Description
Why do states use flags and national insignia to justify violent territory seizures? Throughout history, states have used flags as a means of asserting their sovereignty over others. Whether the U.S.’s landing on the moon in 1969 or Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, the raising of the national flag over these areas was of immediate priority. States constantly use flags to establish legitimacy, relying on the symbolic importance of small pieces of cloth to represent entire nations. While literature on the importance of symbols, sovereignty, and legitimacy remains vast, viewed in the context of territory seizures, it is lacking. In disputes over territory, flags are a cause of great distress and have been used as a justification for deadly violence. Using grounded theory and the constant comparative method, I examine the major geographic disputes of Russia, Argentina, and China in the modern era. In each case, flags and national insignia were used to justify sovereignty claims, often leading to scores of deaths over small, if not insignificant, pieces of land. My analysis shows that states are willing to incur high material costs and that military personnel will engage in deadly conflict despite potential negative outcomes when national symbols are used in territorial seizures. In all, I contribute to research on sovereignty disputes and provide a new perspective on the importance of flags on the battlefield.
