Recognized state-hood might not be achievable for these states for the time being, but the relative calm the world has now can't last forever. Sooner or later there will be new big wars and more states will be destroyed and created.

I think a great deal of the process is simply being in the right place, at the right time. Basically an up-and-coming nation has to be in the right region and the right environment must be in place for a bigger nation to give recognition. Usually it involves something that will benefit the samsung linkstick big power.

I think a great deal of the process is simply being in the right place, at the right time. Basically an up-and-coming nation has to be in the right region and the right environment must be in place for a bigger nation to give recognition. Usually it involves something that will benefit the samsung linkstick big power.

I suppose that I can understand why the author attempted to include the Kurdistan Region, Iraq in a list of Limbo states, but he really should have done his homework. His analysis suffers as a result. How can he justify statements such as for "nominally, independence remains the goal" Can he provide any evidence for this? If he were to read a little of the history of the Kurdish movement in Iraq in the last few decades, he would see that (unlike the PKK in Turkey) independence has never been the stated goal. In various forms, it has always been autonomy or federalism.
I suggest he reads Iraq's federal constitution, ratified in 2005, supported in a referendum by the overwhelming majority of Iraqis (including Kurds) and recognized by the international community. It is a document that declares Iraq to be a federal state. The duties, responsibilities and powers of federal regions such as the Kurdistan Region (which is specifically named), are clearly outlined, although there remains substantial internal debate in Iraq about their implementation. How is this Limbo status?
What we see in Iraq right now would be better described as the expected teething pains of an ethnically and religiously diverse state that is somehow trying to find a way forward after decades of dictatorship and war. It may succeed or fail. The Kurds for their part are trying to reshape Iraq into the kind of country in which they can not only feel feel safe and secure but also prosper. Although political relations between Erbil and Baghdad remain frosty on some issues (notably oil and Kirkuk) business links between the KR and the rest of Iraq are growing inexorably.
In seven years of reporting from Iraq, most of the ordinary Kurds I have spoken to understandably think of self-determination as "a right." But they are, ultimately, as pragmatic as their leadership. They don't want to be bossed around by the federal government in Baghdad, but also show no sign of planning to go it alone.

It is important to ask local people, what kind of life conditions they want for their children? Frankly, I don't think that Abkhazia can even become really independent. Even if it becomes 100% independent from Georgia, it will not gain political independence from Russia. Abkhazia is too small, and if Russians start buying property there (which they do and they will), then Abkhazians will start recognizing that their homeland is disappearing. Many young Abkhazians will get scholarships to study in Moscow and probably stay in Russia's capital for employment; probably will get married and create family there. My point is that if Abkhazian's want to preserve their ethnicity, they are much better of having a wide autonomy within Georgia, rather then being so "close" to Russia. I am not sure though, that the local people have any real say.

If only the local people wanted to be part of Georgia again, do you think Russians would let that happen? I don't think so. So, let's stop talking about independence and focus on Russia's foreign policy objectives and a strong desire to spread it's borders and influence. They don't care about people.

What happens with people? Well, they suffer. No real opportunities, no good healthcare, nothing.

The last, but not the list. How come so many ethnic Georgians still can not return to their homes? They deserve to live there, just like anyone else.

We need to think about people, not territories. And if Georgia want's Abkhazia back, it needs to focus on people, rather then the land alone...

I found your article “Limbo World” quite interesting and insightful. However, I must point out a number of factual inaccuracies with this article as it pertains to Iraqi Kurdistan.

First, the people of Iraqi Kurdistan suffered tremendously under the former regime of Saddam Hussein and this is a well-documented fact. They were murdered, displaced, discriminated against and even gassed. The mass-graves unearthed since 2003 are all testament to the atrocities Iraqi Kurds endured in the past. For decades, Iraqi Kurds fought and made many sacrifices for their rights in Iraq. As a result of their long struggle, they have earned the right to govern themselves within a democratic and federal Iraq. What they have achieved was by no means as a result of a “crate of Klashnikovs” as your article insensitively suggests.

Second, Iraqi Kurds have not called for an independent state; rather, they have maintained all along that they would like to live within a federal and democratic Iraq, where the Kurds are no longer considered second-class citizens as was the case before, and where the Iraqi Constitution is respected.

Third, the KDP and the PUK reached a truce in 1998 and not in 2002 as your article incorrectly suggests. Thankfully those days are over and the KDP and the PUK have formed a strategic alliance to continue their work in Iraq.

Office of Communications
Kurdistan Region Presidency
Web: www.krp.org
Email: karim.zibari@krp.org
Tel:00964 (0750) 498 5500
00964 (0750) 445 1972

In my anticipation to read interview with one of the officials to whom the author refers to I was disappointed with the fact that the article was actually not about interview at all. Which means that no matter what the interview would be about the final article would be negative towards Abkhazia or any other state to which such researchers may go.
On the other hand I was surprised that compassion of high rank officials towards the author caused so much sarcasm by the latter.
Indeed the propaganda monster is painting white as black where the so called “totems of independence” in Abkhazia look more funny then same totems of independence in Georgia or here in US. It is obvious that Graeme Wood might even not to travel to Abkhazia to write the article which he was paid before he left his office in US. I still see that there is no information or deeper analysis about the country at all. I just see simple desire to pretend to be there and not see what he saw. However browsing for Abkhazia I see dozens of such articles showing less objectiveness for Abkhazia while painting Georgia a prosperous democracy – a country which is since the last Rose Revolution is in the hands of ambitious lunatic.
Being intensive traveler myself I used to be in many situations in many countries where people are kind or unkind to me. However I keep these memories for myself or tell it to my buddies when we go out for beer. Graeme Wood writes in joking manner about Karabakh visas but did any American ever try look at the American visa process from the point of ordinary traveler (not the potential terrorist) coming to US. From my girlfriend’s experience obtaining her US visa in Moscow I could say that I never been raped by any beaurocracy in the world even in countries like Karabakh or Abkhazia or Somaliland. Some numerous faceless US Embassy officers were even asking if we had sex with my girlfriend before I decided to invite her to US.
However why should we care about objectiveness. It would be much easier for us to exclude any comprehension from the international situation and just picture Abkhazia as bloody separatist country where people drive separatist cars and children drink separatist milk in their separatist houses. These separatist they even look like us – like humans, but they are not like us, they are separatists that’s why we have to send our democracy there and bomb them with all means that we have. And the means that we have are researches like the author of the above article and of course our noble American canon meat.

