I always contend that there is a
difference between “country” and “nation.” Many countries are not nations per
se.
A country (or state) is a political and legal entity. It is sovereign, with defined borders, a government, and recognition under international law. A nation is also political, but more than that. To me, a nation is a country whose population largely shares a sense of identity – based on language, history, ethnicity, culture, or even a shared narrative about themselves.
Some countries contain multiple nations. The United Kingdom, for example, includes the English in England, the Scottish in Scotland, the Welsh in Wales, and the Irish in Northern Ireland.
Some would also define China this way, but I do not believe the Chinese government tolerates this line of thinking, which I agree. I will return to this later.
Others define “nation” in an even narrower sense: as a group of people without sovereign rights or borders who share a sense of identity. Examples include Native Americans in the United States and the Kurdish people, who live across Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria. Historically, Jewish identity existed as a nation long before the modern state of Israel.
When a country and a nation roughly coincide, it is sometimes called a nation-state. Japan is considered close to this model, as its population is almost homogeneous.
In essence, a country is something you
can map; a nation is something people feel.
That is why nationalism can be so powerful. It is not just about borders or governments, but about identity, belonging, and sometimes grievance. This distinction lies behind many major global tensions:
- Independence movements (when a nation wants its own country)
- Disputes over minorities
- Competing national narratives within the same state
China officially presents itself as a unified nation-state, but in reality, it is closer to what some scholars call a civilisation-state.
- The state (country) is the People's Republic of China.
- The “nation” is framed as Zhonghua minzu (the
Chinese nation) – a constructed, broad civilisational identity.
Internally, there are 56 distinct ethnic groups (e.g., Han, Tibetan, Uyghur), which complicates the idea of a single nation. The Chinese government tries to align nation with country—to make cultural identity and political loyalty converge - engineering a nation to match its country. Despite scepticism, it is nearly succeeding.
The US: White Supremacy from the Very Beginning
American “national” identity is
premised on civic ideals – liberty, democracy, the “American Dream” – not on a
single ethnicity or ancient culture. But in reality, this identity has long
been hijacked. White people dominated from the outset; slavery was introduced;
Indigenous peoples were excluded; citizenship was effectively limited to white
men. From the beginning, there was a gap between ideals and practice.
White supremacy played a major role in shaping American identity – through laws like segregation, immigration restrictions favouring Europeans, and cultural narratives of a “White” America.
Structurally, the US is constitutionally secular, but Christianity has largely shaped American identity. Public life has long been influenced by Christianity (e.g., political rhetoric, social norms). There is also a strong historical presence of Judaism, particularly in intellectual, legal, and cultural spheres.
Although these civic ideals were later used to challenge white supremacy, non-Whites have never felt they are equal. The American nation is built on universal ideals, but those ideals have been selectively interpreted, restricted, and fought over – particularly by forces like racial hierarchy and religious influence. Donald Trump champions this today. The US now looks more like a broken country, let alone a nation.
The Case of Australia
- Indigenous nations – Hundreds of distinct Aboriginal nations
existed long before the modern state.
- British-derived national identity – The original political and
cultural foundation of the country.
- Modern multicultural nation – Built through immigration,
especially post-WWII and recent Asian migration.
The “country” exists clearly (borders, institutions), but the nation is still a work in progress, especially regarding what “Australian values” really mean. Fortunately, Australia remains a stable country.
The Case of Israel
Taiwan is part of China; the majority of its population is Han Chinese. But separatists there see Taiwan as a separate country; some even see themselves as a distinct nation – a Taiwanese identity rather than a Chinese one.
Ukraine versus Russia is another clear example. Russians and Ukrainians are “one people.” Yet Ukraine asserts a distinct national identity - language, history, political orientation. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, the issue was politically and geographically settled. Unfortunately, with NATO’s instigation, Ukraine chose to abandon neutrality and pursue NATO membership – hence the war.
The conflict involving Israel and the Palestinian territories is perhaps the most emotionally and historically layered. Jews have realised their nation-statehood but deny Palestinians the right to seek their own. Essentially, two nations claim the same territory as their country. This conflict is intractable. It is not just a border dispute but a collision of national narratives, histories, and identities.
A country is a structure of power; a nation is a structure of meaning. When both align, the result is stability. When they diverge, tensions arise and conflicts prevail. Unfortunately, the US is always undermining things!
End
