ireland, since few emigrants go there anyway. The possession of dependent territories does influence the status of nation-state. A state with large colonial possessions is obviously inhabited by many ethnic groups, and does not conform to the ideal of a single-culture state. However, in most cases, the colonies were not considered an integral part of the motherland anyway, and were separately administered. Some European nation-states have dependent territories in Europe. Denmark contains virtually all ethnic Danes and has relatively few foreign nationals within it. However, it exercises sovereignty over the Faroe Islands and Greenland. If these are considered separate nations, then Denmark is not a classic nation-state.

Minorities and irredentism

So-called nation-states differ from the definition in two main ways: the population includes minorities, and the border does not include all the national group or its territory. Both have led to violent responses by nation-states, and nationalist movements. The nationalist definition of a nation is always exclusive: no nation has open membership. In most cases, there is a clear idea that surrounding nations are different. There are also historical examples of groups within the nation-state's territory who are specifically singled out as outsiders, such as the Roma and Jews in Europe, or Copts in Egypt. Negative responses to minorities within the nation-state have ranged from total assimilation to total extermination. Typically these responses are effected as state policy, though non-state violence in the form of pogroms occurs. However, many so-called nation-states do accept specific minorities as being in some way part of the nation, and the term national minority is often used in this sense. The Sorbs in Germany are an example: for centuries they have lived in German-speaking states, surrounded by a much larger ethnic German population, and they have no other historical territory. They are now generally considered to be part of the German nation, and are accepted as such by the Federal Republic of Germany, which constitutionally guarantees their cultural rights. Of the thousands of minorities and underlying ethnic nationalities in so-called nation-states across the world, only a few have this level of acceptance and protection. :Main article: Irredentism. The response to the non-inclusion of territory and population may take the form of irredentism, demands to annex unredeemed territory and incorporate it into the evolving so-called nation-state, as part of the national homeland. Irredentist claims are usually based on the fact that an identifiable part of the national group lives across the border, in another so-called nation-state. However, they can include claims to territory where no members of that nation live at present, either because they lived there in the past, or because the national language is spoken in that region, or because the national culture has influenced it, or because of geographical unity with the existing territory, or for a wide variety of other reasons. Past grievances are usually involved (see Revanchism). It is sometimes difficult to distinguish irredentism from pan-nationalism, since both claim that all members of an ethnic and cultural natio belong in one specific state. Pan-nationalism is less likely to ethnically specify the nation. For instance, variants of Pan-Germanism has different ideas about what constituted Greater Germany, including the confusing term Grossdeutschland - which in fact implied the inclusion of huge Slavic minorities from the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Typically, irredentist demands are at first made by members of non-state nationalist movements. When they are adopted by a state, they result in tensions, and actual attempts at annexation are always considered a casus belli, a cause for war. In many cases, such claims result in long-term hostile relations between neighbouring states. Irredentist movements typically circulate maps of the claimed national territory, the greater nation-state. That territory, which is often much larger than the existing state, plays a central role in their propaganda. Examples include:
- Greater Albania
- Greater China
- Greater Finland
- Greater Germany, an expression of Pan-Germanism: compare Pan-Slavism
- Greater Greece, expressed in the policy of Megali Idea
- Greater Hungary
- Greater India
- Greater Morocco
- Greater Romania
- Greater Serbia
- Greater Somalia Irredentism should not be confused with claims to overseas colonies, which are not generally considered part of the national homeland. Some French overseas colonies would be an exception: French rule in Algeria did indeed treat the colony legally as a département of France, unsuccessfully. The US was more successful in Hawaii.

Conflicting nationalisms

Iceland not only has clear borders, it is inhabited by people who are either immigrants or self-identify as Icelandic. In many nation-states, all or part of the territory is claimed on behalf of more than one nation, by more than one nationalist movement. The intensity of the claims varies: some are no more than a suggestion, others are backed by armed secessionist groups. Belgium is a classic example of a disputed nation-state. The state was formed by secession from the United Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1830, and the Flemish population in the north speaks a dialect of Dutch. The Flemish identity is also ethnic and cultural, and there is a strong separatist movement. The Walloon identity is linguistic (French-speaking) and regionalist. There is also a unitary Belgian nationalism, several versions of a Greater Netherlands ideal, and a German-speaking region annexed from Prussia in 1920, and re-annexed by Germany in 1940-1944. The fact that a nation-state has a disputed territory in this way, does not make it less of a nation-state. If large sections of the population reject the national identity, the legitimacy of the state is undermined, and the efficiency of government is reduced, That is certainly the case in Belgium, where the inter-communal tensions dominate politics. Most states now declare themselves to be nation-states, that is states that attempt to define and enforce a state sponsored national identity. In the case of very large states, there are many competing claims and often many separatist movements. These movements usually dispute that the larger state is a real nation-state, and refer to it as an empire and what is called nation-building is actually empire-building. There is no objective standard for assessing which claim is correct, they are competing political claims. Large nation-states certainly need to define the nation on a broad basis. China, for example, uses the concept of "Zhonghua minzu," a Chinese people, although it also officially recognises the majority Han ethnic group, and no less than 55 national minorities.

History

The origins of the nation-state are disputed: see the main article on nationalism. Some theories see them as a 19th-century European invention, the product of nationalist movements, facilitated by developments such as mass literacy and the early mass media. Some see the nation-state as emerging in a few specific states, such as France and its rival England. They expanded from core regions, Paris and London, and developed a national consciousness, and sense of national identity (Frenchness and Englishness). Both assimilated peripheral regions and their cultures (Wales, Brittany, Aquitaine and Occitania), where regionalism and nationalism resurfaced in the 19th century. The idea of a nation-state is associated with the rise of the modern system of states, usually dated to the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). The balance of power, which characterises that system, depends for its effectiveness on clearly-defined, centrally controlled, independent entities, whether empires or nation-states. The nation-state received a philosophical underpinning from the era of Romanticism, at first as the 'natural' expression of the individual peoples (romantic nationalism). Since then many varieties of nationalism have developed. The increasing emphasis on the ethnic and racial origins of the nation, during the 19th century, led to a redefinition of the nation-state in ethnic and racial terms. That reached its height in the fascist movements of the 20th century. The combination of 'nation' ('people') and 'state' expressed in such terms as the Völkische Staat made fascist states such as early Nazi Germany qualitatively different from non-fascist nation-states. Obviously minorities, who are not part of the Volk, have no authentic or legitimate role in such a state. (The ultimate development of the Nazi state was determined by the total war which its conquests initiated, rather than Nazi theories of the state). In recent years, the nation-state's claim to absolute sovereignty within its borders has been much criticised. A global political system based on international agreements, and superanational blocs characterized the post-war era. Non-state actors, such as international corporations and non-governmental organizations, are widely seen as eroding the economic and political power of the nation-states.

Federation

:This article is about federal states. For alternative meanings, see Federation (disambiguation). A federation (from the Latin fœdus', "covenant") is a state comprised of a number of self-governing regions (often themselves referred to as "states") united by a central ("federal") government. In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states is constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of the central government. The form of government or constitutional structure found in a federation is known as federalism. Federations may be multi-ethnic, or cover a large area of territory, although neither is necessarily the case. Federations are often founded on an original agreement between a number of sovereign states. The component states of a federation usually do not have the right to secede unilaterally. Important modern federations include Australia, Brazil, Canada, India and the United States. In cases where a federation consists of only two component entities, of which one is considerably larger or more powerful, it can be referred to as an asymmetric federation (examples of this include Trinidad and Tobago, São Tomé and Príncipe and Serbia and Montenegro).
Federations and other forms of state
In a federation the component states are regarded as in some sense sovereign, in so far as certain powers are reserved to them that may not be exercised by the central government. However a federation is more than a mere loose alliance of independent states. The component states of a federation usually possess no powers in relation to foreign policy and so enjoy no independent status under international law. Federations usually exhibit a single, two-tier structure of government across an entire jurisdiction. Exceptions may occur in which certain parts of the federation are under more direct control of the federal government, as is the case with the autonomous 'territories' of Canada and Australia, with Union Territories in India and with the United States District of Columbia. However it is not characteristic in a federation for small peripheral regions to be self-governing, while a central, much larger 'metropolis' region remains under the direct control of the central government. A federation often emerges from an initial agreement between a number of separate states to come together in order to solve mutual problems, or provide for mutual defence. This was the case with the United States, Switzerland, Canada and Australia.
Unitary states
A unitary state is sometimes one with only a single, centralised, national tier of government. However unitary states often also include one or more self-governing regions. The difference between a federation and this kind of unitary state is that in a unitary state the autonomous status of self-governing regions exists at the sufferance of the central government, and may be unilaterally revoked. While it is common for a federation to be brought into being by agreement between a number of formally independent states, in a unitary state self-governing regions are often created through a process of devolution, where a formerly centralised state agrees to grant autonomy to a region that was previously entirely subordinate. Thus federations are often established voluntarily from 'below' whereas devolution grants self-government from 'above'. It is often part of the philosophy of a unitary state that, regardless of the actual status of any of its parts, its entire territory constitutes a single sovereign entity or nation-state, and that by virtue of this the central government exercises sovereignty over the whole territory as of right. In a federation, on the other hand, sovereignty is often regarded as residing notionally in the component states, or as being shared between these states and the central government. The distinction between a federation and a unitary state is often quite ambiguous. A unitary state may closely resemble a federation in structure and, while a central government may possess the theoretical right to revoke the autonomy of a self-governing region, it may be politically difficult for it to do so in practice. The self-governing regions of some unitary states also often enjoy greater autonomy than those of some federations. For these reasons, it is sometimes argued that some modern unitary states are de facto federations if not federal in theory. Spain is suggested as one possible de facto federation as it grants more self-government to its autonomous communities than most federations allow their constituent parts. For the Spanish parliament to revoke the autonomy of regions such as Catalonia or the Basque Country, or for the United Kingdom government to unilaterally abolish the legislatures of Wales or Scotland, would be a near political impossibility. In the People's Republic of China, a form of de facto federation has evolved without formal legislation. This has occurred as largely informal grants of power to the provinces, to handle economic affairs and implement national policies. This has resulted in a system some have termed "de facto federalism with Chinese characteristics".
Other forms of state
Confederation: While distinct from a unitary state, a federation is also to be distinguished from a confederation. This is a state or entity similar in structure to a federation but with a weaker central government. A confederation may also consist of states that, while temporarily pooling sovereignty in certain areas, are considered entirely sovereign and retain the right of secession. A confederation is sometimes a loose alliance but in other cases the distinction between a federation and a confederation may be ambiguous. For example Switzerland is formally the 'Swiss Confederation' but its structure is similar to that of many federal states. Empire: An empire is a multi-ethnic state or group of nations with a central government established usually through coercion (on the model of the Roman Empire). An empire will often include self-governing regions but these will possess autonomy only at the sufferance of the central government. The term empire, except where used metaphorically, is usually reserved for an entity headed by an emperor, although his or her constitutional role may be purely ceremonial. An empire may, in some cases, also consist of multiple kingdoms organised together with a high king designated as an emperor. One example of this was Imperial Germany.
European Union
The European Union (EU) possesses some of the attributes of a federal state. However, its central government is far weaker than that of most federations so it is usually characterised as an unprecedented form of supra-national union or confederation. The EU has responsibility for important areas such as trade and monetary union, and today around sixty per cent of the legislation in member-states originates in the institutions of the Union. Nonetheless, EU member-states retain the right to act independently in matters of foreign policy and defence, and also enjoy a near monopoly over other major policy areas such as criminal justice and taxation. Furthermore, member-states are separate, sovereign entities under international law and, currently at least, possess a de facto if not explicit de jure right of secession. The proposed Constitutional Treaty would codify the Member States' right to leave the Union, but would at the same time also provide the European Union with more powers in some areas. Whether or not this would move the European Union closer to a federal state than an international organisation is currently the subject of heated political debate.
Russian Federation
Some argue that the Russian Federation is not a federation in the strictest sense. It consists of the metropolis of 'Russia proper' and a number of small autonomous republics or oblasts. Russia proper includes the great majority of the population and, while it is organised into 41 provinces, these are under the direct control of the national government in Moscow. The remaining self-governing regions possess little actual autonomy.
Soviet Union
The constitution of the 1922-1991 Soviet Union (USSR) theoretically provided for a voluntary federation or confederation of 'soviet socialist republics'. Each was notionally governed by its own supreme council and had the right to secede. Furthermore, some republics themselves possessed further nominally self-governing units. In practice, the system of one-party government found in the USSR meant that governance of the Union was highly centralised, with important decisions taken by the leaders of the Communist Party in Russia and merely 'rubber stamped' by local institutions. Nonetheless, with the introduction of competitive elections in the final days of the USSR, the Union's theoretically federal structure became a reality in practice; this occurred only for a brief interim period, as the elected governments of many republics demanded their right to secede and became independent states. Thus the USSR's de jure federal structure played a key role in its dissolution.
Constitutional structure

