Reading on “Ethnic Nationalism and the Fall of Empires”

The book at hand embarks on a venture filled with dangers, as its title plunges us into events and characters that have passed a century of time, specifically the period leading up to, during, and following World War I. As we enter the second decade of the twenty-first century, amidst the turbulent current realities, the return to ancient events, outdated circumstances, and forgotten characters may appear as a cultural luxury devoid of urgency. However, a careful reading of this book reveals a diligent academic effort, patience in tracing events and weaving their threads, and an excitement that invokes and embodies the past as though it occurred just yesterday, or in the recent past.

Nationalism is the central issue that preoccupies the author’s mind, a phenomenon that has engaged many researchers and readers, particularly since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the disintegration of the Balkan states, and the transition of Eastern and Central European countries from the socialist camp to its capitalist rival.

Despite the substantial efforts made in studying nationalism, it remains a concept that is still ambiguous and intertwined with various dimensions. It is hostage to political, cultural, and social events that make it difficult to study as an isolated phenomenon, compounded by the diversity of nationalist spectrums, some of which are soft and tolerant, while others are oppressive, reveling in genocide, ethnic cleansing, and bloodshed.

The book does not merely engage in the perilous retrieval of events that have transpired over a century; it further ventures by focusing its study on only a decade, from the onset of World War I (1914) to the establishment of the Soviet Union (1923). Yet, the occurrences within this historical decade are rich in details and interconnections, making it ripe for a monumental work that immerses the reader in the depths of nuance, transforming the study into a historical record that complicates the tracing of lessons and takeaways. The author often struggles—and frequently succeeds—to avoid falling into the traps of encyclopedic writing regarding those ten years.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that nationalism does not adopt a single color over the decades and centuries; rather, it evolves and transforms into new forms based on political and military changes, as well as the magnitude of surprises carried by radical shifts on the international stage. Moreover, it sometimes falls into the hands of external powers that endorse its steps and support its pursuits while using it to serve long-term imperial objectives.

Certain forms of nationalism owe their existence to the shock of surprise and the peculiarities of political circumstances. When a nation-state forms amid tumultuous and exceptional conditions of global or regional wars, its natural growth stages—from youth to maturity—are often compressed into a hurried short period, which can render it a distorted entity and color its politics with impulsiveness and recklessness.

Concepts

A nation is defined as a collection of shared elements of language, ethnicity, religion, history, and geographic unity that distinguishes it from neighboring nations. When these commonalities translate into a political structure that aspires to competition with neighboring nations, the concept of the nation transforms into internationalism or nationalism; meaning a shift from a static body to an expansive moving force. The nation occupies a middle position between the lower tier represented by tribes and clans, which may ascend to the level of ethnicity— where ethnicities form a nation— and the higher level represented by civilization that comprises multiple nations. For instance, Islamic civilization transcended multiple nations in the old world continents, while European civilization embraced dozens of nations throughout its history.

Nationalism can manifest in various forms, with civil nationalism being the most subdued, not sympathizing with ethnic or religious tendencies, and viewing different segments of citizens equally under the umbrella of citizenship rights. The more dangerous form is organic nationalism, where the state derives its legitimacy from belonging to a specific ethnicity, aiming for ideal sovereignty, unity, and superiority. The most perilous type of nationalism is religious nationalism, a rightist movement that marries religious fanaticism with ethnic superiority. Its danger lies in its transformation— in many cases— into a racist movement targeting religious and ethnic minorities, especially when it morphs into an armed movement.

It is crucial to acknowledge that the emergence of religious nationalisms is a reflection of multiple factors, with the identity crisis, the struggle against state secularism, the comparison of the majority’s conditions with the privileges potentially granted to minorities, external intellectual invasions, and the aspirations of peripheral regions in their conflict with the center playing significant roles. Fundamental shifts in the lives of nations, such as the industrial revolution, advancement in means of communication, and educational expansion, have all contributed to shaping these movements.

The author distinguishes between two main types of nationalism: civil nationalism and ethnic nationalism. The first type emphasizes a populace asserting its collective identity and right to territorial sovereignty based on a shared set of values and allegiance to a defined state. Ethnic nationalism, on the other hand, refers to a collective identity revolving around a shared organic (biological) origin, providing boundless legitimacy for geographic control.

