Born After The War, Raised By Hope – Meet The World's Youngest Nations
New Delhi: A border gets redrawn. A flag goes up. A national anthem echoes for the first time. Somewhere, a country is born.
In the last 30 years, the world has seen some of its most dramatic breakups, secessions and fresh starts. From Africa's red dust plains to the icy heart of the Balkans, people have stepped away from old empires, broken unions and fallen regimes. They chose something else. They chose their own flag.
But who came last to the global family table?
Here's a look at the youngest countries still carving their names into history:
South Sudan (Born in 2011)
A war-scarred land. Generations fought and bled for this piece of Africa. Then, in 2011, South Sudan stepped away from Sudan. Its people voted. The world watched. A new country took shape.
Its journey? Still raw, still uncertain. But the flag flies.
Kosovo (Born in 2008)
Tanks rolled in the 90s. Bombs fell. Cities wept. Then came a slow and stubborn push for freedom.
In 2008, Kosovo declared it. Serbia still disagrees. Some countries look the other way. But Kosovars vote, govern and call their soil their own.
Montenegro (Born in 2006)
A quiet vote. A clean split. Montenegro walked out of its union with Serbia without a shot fired.
Coastal, proud and ancient, this small Balkan nation found its own rhythm and kept walking toward Europe.
Timor-Leste (Born in 2002)
An island with a history of foreign boots. First Portugal. Then Indonesia. Then the people said 'enough'.
A referendum changed everything. In 2002, they stood free. Their past is jagged, but their resolve is firm.
Serbia (Reborn in 2006)
After Montenegro's exit, Serbia stood alone. Not new in spirit, but reborn in law. With deep roots and a complicated past, it remains both survivor and successor.
Palau (Born in 1994)
A Pacific paradise. Palau shook off its UN trusteeship and walked into the world on its own feet.
The United States remains close, but the voice in international halls now belongs to Palau.
Eritrea (Born in 1993)
A bitter war. Years of silence. Then came independence. Eritrea broke away from Ethiopia with scars and pride. What followed has been difficult, but the flag remains a testament to the price paid.
Slovakia (Born in 1993)
No violence. No blood. Just a velvet goodbye. Slovakia parted ways with the Czech Republic and claimed its space. It grew fast, found its place in Europe and held its head high.
Czech Republic (Born in 1993)
From Bohemia to the present. The Czech Republic kept its elegance, its old-world charm and started again. A split without war. A transition with grace.
Croatia (Born in 1991)
The Adriatic coast trembled. Then it burned. Croatia fought for every inch. It bled for sovereignty. Years later, it found peace.
Today, it stands proud, a European nation with salt in its air and steel in its spine.
Nations don't come into the world gently. Each one here was born from friction – war, votes or weariness. They chose identity over comfort. They picked their flag and faced the consequences.
They may be young. But they are real. They are sovereign. They are home to millions who refused to stay voiceless.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
23 minutes ago
- Mint
India must watch out as the world's security architecture shudders and shifts
Gift this article The annual meeting of Nato, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, took place in The Hague last week against the backdrop of a world moving towards a new and fluid security architecture. Thirty of Nato's 32 current members are European, with the US and Canada being its two North American members. The annual meeting of Nato, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, took place in The Hague last week against the backdrop of a world moving towards a new and fluid security architecture. Thirty of Nato's 32 current members are European, with the US and Canada being its two North American members. Born in 1949 soon after World War II, the original raison d'être of Nato was containment of the Soviet Union and its role as a hedge against the remilitarization of Germany. Once West Germany joined in 1955, the second objective was dropped. After the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, Germany was reunited in 1990 and the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Nato's purpose was lost for nearly two decades. With Vladimir Putin's rise in Russia at the beginning of the 21st century and particularly after Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, Nato members found common cause again, and the alliance regained some of its mojo. The Ukrainian conflict that began in 2022 united Nato again. Finland and Sweden, which had remained outside for seven decades, have joined the alliance since. Also Read: Geopolitics: Brace for a global shake-up now that Trump has rattled Nato Beginning with Donald Trump's first US presidency in 2017 and continuing into his second one now, Washington has been indifferent towards Ukraine and shown an unexplained sympathy for Russia's position. President Trump has also publicly declared his ambivalence towards Article 5 of Nato, its 'collective defense" clause that states that an attack against any member requires all members to come to its aid. Whether Trump's disposition is just a threat aimed at making European members increase their contributions to Nato remains unclear. Nato is resourced through the direct and indirect national contributions of its members. Nato's common funds are composed of direct contributions to collective budgets and programmes. National contributions, the largest component of Nato funding, include the forces and capabilities held by each member country that can be provided to Nato for deterrence and defence activities and military operations. Direct funds enable Nato to maintain its capabilities and run the entirety of the organization and its military commands. Nato has three principal common-funded budgets: the civil budget (funding the Nato headquarters), military budget (funding the Nato Command Structure) and the Nato Security Investment Programme (funding military infrastructure and capabilities). For 2025, its direct funds amount to about $5.4 billion, of which the US contributes about 16% (an identical amount is contributed by Germany). If all 30 European countries were to do it, annual defence spending would double from $380 billion today to about $750 billion. The latter number is just a bit lower than the current US defence spending and comparable to China's unofficial level. The summit ended with a firm commitment from Nato allies to spend 5% of GDP, up from today's 2% floor. Whether or not America officially quits Nato, even if it psychologically 'checks out,' the security architecture of Europe would change dramatically without an assured American backstop. At the same time, there are tensions among European Nato members, with Hungary publicly supporting Russia and Turkey playing a nuanced ménage-à-trois game. The new nationalist president of Poland is also likely to hold a more matrix-determined position than his predecessor. Also Read: Nato's endgame on Ukraine will need regime change in Moscow While there are other multi-country strategic groupings like the Quad, made up of the US, India, Japan and Australia, and Aukus, made up of Australia, the US and UK, no other multi-country alliance has shown the commitment and staying power of Nato (till Trump came along). Even traditional alliances have become more situation-dependent in recent times. China has generally supported Pakistan and Russia has supported India since Cold War times. At the same time, China has supported Russia on the Ukraine War. During the recent Operation Sindoor, both Russia and the US were ambivalent in their support of India. Turkey, while pursuing its own calculus, has held positions that are inimical to Indian interests in recent years. Even more recently, Iran must have been surprised that Russia did not come to its defence more publicly during its 12-day conflict with Israel. Also Read: Mint Explainer: Sweden set to join NATO after Turkey backs off Alert to the possibility that a US commitment to their security is no longer reliable (and that the US may even turn hostile), countries from Japan and South Korea to Germany are re-arming themselves. In addition to nuclear-equipped France and the UK, Nato's nuclear sharing arrangements extend to Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. Beyond Nato, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) promulgated in 1969, with 191 current members, is likely to lose some members over the coming years. India is entering a phase where it will have to become far more self-reliant, even as it partners with Russia, the US and others on a context-specific basis. When India purchases defence systems, it will have to insist on technology transfers, source-code access and the interoperability of these platforms with locally developed missile systems. P.S: 'If you have one true friend, then you have more than your share," said clergyman Thomas Fuller. The author is chairman, InKlude Labs. Read Narayan's Mint columns at Topics You May Be Interested In
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Sitharaman to push for Global South reforms at UN, BRICS, NDB meetings
New Delhi: Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman will advocate for greater financial support to developing countries, stronger development banks tailored to Global South priorities, and enhanced private sector participation in sustainable growth initiatives at three high-level international meetings in July. Sitharaman is on an official visit from 30 June to 5 July to attend the UN's Financing for Development conference in Spain, the 10th annual meeting of the New Development Bank (NDB) in Rio de Janeiro, and the BRICS finance ministers and central bank governors meeting, according to an official statement. The meetings come at a time of mounting challenges for the Global South, including rising trade protectionism, unilateralism, and constrained access to affordable capital, issues that are expected to feature prominently in the discussions. At the UN summit in Seville, Sitharaman will deliver India's national statement and a keynote address at a summit focused on mobilizing private capital for sustainable development. The gathering will seek reforms to the international financial architecture and explore ways to unlock investments crucial for meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), according to the UN. On the sidelines, the minister is scheduled to meet with senior leaders including Germany's and Peru's finance ministers, New Zealand's climate change minister, and European Investment Bank (EIB) president Nadia Calviño. In Rio de Janeiro, Sitharaman will participate as India's governor at the NDB annual meeting and attend the BRICS finance ministers and central bank governors gathering. She will also speak at a governors' seminar on Building a Premier Multilateral Development Bank for the Global South. The NDB, in a note on the event, flagged the intensifying development pressures on the Global South amid shifting global dynamics. 'Most critically, the international order and governance founded on multilateralism, equality, and openness are now undermined by unilateralism, hegemonism, and protectionism,' it said. Geopolitical tensions, weaponization of trade and finance, barriers to tech cooperation, and climate setbacks in advanced economies are further complicating the development landscape, it added. The NDB also highlighted chronic underfunding and limited access to affordable finance for developing nations, attributing it to risk aversion in the private sector, lagging reforms in existing multilateral institutions, and the shortfall in official development assistance from advanced economies—often tied to increasing political conditions. The bank is expected to propose a series of targeted measures, including reforms to the global financial system, mechanisms to crowd in private investment, and strategies to deepen development cooperation across the Global South. On the sidelines of the NDB event, Sitharaman will hold bilateral meetings with her counterparts from Brazil, China, Indonesia, and Russia. She will also meet her Portuguese counterpart in Lisbon and engage with prominent investors, the official statement said.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
‘Lovebugs' swarm Seoul as South Korea capital debates pest control
You might think that South Korea's biggest threat is its northern neighbour North Korea. For now, though, South Korean capital has been invaded by another threat: lovebugs. Climate change and poor planning have attracted to Seoul an invasion that appears harder than handling Kim Jong-Un. read more A woman wearing a mask amid the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic takes photographs of her boyfriend at a Han river park in Seoul, South Korea, May 24, 2021. (Reuters/Kim Hong-Ji) While South Korea has a perpetual headache in the form of nuclear weapons' threat from its neighbour to the north, the country's capital Seoul has been invaded by another threat: lovebugs. Formally called plecia longiforceps, these bugs are called lovebugs because of their mating behaviour. These bugs fly in pairs attached to each other. Swarms of lovebugs have infested several neighbourhoods in and around Seoul. While these are harmless bugs as they do not bite or spread diseases, patience of people has been thin as they are being annoyed swarms of bugs. Footage of people's encounters with lovebugs' swarms have surfaced on social media. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Lovebugs are really a thing in my neighborhood these days, and it's much worse in a mountain. Is nature sending Koreans, facing a population crisis, a message? — Subin Kim (@SubinBKim) June 29, 2025 The Guardian reported that the condition is such that footage from Gyeyangsan mountain in Incheon, west of Seoul, shows hiking trails and observation decks carpeted black with these bugs. These bugs are more common in parts of China, Taiwan, and Japan, and are believed to have arrived in South Korea as a result of changing climate. Experts told the newspaper that climate change, urban developments around mountains, and rising temperatures have created ideal conditions for the expansion of these bugs to Seoul, which is infamous for its urban heat-island effect. Even as people lodge more than 100 complaints a day about these bugs, authorities have warned against spraying chemical pesticides on these bugs. Instead, they have advised people to spray water on these bugs to drive them away. They have warned that pesticides may kill these and other bugs that do the important job of pollination and enriching the soil with their larvae. However, people are so continued that a survey found that 86 per cent of Seoul's residents considered these bugs pests, according to the newspaper.
