The necessary conditions for a strong state

In “Strong Societies and Weak Societies” Robert Migdal argues that for new states to form, there must be subversion of old methods and modes of survival (140). However, he also writes that there are certain other criteria that facilitate in the creation of a strong state. Two of these in particular are up for debate and discussion: the importance of an outside military threat and the world historical timing of the new state’s creation. These are valid points in some cases, but do not always hold up to the paradigm he establishes.
The role of a military threat in this process has proven important in many cases; however, it does not ensure state consolidation. An interesting case, or set of cases, upon which to test this idea is Africa. Very few African states fall into the category of a strong state. Many of these states have not faced a serious outside military threat because there is a lack of solid military forces in Africa on the whole. As a result, there is little incentive to take the risks towards state consolidation about which Migdal writes..
The other point up for discussion is the idea of the historical timing of the state change. This premise may very well hold true, but it is based on a good deal of assumptions. First, it assumes that ideas do have a causal quality and are influential in politics. This point has been up for debate for a long time in political discourse, and it is hard to take it for granted. Also, it is hard to posit that there are concentrated movements throughout history where these ideas have a stronghold on the world. Often there are movements of thinking, but it is a bit sweeping to claim that one ideologies becomes dominant in thinking.
Migdal opens an interesting discussion and makes many valid points about the relationship between societies and states. It is imperative to focus in, since his work deals with a multi-faceted issue.