I wish to make a few codifications of the obvious, then state something that I
have newly realized about enclaves.

As nature abhors a vacuum, political geography abhors an enclave. I need not
enumerate the inconveniences to both countries that are engendered by their
existence. This explains why they tend to be eliminated (either unilaterally or
by mutual consent) and are never reconstituted.

There has been much recent discussion at to whether certain claves do or do not
still exist. I would say that claves "exist" only to such extent and for only
so long as they are tolerated by the surrounding state. They are essentially
ungovernable by their de jure states, except by the grace and through the
cooperation of the surrounding state. In the absence of that grace and
cooperation, a vacuum of power ensues, to be filled by the surrounding state.

The Baarle enclaves are tolerated and secure because of close affinity and
cooperation between Belgium and the Netherlands. Switzerland tolerates the
German and Italian enclaves within it because it gets along with everyone and
because the Germanic and Italic Swiss tolerate each other so well. Where ethnic
strife militates against toleration, as between Armenia and Azerbaijan and among
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, enclaves are most imperiled. In the
case of India and Bangladesh, a tense mutual toleration of the 200-odd claves in
and around Cooch Behar is promoted by a relative balance of the exclaves that
each has within the other.

Even in the case of well-tolerated enclaves, they are often a bit more de jure
than they are de facto, the sovereignty of the mother state being somewhat
watered down. We commonly see enclaves partially subject to the surrounding
states, as exemplified in customs unions, currency use, utility service,
exemptions from EU provisions, etc.

The toleration and cooperation necessary for the existence of enclaves is a much
easier matter among sub-national divisions within a nation than between nations.
For this reason, sub-national enclaves are much more common than international
ones. When sub-national claves are established by the national authority for
its own convenience, the sub-national authorities have little choice but to
tolerate the inconvenience.

Finally, I come to the new realization: Most national-level enclaves are
artifacts of the division of some larger entity.

The complexities at Baarle resulted from the independence of Belgium from the
Netherlands. The droves of Cooch Behar enclaves resulted from the division of
British India into India and Pakistan (later Bangladesh). Sastavci resulted
from the disintegration of Yugoslavia. The former West Berlin resulted from the
partition of Germany among the Four Powers. The many iffy enclaves found
scattered about the post-Soviet republics resulted from the dissolution of the
USSR.

Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA