Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Self-determination, National – Kosovo »

All 15 former Soviet Republics share a unique federal history with a particular understanding of the right to self-determination. Moreover, seven of them were federalised during the Soviet era, amounting to a major challenge to their territorial integrity after independence. While these states confronted their minorities in different ways, the Russian solution to its inherited national question has been the most comprehensive. This has made Russian understanding on self-determination essentially different from the mainstream of the international community, which in turn explains Russian persistent objections over the Kosovo independence (2008) and partly clarifies the events in Georgia (2008) and Crimea (2014). This article analyses how the former Soviet Republics coped with the transformation from the ethnofederal state to independence. The focus will be on Russia as the most affected of them and on the persistent Soviet legacy in its interpretations of self-determination and, consequently, its policies towards its post-Soviet neighbours.

The process of creating the Albanian Federation, respectively the acceleration level, is combined with the EU integration process, respectively disintegration process. Certainly, the process of creating the Albanian Federation, as a political project does not face with the challenges the European Political Union project is facing, but the approach to the EU challenges will make us more clear the process from where could be outlined the creation of Albanian Federation. Divergences between the new and older EU members, but also between the EU member states that have national heterogeneity and as consequence were not allowed to pass the Rubicon of internal self-determination, different ethnicities within national borders ( Spain, Romania, Cyprus, Slovakia and Greece ) with those who present the type of homogeneous state ( Germany, Italy, Sweden, Slovenia, etc.. ), are reflected in the attitude towards Kosovo and, generally, the right to self-determination. Comparative overview of theses of Applied Policy Research Center ( CAP, Muenchen ) on possible trends in the development of European integration processes, in relation to the process of creating Albanian Federation to the first and fifth scenario results to be small, while to the fourth scenario this possibility seems to be big. The fourth scenario, combined with elements of the second scenario, it seems to be exactly that, in current circumstances is considered the most probable to be realized, but that goes in favour of the creation process of the Albanian Federation. Creation of the Albanian Federation should be regarded as a contribution to sustainable peace in the region. Albanian Federation could play a positive role in deepening the transatlantic relationship

State is society’s need for the existence of an organized power, equipped with the right equipments of coercion and able to run the society, by imposing the choices that seem reasonable to them, through legal norms. State is an organization of state power; it is an organized power which imposes its will to all the society and has a whole mechanism to execute this will. The state realizes its functions through power, which is a mechanism to accomplish its relevant functions. The power’s concept is a social concept, which can be understood only as a relation between two subjects, between two wills. Power is the ability to impose an order, a rule and other’s behavior in case that he doesn’t apply voluntary the relevant norm, respectively the right. Using state power is related to creation and application, respectively the implementation of law. To understand state power better, we have to start from its overall character. So, we notice that in practice we encounter different kinds of powers: the family’s one, the school’s one, the health’s one, the religion’s, culture’s etc. The notion of powers can be understood as a report between two subjects, two wills. Power is an order for other’s behavior. Every power is some kind of liability, dependence from others. In the legal aspect, supremacy of state presents the constitutive – legislative form upon the powers that follow after it. Supremacy, respectively the prevalence, is stronger upon other powers in its territory. For example we take the highest state body, the parliament as a legislative body, where all other powers that come after it, like the executive and court’s one, are dependable on state’s central power. We can’t avoid the carriage of state’s sovereignty in the competences of different international organizations. Republic, based on ratified agreements for certain cases can overstep state’s power on international organizations. The people legitimate power and its bodies, by giving their votes for a mandate of governance (people’s verdict). It is true that we understand people’s sovereignty only as a quality of people, where with the word people we understand the entirety of citizens that live in a state. The sovereignty’s case actualizes especially to prove people’s right for self-determination until the disconnection that can be seen as national – state sovereignty. National sovereignty is the right of a nation for self-determination. Sovereignty’s cease happens when the monopoly of physical strength ceases as well, and this monopoly is won by another organization. A state can be ceased with the voluntary union of two or more states in a mutual state, or a state can be ceased from a federative state, where federal units win their independence. In this context we have to do with former USSR’s units, separated in some independent states, like Czechoslovakia unit that was separated in two independent states: in Czech Republic and Slovakia. Former Yugoslavia was separated from eight federal units, today from these federal units seven of them have won their independence and their international recognition, and the Republic of Kosovo is one amongst them. Every state power’s activity has legal effect inside the borders of a certain territory and inside this territory the people come under the relevant state’s power. Territorial expansion of state power is three dimensional. The first dimension includes the land inside a state’s borders, the second dimension includes the airspace upon the land and the third dimension includes water space. The airspace upon inside territorial waters is also a power upon people and the power is not universal, meaning that it doesn’t include all mankind. State territory is the space that’s under state’s sovereignty. It is an essential element for its existence. According to the author Juaraj Andrassy, state territory lies in land and water space inside the borders, land and water under this space and the air upon it. Coastal waters and air are considered as parts that belong to land area, because in every case they share her destiny. Exceptionally, according to the international right or international treaties, it is possible that in one certain state’s territory another state’s power can be used. In this case we have to do with the extraterritoriality of state power. The state extraterritoriality’s institute is connected to the concept of another state’s territory, where we have to do with diplomatic representatives of a foreign country, where in the buildings of these diplomatic representatives, the power of the current state is not used. These buildings, according to the international right, the diplomatic right, have territorial immunity and the relevant host state bodies don’t have any power. Regarding to inviolability, respectively within this case, we have two groups to mention: the real immunity and the personal immunity, which are connected with the extraterritoriality’s institute. Key words: Independence, Sovereignty, Preponderance, Prevalence, Territorial Expansion.

