scholarly journals Inherited National Questions: The Soviet Legacy in Russia’s International Law Doctrine on Self-determination

2020 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-66
Author(s):  
Tero Lundstedt
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
National Question ◽  
Soviet Legacy ◽  
The Right ◽  
Former Soviet Republics

All 15 former Soviet Republics share a unique federal history with a particular understanding of the right to self-determination. Moreover, seven of them were federalised during the Soviet era, amounting to a major challenge to their territorial integrity after independence. While these states confronted their minorities in different ways, the Russian solution to its inherited national question has been the most comprehensive. This has made Russian understanding on self-determination essentially different from the mainstream of the international community, which in turn explains Russian persistent objections over the Kosovo independence (2008) and partly clarifies the events in Georgia (2008) and Crimea (2014). This article analyses how the former Soviet Republics coped with the transformation from the ethnofederal state to independence. The focus will be on Russia as the most affected of them and on the persistent Soviet legacy in its interpretations of self-determination and, consequently, its policies towards its post-Soviet neighbours.

scholarly journals PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THEIR ROLE IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN KOSOVO AND CRIMEA. Part 2

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Local Authorities ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
History Of ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

The second part of the article considers the issue of the contradiction of the realization of the right to self-determination and the principle of territorial integrity of Serbia and Ukraine on the example of Kosovo and Crimea. It presents an analysis of the legitimacy of the will expression of Kosovars and Crimeans and its compliance with the norms of international law. The preconditions and factors of the ethnopolitical conflict are examined and the main problematic issues that caused controversies between the central and local authorities in Kosovo and Crimea are identified. The article emphasizes that the result of the plebiscites in Kosovo (1998) and Crimea (2014) was the declaration of independence, denied by central authorities of Serbia and Ukraine and met with mixed reactions by the international community. The self-proclaimed republics have only external features of statehood and are subject to external administration of other countries. A latent opposition of geopolitical opponents in the international arena is noted, which is to some extent traced through the position on the recognition / non-recognition of Kosovo and Crimea. The article draws attention to the fact that inconsistent interpretations of certain principles of international law promote secession movements in countries where conflicts periodically arise between central and local authorities. The emphasis is placed on the necessity of a clearer definition of the aforementioned international legal norms and obligations undertaken by subjects of international law. The article holds that in order to avoid such situations as in Kosovo or Crimea, to eliminate conflicts related to the possibility of an ambiguous interpretation and application of the principles of international law, an internationally recognized system of more stringent and comprehensive measures should be introduced to cease and prevent threats to the territorial integrity of countries. A strong position of the international community on the abovementioned principles with the history of the liberation movements of these peoples taken into account should become the measure precluding the aggravation of conflict situations related to the aspiration of peoples for self-determination.

The Nomos and the Gaze

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoran Oklopcic
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Political Autonomy ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Main Factors ◽  
The Right

Chapter 5 confronted the imagination of the right to self-determination in international law. It focused on the ways in which interpretations of that right hinge on jurists’ implicit cartographies, their scopic regimes, affective predilections, disciplinary self-images, concealed calculi of suffering, visions of alternative universes, false binaries, and their idiosyncratic levels of (im)patience and anxiety, which—together with their quasi-nationalistic professional commitments and dreams of disciplinary sovereignty—remain some of the main factors that determine how international lawyers interpret the national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political autonomy of everyone else. After having proposed a number of new ways of looking at the claims of the right to self-determination, Chapter 6 ends on a sobering note: as long as jurists remain preoccupied with their own disciplinary self-determination and ‘linguistic’ purity, they will continue reproducing the flat, monochromatic, and vacuous imaginary of popular sovereignty.

scholarly journals The Ukrainian Crisis: A Test for International Law?

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Marcin Marcinko ◽  
Bartosz Rogala
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
The Political ◽  
Hybrid Warfare ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Ukrainian Crisis

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine raises significant questions related to the fundamental features of international law. The chief concern is the efficacy of the said legal order as well as territorial integrity and right to self determination. Since the political crisis has led to a military clash, so-called hybrid warfare and the rules on occupation are also discussed. It seems the current geopolitical scene has led to what some perceive as a watering down of the rules of international law and further exposure of the flaws of the UN. International law, however, despite its shortcomings and limitations, still offers valid solutions to the international community as a way to solve not only the discussed conflict, but also many others.

scholarly journals Origin, establishment and development of the idea of self-determination of peoples

2021 ◽  
pp. 60-73
Author(s):  
Azer Kagraman Ogly Kagramanov
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
The World ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right

The subject of this research is the examination of evolution of the idea of self-determination of peoples based on the fundamental works of the Russian and foreign scholars, thinkers of the antiquity and modernity. The author considers the transformations experienced by the principle of self-determination at various historical stages of development; as well as builds a corresponding systems of the development cycles. The conclusion is made that after conception of the idea of self-determination, the colonial powers viewed this concept as ethical, seeing the threat to legitimacy of the established order. Therefore, throughout almost a century, the leading countries refused to include this right into the corresponding international and domestic documents. The main conclusions are as follows: after consolidation of the principle in the Charter of the United Nations, it became the foundation for the emergence of news states and destruction of the colonial world; the principle served as a leitmotif for the development of human rights and international relations, but at the same time became a threat and challenge to the territorial integrity; wars between the countries are replaced with the civil and interethnic conflicts; the world is captured with such phenomena as state nationalism that subsequently grew into extremely radical forms, such as fascism and Nazism; the modern international law actively promotes the two competing principles – territorial integrity and self-determination; in modern world, the right to self-determination is not limited by peoples under the colonial past – there occur new forms of self-determination that threaten the existence of sovereign states. Uncertainty of the status of the newly emerged states formations serves as the source of domestic and international tension, which inevitably leads to intergovernmental clashes and negatively impacts geopolitical situation in separate regions and in the world as a whole.

