Break up of States

process of de-colonisation
1. Africa is evidence of de-cononliasation, agreements of where Africa was possessed, seen through straight lines of boundaries
2. this does not only impact the country who self-determined
3. 1991 saw a massive explosion of new states in EU
three methods of break up
1. separation
  1. consent given
2. dissolution
  1. no government exists anymore
3. Secession
  1. no consent given
4. difference of the three is in the attitude of the already existing territorial state
terra nulli is historical fact
1. to form new states, territory must be taken from older state
SEPARATION
1. voluntary loss of territory which creates a new sovereign entity
2. most common method not controversial
3. new states are recognised normally, as the rest of the world follows the original territory
  1. Scottish Referendum; England said they would recognise them
  2. Spanish Government refused to recognise the State of Catalonia, therefore the rest of the world would not
4. examples; Norway from Sweden (1905), Ireland from GB (1922), Iceland from Denmark (1944), Singapore from Malaysia (1965)
DISSOLUTION
1. where territorial state disappears, where there is a dissolution; there is the possibility of new states
  1. eg. state collapses
2. Dissolution by consent
  1. In 1991 Supreme Soviet officially dissolved the USSR
    1. State agreed to dissolve itself
    2. One state disappeared and 15 emerged
3. 'Forced' Dissolution: Yugoslavia
  1. Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY)
    1. Croatia and Slovenia wanted to be part of the EU, therefore ignored the federal government and EU recognised them
      1. creation of new states through the will of the people
        important for self-determination
    2. Kosovo didn't emerge as a state at this time, did not have federal recognition (only autonomy), therefore did not become a state
    3. Badinter Committee was set up to advise
    4. federal state, federal government represents the components of the Federation
4. don't want a sovereignty vacuum
SECCESSION
1. most controversial establlshment of new state
  1. without consent of central government
2. International Law is law made by states
  1. international law is not supportive of Seccession to create new states
3. three bases for claim of self-determination
  1. still need the requirements to be a state (1) effective control (2) control over population (3) capacity to enter into international agreements
  2. self-determination
  3. NATURAL RIGHT
    1. world is comprised of nation groups
      1. eg. catalunia, scotland, france
      2. due to the importance of language and culture have a right to be a state and can argue a right of self-determination
    2. idea is traced back to Woodrow Wilson
      1. outlined War aims in WWI; Poland should include territories inhabited by Polish populations
    3. Paris Peace Conference
      1. idea that states should be drawn on ethnic lines
      2. After WWI decision to carve empire on basis of identification of ethnic groups
  4. HUMAN/CIVIL RIGHT
    1. nations are arbitrary beings, what matters is individuals
    2. eg. scotland does not exist as a reality
  5. UN decolonisation process
    1. Declaration on the granting of Independence to Colonial Territories and Peoples (1960)
    2. self determination of all colonised people
      1. targeted territories eg. Nigeria
    3. became a globalised principle
4. Article 1 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966): All peoples have the right of self-determination
  1. but does this mean that internal peoples have a right to secession?
  2. still have to be a state! (requirements)
  3. Rights to Secession
    1. Remedial Right
      1. where part of the population is excluded from public life and subject to serious human rights violations, as a last resort
      2. eg. Bangladesh, eastern and western Pakistand, without consent of central government, which still exists
        except, Bangladesh was not admitted to UN until after Pakistan recognised it
    2. Promissory Secission
      1. constitutional or international agreement
        state promises that there is an independence vote
      2. if voted in favour, then this triggers the right to self-determination
      3. if the state promises and delivers = separation
      4. if state goes back on its word = process of state hood is triggered
        promise is upheld
      5. eg. Montenegor, South Sudan
    3. Democratic Secession
      1. positive in a VALID referendum in support of independence
      2. eg. Kosovo? Crimea?
      3. if you vote for independence, then you have a right to independence
        democratic legitimacy
        still must adhere to state requirements
      4. contraversial

Next up

Break up of States

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by ilonajade about 10 years ago