Search

Begin New Search Topic Self Determination Publication Year within 10 Years

11. The Securitisation of Kurdish Self-Determination as A Challenge for the Sectarian Balance of Power in the Middle East

Author:
Marek Musiol
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Polish Political Science Yearbook
Institution:
Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
Abstract:
The article addresses current questions concerning the Kurdish situation before and after the invasion and expansion of ISIS. It applied the theory of securitisation to study the tangled circumstances and frameworks of Kurdish claims, underlining their attempts at gaining their much-desired independence. This elaboration enables one to recognise the genesis and the local, regional and global context of international actions vis-à-vis Kurdish interests, and the possible supporters and opponents of the Kurdish project of statehood in the Middle East. It portrays also the current perception of Kurdish efforts to establish their own national and legal subjectivity that must be recognised by the majority of state actors in order to meet the indispensable criteria of international law. This article is particularly important in the context of recent developments in the Middle East. First of all, it refers to pressures, as well as openly offensive actions targeting the inter- ests and territories controlled by the Kurds in Turkey during the existence of the so-called Islamic State. Secondly, it reflects on actors’ reactions in the international arena, including the countries of the Middle East, towards the independence referendum in Iraqi Kurdistan, as well as on direct actions aimed at shaping a new geopolitical order after the fall of ISIS (attack by Iraqi troops in Kirkuk or the Turkish army in Afrin).
Topic:
Terrorism, Self Determination, Democracy, ISIS, and Independence
Political Geography:
Middle East

12. Secessionist Conflict: A Happy Marriage between Norms and Interests?

Author:
Rafael Biermann
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Abstract:
This roundtable debates how norms, values, and interests are balanced and harmonized in a world of conflict. My contribution focuses on one specific policy field: secessionist conflict. Like Megan Bradley’s contribution on the international refugee regime,1 this essay takes a metaperspective and does not investigate any one specific case or actor.2 I assume a political science perspective, paying attention first to social norms (as standards of appropriate behavior), which encompass but go beyond legally codified norms of international law;3 and second to interests, whether they be national, group, personal, or other. My perspective here is a critical social constructivist one, investigating the dialectic relationship of norms, interests, and power. I introduce the concept of “norm selection” in a policy field, which offers choice within a cluster of competing norms. Finally, following Bernd Bucher’s call to bring back agency into what he terms international “norm politics,” this contribution prioritizes agency, arguing that it is actors with diverging interests who do the balancing of norms, values, and interests.4 This was one of the major insights we gained from the workshop preceding this roundtable.5 The central argument of my contribution is that the policy field of secessionist conflict is structured around a set of five rival norms, of which territorial integrity and self-determination form the core. This normative structure permits the parties involved in a secessionist conflict to select from a menu of norms those that best suit their interests. The selection displays remarkable regularities, indicating default positions for each type of actor. However, significant outlier cases signal that interests do not simply trump norms but that actors accord different values to those norms. This attribution is influenced by the dynamics of a normative environment in which norms rise and fall. In particular, since the Cold War ended, discourse as well as state practice have shifted away from the traditional taboo on secession toward more revisionist concepts, such as remedial secession or earned sovereignty, providing an opening for the secessionist wave that started with the breakup of the Soviet Union and of Yugoslavia. I present my argument in three steps. First, I introduce the above-mentioned cluster of norms that shape discourse and policies on secession, distinguishing the two core norms and the three circumjacent ones of noninterference, human rights, and democratic good governance. Second, I identify five major types of actors in secessionist conflicts and investigate how each balances those norms. Since this balancing is actor-specific and conforms to the interests that each pursues, I arrive at distinct default positions for each actor type. Whereas this analysis suggests that norms serve primarily as legitimation devices to advance the diverging interests of various actors, the last section discusses outlier cases where norms and interests do not match as presumed.
Topic:
International Law, Self Determination, Norms, and Secession
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Self-Determination and U.S. Choices

