Is the efficiency of the international system bound to a few dominant powers, with smaller nations anchoring themselves to them? Peo Hansen, Professor of Political Science at the Institute for Research on Migration, Ethnicity and Society (REMESO) at Linköping University was invited to discuss this timely question at SAIS Europe. The discussion examined the geopolitical challenges faced by small states, their historical development, and their contemporary relevance within the European Union and beyond.

Professor Hansen framed the discussion using a striking metaphor, comparing small states to bumblebees: creatures that, according to conventional logic, should not be able to fly due to their size, yet persist due to their unique wing structure. Similarly, small states have long been considered anomalies in an international order dominated by great powers. Following the Napoleonic Wars, the prevailing consensus was that small states were destined to disappear.

Professor Hansen explored different conceptualizations of small states, opposing them to the notion of empire, and projecting them within a chaotic international system brought to order by great powers. Referencing Ray Stannard Baker's assertion from 1923 that "nothing but regard for its own interest was to be expected from any small state," the speaker highlighted the tension between the idea of small states as independent actors and their perceived necessity to align with larger powers. This idea arose in the Treaty of Versailles and resurfaced in the League of Nations, where small nations were expected to accept the rules set by great powers and be grateful for inclusion. The League of Nations provided the first international platform for small states but also exposed their limited influence, and occasionally led smaller nations to recognize their shared interests with global counterparts rather than with great regional powers.

A key focus of the discussion was the European Union's geopolitical trajectory. The EU's "long twentieth century" was characterized by a relentless pursuit of a "Geopolitics of European unity": ensuring cohesion to avoid chaos. However, to project power externally, the Union required internal centralization, creating tension with the principle of self-determination that was brought to the debate a century ago. Professor Hansen traced how early European integration efforts in the 1950s sought to retain associated territories in Africa within a larger European sphere of influence, resisting the full realization of a nation-state system. Academic consensus at the time largely opposed the proliferation of independent states, advocating instead for regional integration. This perception persisted until the era of decolonization which saw the emergence of new nation-states and the transformation of global political structures.

Professor Hansen finally turned to the contemporary debate on the role of small states within the EU. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has argued that for the EU to be a geopolitical global leader, it must become more efficient, implicitly advocating for greater centralization. The perspectives of larger nations often take precedence, shaping policy priorities and institutional reforms. This raises concerns about the influence of smaller nations, particularly regarding unanimity and veto power within EU decision-making, but makes us also wonder what an EU without Britain, France, and Germany would look like.

While the survival and agency of small states remain contested, their ability to navigate alliances and advocate for self-determination continues to shape international politics. They always have the choice to engage or disengage, to organize themselves at a sub-regional level. Many have found ways to assert their agency, leveraging diplomatic influence and advocacy roles, particularly in climate change discussions. At the same time, some opt to integrate within larger power structures, whether out of necessity or strategic alignment, risking subordination as vassals within broader geopolitical frameworks, and making us question the future of small states.

---

hosted by Professor Mark Gilbert


Peo Hansen is Professor of Political Science at the Institute for Research on Migration, Ethnicity and Society (REMESO), Linköping University. He is also Simone Veil Fellow at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies in Florence. Hansen's research examines both the historical and contemporary trajectory of European integration. His books include A Modern Migration Theory: an Alternative Economic Approach to Failed EU Policy (Agenda Publishing, 2021); and Eurafrica: the Untold History of European Integration and Colonialism (co-authored with S. Jonsson, Bloomsbury, 2014), which was published in French in 2022: Eurafrique: Aux origins colonials de l'Union européenne (La Découverte).