The recruitment and retention of well-qualified military personnel are essential for any armed forces. This is even more true because most armed forces in Europe have shifted from a conscript-based to an all-volunteer format. Based on presentations and discussions during the 14th ERGOMAS Conference in Athens, Greece, June 26-30, 2017, this special publication of Contemporary Military Challenges focuses on the challenges of recruiting and retaining interested young people in the armed forces. In the ERGOMAS Working Group “Recruitment and Retention”, chaired by Tibor Szvircsev Tresch, 20 papers from different researchers were presented. In the five conference sessions on this issue, we had interesting discussions on various related topics. Session 1 dealt with the subject of minorities in the armed forces, and especially how they can be integrated and how they can participate in the system. In the next session, recruitment and retention in the reserve forces stood as the theme of the presentations. Politics and the military: mutual influence and the effect on military personnel was the topic of session 3, and session 4 analysed the motivational factors and reasons for attrition. The last session focused attention on recruitment and retention strategies. From these five sessions we were able to choose five presentations from all of these topics to adapt as journal articles. In the five articles offered in this journal, recruitment and retention are broadly discussed in historical terms and also based on the most recent research results. In military sociology research has generally addressed the recruitment of volunteers into the active force, but the reserve components and the conscription system should also be reviewed in detail. This special issue also analyzes reserve forces and conscription systems with regard to recruitment and retention. In the past not much attention has been paid to the topic of recruitment and retention in Europe. This was also true during the time of the Cold War for the conscript-based armed forces; the recruitment of new personnel was guaranteed by the conscript system. The advantages of this system were that the conscripted young men (in Europe only men were obliged to enter the armed forces; for women this was on a volunteer basis, and in some countries it was even forbidden for women to join the armed forces, or they could join only in auxiliary positions) could be socialized during their military service and also convinced that a professional military position could be a career for them. In other words, through the conscript system the armed forces were able to win new personnel who could imagine staying in the armed forces as long-term employees. One consequence of this was that the armed forces did not have to recruit new personnel on the free job market. The ‘in-house’ recruiting system provided by conscription was in most cases sufficient to catch enough personnel and – very importantly – well-qualified staff. But with the end of the Cold War and new missions, armed forces had to cover new tasks. These new tasks also required, on the one hand, personnel who were able and willing to stay abroad for a longer time, and on the other hand, new skills to cope with the new circumstances in the missions abroad. With the conflicts in the 1990s such as the Gulf War, the Somali Civil War with the United Missions UNOSMO I and II, the Bosnian War and the Kosovo War with the involvement of NATO, Western European armed forces had huge problems sending qualified personnel to these crises. Paradoxically the European armed forces were at that time much bigger in the number of soldiers than they are today, but in almost every country it was forbidden to send conscripted soldiers on missions abroad. Therefore the situation was that after the end of the Cold War these armed forces were not fit for the new tasks. Through the experience gained within these missions, a process of multi-nationalization and professionalization took place in the European armed forces. Multi-nationalization meant that it was more important for many states to join alliances, especially NATO. In a multi-national framework the aspect of greater interoperability between different armed forces was given heed. This led to more professional structures. This structural change is strongly reflected in the number of armed forces that have suspended conscription. In 1990, just four out of 26 European countries had an all-volunteer force, i.e. no conscription system. Today, most European states have switched to an all-volunteer format for their armed forces. This situation has altered the manning system. The flow of newly conscripted recruits disappeared, and personnel had to be found on the free market. At the same time as the armed forces were changing from conscript-based mass armies to leaner all-volunteer forces, civil society was engaged in a process of changing values. Traditional values such as obedience, discipline, and subordination became less significant for young people, and values such as autonomy and self-determination were esteemed much more. Some reasons for this were urbanization, an increasing level of education, and greater differentiation and specialization in the working environment. This led to a discrepancy between civil values that focus on the individual, and military values, which refer to the group dimension. At the moment the consequences of this process can be seen in the difficulty recruiting military personnel in sufficient quantity and quality. Questions related to human resources have become existential for armed forces; not only filling positions in the armed forces, but also adapting them to the new missions in a multicultural environment requires the urgent efforts of human resources development. Attention is now directed towards widening the recruitment pool. Women and young people with a migrant background should complement the traditional recruitment profile of a young, white male. Or in other words, the new recruiting targets must be on an equal footing with the old traditional recruitment basis. With that in mind the European armed forces must alter their recruitment outlook so that they will be attractive to these new target groups. The papers and research presented in this journal may help to broaden the understanding of this new recruitment and retention process. Have a good read!

