There are currently over 100 stateless nations pressing for greater self-determination around the globe. The vast majority of these groups will never achieve independence. Many groups will receive some accommodation over self-determination, many will engage in civil war over self-determination, and in many cases, internecine violence will plague these groups. This book examines the dynamic internal politics of states and self-determination groups. The internal structure and political dynamics of states and self-determination groups significantly affect information and credibility problems faced by these actors, as well as the incentives and opportunities for states to pursue partial accommodation of these groups. Using new data on the internal structure of all self-determination groups and their states and on all accommodation in self-determination disputes, this book shows that states with some, but not too many, internal divisions are best able to accommodate self-determination groups and avoid civil war. When groups are more internally divided, they are both much more likely to be accommodated and to get into civil war with the state, and also more likely to have fighting within the group. Detailed comparison of three self-determination disputes in the conflict-torn region of northeast India reveals that internal divisions in states and groups affect when these groups get the accommodation they seek, which groups violently rebel, and whether actors target violence against their own co-ethnics. The argument and evidence in this book reveal the dynamic effect that internal divisions within SD groups and states have on their ability to bargain over self-determination. Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham demonstrates that understanding the relations between states and SD groups requires looking at the politics inside these actors.

The Politics of Self-Determination examines the territorial restructuring of Europe between 1917 and 1923, when a radically new and highly fragile peace order was established. It opens with an exploration of the peace planning efforts of Great Britain, France, and the United States in the final phase of the First World War. It then provides an in-depth view on the practice of Allied border drawing at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, focussing on a new factor in foreign policymaking-academic experts employed by the three Allied states to aid in peace planning and border drawing. This examination of the international level is juxtaposed with two case studies of disputed regions where the newly drawn borders caused ethnic violence, albeit with different results: the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France in 1918-19, and the Greek-Turkish War between 1919 and 1922. A final chapter investigates the approach of the League of Nations to territorial revisionism and minority rights, thereby assessing the chances and dangers of the Paris peace order over the course of the 1920s and 1930s. Volker Prott argues that at both the international and the local levels, the 'temptation of violence' drove key actors to simplify the acclaimed principle of national self-determination and use ethnic definitions of national identity. While the Allies thus hoped to avoid uncomfortable decisions and painstaking efforts to establish an elusive popular will, local elites, administrations, and paramilitary leaders soon used ethnic notions of identity to mobilise popular support under the guise of international legitimacy. Henceforth, national self-determination ceased to be a tool of peace-making and instead became an ideology of violent resistance.

There have been an increasing number of self-determination conflicts where sub-state groups challenge existing state authority. This book explains how self-determination can exercised beyond the decolonisation process and demonstrates that rather than a threat to international peace and stability, it has strong potential as a tool for conflict prevention and resolution.

TABLE OF UN DOCUMENTS.

This 2005 book presents an argument for the right of groups to secede, offering a thorough and unapologetic defense.

Leading scholars demonstrate how colonial subjects, national liberation movements, and empires mobilized human rights language to contest self-determination during decolonization.

How do groups—be they religious or ethnic—achieve sovereignty in a postnationalist world? In Self-Determination without Nationalism, noted philosopher Omar Dahbour insists that the existing ethics of international relations, dominated by the rival notions of liberal nationalism and political cosmopolitanism, no longer suffice. Dahbour notes that political communities are an ethically desirable and historically inevitable feature of collective life. The ethical principles that govern them, however—especially self-determination and sovereignty—require reformulation in light of globalization and the economic and environmental challenges of the twenty-first century. Arguing that nation-states violate the principle of self-determination, Dahbour then develops a detailed new theory of self-determination that he calls "ecosovereignty.” Ecosovereignty defines political community in a way that can protect and further the rights of indigenous peoples as well as the needs of ecological regions for a sustainable form of development and security from environmental destruction. In the series Global Ethics and Politics, edited by Carol Gould.