If we accept that nations (that is, communities of people with a feeling of belonging to the same group that share history, culture, language, traditions, etc.)

If we accept that nations (that is, communities of people with a feeling of belonging to the same group that share history, culture, language, traditions, etc.) exist, then we must accept that they should be considered equal in the same way people are considered equal: they should treat each other as equal and should care about the wellbeing of each other. They should look for their own wellbeing, but consider the common good of all nations to be even more important. Given these principles, the world should encourage nations to take care of their own issues and reach the maturity and capability to function economically and advance culturally and socially, and to interact with the rest in spirit of cooperation; they would provide the means for that. This would be, in my opinion, one of the requirements to ensure lasting peace, as well as a potent boost for the world economy. The alternative is that these nations are not recognized or only partially recognized, and that they are unable to manage their own issues the way they wish, and to have their own voice in the world, for so many of the important matters are global nowadays. Ignoring them will always lead to growing instability, as these nations and their aspirations will not disappear -and if they do, that would be a loss for humanity. We have the tools of democracy to achieve this peacefully. The editorial of the NYT a few days ago[1] talked about the value of achieving this democratically. Xavier Sala-i-Martín, economist at Columbia University, often explains a story that makes the same point (I tried to improve Google's translation a little): "What if an alien interested in bringing democracy to its planet suddenly appeared in our living room and asked us how do we earthlings make collective decisions? Surely we would explain that to choose our leaders, we vote; that to pass our laws, we vote; you to decide how public money is spent, we vote, and to set taxes, we vote. If, suddenly, the galactic sir stood in front of a world map and told us: "I guess you also vote in order to change the borders on this map, right?". We would have to embarrassedly respond: "No, the borders can be changed only by fighting". Given this bizarre revelation, poor Mr. green would turn green (if that was not its original color) and would run, exclaiming that we are barbarians."[2] [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/opinion/scotlands-identity-put-to-a-vote.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/opinion/scotlands-identity... [2] https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.caffereggio.net%2F2012%2F11%2F17%2Fel-col%25C2%25B7lectiu-wilson-de-xavier-sala-i-martin-en-la-vanguardia%2F&sandbox=1 https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=h...