THE LEGITIMACY OF SECESSION AND THE CASE OF MONTENEGRO
Undergraduate
Abstract
The principle of self-determination
traditionally refers to respect for state sovereignty. It has been
inclreasingly employed to lower level communities as they have argued their
right to national self-determination. National groups have, based on a common
culture or likewise, made claims to secession. Secession can have severe
consequences for either one of the two political units. It can also be
extremely difficult to implement as it involves territorial aspects and the
fundamental question of who belongs to the national group wishing to secede. A
framework for evaluating the legitimacy of secession is developed in this
thesis, based on three general types of secession theories applied and compared
to the case of Montenegro. The framework builds upon a theoretical background
defining what is meant by nationalism, nations and identity. The language used
in this essay is therefore that of constructivism, rooted in the civic idea of
nationalism. The belief that human identities are dynamic and subject to change
is a crucial assumption. With the aid of an historical presentation of
Montenegro, an evaluation of the region’s independence is made. To underline
why secession should be implemented with care, arguments against secession are
then presented. Secession should not be confused with a solution to ethnical
tensions. Alternatives to secession are thus demonstrated, showing the
complexity of the multiculturalist field in general. Multicultural policies
risk fixing ethnical lines rather than dissolving them. The secession of
Montenegro is legitimate as relatively stable democratic and liberal tradition
existed prior to independence. The referendum in Montenegro was, more over,
determined by a well organised referendum where civil elements dominated over
ethnical ones.
The general understanding of world politics has, in the
past few decades, shifted from having primarily an ideological dimension to
having an ethnical one. The World Wars and the Cold War had sovereign
nation-states as primary actors in conflict. The power of nation-states was
reduced as globalisation came about and supra-national institutions grew in
importance. International institutions are, however, still build up around the
concept of the nation-state despite the widespread tendency of civil wars.
There seems to be a link between the convergence of
cultures world wide and the increase in ethnic conflicts. This increase can be
explained by a simultaneously increasing sense of anomie following the rise of
globalisation and disintertwining of nation-states (Dunne, 1995). Globalisation
came in the way of governments and their egalitarian promises made between 1945
and 1960, leaving them unfulfilled. At the same time nation-states lost
significance and people needed new ways to make sense of the world, like
resorting to an ethnic understanding of nationalism (Brown, 2006).
Parallel to the increase in international interaction, an
increase in ethnic conflicts took place and the Cold War came to its end.
Particularly in the former Soviet Union and Yugoslav states the fall of
Communism caused an upsurge of conflicts (Horowitz 1998, 200). The
decolonisation of Africa was, more over, followed by an extraction of new states
from previous political unions and units, further illuminating the tendency of
intra-state conflicts. With a limited focus on the power of the nation-states,
the perceptions of conflicts also changed (Dunne, 1995). The alternative
understandings of concepts such as nationalism and the principle of
self-determination that emerged, brought with them new tendencies in politics.
Following the gradual increases in ethnic conflicts was, therefore, a trend
towards identity politics.