Exploring the Legality of the Constitutional and Independence Referendums in Nagorno-Karabakh under International Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Saeed Bagheri
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Autonomous Region ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

As a result of the constitutional referendum held on 20 February 2017 in the unrecognised Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, both the name and administration of the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh changed. According to the new Constitution, adopted with an 87 per cent majority, Nagorno-Karabakh’s name is now the Republic of Artsakh, its Armenian name, and the system is changing from semi-presidential to presidential. This study discusses the legality of the referendum, the third since Nagorno-Karabakh was established in 1991; it evaluates the referendum in the context of the secession and the right to self-determination in international law. Having looked at similar cases, the article challenges the compatibility of all referenda held in the region with the uti possidetis juris principle and principle of territorial integrity under international law.

TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY AND CONSENT IN THE CHAGOS ADVISORY OPINION

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-238
Author(s):  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Jennifer Robinson ◽  
Nicola Peart
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The People ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Right

AbstractA key element of the right to self-determination is territorial integrity. This has usually been considered solely in relation to the territorial integrity of an existing State seeking to resist claims by peoples for the right to self-determination. Yet the Chagos Opinion by the International Court of Justice examines a different type of territorial integrity—that of the colonial territory itself. This article explores the consequence of the Court's view that the territorial integrity of the colonial territory is a matter of customary international law, and that any division, integration or other disruption of that colonial territory after December 1960 is unlawful, without the free and genuine consent of the people of the colonial territory. In particular this article seeks to explore what the Chagos Opinion means in terms of the territorial integrity of a colonial territory. It also examines the required conditions for ascertaining a free and genuine consent of the people of that territory, and the legal effects of not complying with them. There is also consideration of the implications for other situations from the clarification of customary international law in the Chagos Opinion, with a special focus on West Papua.

Decolonization and Self-Determination

2020 ◽  
pp. 186-200
Author(s):  
Natsu Taylor Saito
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Primary Interest ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Legal Structures ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Unique Status

International law recognizes the unique status of Indigenous peoples and the right of all peoples to self-determination. However, it is also largely controlled by states whose primary interest is in maintaining their own power, wealth, and “territorial integrity.” Considering what the right to self-determination encompasses and how it differs from the law protecting “minorities” from discrimination, this chapter suggests that decolonization of settler states will not be implemented by international legal structures but must be undertaken by the peoples themselves.

The Right of Secession in Public International Law

1983 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 24-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Turp
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Right Of Self Determination

SummaryIn light of the numerous secessionist claims witnessed by the international community, it is of great interest to ascertain if international law provides for a right of secessionist self-determination. An analysis of treaty provisions encompassing the right of self-determination of peoples, namely the United Nations Charter and the Human Rights Covenants, suggests that the latter treaties consecrate an authentic right to secede. Such a right appears to be unhindered by any customary norm which would prohibit secession as a means of implementation of the right of self-determination of peoples, seeing that the practice of States is clearly divided on the issue of secession. It is submitted, however, that there is a need for more detached criteria with respect to the right of secession, its beneficiaries and its conditions of exercise and, consequently, for an acknowledgement, to the benefit of the international community as a whole, of the legitimacy of national affirmations and secessionist claims.

scholarly journals Self-Determination in Regional Human Rights Law: From Kosovo to Cameroon

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dinah Shelton
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
World War ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination

The right of self-determination has long been celebrated for bringing independence and self-government to oppressed groups, yet it remains a highly controversial norm of international law. From the breakup of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires after World WarI to the struggle of colonial territories for independence following World War II and the later dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, there has been an unavoidable conflict between the efforts of peoples to achieve independence and the demands of existing states to preserve their territorial integrity.

scholarly journals The issue of justification of application of the principle of self-determination of peoples by separatist formations in Ukraine

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Klymenko Kyrylo ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Ethnic Group ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
The People ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

The article provides an analysis of the possibility of separatist formations in Ukraine to refer to the principle of self-determination of peoples as a justification for their activities. The minimum necessary criteria of legal bases for self-determination are considered, among which: the existence of effective connection of the subject of self-determination with a certain territory; the existence of the subject itself, i.e., the people (ethnic group), which claims self-determination; and the recognition by the international community of such a potential entity as the bearer of the right to self-determination. Regarding the connection with the territory, the doctrine of international law and practice recognizes the right to cultural and national self-determination in a particular territory for any ethnic group. This right is limited to the common interests of all the people of the state, which consists in the unconditional preservation of the inviolability and integrity of its territory. As for the existence of the subject of self-determination, the people is recognized as the historical community of people formed in a certain area and have stable features of the language, culture, and mental composition (mentality), as well as aware of their unity and difference from others through conscious self-name. At the same time, diasporas and migrants must be subject to the laws of the country of residence under the right of citizenship or the right of permanent residence. As for the recognition of the subject of self-determination by the international community, it may recognize as the people those who are under colonial rule, occupation by a foreign state, or against whom a policy of racism is pursued. Thus, international law does not protect separatist movements aimed at secession if they do not meet these criteria. This means that separatist formations in Ukraine do not have the right to secession but are terrorist organizations in terms of their methods of activity. Keywords: people, international recognition, right to self-determination, secession, territory

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document