In this manner, researchers sometimes differentiate between two types of nationalism; the first is unifying nationalism, which seeks to recombine units and regions from a state that was once unified (as illustrated by the consolidation of the Italian peninsula in the 19th century). The second type is expansionist nationalism, which refers to military expansion at the expense of neighboring lands, provinces, and states, often justified by organic origins or ethnic connections to a youthful state that possesses sufficient military might to adopt this approach.

In all instances, a nationalist movement traverses three stages: intellectual maturation, invocation of heroic (and sometimes mythical) ideals, followed by mass mobilization and rallying. These three stages may achieve the emergence of a nation-state or at least lay the groundwork necessary for its establishment. However, the nascent state may not continue to embrace the nationalist ideology due to the intertwining of circumstances, the multiplicity of influences, and the compromises that local and international politics may adopt. This predicament leaves nationalists in isolated and marginalized positions that starkly contrast with the long journey they have undertaken to realize the dream of their state. What complicates this picture is that these new nation-states may oppress smaller ethnicities within their borders, subjecting them to the same cup they once tasted painfully themselves.

Architects of History

The author focuses on three empires that occupied the largest geographical expanse in the old world continents (Europe, Asia, and Africa): the Russian Empire (associated with the Romanov family), the Austro-Hungarian Empire (associated with the Habsburg family), and the Ottoman Empire (associated with its founder, Osman I). These territories are vast and diverse in nations and ethnicities, yet the book concentrates on the nationalist movements that strive to maintain their identities against the imperial authority that has forcibly subjugated them to its influence and dominion, which are numerous and varied.

On the stage of the Habsburg Empire, there were Polish, Czech, Slovak, Hungarian, Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian, Slovenian, and Jewish nationalist movements. Within the Russian Tsardom, other nationalities struggled in Northern Caucasus (Chechen, Dagestani, Circassian) and Southern Caucasus (Azerbaijanis, Georgians, Armenians), as well as Turkestan nationalities (now part of Central Asia), in the Ural Mountains (Tatar nationality), and in Eastern Europe (Ukrainians, Jews, and Lithuanians). In the Ottoman sphere, the ethnic map of nationalities struggling to crystallize their identities was no less complicated, encompassing— alongside the Turks— Arab, Kurdish, Armenian, Serbian, Albanian, Maronite, Druze, Alawite, and Jewish ethnic groups.

Some of these nationalities were subjected to one of the empires for several consecutive centuries, only to find themselves at the mercy of another empire due to wars and battles— much like the Balkans oscillated between the Habsburg and Ottoman empires or the Southern Caucasus between the Ottoman and Russian empires, while Eastern Europe shifted between Russia and the Habsburgs.

In addition to the campaigns of repression, subjugation, and deterrence adopted by the central forces across the three empires, nationalist movements also suffered softer forms of assimilation and identity swallowing, known as Russification (coloring nationalities with a Russian tint), Turkification (imposing a Turkish characteristic on nationalities), and Magyarization (imposing a Hungarian character on nationalities under Habsburg authority).

As wars escalated and armies surged into battlefields and frontlines, the central authorities in the three empires became gradually aware of the potential fragmentation of the internal front through uprisings from the forcibly subjugated nationalities. This led to a plethora of tempting offers directed at nationalities, promising them self-governance or partial independence— promises that imperial rulers were compelled to make out of cowardice and weakness, not noble intent or honor. Amidst the scenes of conscription for nationalities, battlefronts witnessed mass surrenders of opposing forces and instances of “defections to the enemy,” who sometimes were closer in ethnicity and religion to the old masters, such as Serbs finding themselves closer to Russians, and Muslims in the Russian Caucasus identifying more with Ottomans.

The Habsburg Empire

The book transitions directly to its central concern regarding the realities of minorities and their developments during the period concurrent with and following World War I in the three empires. Thus, it is useful to provide an introductory glimpse into the historical progression and the dimensions of the geographical stage that will underpin the discussions of this book.

This empire is initially referred to as the “Austrian House,” one of the most significant royal houses in European history, viewed as the source of all kings electorally (formally) carrying the title of King of the Holy Roman Empire during the years 1438-1740. This house also provided rulers for Austria and Spanish empires, among others.

The origins of this family trace back to a castle built by Count Radbot in 1020 near Zurich (in present-day Switzerland). Due to its location atop a high mountain, it was named “Habsburg,” meaning “high castle,” later distorted to “Habsburg.” While the boundaries of the principality began small in the Swiss cantons during the 11th and 12th centuries under the ownership of Radbot’s descendants, the Habsburgs, after losing these Swiss lands, managed, in the last quarter of the 13th century—during Count Rudolf’s reign (1273-1291)—to acquire new territories in Austria.