Author:
Will Todman
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
The United States government can neither engender new states nor prevent them from coming into being, but it does possess a range of policy tools to influence the trajectory of new or aspiring states. While U.S. history creates a certain amount of empathy for self-determination groups, as a general rule the U.S. government views most independence movements skeptically. This is appropriate, in part because few such movements are viable. Economies are small or fragile (or both), the cause enjoys limited internal support, or the forces arrayed against it are too massive. In addition, the United States is tied diplomatically to some 190 countries around the world, and it usually privileges intergovernmental ties over those with non-governmental groups. Supporting secession not only would threaten U.S. relations with countries fighting U.S.-backed movements, but also other countries that feared that the United States might come to support secessionists elsewhere. For the United States, some sort of decentralization or autonomy arrangement is often a less costly option. It is also more agreeable to partner governments and reduces the risk of regional instability. However, exceptions can occur when secessionist movements take root in countries where the United States has more difficult relations, or where repression of minority groups or some other humanitarian factor weighs heavily on the scale.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Non State Actors, Governance, Self Determination, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

14. Settling Kurdish Self-Determination in Northeast Syria

Author:
Will Todman
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
When President Trump declared on December 19 that U.S. troops in Syria were “all coming back and coming back now,” it plunged the future of the East of the country into uncertainty.1 Dynamics in Syria were already shifting against the Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration (AA) in Northeast Syria, as threats from Turkey and the regime increased. The impending withdrawal of U.S. forces eliminates the AA’s main source of leverage over the Assad regime and increases its vulnerability to the Turkish invasion President Erdogan has threatened. Scrambling to avoid conflict, AA officials have turned to Russia to mediate a political deal with President Assad, hoping to restore regime control to Syria’s eastern borders in exchange for self-administration.2 However, the lack of clarity over the timeline of the withdrawal means the United States maintains important influence in eastern Syria.3 Shaping the outcome of the Kurdish question at this critical juncture and preventing a new conflict in Northeast Syria are among the few remaining positive steps it can take in Syria. Although the Kurdish issue seems tangential to U.S. interests, the United States should invest in its diplomatic and military tools to facilitate a limited autonomy settlement in Northeast Syria when the area is formally reintegrated into Assad’s territory. To do so, the United States should work to discourage potential spoilers to such a deal and then forge an international coalition to act as guarantors to the agreement. Failing to secure an autonomy settlement could sow the seeds of long-lasting instability in Northeast Syria. The experience of autonomy has fanned the flames of Kurdish self-determination, and although the position of Syrian Kurds is now precarious, they are nonetheless stronger and more united than they ever have been. Throughout the conflict, they have won freedoms which Damascus long denied them and built a formidable army: the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) reportedly numbers over 60,000 troops.4 Such self-determination movements do not flare out so easily. A new CSIS edited volume, Independence Movements and Their Aftermath: Self-Determination and the Struggle for Success,” shows that from Bangladesh to East Timor, governments’ attempts to curb a minority’s rights have often accelerated their push for independence.5 A U.S. abandonment of Syrian Kurds without facilitating a negotiated settlement could therefore ignite another bloody, long-term struggle for self-determination in the Middle East, with wide-reaching regional implications.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Governance, Self Determination, Settlements, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Middle East, Syria, North America, Kurdistan, and United States of America

15. One hundred years of State Secessions

Author:
Ricardo Torres
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Argentine Council for International Relations (CARI)
Abstract:
The basic idea behind this short paper is to analyze secessionism in the last century.
Topic:
Nationalism, History, Self Determination, Woodrow Wilson, Lenin, Nation-State, and Secession
Political Geography:
Argentina and Latin America

16. The West Bank’s Area C: Israel’s Eastern Line of Defense

Author:
Gershon Hacohen
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies (BESA)
Abstract:
This study explores the strategic-military implications of the establishment of a Palestinian state along the pre-June 1967 lines. Its central thesis is that the creation of such a state, on the heels of the IDF’s total withdrawal from the West Bank, will not only deprive Israel of defensible borders but will almost certainly lead to the advent of a terrorist entity like the one created in the Gaza Strip – at a stone’s throw from the Israeli heartland.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Military Strategy, Self Determination, and Occupation
Political Geography:
Israel, Palestine, Gaza, and West Bank

