The study is the result of an international collaborative project supported and funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. This multi-year venture has involved a research team of some forty chapter authors and commentators. The research has been accompanied by three major workshops on project methodology, initial chapter reviews and final discussions. A point was made of including both scholars and practitioners involved in power-sharing settlements in the review process, in the hope that more would be learned about the actual implementation of the settlements under investigation. The project team was united in its wish to explore whether long-standing secessionist conflicts have been addressed effectively through the significant number of self-determination settlements that were generated in response to the wave of internal conflicts of the 1990s. It was also committed to testing whether consociationalist and integrative techniques of conflict settlement really are as mutually exclusive as is sometimes supposed, or whether they can in fact be mutually reinforcing. Finally, the project derives its impetus from the necessity to critically rethink the doctrine of self-determination. One may question whether its traditional, restrictive interpretation will be adequate in confronting the wide variety of future challenges to the territorial integrity of states.

Conflicts over the rights of self-defined population groups to determine their own destiny within the boundaries of existing states are among the most violent forms of inter-communal conflict. Many experts agree that autonomy regimes are a useful framework within which competing claims to self-determination can be accommodated. This volume explores and analyses the different options available. The contributors assess the current state of the theory and practice of institutional design for the settlement of self-determination conflicts, and also compare and contrast detailed case studies on autonomous regimes in the former Yugoslavia, the Crimea, Åland, Northern Ireland, Latin America, Indonesia and Vietnam.

Throughout the world many sovereign states grant one or more of their territories greater autonomy than other areas. This arrangement, known as asymmetric autonomy, has been adopted with greater regularity as a solution to ethnic strife and secessionist struggles in recent decades. As asymmetric autonomy becomes one of the most frequently used conflict resolution methods, examination of the positive and negative consequences of its implementation, as well as its efficacy, is vital. Asymmetric Autonomy and the Settlement of Ethnic Conflicts assesses the ability of such power distribution arrangements to resolve violent struggles between central governments and separatist groups. This collection of new case studies from around the world covers a host of important developments, from recentralization in Russia, to "one country, two systems" in China, to constitutional innovation in Iraq. As a whole, these essays examine how well asymmetric autonomy agreements can bring protracted and bloody conflicts to an end, satisfy the demands of both sides, guarantee the physical integrity of a state, and ensure peace and stability. Contributors to this book also analyze the many problems and dilemmas that can arise when autonomous regions are formed. For example, powers may be loosely defined or unrealistically assigned to the state within a state. Redrawn boundaries can create new minorities and make other groups vulnerable to human rights violations. Given the number of limited self-determination systems in place, the essays in this volume present varied evaluations of these political structures. Asymmetric state agreements have the potential to remedy some of humanity's most intractable disputes. In Asymmetric Autonomy and the Settlement of Ethnic Conflicts, leading political scientists and diplomatic experts shed new light on the practical consequences of these settlements and offer sophisticated frameworks for understanding this path toward lasting peace.

Analyzes the role of self-determination and territorial integrity in some of the most difficult decolonization cases.

The year 2020 marks the 75th anniversary of the United Nations Organisation, and the 50th anniversary of the United Nations Friendly Relations Declaration, which states the fundamental principles of the international legal order. In commemoration, some of the world's most prominent international law scholars from all continents have come together to offer a comprehensive study of the fundamental principles of international law. Each chapter in this volume reflects decades of experience, work and reflection by the most authoritative voices of the field. At the same time, the book is an invitation to end narrow specialisation and re-engage with the wider body of rules and processes that lie at the foundations of the international legal order.

There is new movement in the discussion about self-determination and statehood. The contested declaration of independence by Kosovo and Russia’s recognition of the purported independence of Abkhasia and South Ossetia have caused significant controversy. These developments may well put an end to the attempt by governments to keep in place the highly restricted doctrine of self-determination that has previously only been made available in the colonial context. This monograph argues that classical self-determination, narrowly conceived in the colonial context. cannot contribute to the resolution of the presently ongoing self-determination conflicts around the world. However, this study finds that over the past few years a new practice of addressing self-determination conflicts has emerged. This practice significantly extends our understanding of the legal right to self-determination and of the means that can be brought to bear in terminating secessionist conflicts.

This book provides essential legal information on state secession in an innovative manner: unlike conventional approaches, which invariably focus on whether there is a right to secession, here the discussion centers on how secessionist conflicts can be effectively resolved. To that end, the book not only reveals the inadequacy of the current international legal framework, but also carefully considers how relevant actors can work to improve the legal system. In short, it argues that secessionists and non-secessionists should conclude an agreement to reconcile their conflicting rights to self-determination, while external actors should do their utmost to ensure the success of these efforts. Positive external involvement requires external actors to refrain from the use of force and to participate more rationally in secessionist conflicts. Given its subject matter, the book will appeal to a broad readership, including students and researchers in international law, international relations and ethnic studies, as well as enthusiasts in these fields.