DISADVANTAGES: =============== Sharing of power between the Center and the states includes both advantages and disadvantages

of federation. Sometimes there can be overlapping of work and subs equent confusion regarding who is responsible for what. For example, when typhoo n Katrina hit Greater New Orleans, USA, in 2005, there was delay in the rescue w ork as there was confusion between the state governments and the federal governm ent on who is responsible for which disaster management work. This resulted in t he loss of many lives. Federal system of government is very expensive as more people are elected to off ice, both at the state and the center, than necessary. Thus, it is often said th at only rich countries can afford it. Too many elected representatives with over lapping roles may also lead to corruption. Federalism leads to unnecessary competition between different regions. There can be a rebellion by a regional government against the national government too. Bo th scenarios pose a threat to the countries' integrity. Federalism promotes regional inequalities. Natural resources, industries, employ ment opportunities differ from region to region. Hence earnings and wealth are u nevenly distributed. Rich states offer more opportunities and benefits to its ci tizens than poor states can. Thus, the gap between rich and poor states widens. Federalism can make the state governments selfish and concerned only about their own region's progress. They can formulate policies which might be detrimental t o other regions. For example, pollution from a province which is promoting indus trialization in a big way can affect another region which depends solely on agri culture and cause crop damage. Federalism does not eliminate poverty. Even in New York, there are poor neighbor hoods like Harlem with a majority of black population. The reason for this may b e that during policy framing, it is the intellectuals and not the masses who are invited by the local government. These intellectuals may not understand the loc al needs properly and thus, policies might not yield good results. Thus, it is understandable that there have been both advantages and disadvantage s of Federalism in USA. There is a general feeling that the rights of the minori ties, like blacks, are compromised in USA. But at the same time, USA now has a d emocratically elected African American President. Similarly, there have been adv antages and disadvantages of federalism in other countries as well. For federali sm to be truly successful it should be accompanied by other ideals like Seculari sm, Democracy and Liberalism. CRITICISMS: ========== Critics point out that consociationalism is dangerous in a system of differing a ntagonistic ideologies, generally conservatism and communism.[citation needed] T hey state that specific conditions must exist for three or more groups to develo p a multi-party system with strong leaders. This philosophy is dominated by elit es, with those masses that are sidelined with the elites having less to lose if war breaks out. Consociationalism cannot be imperially applied. For example, it does not effectively apply to Austria. Critics also point to the failure of this line of reasoning in Lebanon, a country that reverted back to civil war. It onl y truly applies in Switzerland, Belgium and the Netherlands, and not in more dee ply divided societies. If one of three groups gets half plus one of the vote, th en the other groups are in perpetual opposition, which is largely incompatible w ith consociationalism.Consociationalism focuses on diverging identities such as ethnicity instead of integrating identities such as class, institutionalizing an d entrenching the former. Furthermore, it relies on rival co-operation, which is

inherently unstable. It focuses on intrastate relations and neglects relations with other states. Donald L. Horowitz argues that consociationalism can lead to the reification of ethnic divisions, since "grand coalitions are unlikely, becau se of the dynamics of intraethnic competition. The very act of forming a multiet hnic coalition generates intraethnic competition flanking if it does not already exist".Consociationalism assumes that each group is cohesive and has strong lea dership. Although the minority can block decisions, this requires 100 per cent a greement. Rights are given to communities rather than individuals, leading to ov er-representation of some individuals in society and under-representation of oth ers. Grand coalitions are unlikely to happen due to the dynamics of ethnic compe tition. Each group seeks more power for itself. Consociationalists are criticize d for focusing too much on the set up of institutions and not enough on transiti onal issues which go beyond such institutions. Finally, it is claimed that conso ciational institutions promote sectarianism and entrench existing identities. The Difficulties Of Power Sharing In Kirkuk: The 2008 Provincial Election Law s Article 23 created a committee to come up with a power sharing deal in Tamim province amongst other things before voting could happen there. Ideas on how to divide up positions amongst the different groups i n the province was the only area where the group made some headway. Politicians in Kirkuk actually agreed on a formula for dividing up the top positions in the province. This would lead to a Kurd being governor, an Arab deputy governor, and a Turkmen chair of the provincial council. Less was achieved on the lower posit ions. There was general consensus of divvying up jobs roughly by thirds with 32% for Kurds, 32% for Arabs, 32% for Turkmen, and 4% for Christians, but the probl em was how to actually achieve this throughout the province. While the Kurds hol d most of the top positions in Tamim, the Arabs and Turkmen dominate the lower l evels, and did not want any of their group to lose jobs. Of the roughly 60,000 g overnment officials in Tamim, 56% are Arabs, 22% are Turkmen, 18% are Kurds, and 4% are Christians. The Arabs and Turkmen were only willing to give up their pos itions when the current occupants retired, which of course would take a generati on or two to achieve, a naturally dead end argument. The Kurds on the other hand were willing to concede some of their high level jobs in return for a fare shar e in the rest of the province s government. They wanted Baghdad to assure this agr eement, but with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki playing the Kurdish card to gain nationalist credentials in the rest of the country that never happened. The ide a of power sharing has not moved forward since.