Division of powers
In a federation, the division of power between federal and regional governments is usually outlined in the constitution. It is in this way that the right to self-government of the component states is usually constitutionally entrenched. Component states often also possess their own constitutions which they may amend as they see fit, although in the event of conflict the federal constitution usually takes precedence. In almost all federations the central government enjoys the powers of foreign policy and national defence. Were this not the case a federation would not be a single sovereign state. Beyond this the precise division of power varies from one nation to another. The United States Constitution provides that all powers not specifically granted to the federal government are retained by the states. The Constitution of Canada, on the other hand, provides the opposite: that powers not explicitly granted to the provincial governments are retained by the centre. In Germany, the division of powers is less one of content than of administration: the federal government often merely issues broad directives to the Länder (self-governing regions), which then have broad discretion as to how to implement them. In the People's Republic of China, regarded by some as a de facto although not de jure federation, the central government sets up general economic policy and goals, and leaves the implementation to provincial governments. Where every component state of a federation possesses the same powers, we are said to find 'symmetric federalism'. Asymmetric federalism exists where states are granted different powers, or some possess greater autonomy than others do. This is often done in recognition of the existence of a distinct culture in a particular region or regions. In Spain, "historical communities" such as Navarre, Catalonia, and the Basque Country have more powers than other autonomous communities, partly to deal with their distinctness and to appease nationalist leanings, partly out of respect of privileges granted earlier in history. It is common that during the historical evolution of a federation there is a gradual movement of power from the component states to the centre, as the federal government acquires additional powers, sometimes to deal with unforeseen circumstances. The acquisition of new powers by a federal government may occur through formal constitutional amendment or simply through a broadening of the interpretation of a government's existing constitutional powers given by the courts.
Organs of government
The structures of most federal governments incorporate mechanisms to protect the rights of component states. One method, known as 'intrastate federalism', is to directly represent the governments of component states in federal political institutions. Where a federation has a bicameral legislature the upper house is often used to represent the component states while the lower house represents the people of the nation as a whole. A federal upper house may be based on a special scheme of apportionment, as is the case in the senates of the United States and Australia, where each state is represented by an equal number of senators irrespective of the size of its population. Alternatively, or in addition to this practice, the members of an upper house may be indirectly elected by the government or legislature of the component states, as occurred in the United States prior to 1913, or be actual members or delegates of the state governments, as, for example, is the case in the German Bundesrat. The lower house of a federal legislature is usually directly elected, with apportionment in proportion to population, although states may sometimes still be guaranteed a certain minimum number of seats. In Canada, the provincial governments represent regional interests and negotiate directly with the central government. A First Ministers conference of the prime minister and the provincial premiers is the de facto highest political forum in the land, although it is not mentioned in the constitution. Federations often have special procedures for amendment of the federal constitution. As well as reflecting the federal structure of the state this may guarantee that the self-governing status of the component states cannot be abolished without their consent. An amendment to the constitution of the United States must be ratified by three-quarters of either the state legislatures, or of constitutional conventions specially elected in each of the states, before it can come into effect. In referenda to amend the constitutions of Australia and Switzerland it is required that a proposal be endorsed not just by an overall majority of the electorate in the nation as a whole, but also by separate majorities in each of a majority of the states or cantons. Some federal constitutions also provide that certain constitutional amendments cannot occur without the unanimous consent of all states or of a particular state. The US constitution provides that no state may be deprived of equal representation in the senate without its consent. In Australia, if a proposed amendment will specifically impact one or more states than it must be endorsed in the referendum held in each of those states. Any amendment to the Canadian constitution that would modify the role of the monarchy would require unanimous consent of the provinces. The German Basic Law provides that no amendment is admissible at all that would completely abolish the federal system.
Other technical terms