The geopolitical turning point for the expansion of the Habsburgs occurred in the surprising event of 1273, when the German princes chose a king from among themselves and unexpectedly selected Count Rudolf of the Habsburgs to be their king, relying on their shared Germanic origin and a desire to exploit his military strength against the Slavic threats in Bohemia (modern-day Czech Republic). The German princes were alarmed by King Otakar II of Bohemia’s annexation of Austrian lands, considering it a significant threat to the geopolitical territory of Germany in Europe. Rudolf succeeded in conquering Austria, expelling the King of Bohemia, and incorporating all Austrian territories, along with southern Tyrol (in present-day Northern Italy), resulting in a strategic control of critical trade routes through the Alps.

Ironically, just before Rudolf’s death, the original lands in Switzerland were lost to the Habsburgs following two decisive battles where Swiss peasants proved to be clever fighters, inventing new weapons like hooks that could dismount Habsburg knights from their horses. The Habsburgs eventually acquiesced to the loss of Switzerland and adopted Austria as the new center for their kingdom, despite the loss of the “high castle” along with its lost possessions.

The Habsburg family continued to retain Austria as it became increasingly clear that Switzerland was definitively lost during the 14th and 15th centuries. In the latter half of the 15th century, Habsburg rule was close to fading due to internal divisions, an opportunity that the King of Hungary, Matthias Corvinus, took to invade Austria and make Vienna the capital of his united kingdom of Hungary and Austria in 1485. However, the Habsburg family quickly regained their status after Matthias’s death in 1490, reclaiming Austria once again.

It seems the Habsburg princes realized that war was not a successful means to enhance their possessions; instead, they relied on marriage and alliances. Through this process, the family managed to incorporate vast regions and diverse ethnicities and nationalities into their hereditary domain, including Burgundy (in modern-day France), Spain, Bohemia, Hungary, in addition to other provinces and regions in the Balkans.

In the 16th century, the hereditary house split into the Spanish Habsburgs as the main trunk and the Austrian Habsburgs as a branch. The Spanish Habsburg house faded away in the 18th century after the termination of its Spanish branch, with the Bourbon family succeeding it. The Austrian Habsburg line ended in 1780 with the death of Empress Maria Theresa, succeeded by the Habsburg-Lorraine dynasty from that year onward.

This empire is typically referred to as the “Austrian Empire” from 1804 to 1867, while it is identified as the “Austro-Hungarian Empire” from the period spanning 1867 until its downfall in 1918.

The Russian Empire

The Russians emerged as a local power by the end of the 10th century A.D., as a collective of tribes controlling trade routes stretching from the Baltic Sea in the north to the Black Sea in the south. During this period, a union of Russian tribes arose, known as the Frankish Russia, which grew in prominence following an alliance with the Byzantine Empire. About a century later, Prince Vladimir, the ruler of Kievan Rus’ (in present-day Ukraine), adopted Christianity as the state religion and was baptized in 988.

Since the late 10th century, Russia, with its Orthodox Christian faith, stood against the Muslim Volga Tatars who were ideologically aligned with the Abbasid Caliphate in the Islamic East. Meanwhile, Catholic Christianity spread across Poland, Hungary, and Germanic principalities, while to the south, the Jewish Khazar Kingdom stretched between the Caspian Sea in the east and the Black Sea in the west.

Since that time, Russia became subject to the Byzantine idea of establishing a “Christian Kingdom,” thus shading its political ambitions with a religious dimension derived from the support of the Orthodox Church, which considered the geographical wars and expansions of the empire as steps on the path to the Kingdom of God to which all nations and kingdoms would eventually submit. Between the late 9th century and early 11th century, Vladimir’s descendants expanded their control over the regions surrounding the capital, Kyiv, before this young principality fell into the hands of the Mongols between 1228 and 1462.

It was thanks to Grand Prince Ivan III, or Ivan the Great (1462-1505), that independence from the Mongols was achieved. Beginning in 1480, he embarked on the path to unite the rest of the Russian principalities, marking the start of a new chapter in Russian history, referred to as Muscovite Russia, with the era henceforth known as the Tsarist period. Following Ivan III, Vasily III (1505-1533), and then Ivan IV, known as Ivan the Terrible (1533-1584), expanded the Russian territory geographically like never before. Both succeeded in annexing vast territories across Asia and Europe. The Tsarist era commenced with the rule of Mikhail I in 1613, marking the beginning of the Romanov dynasty, which lasted three consecutive centuries, from 1613 until 1917.

During the 16th to 18th centuries, dozens of ethnicities were forcibly subjugated to Tsarist rule, beginning with regions between the Black and Caspian Seas, extending to Caucasian Islamic and Christian ethnicities. In the 18th century, new ethnic groups and nationalities were added to the “prison of nations” within the Russian Empire when Lithuania, Poland, and Moldova were annexed, in addition to all of Finland and a significant expanse of Central Asia, represented primarily by the Islamic Turkistan and Kazakhstan regions. Russian expansion during this century also reached Siberia, advancing to Alaska, the Far East, Sakhalin, and the Kuril Islands.

In pursuit of marine fronts, Russia ignited wars in the Baltic Sea to establish Saint Petersburg at the beginning of the 18th century, while also pushing towards the Mediterranean through conflicts with Turkey to assert control over the Black Sea. Russia even advanced into its internal seas, invading Northern Persia in the first half of the 18th century (1722), successfully turning the Caspian Sea into a “Russian lake.” Additionally, one of its most significant ports in history was established—Vladivostok (open for navigation year-round)—by occupying territories east of the Amur River, a geopolitically vital area taken from China in 1860.

Thus, the Russian Empire annexed vast lands and various ethnicities across different geographical areas. It appears that the substantial ethnic diversity witnessed by the Russian state during its centuries of construction did not allow for the formulation of a state based on ethnicity, except for what could be termed preferential treatment for the center’s inhabitants (the national Slavic ethnicity) at the expense of the outskirts’ inhabitants (those on the periphery of the state). In fact, during the 19th century and early 20th century, the Russians themselves experienced a national schism caused by a social and economic imbalance—under an agrarian system that prevailed in most of the 19th century—between impoverished peasants and a westernized elite influenced by German and French cultures.

As Russia entered the 20th century, it had forged the largest empire that Moscow had ever known in its history, connecting its borders from the outskirts of Japan and China to the borders of European empires as it brushed against Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Romania, extending northward to the Arctic Circle, unchallenged, and in the south, coming into contact with the Ottoman Empire.

The Ottoman Empire

This empire is named after its founder, Osman I, and is historically known in Turkish as the “Ottoman State,” extending for more than six continuous centuries, from 1299 to 1923. While the Russian Empire encompassed Europe and Asia, and the Habsburgs confined themselves to influence in the European continent, the “Sublime State” extended to all three continents of the old world, from the Caucasus and Anatolia to Iraq, the Levant, and the Hejaz in Asia, from the Black Sea across the Balkans to Hungary and Austria in Europe, and in Africa, it colonized the northern coast stretching from Egypt to the Maghreb, as well as the coasts of the Red Sea.

Before the empire bore a name in history, the Seljuk state controlled vast areas stretching from Iran to Anatolia. As Ottoman Turkish power ascended, their geographical expansion occurred over territory initially under Seljuk control, particularly in Anatolia, within the domain known as the Sultanate of the Seljuks of Rome (from Armenia in the east to Byzantium in the west) by around the year 1300 A.D.

At this time, there was no unified Ottoman force; rather, there existed dozens of small emirates, each led by a leader with the title “Gazi,” who succeeded in annexing Anatolia at the expense of the weakened Byzantine Empire. Osman I, one of these “warrior” princes, managed to unify those emirates, expand their territory, and strengthen their authority. Within a century of Osman I’s death, the Turks had extended their reach in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans and captured the strategically important city of Thessaloniki on the opposite bank of the Bosporus in 1387.

The history of the Ottoman Empire, especially in relation to Europe and the Islamic-Christian conflict, features a pivotal event in 1389, when the Battle of Kosovo ended Serbian power in the Balkans in favor of the Ottomans.

Shortly thereafter, the Ottomans also triumphed in the Battle of Nicopolis in 1396 in Bulgarian territory, another decisive engagement that inaugurated the unity of the Christian West, which had mobilized a formidable army to halt the Ottoman advance. This battle also allowed for significant Ottoman geographic expansion in the Balkans and Southeastern Europe while dismantling the remnants of the Byzantine Empire.

