What makes territory important: tangible and intangible dimensions

Abstract

Conflicts over territory have resulted in innumerable wars and other violent incidents, but the reasons that some territory is more highly valued or volatile than other areas may not be obvious. This paper demonstrates a taxonomy for analyzing international territorial disputes that seeks to capture their tangible and symbolic dimensions and to weigh them as the international community might. Twenty-six territorial disputes, including offshore areas and separatist issues, were examined and scored according to 15 criteria for objective prominence and 7 criteria related to how a country might view the dispute in terms of its national interest. The taxonomy used Saaty’s Analytic Hierarchy Process to identify tangible and intangible properties, measure their interrelations, and produce intermediate and overall ranks. Each dispute was evaluated for prominence by examining intensifying (symbolic) factors, measures of magnitude, and characteristics that retard resolution. The magnitude of a dispute was judged to contribute the most to overall prominence, having twice the weight of the other two factors. The top five disputes in terms of prominence were the Kurdish issue, Kashmir, Tibet, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Xinjiang. The second hierarchy evaluated the disputes from the perspective of an international actor, in this case the United States. When judged by U.S. national interest, the most important factors were the deployment of U.S. forces in the claimant countries and if one of the claimants were a U.S. ally. Finally, the results from the two hierarchies were compared.