- Fiscal federalism - federalism involving the transfer of funds between different levels of government.
- Formal federalism (or 'constitutional federalism') - the delineation of powers is specified in a written constitution.
- Executive federalism (also known as 'administrative federalism').
Federalism as a political philosophy
Main article: Federalist The meaning of federalism, as a political movement, and of what constitutes a 'federalist', varies with country and historical context. Movements associated with the establishment or development of federations can be either centralising or decentralising. For example, at the time those nations were being established, 'federalists' in the United States and Australia were those who advocated the creation of strong central government. Similarly, in European Union politics, federalists are mostly those who seek greater EU integration. In contrast, in Spain and post-war Germany, federal movements have sought decentralisation: the transfer of power from central authorities to local units. In Canada, where Quebec separatism has been a political force for several decades, the 'federalist' force is dedicated to keeping the federation intact and adapting the federal structure to better suit Quebec interests.
Internal controversy and conflict
Federalist Certain forms of political and constitutional dispute are common to federations. One issue is that the exact division of power and responsibility between federal and regional governments is often a source of controversy. Often, as is the case with the United States, such conflicts are resolved through the judicial system, which delimits the powers of federal and local governments. The relationship between federal and local courts varies from nation to nation and can be a controversial and complex issue in itself. Another common issue in federal systems is the conflict between regional and national interests, or between the interests and aspirations of different ethnic groups. In some federations the entire jurisdiction is relatively homogeneous and each constituent state resembles a miniature version of the whole; this is known as 'congruent federalism'. On the other hand, incongruent federalism exists where different states or regions possess distinct ethnic groups. The ability of a federal government to create national institutions that can mediate differences that arise due to linguistic, ethnic, religious, or other regional differences is an important challenge. The inability to meet this challenge may lead to the secession of parts of a federation or to civil war, as occurred in United States and Switzerland. In some cases internal conflict may lead a federation to collapse entirely, as occurred in Nigeria, the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, the United Provinces of Central America and the West Indies Federation.
List of federations

Contemporary

Long form titles

- Federal Republic: Brazil, Germany, Nigeria.
- Federation: Malaysia, Russia.
- Republic: Argentina, Austria, India.
- Others::
- Bolivarian Republic (Venezuela)
- Confederation (Switzerland)
- Commonwealth (Australia)
- Federal Democratic Republic (Ethiopia)
- Federated States (FS Micronesia)
- Federative Republic (Brazil)
- Kingdom (Belgium)
- Union (Comoros)
- United Mexican States (Mexico)
- United Arab Emirates (United Arab Emirates)
- United States of America (United States)
- None: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada (rarely Dominion), Serbia and Montenegro.
Defunct

- Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1569–1795)
- United Provinces of Central America (1823–1840)
- Confederate States of America, (1861–1865)
- French West Africa (1904–1958)
- Union of Soviet Socialist Republics² (1922–1991)
- Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia³ (1945–1992)
- Federated Malay States (1896–1946)
- Malayan Union (1946–1948)
- Federation of Malaya (1948–1963)
- Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland (1953–1963)
- West Indies Federation (1958–1962)
- Mali Federation (1959–1960)
- Federal Republic of Cameroon (1961–1972)
- Federation of South Arabia (1962–1967)
- Czechoslovakia (1969–1992)
- Federation of Arab Republics (1972–1977)
- Imperial Federation (1884 –1919)⁴
Notable Fictional Federations

- United Federation of Planets (Star Trek)
- Galactic Federation of Free Alliances (Star Wars)
- Earth Federation Forces (Gundam)
List of unitary states with devolution
Some unitary states have devolved powers given to certain, or all, regions. For example, the United Kingdom has devolved limited power to four different regions (Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Greater London), creating representative bodies with varying degrees of devolved power. However, subject to certain exceptions, all power is vested in Parliament, which could abolish or alter the powers given to the devolved authorities. For instance, the Scottish Parliament was established by Parliament, and it can be changed or abolished by Parliament with or without the authority of the Scottish Parliament itself.

Footnotes
#Whether or not the Russian Federation is a genuine federation is a matter of dispute. See: Russian Federation section. #The USSR was a federation according the letter of its constitution, but, at least until its final days in the late eighties and early nineties, its governance was highly centralised in practice. See: Soviet Union section. #The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was officially proclaimed in 1963. Prior to this the communist Yugoslav state was named Democratic Federal Yugoslavia in 1945 and the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia in 1946. See: Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. #The Imperial Federation was a proposal that never came into being. It was intended to supersede the British Empire, in which all colonies and dominions would be represented by a single Imperial Parliament under the Imperial Crown. The idea however was ahead of its time and the Imperial Federation gave way to the Commonwealth of Nations.
See also

- Federation of Australia
- Federalism in Australia
- Foederati
- New federalism
- Corporative federalism
- Neo-functionalism
- Republics of the Soviet Union
- World Federalist Movement
- International organisation
- Międzymorze Category: Lists of subnational entities ja:連邦

Commonwealth

:Alternative meanings: the Commonwealth of Nations or Commonwealth of Independent States

Definition and linguistics

The original phrase "common wealth" or "the common weal" is a calque translation of the Latin term res publica ('public matters'), from which the word republic comes, which was itself used as a synonym for the greek politeia as well as for the republican (i.e. non-monarchical) Roman constitution (in legal theory still in force during the empire, see Principate). The English noun Commonwealth dates originally from the fifteenth century and in different contexts indicates: # a political unit founded in law by agreement of the people for the common good; # a federated union of constituent states; # a republic; # a Co-operative Commonwealth is a society based on cooperative and socialist principles.

International or Multinational

Commonwealth of Nations

When capitalised, "Commonwealth" refers to the Commonwealth of Nations - formerly the "British Commonwealth" - a loose confederation of nations formerly members of the British Empire (with one exception: Mozambique). The Commonwealth's membership includes both republics and monarchies and the (appointed, not hereditary) head of the Commonwealth of Nations is Queen Elizabeth II. She also reigns as monarch directly in a number of states, known as Commonwealth Realms, notably the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Jamaica and others.

Commonwealth of Independent States

The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is a loose alliance or confederation consisting of 12 of the 15 former Soviet Republics. Its creation signaled the dissolution of the Soviet Union, its purpose being to "allow a civilized divorce" between the Soviet Republics. The CIS has developed as forum by which the member-states can co-operate, and even integrate, in areas of economics, defense and foreign policy.

National

Great Britain

The Commonwealth of England was the official name of the political unit (de facto military rule in the name of parliamentary supremacy) that replaced the kingdoms of Scotland and England (after the English Civil War) under the rule of Oliver Cromwell and his successors from 1649 to 1660. It formed the first republic in the English-speaking world, though this quickly devolved into a pseudo-monarchy.

Australia

The term also served when the six Australian colonies federated to form the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act created a federal system, in which power is divided between the federal, or national, government and the States - the evolved status of the colonies. The Constitution stipulated that Australia was a constitutional monarchy, where the Head of State, the British (or, since 1973, Australian) monarch, is represented at federal and state level by a Governor-General and Governor