1

The classical definition of a nation state requires territory, population, a formal body that can impose taxes and government policy, and recognition by (some number) of sovereign states. How does the last principle sit with regards to the right to self determination, which seems to be getting closer to becoming a peremptory norm?

Ilya Grushevskiy
  • 185
  • 1
  • 6
  • It's not clear to me what you mean by classical definition. The first three points seem to come directly from the Montevideo Convention, but the fourth directly contradicts it. – Peter Taylor Oct 01 '17 at 13:03

2 Answers2

2

The right of self-determination is typically a right of a "nation", i.e. a group of people who share a national identity (e.g. Kurds or Palestinians or Navajos or Kosovars or Scots) who are the dominant population of a compact and contiguous geographic area. Self-determination is a right that belongs to "peoples" not to states.

If you have a "nation state" then you have already achieved the self-determination to which you are entitled, which is another way of saying that you have a right to establish a sovereign state or in lieu of that, an autonomous region with substantially autonomous self-government.

ohwilleke
  • 79,130
  • 11
  • 224
  • 303
  • So does self-determination mean a desire for more autonomy then, rather than the more clearly defined (and more evidenced) desire for self-government, which by definition satisfies the third criteria of a state? – Ilya Grushevskiy Sep 29 '17 at 13:25
  • 1
    According to the UN organizations that is linked either autonomy or sovereignty could constitute self-determination, and there are plenty of dependencies with an ethnic identity (e.g. Scotland and Puerto Rico) that have rejected independence in referendums when they have been held because they think being part of something bigger is worth it. Self-determination means an ability to determine what system of governance a people will have. If sovereign independence were the only goal, you would never see organizations like the EU form. – ohwilleke Sep 29 '17 at 16:56
  • does right to self determination involve right to "form a people" too ? as in organizing and promoting a national identity and cooperation –  Apr 07 '23 at 14:22
  • @OldAccount2005 Since this right is never litigated and instead is just a diplomatic talking point, there is no definitive answer. International law is not like domestic law. – ohwilleke Apr 07 '23 at 15:11
  • @ohwilleke but if it was , litigated in a court , could this be infered ? –  Apr 07 '23 at 16:00
  • @OldAccount2005 International law is not law in the ordinary sense of the word. It's more like an ideology free for the beholder to define. – ohwilleke Apr 07 '23 at 18:03
0

How does the last principle sit with regards to the right to self determination

Well, if you get

territory, population, a formal body that can impose taxes and government policy, and recognition by (some number) of sovereign states

then you have the right to self determination, if you do not get them then you do not have that right1.

BTW, the requisites you mention are for the classical definition of an state, whatever it is a nation state or it is not.

1Maybe you could claim that you have the right but you are not allowed to use it, which reminds me much of this scene
SJuan76
  • 31,715
  • 8
  • 87
  • 112