17. Kashmir: A Case for Self-Determination

Author:
Hafsa Kanjwal
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
On 5 August 2019, the Indian government unilaterally changed the legal status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, undermining its own constitutional process and completely annexing a territory that remains disputed in the international arena. In a statement to the Indian parliament, the Indian Home Minister announced the abrogation of Kashmir’s special status enshrined in Article 370 of the Indian constitution, as well as the bifurcation of the state into two Union Territories to be directly governed by the central government. Since then, the government has placed Indian-occupied Kashmir on lockdown. Despite restrictions on the movement of reporters and human rights observers and a clampdown on communication infrastructure (including the internet and some phone services), there have been reports of widespread human rights abuses including extrajudicial detentions (including of minors), torture, sexual violence, and lack of access to basic medical and healthcare services.
Topic:
Post Colonialism, Territorial Disputes, Self Determination, Colonialism, and Empire
Political Geography:
India, East Asia, and Kashmir

18. Kashmir and Global Powers

Author:
Amjad Abbas Khan, Sardar Sajid Mehmood, and Mehboob Alam
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
South Asian Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
Kashmir is generally visualized by the global powers with Indian and Pakistani perspective rather than a humanitarian issue. No doubt it is a bone of contention between two countries but cannot be declared as a simple bilateral conflict because of multi-dimensional nature. Kashmiri people have been struggling for their birth right, the right of self-determination since 1948, in the light of UN Security Council‟s resolutions. This paper highlights responsibilities and the role played by global powers in the resolution of longstanding issue of Asian Sub-continent according to the UN Security Council resolutions for peace and prosperity of the region.
Topic:
Human Rights, United Nations, Bilateral Relations, Territorial Disputes, Self Determination, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, India, Kashmir, and Punjab

19. Complex Palestinian Narratives & Competing Political Visions | FMEP

Author:
Omar Baddar, Rula Kort Bawardi, Nizar Farsakh, and Muna Shikaki
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
The American public and policymaking circles all too often reduce the “Palestinian perspective” to a single, monolithic viewpoint, both in terms of historical experience and yearning for the future. The oversimplification glosses over key complexities that directly result in a varying answers to the question “what do Palestinians want?”. This reduction of the Palestinian perspective contributes to a distortion in how the American policy world, as well as public, view Palestinians. The panelists explore the multiplicity of Palestinian perspectives and narratives looking back on the events since 1948 and looking forward on the future of the Palestinian people.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, History, and Self Determination
Political Geography:
Middle East and Palestine

20. Resistance at 70: The Future of the Palestinian National Movement

Author:
Tareq Baconi, Khaled Elgindy, Noura Erakat, and Lara Friedman
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
Seventy years after the Nakba, the Palestinian dispossession and exile that accompanied the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Palestinians today remain stateless. Their prospects for securing collective or individual rights are bleaker than they have been for decades. Alongside the international and regional developments that are undermining their quest for self-determination, Palestinians are also on the cusp of a leadership change that could have far reaching implications for their collective future. News emerging from the Gaza Strip today offers a glimpse that Palestinians are entering a new phase in their struggle. Drawing on his newly-released book, Hamas Contained: The Rise and Pacification of Palestinian Resistance, Tareq Baconi reflects on the wider trajectory of Palestinian nationalism through the prism of Hamas and the extraordinary challenges faced by Palestinians in Gaza. He is joined by, Khaled Elgindy, who addresses the history of American policy towards the Palestinians and the peace process and its impact on the Palestinian leadership more broadly. Noura Erakat focused on the role of international law in shaping the current Palestinian predicament and assess Palestinian officialdom’s legal strategy since 2000 to indicate possible horizons. The discussion was moderated by FMEP President Lara Friedman.
Topic:
History, Social Movement, Self Determination, and Nakba
Political Geography:
Middle East and Palestine