Hechter defines nations as “territorially concentrated ethnic groups” (p. 14). He focuses on the transition from indirect to direct rule and identifies different types of nationalism: State-Building Nationalism, Peripheral Nationalism, Irredentist Nationalism, Unification Nationalism, and Patriotism. Hechter, echoing Gellner, defines nationalism as “a collective action designed to render the boundaries of the nation congruent with those of its governance unit” (p. 15). The rulers of the other states in Kathiwar condemned the accession of Junagadh to Pakistan and requested the Nawab to reconsider his decision. To this the Nawab replied "The Indian Independence Act did not and does not require a ruler to consult his people before deciding on Accession. I think we are making an unnecessary fetish of the argument of geographical continuity. Even then, this is sufficiently provided by Junagadh's sea coast with several ports which can keep connection with Pakistan"

Patel responded saying that this was no time for people like him to think of rest or retirement. That he ought to consider it his bounden duty to work for the consolidation of freedom. Putting nation ahead of personal interests, at just this one direction from Sardar, Menon came on board to accept the secretaryship of the States Ministry. Together with Sardar Patel, Menon played an instrumental role in the integration of 565 princely states into the Union of India in such a short span of time. Etzioni, Amitai. "The folly of nation building." National Interest 120 (2012): 60–68; on American misguided efforts online Anderson, Benedict R. O'G. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso. pp.6–7. ISBN 978-0-86091-546-1. nation-state, a territorially bounded sovereign polity—i.e., a state—that is ruled in the name of a community of citizens who identify themselves as a nation. The legitimacy of a nation-state’s rule over a territory and over the population inhabiting it stems from the right of a core national group within the state (which may include all or only some of its citizens) to self-determination. Members of the core national group see the state as belonging to them and consider the approximate territory of the state to be their homeland. Accordingly, they demand that other groups, both within and outside the state, recognize and respect their control over the state. As the American sociologist Rogers Brubaker put it in Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (1996), nation-states are “states of and for particular nations.” Umut (2010). Theories of Nationalism: A Critical Introduction (2nded.). London: Palgrave Macmillan. p.78.

International Relations

Several princely states sat on the fence acceding neither to India nor Pakistan till the hour of freedom. Some like Hyderabad, one of the richest states in the heart of India, harboured dreams of complete independence. Pakistan also had an eye on it. If Hyderabad had acceded to Pakistan, a piece of Pakistan would have been within the territory of India. Ergun, Ayça. "Citizenship, National Identity, and Nation-Building in Azerbaijan: Between the Legacy of the Past and the Spirit of Independence." Nationalities Papers (2021): 1–18. online

Professor of Government Grzegorz Ekiert, the Center for European Studies’ director, introduced Fukuyama, describing him as one of the nation’s leading public intellectuals over the past 20 years and the author of nine books, including 1992’s “The End of History and the Last Man.” Poulton, Hugh (2000). Who are the Macedonians? (2nded.). C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. pp.19–20. ISBN 978-1-85065-534-3– via Google Books.

Somalia (1993)

James, Paul (1996). Nation Formation: Towards a Theory of Abstract Community. Vol.1. London: SAGE Publications. Fundamentally, there are two different approaches to institution-building in healthcare – the paternalistic top-down approach and a participatory bottom-up approach.[ 5] In the top-down approach, a fully loaded high-impact tertiary/quaternary care institution is built first and the services (which the institution deems necessary) are provided to the society.[ 5] The role of the society is only to uptake the services provided at will and participate in the process in a limited manner. A strong institution that clearly stands apart from the rest of the organizations in the milieu in terms of equipment, clinical; and research expertise, key opinion leaders among its faculty, and a strong leader can drive a top-down paternalistic approach and make it a success.[ 5] Several eye care institutions have been developed on this model. The impact of such a model is immediate, measurable, and visible, and the prospect of growth is rapid. The participatory bottom-up approach is based on the premise that “there is wealth (health) at the bottom of the pyramid” and the potential beneficiaries are vitally interested in the change and will be willing participants in the process. Such a model would build excellent primary care facilities catering to villages and groups of villages, linking organically to secondary, tertiary, and quaternary (apex) facilities in district, state, regional/national levels respectively over time. Such an approach, despite a solid community-based foundation and a stable broad base, may be time, resource and energy intensive, and the growth and recognition may be painfully slow, A hybrid approach with an existing fully functional quaternary care institution percolating down to drive primary and secondary levels of care in the region and then establishing several tertiary care facilities to complete the vertical linkage ( meeting in the middle) seems to be a realistic approach that embodies the virtues of both the models. Several successful eye care institutions in India are based on the combined top-down and bottom-up approach. They have become the nuclei for establishing the standards of care and outcome, driving relevant research, incorporating new knowledge into their clinical practice, and teach/train human resources – essential ingredients for improvement and growth. The most prevalent types of exclusion do not involve the physical expulsion of minorities but rather their social, cultural, and political subordination to the dominant group. Minority groups are often excluded from core state institutions (particularly government), suffer from economic deprivation, and are underrepresented in the national media and the public sphere. In nondemocratic countries, the exclusion of minorities may take the form of direct suppression. In so-called “ethnic democracies” (democratic countries that are dominated by core ethno-national groups), individual rights are granted equally to all citizens, but institutional mechanisms maintain ethno-national boundaries, exclude minorities from the symbols and power-centres of the state, and systematically prioritize the interests of the dominant ethno-national group over the interests of minorities. In Israel, for example, Arabs and Palestinians constitute a large minority of citizens (about 20 percent), yet Arab-Palestinian political parties have never been part of the government, official state symbols contain only the symbols of the Jewish majority group, and the Palestinian narrative of the Jewish-Palestinian conflict is excluded from the curriculum at schools, which exclusively teach the Zionist narrative. Country: a geographic territory, which may or may not have an affiliation with a government or ethnic group