practical possibility”(p.100).Chapters Five, Eight, Nine and Fourteen are written in French (provided only with the most infinitesimal of Englishtranslation) on a repertoire of topics, including the State as a primary fact, the gap of international secession law, Africansecession with a new right of the [*620] African Union to intervene within a member State to restore peace and stability:p.257), and the history of secession of the Canton of Jura in Switzerland. An additional region-specific essay addressessecession and international law, Latin American style. In Chapter Twelve, Frida Armies Pfirter and Silvina GonzalezNapolitano take an historical perspective dating from the 16th century viceroyalty”onwards (p.378). This chapter inparticular, presents an unparalleled lawful interpretation of this region’s history.Antonello Tancredi’s essay on the “due process”of secession practice –despite the bustling activity in the footnotes andintermittent insertion of French sentences (pp.173, 183), is less successful.Andreas Zimmerman’s installment covers the beguiling problems of secession and succession, analyzing what rules of Statesuccession apply in regard to treaties. At the outset Zimmerman asserts that, traditionally “seceding States have . . . claimednot to be automatically bound by treaties concluded by their respective predecessor States”(p.213). As a result, readersmay be forgiven for concluding that, “such successor States did not automatically inherit the contractual obligations”(of theformer colonial power) (p.214). However, Zimmerman stipulates that, State practice post-1990 confirms (referencing ICJudgment in 1997) that the customary treaty law ensures a corollary that treaties attach to the territory –running with the landso to speak – “automatically devolving upon the successor State”(p.214). The historical correlation of statements ensuresthis chapter is a serious page-turner.The tenth essay in is supplied by Li–Ann Thio. Her contribution successfully wraps up secession in the Asia Pacific region.Despite separatist initiatives that threaten regional order, Thio elucidates how the international community is increasinglyprone to recognize the realities of secessionist attempts as a remedy where the government of the predecessor Statecommitted . . . human right violations against the seceding unit”(p.300). Thio supports this statement with the example of Bangladesh, where the UN did not immediately recognize Bangladesh but expressed concern for the gross human rightsviolations committed”(pp.305, 336). She later catalogues the configuration of territorial units by colonial powers and theconstruction of multi-ethnic States (in India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka) with the attendant problems promoting co-existence.”Thio correctly interprets this as “partly a legacy of European colonialism”(p.312). The litany of complaints (frompostcolonial States) is not
all
laid at the door of imperialism, for Thio only attaches part responsibility. She concludes hercontribution, unequivocally stating that, “while one might hope that international law on secession is morally progressive, aminimal realism is warranted, given States”preoccupation with internal security and regional stability”(p.350). The mostunambiguous example one could attach to Thio’s remarks is the equilibrium relating the US-China-Taiwan Triangle. (DuringChinese [*621] President Hu Jintao’s visit to the United States on 20th April 2006, President George W. Bush reaffirmed tothe world that he supports the U.S. one China”policy.). Thio is incredibly conscious of the “potency of nationalism-related .. . issues of State fragmentation in the Asia Pacific . . . led by oppressed ethno-cultural minority groups within post-colonialStates,”the corollary of which will “spark fears of political balkanization”(p.353). Thio’s writing (cross–disciplinary) is of thehighest order and most comprehensible, utilizing a vast repertoire of sources (though one feels that Benjamin (2003, at 8–10)would have supplied valued added material).The most superior chapter in the volume is the eleventh. Undergirded by unsurpassed (European) historical analysis thisessay should be read first. Photini Pazartzis discusses the imposition of conditions (of both popular will and respect forhuman rights) providing the scaffold that is “internal self–determination,”the perquisite to external self–determination(pp.369, 372) –a most clear and scholarly exposition.In conclusion, the contributors coherently instruct their intended audience that it would be erroneous to proclaim thatsecession violates the principle of State territorial integrity, for this term applies only in international relations. However, asthe reader will rapidly become aware, politically–speaking, forcible attempts at secession are increasingly condemned as athreat to international security. Such condemnation in turn, undermines the effectiveness of a secessionist entity claimingstatehood. Crucially though, this reviewer interprets “law”as little more than a scarecrow on the international landscape, andits logical function is, appropriately, that of a straw man.
Leave a Comment