Irredentism in the context of "Malay world"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Irredentism in the context of "Malay world"

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Irredentism

Irredentism is one state's desire to annex the territory of another state. This desire can be motivated by ethnic reasons because the population of the territory is ethnically similar to or the same as the population of the parent state. Historical reasons may also be responsible, i.e., that the territory previously formed part of the parent state. Difficulties in applying the concept to concrete cases have given rise to academic debates about its precise definition. Disagreements concern whether either or both ethnic and historical reasons have to be present and whether non-state actors can also engage in irredentism. A further dispute is whether attempts to absorb a full neighboring state are also included. There are various types of irredentism. For typical forms of irredentism, the parent state already exists before the territorial conflict with a neighboring state arises. There are also forms of irredentism in which the parent state is newly created by uniting an ethnic group spread across several countries. Another distinction concerns whether the country to which the disputed territory currently belongs is a regular state, a former colony, or a collapsed state.

A central research topic concerning irredentism is the question of how it is to be explained or what causes it. Many explanations hold that ethnic homogeneity within a state makes irredentism more likely. Discrimination against the ethnic group in the neighboring territory is another contributing factor. A closely related explanation argues that national identities based primarily on ethnicity, culture, and history increase irredentist tendencies. Another approach is to explain irredentism as an attempt to increase power and wealth. In this regard, it is argued that irredentist claims are more likely if the neighboring territory is relatively rich. Many explanations also focus on the regime type and hold that democracies are less likely to engage in irredentism while anocracies are particularly open to it.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Irredentism in the context of Malay world

The Malay world or Malay realm (Indonesian/Malay: Dunia Melayu or Alam Melayu) or Malaysphere is a political concept or an expression that has been used by different authors and groups over time to denote several different notions, derived from varied interpretations of 'Malay' either as an ethnic group, as a racial category, as a linguistic group or as a cultural group. The use of the term Malay in much of the conceptualisation is largely based on the prevalent Malay cultural influence, manifested in particular through the spread of the Malay language in Southeast Asia as observed by different colonial powers during the Age of Discovery and spread of Islam. The term remains highly controversial in Indonesia and outside the Malay-speaking areas, because it is considered politically charged and irredentist rather than purely cultural.

The concept in its broadest territorial stretch may apply to a region synonymous with Austronesia, homeland to the Austronesian peoples, that extends from Easter Island in the east to Madagascar in the west. Such description has its origin in the introduction of the term Malay race in the late 18th century that has been popularised by orientalists to describe the Austronesian peoples. In the development of further research, the Malay race was categorized as a Malayo-Polynesian languages. In a narrower sense, the Malay world has been used as a synonym for Malay sprachraum, referring to the Malay-speaking countries and territories of Southeast Asia, where different standards of Malay are the national languages or a variety of it is an important minority language. The term in this sense encompasses Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Southern Thailand, and is sometimes used interchangeably with the concepts of 'Malay Archipelago' and 'Nusantara'.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Irredentism in the context of Creation of Yugoslavia

Yugoslavia was a state concept among the South Slavic intelligentsia and later popular masses from the 19th to early 20th centuries that culminated in its realization after the 1918 collapse of Austria-Hungary at the end of World War I and the formation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. However, from as early as 1922 onward, the kingdom was better known colloquially as Yugoslavia (or similar variants); in 1929 the name was made official when the country was formally renamed the "Kingdom of Yugoslavia".

The creation of Yugoslavia has been described as expansionist and irredentist in its approach to foreign policy, and federalist in its approach to politics, with power centralised in the Serb-dominated government. Despite the idea of Yugoslavism having promoted equality among the South Slavic ethnic groups, the new Yugoslav state was ruled by the Serbian Karađorđević dynasty that sought to implement pro-Serb policies throughout the country, leaving minority groups like Croatians and Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) not feeling represented in the new government. This led to the formation of opposition parties that became identified with particular ethnic groups within the country. Similarly, the concept of Yugoslavism became associated with the idea of a South Slavic nation dominated by Serbs; and in some instances, forced cultural assimilation policies introduced by the Serb-led Yugoslav government. However, the creation of Yugoslavia remained popular even among non-Serbs, as it was seen as a means of unification for South Slavs to protect themselves against non-Slavic powers such as Fascist Italy.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Greater Azerbaijan

Whole Azerbaijan (Azerbaijani: Bütöv Azərbaycan) is an irredentist concept of uniting presumed historically Azerbaijani-inhabited territories into the Republic of Azerbaijan.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Revanchism

Revanchism (French: revanchisme, from revanche, "revenge") is a policy or political doctrine aimed at a revenge or the reversal of the losses incurred in previous political or military defeats, most commonly, the incurred territorial losses. The term revanchism originated in 1870s France in the aftermath of the Franco-Prussian War among nationalists who wanted to avenge the French defeat and reclaim the lost territories of Alsace-Lorraine.

Revanchism draws its strength from patriotic and retributionist thought and is often motivated by economic or geopolitical factors. Extreme revanchist ideologues often represent a hawkish stance, suggesting that their desired objectives can be achieved through the positive outcome of another war. It is linked with irredentism, the conception that a part of the cultural and ethnic nation remains "unredeemed" outside the borders of its appropriate nation-state.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Maltese Italians

Italian irredentism in Malta is the movement that uses an irredentist argument to propose the incorporation of the Maltese islands into Italy, with reference to past support in Malta for Italian territorial claims on the islands. Although Malta had formally ceased to be part of the Kingdom of Sicily only since 1814 following the Treaty of Paris, Italian irredentism in Malta was mainly significant during the Italian Fascist era.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Italian irredentism

Italian irredentism (Italian: irredentismo italiano [irredenˈtizmo itaˈljaːno]) was a political movement during the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the Kingdom of Italy. It originated to promote the annexation of majority Italian-speaking territories which were still retained by the Austrian Empire after three wars of independence (1848-1849, 1859 and 1866); specifically, Trento and Trieste were designated as the main "irredent lands". Both provinces were ultimately annexed as a result of World War I, considered in Italian discourse to be the "fourth war of independence": the conclusion of the conflict on November 4, 1918, is still commemorated in Italy as National Unity Day. Thereafter, Italian irredentism waned in importance; however, Italian nationalists and fascists would use irredentist arguments to justify the Italianization of other territories Italy annexed in World War I (such as South Tyrol and the Slavic parts of Istria) and claim many other lands beyond Trento and Trieste. Those latter policies and claims have been abandoned by the Italian Republic.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Podgorica Assembly

The Great People's Assembly of the Serb People in Montenegro (Serbo-Croatian: Велика народна скупштина српског народа у Црној Гори, romanizedVelika narodna skupština srpskog naroda u Crnoj Gori), commonly known as the Podgorica Assembly (Подгоричка скупштина, Podgorička skupština), was an ad hoc popular assembly convened in November 1918, after the end of World War I in the Kingdom of Montenegro. The committee convened the assembly with the aim of facilitating an unconditional union of Montenegro and Serbia and removing Nikola I of Montenegro from the throne. The assembly was organised by a committee supported by and coordinating with the government of the Kingdom of Serbia. The unification was successful and preceded the establishment of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes as a unified state of South Slavs by mere days. The unification was justified by Serbian irredentists by the need to create a single Serbian state for all Serbs, including Montenegro, where a part of the population believed that Montenegro belonged to the Serbian nation and supported the unification.

Nikola I criticised the Podgorica Assembly's elections and resolutions, arguing both were illegitimate and unlawful while his government was in exile in France. Opponents of the unconditional union, known as the Greens for the colour of paper used for pro-independence candidates, supported either full independence of Montenegro or a federation or a confederation with Serbia and other South Slavs where Montenegro would be an equal partner.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Çamëria

Chameria (also spelled Çameria; Albanian: Çamëria; Greek: Τσαμουριά, romanizedTsamouriá) is a historical region along the coast of the Ionian Sea in southwestern Albania and northwestern Greece, traditionally associated with the Albanian ethnic subgroup of the Chams. For a brief period (1909-1912), three kazas (Filat, Aydonat and Margiliç) were combined by the Ottomans into an administrative district called Çamlik sancak. During the interwar period, the toponym was in common use and the official name of the area above the Acheron river in all Greek state documents. The term is used today mostly by Albanians and it is obsolete in Greek, surviving in some old folk songs. Most of what is called Chameria is divided between parts of the Greek regional units of Thesprotia, Preveza, and Ioannina (some villages at the western side); and the municipality of Konispol at the southernmost extremity of Albania. Apart from geographic and ethnographic usages, in contemporary times within Albania the toponym has also acquired irredentist connotations.

↑ Return to Menu

Irredentism in the context of Neo-Ottomanism

Neo-Ottomanism (Turkish: Yeni Osmanlıcılık or neo-Osmanlıcılık) is a reactionary, revisionist, monarchist, conservative and Islamist political ideology in Turkey that discredits the Turkish secular nationalist republic and its reforms, and glorifies the Ottoman dynasty and its traditionalist establishments like the caliphate. It is also an irredentist and imperialist ideology that, in its broadest sense, advocates to honor the Ottoman past of Turkey and promotes the greater political engagement of the Republic of Turkey within regions formerly under the rule of the Ottoman Empire, the predecessor state that covered the territory of modern Turkey among others.

Neo-Ottomanism emerged at the end of the Cold War with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, forming two distinct waves of the ideology: the first, in the early 1990s, developed by the Turkish journalist and foreign policy advisor to President Turgut Özal, Cengiz Çandar; the second, associated with Ahmet Davutoğlu, former president of Turkey and founder of the Future Party. Davutoğlu's foreign policy goals include establishing Turkey as an influential power within the Balkans, Caucasia and the Middle East.

↑ Return to Menu