Secessionism is a process that has been part of international discourse since the development of government. Regardless of the success or equity created under a particular rule, various groups have sought separation from the state in an effort to create more autonomy and achieve a higher level of independence. While some secessionist movements have taken place without any real conflict or controversy, scholars report that, "Self-determination movements are the most frequent source of violent conflict in the international system today" (Walter, 313). As such, it is not surprising to find that the scholarship on secessionism and secessionist movements has increased dramatically in recent years. As secessionism serves to threaten global peace and America's asserted hegemonic power, interest in secessionist movements has become a more pressing issue for international discourse.Given the importance of secessionism to the overall stability of the international community, there is a clear impetus to understand this process and its overall impact on the development of the international community. Using this as a basis for research, this investigation considers a broad overview of modern secessionist movements.
[...] Seeking to answer this question, researchers have turned to the issue of democracy as a mitigating factor in the development of peaceful versus violent secessionist movements. In particular, scholars report that the Tamil are a totalitarian organization that will not work in a democratic and peaceful manner to achieve the separatist state that they desire: They [the Tamil] would have to quit their 'controlled areas' and guarantee a vote under tranquil circumstances. The LTTE is a totalitarian organization and it would be foolish to imagine the Tigers laying down their guns and participating in a democratic exercise of this nature exposing themselves to competition from other rival Tamil groups that are bound to assert themselves freed of constraint in a democratic environment (217). [...]
[...] Other efforts to explicate the development of secessionist movements include a critical review of regional political institutions in developing countries. Specifically, Saideman makes the argument that separatist conflicts continue to remain a pervasive challenge to world order because these conflicts are not easily resolved by political entities (Saideman, 722). According to this author, secessionist movements that develop in one nation are not addressed by either neighboring governments or the international community. Neighboring states fail to engage in separatist conflict because they believe that by committing resources to a separatist conflict, they will prompt separatist conflict in their home state (722). [...]
[...] As globalization forces the development of an international world order, consensus on when and how secessionist movements should be supported remains a difficult question for any one government or international body to answer in a meaningful manner. If the international community is to move forward in a manner that allows the integration of political and economic systems, some general consensus about the issue of secession will need to be addressed. If this issue is not addressed, individual states will be forced to manage the negative ramifications of globalization with no real means to address separatist movements in the state. [...]
[...] Thus, “Since nothing in the written constitution spoke directly to the point, the court asserted a number of broad principles that underpin the constitution, and that should govern in any secession debate: constitutionalism and the rule of law, federalism, democracy, and respect for minorities” (235). The pathway chosen by Quebec in its move to create an independent state is reflective of a more peaceful route to achieving autonomy. As reported in the current literature, the people of Quebec did not start a military campaign to advance or assert their rights; rather separatists seeking autonomy in the state pursued existing channels of political and social development in an effort to legally express their desires and opinions. [...]
[...] Holitscher, Marc and Roy Suter. paradox of economic globalization and political fragmentation: Secessionist movements in Quebec and Scotland. Journal of Interdisciplinary International Relations, (1999): 257-286. Jayasinghe, Shyamon. undertones of the Sri Lankan conflict.” Contemporary Review, 277(1617): 216-221. Lecours, Andre. “Ethnic and civic nationalism: Towards a new definition.” Space & Polity, (2000): 153-166. Mayall, James and Mark Simpson. “Ethnicity is not enough: Reflections on protracted secessionism in the Third World.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology, (1992): 5-25. Saideman, Stephen M. “Explaining the international relations of [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
