The Student Room Group

The next nation state to collapse.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Avatar for Quady
Quady
20
Original post by Aj12
My money is on Saudi Arabia.


Surely Saudi is the last of the oil nations to go?

Russia is looking vulnerable.

Any of the developing economies could get hit with liquidity problems as QE causes capital flight back to the states.
Original post by The Marshall
Pakistan is very likely to collapse within many years, Iraq as well.


One could argue they already have.
Original post by Rakas21
One could argue they already have.


Fully agreed with you at this point.
I would say Pakistan. But then again Pakistan has been in a state of collapse for years, and despite all the political turmoil and violence things still continue. Plus the military is still a strong and somewhat respected institution, essentially their insurance policy to stop a total collapse. Somalia is actually looking on the up. Mogadishu is in the best state it has been in years. It'll take a while to convince the warlords and various clans to back the government, as well as beat Al-Shabaab, but it no longer looks like the pipe dream it was 4 years ago.

If I had to put my money on any country it would be South Sudan.
Reply 44
Avatar for Aj12
Aj12
OP
18
Original post by Quady
Surely Saudi is the last of the oil nations to go?

Russia is looking vulnerable.

Any of the developing economies could get hit with liquidity problems as QE causes capital flight back to the states.


They are so unstable with a lot of pent up anger in the population as well as the ageing leadership. When the king dies his successors won't be much younger than him and so they could go through a series of weak leaders. All the while the country falls to bits.



Original post by The Marshall
Fully agreed with you at this point.



Original post by Rakas21
One could argue they already have.


Still some semblance of a state there. A scary thought is if it all became like the tribal regions, though the army might be able to hold things together.
Original post by Aj12
No, I agree there. I don't think it'd bring about the complete collapse of China though

Posted from TSR Mobile


You're telling me the people in Xinjiang and Tibet will wish to remain part of the country? Or even the Hong Kongers?
Reply 46
Avatar for Aj12
Aj12
OP
18
Original post by Stalin
You're telling me the people in Xinjiang and Tibet will wish to remain part of the country? Or even the Hong Kongers?


Fair point.
Original post by Aj12
They are so unstable with a lot of pent up anger in the population as well as the ageing leadership. When the king dies his successors won't be much younger than him and so they could go through a series of weak leaders. All the while the country falls to bits.








Still some semblance of a state there. A scary thought is if it all became like the tribal regions, though the army might be able to hold things together.


The army is just ....nothing. Indian firepower can literally destroy it.
Original post by Aj12
They are so unstable with a lot of pent up anger in the population as well as the ageing leadership. When the king dies his successors won't be much younger than him and so they could go through a series of weak leaders. All the while the country falls to bits.

Still some semblance of a state there. A scary thought is if it all became like the tribal regions, though the army might be able to hold things together.


Parts of Pakistan already have little to no government in effect. Completely lawless.
Original post by Stalin
You're telling me the people in Xinjiang and Tibet will wish to remain part of the country? Or even the Hong Kongers?


The army will almost certainly remain loyal.

Possibly I could see China remaining one party state but electing the president.
Reply 50
Avatar for Aj12
Aj12
OP
18
Original post by The Marshall
The army is just ....nothing. Indian firepower can literally destroy it.


Doesn't matter. Domestically they are fairly powerful.
Original post by Aj12
Doesn't matter. Domestically they are fairly powerful.


You're joking me - domestically they are incapable of running anything. The Modi Government of India is far stronger and better equipped at dealing with Pakistan's violent cease fire violations.

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/pak-resorts-to-firing-shelling-again-along-ib-in-samba-kathua-districts/20150103.htm
Original post by anarchism101
Saudi Arabia is the Crown Jewel of the American Empire, it'll take an awful lot for Washington to let the Sauds go under.

A year or two ago I'd have said Greece, but Golden Dawn have been heavily weakened by the crackdown, so no real chance of a fascist coup when Syriza win the elections next year.


Washington only supports those tyrants because they give them oil - they don't give a **** about the Saudi monarchy, as long as the oil is flowing.
Original post by Aj12
Turmoil and crisis can strengthen a country, it causes a nation to reevaluate and it learns how to manage crisis.


Tell that to Egypt. Or Iraq. Or Afghanistan. Or Somalia. Or the DR Congo. Or ...
Reply 54
Avatar for Gouki
Gouki
12
Original post by felamaslen
Washington only supports those tyrants because they give them oil - they don't give a **** about the Saudi monarchy, as long as the oil is flowing.


They also don't give a **** about freedom or democracy as long as the oil is flowing...
Original post by Gouki
They also don't give a **** about freedom or democracy as long as the oil is flowing...


True in the case of Saudi Arabia, but it certainly wouldn't hurt the United States for it to become a free country.
Reply 56
Avatar for Gouki
Gouki
12
Original post by felamaslen
True in the case of Saudi Arabia, but it certainly wouldn't hurt the United States for it to become a free country.

It would probably go against them as the population generally has a negative view of the US so the current situation is fine for the US.
Original post by Gouki
It would probably go against them as the population generally has a negative view of the US so the current situation is fine for the US.


Well that's part of the problem of why it can't be a free country. The people don't believe in freedom.
Original post by felamaslen
Washington only supports those tyrants because they give them oil - they don't give a **** about the Saudi monarchy, as long as the oil is flowing.


Mostly, but there are other strategic reasons why the Sauds are important. For example, the US may not care about monarchism in principle, but most current monarchist regimes in the region are pro-US (e.g. Jordan, Kuwait). A successful anti-monarchist transition in Saudi Arabia, even to a pro-US republic, could threaten the pro-US monarchies of other states.
Original post by anarchism101
Mostly, but there are other strategic reasons why the Sauds are important. For example, the US may not care about monarchism in principle, but most current monarchist regimes in the region are pro-US (e.g. Jordan, Kuwait). A successful anti-monarchist transition in Saudi Arabia, even to a pro-US republic, could threaten the pro-US monarchies of other states.


If only it could all transition to liberal democracy fairly instantaneously, without any anti-US nonsense.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you