Following a period of internal chaos and civil wars over the Sultan’s throne, Mehmet II (the Conqueror) was able to stabilize the state and the army, asserting control over Constantinople in 1453. Over the following three decades, the Ottomans launched a campaign for supremacy over Rome, seeking to subjugate the Italian peninsula, though this endeavor did not meet with success, and they retreated after Mehmet’s death in 1481.

Mehmet II’s reign is seen as the beginning of the largest geopolitical expansion project of the Ottoman Empire, both on land and at sea. The Ottoman fleet achieved naval security for trade routes and supported military campaigns. The expansion continued with robust sultans like Selim I (1512-1520), who defeated Shah Ismail I of the Safavid Persian state, conquered Egypt, and penetrated the maritime domain of the Red Sea by directing parts of the Ottoman fleet towards it. This move created a state of maritime competition between the Ottomans and the Portuguese.

Suleiman the Magnificent (1520-1566) expanded on the territorial foundations laid by his predecessors, taking the Serbian capital, Belgrade, in 1521, and completely subjugating the Kingdom of Hungary in 1526. Suleiman had barely quelled Hungarian territories when he launched his most famous campaign worldwide with the Siege of Vienna, the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, in 1529. His attempts failed, and he made another attempt in 1532, suffering another defeat. Though the Ottomans halted at Vienna’s walls, they did seize significant strategic parts of Hungary, Transylvania, Walachia, and Moldova from the Habsburg Empire.

On the Eastern Arab front, the Ottomans continued their advancements, capturing Baghdad from Persian control in 1535, gaining dominion over Mesopotamia, and securing free maritime navigation in the Arabian Gulf for their navy. In the Maghreb, the Ottoman admiral Hayreddin Barbarossa (seen by the Ottomans as a valiant hero and master of the sea, while Europeans classified him as a savage pirate) asserted Ottoman sovereignty over the western Mediterranean.

The Ottoman Empire executed a strategic shift by forging alliances with various European powers at different intervals, such as France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Italy.

The Ottoman military presence remained strong until their defeat at the Battle of Vienna in 1683, a pivotal moment marking the onset of Ottoman decline in Europe, facing a unified alliance of European powers including Germany, the Habsburgs, and Poland. The Ottoman fleet had also suffered defeats in the Mediterranean before this. The technological imbalance between the Ottomans and their European foes became increasingly apparent in the 17th century, as military modernization and technical advancements outpaced their Ottoman counterparts, suggesting the onset of a dangerous phase of relaxation and stagnation, reliant on defense and retreat instead of attack and advance.

Following the loss at the Battle of Vienna in the late 17th century, Turkey began to lose provinces and lands across all fronts—whether in Hungary and the Balkans to Europe, in the Caucasus to Russia, or in the Arab world to European colonialism. By the mid-19th century, Europeans dubbed that empire “the sick man of Europe,” emboldening many provinces in the Balkans and Greece to seek independence from Ottoman sovereignty. During this upheaval, nationalities, ethnicities, and religious minorities that had previously been allied with the Ottomans were forced to flee their homelands in the face of revenge campaigns waged by Ottoman enemies in Russia, the Habsburgs, and the Balkans, resulting in hundreds of thousands of Tatars, Circassians, and Balkan Muslims flooding into Turkey’s core lands.

The rise of nationalist movements, among which the Arab nationalist movement was fundamental, contributed significantly to the fragmentation that afflicted the empire by the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, which is the period the book at hand focuses upon.

Methodology and Plan of the Book

The author adopts a historical approach in his study, positioning time as the foundation and navigating through geography and locations within the chapters, which has led to repeated appearances of geographical regions under the same title across multiple chapters. After laying the groundwork for his study in the first chapter, he delves into the historical dimension of nationalist thought in the second chapter, dividing it into three sections, with each section addressing the political evolution and the ethnicities’ and nationalities’ attitudes towards the central authority in each of the three empires. In the third chapter, the book examines the role of the intelligentsia (the thinkers, opinion leaders, and cultural elites) in shaping the national projects of ethnicities within these empires, addressing Eastern and Central European nationalities (Poland under Russia and Czechoslovakia under the Habsburgs) and then moving to the case of Yugoslavia under the Habsburgs, finishing with the case of nationalities within the Russian Empire (Finland, Ukraine, Armenia, Georgia, Tatars, Turkestan, and Jews), concluding with the relationship between Turkish nationalism and Arab nationalism.

This approach is reiterated in the fourth chapter, which addresses the positions of ethnicities and nationalities during the outbreak of the war, as the author reviews the behaviors of nationalities along the front lines in the Habsburg Empire, especially in the Balkans and Czechoslovakia. This is followed by an examination of the case of Russian ethnicities and nationalities engaged in direct conflict with the Bolsheviks in Belarus (White Russia), Ukraine, Kazan (in the Volga-Ural region), Kazakhstan, and Azerbaijan. This chapter concludes with the stance of Turkish nationalism during the war regarding minorities, including the tragedy of the Armenian massacres, which resulted in the deaths of half a million to a million individuals, along with the oppression of Arab nationalism.

The fifth chapter discusses the role played by nationalist leaders in exile to aid their compatriots under the sway of the three empires, along with national activism within military occupation contexts, particularly in areas under German occupation in Eastern Europe. The fifth chapter further examines a new topic in this context: the foreign volunteer corps formed either in exile during the war or within military occupation zones, as well as the significant roles these corps played in launching retaliatory attacks against their former colonizers.

The sixth chapter addresses the ramifications stemming from the collapse of the three empires, whether in the form of imperial regime collapses, civil wars, or the formation and establishment of new states, alongside the positions of ethnicities and nationalities regarding these momentous events. The seventh chapter offers a careful reading of the positions of new elites following the establishment of nation-states, touching on regions of interest within the Balkans, the Arab East, Eastern Europe, and the Caucasus. The eighth chapter concludes with a final word, extracting lessons and insights.

Book Catalog Data

• Roshwald, Aviel (2001) “Ethnic Nationalism and the Fall of Empires (1914-1923): Central Europe, Russia, and the Middle East”. Translation: Atef Mo’tamed and Ezzat Zeyyan (2012) Cairo: Egyptian Ministry of Culture (National Center for Translation, 1891) 458 pages.
• Roshwald, Aviel (2001) “Ethnic Nationalism and the Fall of Empires: Central Europe, the Middle East, and Russia, 1914-1923”. London and New York: Routledge. (264 p.)

About the Author: Aviel Roshwald: Professor of history at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. Born in 1962, he has authored numerous works, including “Britain, France, and the Middle East During World War II” (published by Oxford University Press) which was released in 1990. He has also co-authored “European Culture in the Great War: Art, Entertainment, and Propaganda, 1914-1918” (published by Cambridge University Press).

Chapters of the Book:

1. Introduction
2. Historical Introduction to Ethnicity and Empire: The Austro-Hungarian Empire, The Russian Empire, The Ottoman Empire.
3. On the Threshold of War: Intelligentsia as a Vanguard of Nationalism, Conflicting National Projects in Central and Eastern Europe, Populism, Socialism, and Nationalism in the Russian Empire, Social Elites and Nationalist Thinkers in the Ottoman Empire, From Ottoman to Turkish Nationalism, From Ottoman to Arab Nationalism.
4. Liquidation of Imperial Forms (1914-1918): The Front Line, The Habsburg Empire, Front Line Loyalties, Czech Internal Front, The Southern Slavic Territories, The Ethnic Dimension of War and Revolution in Russia, Nationalism and Separatism under the Provisional Government, The Socio-Cultural Foundations of Ethnic Turmoil, The Burden of War in the Middle East, The Revolutionary Dimension of Turkish Nationalism, Suppression of Rebellion in Arab Territories.
5. Nationalities of Occupation and Exile (1914-1918): Occupied Regions: Poland and Lithuania, The Maturation of Lithuanian Nationalism, Jews Under German Occupation, A Comprehensive Analysis of Events: Serbia, Policies of Exile, The Czechoslovak National Council, The Yugoslav Committee, The Polish National Committee, Zionism, A Thorough Review of Events: Volunteer Legions, The Czechoslovak Legion, The First Pilsudski Brigade, The Arab Revolution.
6. Defining the Boundaries of the Nation (1918-1923): Boundary Definition in Central Eastern Europe, The Geopolitical Geography of the Ethnic Soviet Union: The Ethnic Dimension of Russian Political Collapse and Civil War, The Soviet Ethnic Federal Experience, Redrawing Identity Limits in the Middle East: Turkish Settlement and the Kemalist State, Colonialism and Nationalism in the Arab East, The State versus the Nation in the Arab World, Sectarianism and Ethnic Politics in the Arab East.
7. Old Elites and New Nation-States (1918-1939): Institutional Continuity and Ethnic Groups: The Cases of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia; Revolutionary Elites in Poland and the Arab East: Poland, Syria, and Iraq.
8. Conclusion.