Review – Resilient Statehood
Chokri Kooli
Resilient Statehood: Why and How Some Nations Maintained Long-Term Independence and Sovereignty
By Logan Cochrane and Alexandra Wilson
Springer, 2026
For centuries, historians have been fascinated by empires. We know why Britain expanded, how France consolidated its colonial possessions, and why European powers came to dominate much of the globe. Far less attention has been paid to the opposite question: why did some states remain independent? Resilient Statehood, edited by Logan Cochrane and Alexandra Wilson (2026), begins precisely where much of the literature ends. By shifting attention from the conquerors to those who resisted conquest, the editors make a deceptively simple yet intellectually significant contribution. They invite readers to reconsider sovereignty not as an accident of history, but as an achievement.
E-International Relations is free to read on our website and on substack. We rely on reader support to make this possible.
The volume examines six historical cases including Japan, Thailand, Bhutan, Afghanistan, Iran, and Ethiopia. It concludes with a comparative framework drawing additional insights from Nepal and Mongolia. The objective is not simply to explain why these countries escaped colonization, but to identify broader patterns that help explain resilient statehood across different historical and geopolitical contexts. The selection of cases is well justified, yet it inevitably raises questions regarding omission. Countries such as Korea, Liberia, or other partially autonomous polities receive only limited attention despite presenting potentially informative counterfactuals. Although the editors acknowledge many of these complexities, the boundaries of what constitutes a "resilient state" remain open to debate and invite further comparative research.
The editors deserve considerable credit for resisting deterministic explanations. Nevertheless, the emphasis on political agency occasionally risks underplaying structural international constraints. In several chapters, the balance between domestic leadership and external geopolitical opportunity could have been explored in greater analytical depth. Geography, for example, appears throughout the book, yet the contributors repeatedly demonstrate that geography alone explains remarkably little. Mountains do not preserve sovereignty; political leadership determines whether mountains become strategic assets or insurmountable obstacles. Bhutan illustrates this particularly well. Likewise, Japan's experience shows that resilience emerged not from isolation itself but from selective engagement with external powers, adopting foreign knowledge where beneficial while maintaining political autonomy. Similar patterns appear across the remaining chapters. Diplomatic flexibility, institutional continuity, cultural cohesion, and political judgment consistently prove more important than any single structural advantage.
One of the book's greatest strengths is its emphasis on agency. Histories of colonialism often portray smaller states as passive objects of great-power politics. Resilient Statehood reverses that perspective. Throughout the volume, governments are shown making strategic choices, adapting institutions, balancing competing powers, and exploiting opportunities created by changing geopolitical circumstances. The message is neither triumphalist nor deterministic. Rather, resilience emerges as a continuous process of adaptation in which political choices matter. Some readers may disagree with particular historical interpretations advanced in individual chapters, but such disagreement reflects the contested nature of comparative historical scholarship rather than a deficiency of the volume itself.
The comparative design is equally successful. Edited collections are frequently read as independent essays gathered under a common title. Here, however, the chapters genuinely speak to one another. The concluding synthesis is particularly effective in distinguishing between agency-driven strategies and structural constraints, producing a framework that is both historically grounded and theoretically useful. Rather than proposing a universal formula for resilience, the editors convincingly argue that sovereignty has always been produced through different combinations of leadership, institutions, diplomacy, geography, and historical contingency. At the same time, because the framework is derived from a relatively small number of carefully selected cases, readers may reasonably question how readily its propositions travel to countries with more fragmented state formation or different historical trajectories. Future comparative testing across a broader range of cases would strengthen the framework's broader explanatory claims.
Yet, the real achievement of this book lies not only in the answers it provides but also in the questions it provokes. However, because the volume is primarily historical and qualitative, it deliberately privileges interpretive explanation over systematic hypothesis testing. Readers seeking quantitative comparisons or explicit criteria for weighing the relative importance of competing explanatory factors may therefore find the framework more suggestive than conclusive.
After reading the book chapters, I repeatedly found myself wondering whether the concept of resilient statehood extends beyond the age of formal empire. If the nineteenth century was defined by territorial conquest, today's international order is increasingly characterized by more indirect forms of influence. Military occupation has become relatively rare, but dependence can emerge through financial systems, technological infrastructures, global supply chains, educational influence, external debt, and international institutions. Sovereignty is no longer challenged only by armies crossing borders; it can also be constrained by networks, markets, and institutions that shape domestic policy without formally undermining legal independence.
This observation should not be read as a criticism of the volume. On the contrary, it reflects its intellectual strength. Good books answer important questions. Excellent books generate new ones. Cochrane and Wilson provide a conceptual framework that can readily be extended to examine contemporary forms of resilience. If previous generations relied upon defensive diplomacy and selective modernization, today's equivalents may include digital sovereignty, technological autonomy, educational capacity, cybersecurity, and resilient supply chains. The framework developed here is therefore not confined to the history of colonialism; it provides an analytical foundation for thinking about sovereignty under contemporary conditions.
The book also prompts further reflection on the relationship between external pressure and domestic governance. Several chapters implicitly demonstrate that foreign influence becomes most effective when internal institutions weaken. Resilience therefore depends not only on resisting external coercion but also on maintaining legitimate institutions capable of making long-term strategic decisions. Leadership matters, not because individual leaders alone determine national destinies, but because resilient institutions are ultimately built, maintained, and defended through political choice.
The contemporary relevance of these arguments is difficult to ignore. Current debates surrounding strategic autonomy, technological dependence, and geopolitical realignment suggest that sovereignty remains an evolving political project rather than a settled legal status. Whether considering the efforts of Türkiye to pursue a more autonomous foreign policy, the Alliance of Sahel States' attempts to redefine external partnerships, or wider global debates over digital sovereignty and economic security, the analytical lens offered by Resilient Statehood remains remarkably useful. The book wisely avoids forcing contemporary events into its historical framework, yet it equips readers with concepts that travel well beyond the historical cases examined.
Perhaps the book's most important contribution is historiographical, although some readers may wish for greater engagement with competing theories of sovereignty and state formation developed in international relations and comparative politics. Integrating these perspectives more explicitly could further strengthen the book's interdisciplinary reach. For decades, scholarship has concentrated on understanding empire. This volume reminds us that the history of those who were not conquered deserves equal attention. That reversal is more than an interesting change of perspective; it reshapes how we think about sovereignty itself. Independence is revealed not as a fortunate exception but as a political achievement requiring continual adaptation to changing international realities.
In an era when power increasingly operates through finance, technology, information, and institutions as much as through military force, Resilient Statehood offers an original and timely framework for understanding how states preserve meaningful autonomy. While some conceptual questions regarding case selection, generalizability, and the balance between agency and structural constraints remain open, these limitations are less weaknesses than invitations for continued scholarly debate. The volume succeeds not because it claims to provide definitive answers, but because it reframes an important historical question in a way that encourages further research. That capacity to stimulate debate is ultimately the hallmark of a significant scholarly contribution.
Chokri Kooli is a full-time faculty member at the royal military college of Canada and part time Professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Ottawa, Canada. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences (EHESS, Paris) and has more than 19 years of teaching and research experience in Canada, France, and the GCC. Dr. Kooli also serves as an Inclusive Policy Lab Expert with UNESCO. His research interests center on public administration/policy, health, education governance, and leadership.