The inclusion of Kurdistan Region of Iraq among the limbo states destroys the credibility of an otherwise reasonable article. The article also shows its author Graeme Wood's strong bias against, if not ignorance of, Iraqi Kurdistan, its relations with other nation-states, and the current state if independence movement.

As mentioned previously by another commenter, Kurdistan is already recognised as a federal entity in the Iraqi constitution of 2005. The regional presidency, the government and the parliament is already recognised as the legitimate, legal authorities of the region by Baghdad as well internationally. The relations between the federal government in Baghdad and the regional government in Erbil has long been conducted on that basis and the only point of contention between the two governments is about certain specific provisions of the Constitution, not whether Kurdistan is a separate entity within Iraq.

Internationally, since 2003, US Secretaries of State, Secretaries of Defense as well as other high officials, have made numerous visits to Erbil. Former Vice-President Dick Cheney has been to Kurdistan too. Last July, a planned visit by the current Vice-President Joe Biden was cancelled at the last minute due to a sand-storm. The democratically elected president of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), Masoud Barzani, has already had a meeting with President Barack Obama in Baghdad. Moreover, President Barzani, in his official capacity, was invited to and has visited many times the White House as well and many other European capitals in the last six years. None of the limbo states mentioned in the article enjoys this much international recognition from the West. Not even Taiwan.

The author says, "Critics charge Limbo Worlders with having things backward, even practicing a form of cargo cultism. Just as New Guinean tribes built crude airstrips to lure planes bearing valuable cargo, quasi-countries build crude foreign ministries in the vain hopes of luring ambassadors bearing credentials from London, Paris, and Washington." The international airports of Erbil and Suleymaniyah, opened in recent years with great fanfare, now not only hosts daily flights between major European and Middle Eastern cities, but they also act as the main port of entry for many businessmen looking for fresh opportunities, tourists seeking exotic destinations, as well as diplomats to various posts in Erbil. There are more than twenty consulates, in addition to embassy offices, in Erbil, including those from the USA, the UK, Russia, Germany, Japan, Turkey and Iran. Foreign diplomats posted to Kurdistan offer their credentials to the KRG's Department of Foreign Relations. The KRG maintains official representations in many capitals around the world. It is easy to conclude that the author's inclusion of Kurdistan among the limbo states that practice cargo cultism with regard to international relations has absolutely no basis in reality.

Indeed, it is rather curious why the author, Graeme Wood, would choose to consider Kurdistan as a limbo state at all, let alone one that has similarities with Somaliland, Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus and Khalistan. Kurdistan has nothing in common with these entities except for the lack of recognition as an independent state. An honest, informed assessment of Kurdistan's status would put the region into the same class of federal or autonomous entities such as Quebec, the Basque Country, Catalonia, Wales and Scotland.

One can only speculate as to whether it is ignorance or entrenched bias, or whether it is an attempt to deliberately mislead the audience with regard to Kurdistan's status that Mr Wood has made his choices. For example, the capital city of Kurdistan is a bustling city of 1.3 million people (certainly not a "makeshift capital"). Suleymaniyah has a population of 800.000. Construction has been booming in both population centres. More than two thirds of the population of the Kurdistan region now live in towns and cities, partly the result of the genocidal Anfal campaign of 1986-88 that destroyed much of the country side. Yet the only photograph representing Kurdistan shows a shepherd tending his flock of sheep! This is more in tune with the old encyclopedic description of Kurds as a nomadic people of the Zagros Mountains than the current realities.

Finally, a few words about independence. It is true that interest for an independent state has waned in Iraqi Kurdistan, in both leadership and grassroots levels, since the unofficial referendum of 2005 during which 97 per cent of the voters chose independence. The decline can be attributed mostly to unrealised fears that Baghdad would seek to impose control over the region. However, should a government in Baghdad seek to suspend or abrogate the Constitution of Iraq in whole or in part (especially Article 140) at any time, then the movement for an independent Kurdistan is guaranteed to return. As the prime minister, Barham Salih, told Reuters in May, 2004, "we are willing to be part of a federal, democratic Iraq. But should you, my Arab compatriot, contemplate turning Iraq into a fundamentalist state or an Arab nationalistic dictatorship, again, I am sorry but we are not willing to be part of such a country."

Your article starting of this comments .. the Republic of Abkhazia, a country that does not exist makes its curious to read the whole article....

This article had the potential to really shine, but the author's patronizing approach was too distracting. Just because these places aren't recognized by the UN, or the US, or by a majority of other mutually recognized states, or whatever the unspecified threshold was, doesn't mean they're not real or that they don't exist. Even when listing what some of these places are doing well he has to throw obnoxious words like "fake" into the mix.

And no, I don't have a connection with any of these places, so it's not like I'm personally affronted. I just know arrogance when I see it -- and don't appreciate it any more than I expect do those people who extended hospitality to the author on his trip.