Secession, Territorialisation, and Resolution: Geopolitical Tensions in International Law

Authors: Li Houzhe (25A01A), Joni Ng (25A01A), Chen-June Kee Fay (25A01B), Themis Lai (25S03F)

Abstract

Secession stands as a cause célèbre within international law—its nebulous legality is dangerous given the often violent triggers, means, and consequences of irredentist movements, and their destabilising potential vis-à-vis the international order.

In this paper, we explore the early applications of international legal instruments including the United Nations Charter—which contains irreconcilable provisions for state sovereignty and peoples’ right to self-determination—to secessionist movements, and analyse the inconsistencies in international response vis-à-vis Kosovar and Crimean secessionist movements. In particular, Kosovo and Crimea had striking similarities in ethnic incongruity; however, whilst Kosovo was supported by the West and endorsed under the aegis of the UN, Crimea was internationally condemned, sans Russia and its political allies.

We then analyse the International Court of Justice’s past deficiencies in arbitrating these geopolitical—and fundamentally internationally aggravated—disputes. The UN Charter's contradictions,the voting power of the Third World majority and exploitation of membership frequently detract from the effectiveness of ICJ rulings. We propose a legal framework which can be adopted by international institutions to ensure consistency in recognising or rejecting secessionist movements. In developing criteria for evaluating the veracity of secessionist movements, we attempt to reconcile the interests of parent states, secessionists, and civilians. This forms a unifying lens through which the international community can ameliorate tensions in a fundamental pillar of human existence—statehood and identity.

Secession,Territorialisation,and Resolution_GeopoliticalTensionsinInternationalLaw_Final.pdf

Download PDF • 257KB