What to do? If the diagnosis of future wars of the third kind is essentially correct, then the solution to the problem lies predominantly within states themselves. Weak states must become stronger, and those on the trajectory of failure must turn themselves around. The only other possibility is to develop an alternative to the state, or at least to the state as it has been so far conceived and institutionalized in practice. This would mean, in effect, to reverse the long historical process of political homogenization. But this is a hypothetical subject that needs separate treatment. The more immediate solution is to strengthen existing states.

This is eminently simple in theory and extremely difficult in practice because of the state-strength dilemma. Students of international relations are not, in any case, particularly well equipped to provide advice. Development analysts with vision and sensitivity, as well as comparative politics analysts have no doubt more to offer. Most important is the knowledge gained by those who have succeeded in transforming colonial entities into states on the trajectory of strength.

The fundamental problem is the state-strength dilemma: many of the steps governments take to strengthen the state and to enhance vertical and horizontal legitimacy bring about unintended consequences that actually undermine the coherence of the state. The dilemmas are numerous; some examples are worth underlining.

A standard post-1989 policy solution has been “democratization.” Through the mechanism of regular elections and the institutionalization of political parties, many have argued, both the horizontal and vertical dimensions of legitimacy will be strengthened.