In international law there exist two contradictory principles. One is right of people's and nations for self-determination and the other is invariability of national sovereignty and borders. That creates conflict of interests. A simple example of such conflict of interests would be if a part of an existing country wants to secede and form its own country. Right of self-determination says it has a right to do so. However, a country they currently part of then can claim that their possible independence violates their sovereignty and borders. Give them independence and violate integrity of their current nation borders or deny them independence and violate their right to self-determination. No matter what you do it will break one or the other law.
These conflicting principles led to a situation where in practice interests of powerful nations decide who gets independence and who does not. Force and influence decide who gets to be free and who ends up being oppressed. Uyghurs and Tibetans live under Chinese yoke because China is big and strong in that areas. Tiny South Ossetia, that has less people than Monaco, wins its unrecognized independence on the back or Russian arms.
Dictatorships are not the only ones at fault though. Spain suppressed Catalan independence and EU OK-ed it because they do not want to ruin their cozy relationship with Spain.
These are just few examples. World is full of areas and unrepresented nations, big and small who all claim right for independence, but unable to achieve it. There are also places like Northern Ireland, Cyprus, Bosnia, Ethiopia and many others, where two or more distinct (nations)bodies of people vie for control over the territory and its government.
Nation state is a country where one body of people controls the government collectively. That can only work if there is only one such body of people in any given country. If there are two or more, then they will fight each other over the control of government. Once one group wins such control, they will use it to benefit only their ethnicity, sidelining or even drying extinct the other ethnicities. Multinational experiments, such as Yugoslavia or USSR failed because eventually consistent nations started accusing each other of hogging up all the wealth for their own people only and denying it to others.
Yet collapse of Yugoslavia led towards international community repeating this experiment in Bosnia, where its three nations: Serbs, Croats and Bosnaks are deadlocked in never-ending Mexican Standoff and nothing ever gets done. As much as some might wish that these people would abandon their petty ethnic differences and unite behind one Bosnian banner, they do not do so. Croats and Serbs in Bosnia may hold Bosnian Passports but see Bosnaks as their enemies and people of nations of Croatia and Serbia respectively as their fellow countrymen. The remaining third nation of Bosnia, Bosnaks wish to unite their country but simply cannot.
A solution is needed because leave things be and let things work out does no work. Fundamentally countries like Bosnia have to be divided until they reach one nation (polity of people) per country
However, that raises another question. If country is to be divided, then where borders should run and who should be entitled to a nation and who does not. That in turn can create new injustice to replace the old one.
For example, Kosovo was granted independence in its administrative borders, drawn by Josef Tito. That left province with a Serbian enclave of around 10%. During Serbian control over the area, Serbs attempted to genocide Albanians of Kosovo, who were an ethnic minority in whole of Servia but majority in Kosovo itself. Solution, that granted Kosovo independence, now left Serb minority in new Kosovo, reversing the tables between ethnicities.
As much as some may say it's fair that Serbs now experience what it's like to be a minority ruled by others who hate them, it's not a solution to a problem, it's just a reversal of roles. Serbia and sympathizers will protest, then do something and a constant chain of offenses will continue.
Kosovo's independence itself raised conflict between territorial integrity and right for self-determination. Sure, there were good reasons to allow Kosovo its independence and the decision was made by a representative of neutral enough country to forestall accusations of bias. However, it was a decision based on merits of the situations seen by a guy from Finland. There was nothing more substantial to back it up.
Russia, long ally of Serbia, protested Kosovo independence on the grounds of Serbian territorial integrity. Later Russian ceased this precedent to hold referendums in Crimea and then claim that people of Crimea should have self-determination to secede from Ukraine. Now EU claimed that Ukrainian territorial integrity cannot be violated in this manner.
Sure, Russia is a dictatorship, it is unduly biased towards Serbia, there was a proper due process in Kosovo but not in Ukraine, Russia has history of electoral fraud and so results of referendum it organized cannot be trusted, Serbs were committing genocide in Kosovo and Ukrainians did not and many other reasons why Kosovo's independence is justified, and Russian annexation of Crimea is not.
However, it is not written anywhere in particular what is fair and what is not. Lack of clear rules on self-determination is to blame that it used more as a pretext to war or foreign interference than a real body of rules that can govern humanity. For Europe its territorial integrity of Ukraine but right for self-determination of Kosova's Albanians. For Russia its self-determination of Russians in Crimea but territorial integrity of Serbia. Net result that is not an international law but an excuse to carve up the map as one sees fit and more war as a result.
However, it does not have to be this way. A comprehensive set of principles to govern people's right for self-determination can be created to prevent any further wars and accusations of bias and unfairness.
Such rules have to include minimum size of polity that can be considered for independence. Density of their residence in the area of question. Special provisions have to be made in split areas where half of population wants independence, and the other half does not. Safeguards against saturating area with recent settlers to alter its demographics also has to be accounted for. Options for resettlement to nation of their choice should be offered.
Geographic implications on nation they want to secede from and many more. New nations should not geographically disadvantage the original nations by blocking all their access to sea, like Eritrea did to Ethiopia. New borders have to be defensible and not put either nation in jeopardy of invasion. Natural barriers like rivers and mountains should be considered as borders whenever possible. Natural resources also have to be considered, new nations should not hog up all the valuable resources such as oil from the nation the want to secede from.
Borders of the new nations should be drawn to avoid including any ethnic minorities. If unrepresented nation/ethnicity makes up 60% of region's population they should get 60% of region territory, not the whole of it. Credible historical population figures should be considered if the current controller of the area deliberately brought migrants of their main ethnicity to the region to dilute its ethnic composition. Population stuffing should be discouraged. Recent migrants should be told to either accept separation from their nation or return to their provinces of origin.
Finally, referendums on self-determination should be organized, held by UN. Votes should be counted by UN in presence of all concerned parties and neutral observers to avoid accusations of electoral fraud. Votes should be counted not only for region as a whole but also for each individual city and sub region. Areas that vote against independence should not be forced to secede with the rest of the province.
Hopefully my proposal principles on nations' self-determination will be able to create a better and both more fair and more workable world where each polity of people will be able to have a country of their own. A world where bigger ethnicities will not oppress smaller ones. A world of rule of law.
No comments:
Post a Comment