Intervention and Collective Self-Determination

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff McMahan
Keyword(s):  
Self Determination ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Ethical Dimension ◽  
Common Assumption ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right

Intervention often violates both respect for state sovereignty and the right to self-determination. McMahan focuses on the latter ethical dimension rather than the former political and legal one, although his claims have important implications for issues of state sovereignty. He challenges the common assumption that respect for self-determination requires an almost exceptionless doctrine of nonintervention by first defining the notions of “intervention” and “self-determination,” and then analyzing Walzer's doctrine of nonintervention. The recognition that there are different ideals of self-determination results in a less rigid and more permissive doctrine of nonintervention.

Regional Hegemony: Domination and Resistance in the Horn of Africa

1993 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Iyob
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
African Unity ◽  
Horn Of Africa ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
European Colonialism ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination

Contested territories and challenges to state sovereignty have become almost the norm in post-colonial Africa. The nexus of many of these conflicts resides in a status quo which gives primacy to territorial integrity over the right of peoples to self-determination. The comparative advantage thus accorded to sovereign states has resulted in a disequilibrium that legitimated the violation of both regionally and internationally sanctioned rules enshrined in the Organisation of African Unity (O.A.U.) and the United Nations (U.N.). Thus a normative bias in favour of the imperative of stability and order was justified by reference to the fragility of the newly independent régimes. In the process, the right of self-determination was narrowly interpreted to refer solely to those African peoples waging liberation struggles against European colonialism or white rule.

19. Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Havemann
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Group Rights ◽  
Indigenous Group ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

This chapter examines issues surrounding the human rights of Indigenous peoples. The conceptual framework for this chapter is informed by three broad, interrelated, and interdependent types of human rights: the right to existence, the right to self-determination, and individual human rights. After describing who Indigenous peoples are according to international law, the chapter considers the centuries of ambivalence about the recognition of Indigenous peoples. It then discusses the United Nations's establishment of a regime for Indigenous group rights and presents a case study of the impact of climate change on Indigenous peoples. It concludes with a reflection on the possibility of accommodating Indigenous peoples' self-determination with state sovereignty.

Between Race and Nation: Marcus Garvey and the Politics of Self-Determination

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Desmond Jagmohan
Keyword(s):  
White Supremacy ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Black Diaspora ◽  
Irish Nationalism ◽  
Independent State ◽  
Marcus Garvey ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
Self Rule ◽  
Argument Proceeds ◽  
The Right

This essay argues that Marcus Garvey held a constructivist theory of self-determination, one that saw nationalism and transnationalism as mutually necessary and reinforcing ideals. The argument proceeds in three steps. First it recovers Garvey’s transnationalist emphasis by looking at his intellectual debts to other diaspora struggles, namely political Zionism and Irish nationalism. Second it argues that Garvey held a constructivist view of national identity, which also grounds his argument that the black diaspora has a right to collective self-determination. Third it explicates Garvey’s further contention that the right to self-determination and the persistence of oppression give the African diaspora a pro tanto claim to an independent state, which he considered essential to vanquishing white supremacy and realizing collective self-rule.

A.I. Solzhenitsyn's Publicism of 1960–1970-ies in the Context of the Debates on the Nation and Ethnic Issues

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 276-288
Author(s):  
Alexey B. Panchenko
Keyword(s):  
National Policy ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Literary Language ◽  
Soviet People ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
High Level

Article is devoted to the analysis of A.I. Solzhenitsyn’s views on the phenomenon of nation and ethnic issue, which were reflected in his publications in 1960–1970-ies. At that time Soviet theories of nation and ethnos were taking shape and on their basis the national policy of creating of the new historical community – the Soviet people, – was pursued. Those questions were actively discussed by dissidents and emigrants. That’s why Solzhenitsyn's publications are considered in this article in the context of those discussions and on the basis of the performed analysis the following points can be singled out. Solzhenitsyn linked the existence of nation with the development of the living literary language, but language was not one of the markers of nation. Each nation is the personality of high level, which is manifested in individuals, each of whom embodies the whole nation. And preservation of national variety is the condition of further mankind development. It follows that the task of preserving the Russian nation against its transformation into the Soviet people is very important. Therefore differentiation of «Russian» and «Soviet» becomes one of the key points in Solzhenitsyn's publicism. The common issue in Solzhenitsyn's works and the concurrently held debates was their failure to see the nation as political community of citizens. In general Solzhenitsyn's views can be described as consistent Russian nationalistic while he recognized the right of all nations on self-determination.

