Why should the Russian president’s
innovative attitude towards borders be restricted to Eastern Europe?
When Vladimir Putin justified his
annexation of Crimea on the ground that he owed protection to Russian speakers
everywhere, the Economist had redrawn the world’s boundaries according to Mr
Putin’s principles, and suggests that the resulting map has considerable
appeal.
Under Mr Putin’s dispensation, things
look up for the old colonial powers.
· Portugal gets to reclaim Brazil.
· Spain most of the rest of Central and South America.
· France – most of west Africa, which would probably be fine
by the locals, since many of their current governments are not much cop.
· A mighty Scandinavian kingdom comes into being—including
Finland, although Finnish is very different from the Scandinavian tongues. Since
Swedish is Finland’s second language, the Vikings would have strong grounds for
bringing about the sort of peaceful merger based on shared cultural values for
which they are famous.
· A unified Arabia would stretch from the Atlantic to the
Indian Ocean. There might be the odd squabble between Sunnis, Shias, Christians
and adherents of archaic notions of nation; but united by a common tongue, the
Arabs would be sure to get along fine, especially if they teamed up to smite
the Persian-speakers on the other side of the Gulf. The two Koreas would become
one, which might be a good thing—or not, depending on which system prevailed.
· Since Hindi and Urdu are both a mutually intelligible
mixture of Sanskrit and Persian, India could make a claim for Pakistan—and vice
versa. The existence of nuclear weapons on either side would bring added spark
to the debate over linguistic precedence.
· Best of all, Britain would regain its empire,
including—since it spoke English first—the United States. It would, obviously,
give Barack Obama a prestigious position—Keeper of the Woolsack, say—and a nice
uniform. Britain might, however, have to surrender some of London’s
oligarch-dominated streets, as well as Chelsea Football Club, to Russia. A
sizeable minority of The Economist’s staff also speaks Russian and would
like to claim Mr Putin’s protection in advance of the next pay negotiations.
There is, however a hitch.
Consolidation would be undermined by linguistic independence movements:
· Dozens of segments would peel away from Mandarin-speaking
China.
· Mayaland would agitate for autonomy in Central America.
· Swahililand would demand independence in Africa.
The world’s 7 billion people speak more
than 7,000 languages; in Russia alone there are more than 100. Perhaps, on
second thoughts, Mr Putin should quit while he is ahead.