В статье рассматривается, сложная проблема национального самоопределения народов. В современном международном праве, как известно, признаются два кардинально противоположных подхода к решению данной про блемы. Первый подход связан с территориальной целостностью государств, ко торая признается международным правом и уставом ООН, а второй с правом нации на самоопределение вплоть до отделения и возникновения нового незави симого государства. В то же время от влиятельных государств земного шара, а не от международного права зависит, признавать то или иное вновь образо вавшееся государство или не признавать. Классическим примером в этом плане служит Республика Косово, чью независимость признали США и другие государ ства, а независимость Абхазии и Южной Осетии признала РФ и еще несколько государств. The article deals with the complex problem of national selfdetermination of peoples. Modern international law, as we know, recognizes two radically opposite approaches to the solution of this problem. The rst approach is related to the territorial integrity of States, which is recognized by international law and the UN Charter, and the second to the right of a nation to selfdetermination up to the separation and emergence of a new independent state. At the same time, it is up to the in uential States of the world, not international law, to recognize a newly formed state or not to recognize it. Classic examples in this regard are the Republic of Kosovo, separated with the help of the United States, great Britain and other States from Serbia, as well as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, separated from Georgia. The independence of Kosovo was recognized by the USA and other States, and the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia was recognized by Russia and some other States.

Nombreux sont ceux qui pensent que la dissolution de la Yougoslavie commence et finit au Kosovo. Il s’agit d’une suite logique de l’éclatement yougoslave une fédération fragile composée des différentes nationalités. