The Langar Hall

Self-Determination

Posted by Reema | Wednesday, February 20, 2008 – 4:00 am

The U.S., France, and Britain (among other nations) have formally recognized Kosovo after it declared its independence on Sunday. This tiny province was unable to reach a deal with Serbia after decades of conflict and the dissolution of former Yugoslavia.

The province declared independence from Serbia on Sunday, sending tens of thousands of ethnic Albanians streaming through the streets to celebrate what they hoped was the end of a long and bloody struggle for national self-determination.

Not everyone in the community of nations is as happy about this declaration as Kosovo’s ethnic Albanians. Some dealing with their own separatist movements have resisted and protested recognizing Kosovo.

Russia, which opposes Kosovo’s independence, demanded an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Sunday to proclaim the declaration “null and void,” but the meeting produced no resolution…the foreign minister of Spain, Miguel Angel Moratinos, told reporters that the declaration did not respect international law and Spain would not recognize Kosovo…Cyprus, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Greece have also been reluctant to recognize Kosovo.

China expressed grave concern over the declaration, fearing Taiwan would be encouraged to follow suit. Sri Lanka, dealing with Tamil secessionists, condemned the declaration. Even Condi qualified her recognition saying that Kosovo should not be seen as setting a precedent for other ’situations’ in the world today.

Some experts think a nation has to be recognized as such before it can really be a nation, while others think this supposedly legitimating statement, “I recognize you” is unnecessary. After all, how does a simple statement or recognition have the power to create or withhold the identity of another group?

Shouldn’t one’s identity be something that is entirely self-determined? Well… there may be moral reasons for thinking this should be so, but it’s unclear whether this right of self-determination is one that is as accepted by the international community as other rights- such as the right to not be tortured or arbitrarily killed. Though the words ’self-determination’ are often touted by politicians and academics, many nations fearing secessionist movements have claimed that the right only exists in relation to people under ‘foreign domination’ - responding to colonialism, but limiting internal fragmentation.

Generally, an idea becomes enforceable when parties have long-term, mutual self-interest in it. Attempts at self-determination, whether at the individual, group, or national level are inevitably clashes with entrenched groups in power who have an interest in maintaining status quo. Despite past turmoil and threats of secession, India still groups Sikhs under Hindus in their Marriage Act (as well as Buddhists and Jains). So, though self-determination may sound like a fundamental right, it has not been historically respected as fundamental and may also be difficult to enforce in the future.