Conclusion: Territorial Sovereignty and Global Institutions

2019 ◽  
pp. 249-258
Author(s):  
Anna Stilz
Keyword(s):  
Limit State ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Climate Justice ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
World Government ◽  
Global Institutions ◽  
Multilateral Cooperation ◽  
Multilateral Institutions ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
Territorial States

This book has offered a qualified defense of a territorial states system. This chapter summarizes the book’s argument and suggests we have a common responsibility to work to create multilateral institutions that would better specify, allocate, and enforce duties to protect the fundamental territorial interests of the earth’s inhabitants. Following Kant, the chapter argues for institutionalizing these cosmopolitan duties through multilateral cooperation and horizontal sanctioning, rather than by instituting a world government with executive powers. There is every reason to work toward climate justice, more extensive refugee rights, and other cosmopolitan reforms via “self-binding” arrangements that will reflect, rather than violate, collective self-determination. Such a strategy may allow for the establishment of multilateral institutions that can limit state sovereignty by enforceable duties to secure fundamental territorial interests.

The Existing Cause of Biafra and its Right to Self-determination

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Yinka Olomojobi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Regional Differences ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
The South ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Independent States ◽  
The Right

Abstract There has been recent agitation for self-determination in the south-east of Nigeria for the state known as Biafra (a pro-secessionist group). The principle of self-determination is a well-debated discourse since it connects with the right to secede and create a sovereign state. Like a marriage at gunpoint, a reluctant partner will always want a way out of the marriage, and will take a hike at the first opportunity. Given this political inheritance, Nigeria has fallen prey to several attempts to undermine state sovereignty originating in ethnic and regional differences. The controversy has concerned both the principle’s status in international law and its charter. This principle has played a prominent part in the emergence of former colonies as independent states. The aim of this article is to explore the ongoing agitation for a Biafran Republic and to assess whether it is in conformity with the right to self-determination.

scholarly journals Constituent Power, the Rights of Nature, and Universal Jurisdiction

2014 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Colón-Ríos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Environmental Conditions ◽  
International Community ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Constituent Power ◽  
The Right

This article provides a justification for the exercise of universal jurisdiction in cases of serious environmental damage. This justification rests in important ways on the theory of constituent power. The theory of constituent power has an intergenerational component that requires the protection of the environmental conditions that allow future generations to engage in constitution-making episodes. This article maintains that, by virtue of the connections between constituent power, the right to self-determination, and state sovereignty, the justification for the exercise of universal jurisdiction for serious environmental damage is at least as compelling as the justification for its exercise with respect to egregious human rights infringements. In those scenarios, courts exercising universal jurisdiction would be acting to protect the ability of present and future peoples to participate in the constitution and reconstitution of the states that make up the international community. Such a jurisdiction would rest on the authority of humanity as a whole rather than on that of any state or people.

scholarly journals Black Liberation and Indigenous Sovereignty

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Brink Mosey
Keyword(s):  
Nova Scotia ◽  
Settler Colonialism ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Black Liberation ◽  
Black Canadians ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
Indigenous Sovereignty ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right ◽  
Collective Thinking

As part of a collective thinking project, article proposes that all Black Canadians move to Nova Scotia to set up a decolonial, anti-racist, non-patriarchal, abolitionist settlement. Recognizing the denial of the right to collective self-determination for Black Canadians, this article explores how Black Canadians can work in solidarity with Indigenous solidarity movements to correct the injustices of settler-colonialism. 

Do Legitimate States Have a Right to Do Wrong?

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 515-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Heath Wellman
Keyword(s):  
Self Determination ◽  
External Interference ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Territorial Sovereignty ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis essay critically assesses Anna Stilz's argument in Territorial Sovereignty: A Philosophical Exploration that legitimate states have a right to do wrong. I concede that individuals enjoy a claim against external interference when they commit suberogatory acts, but I deny that the right to do wrong extends to acts that would violate the rights of others. If this is correct, then one must do more than merely invoke an individual's right to do wrong if one hopes to vindicate a legitimate state's right to commit injustices. Of course, there may be distinctive features of legitimate states that explain why they enjoy moral protections that individuals lack, but I argue that the value of collective self-determination is not up to this task. And even if these arguments fail, self-determination would at most explain why legitimate states enjoy a right to commit injustices against their own citizens; it would provide them no moral protection when they violate the rights of outsiders.

Legitimacy and Self-Determination

2019 ◽  
pp. 89-118
Author(s):  
Anna Stilz
Keyword(s):  
Core Values ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Autonomy ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Private Rights ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
The Right

This chapter turns to the question of how a state might acquire legitimate territorial jurisdiction over a population of rightful occupants. What gives a state the right to rule a specific territory and group of people? I hold that a state has a right to rule a territory and population if and only if it: (i) protects certain essential private rights for all its subjects and respects these rights in outsiders and (ii) it reflects the shared will of its population as to how—and by whom—they should be ruled. To gain the right to rule, a state must serve the second and third core values that underpin the states system: basic justice and collective self-determination. The chapter offers a specific account of the interest in collective self-determination, which it calls “the political autonomy theory.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document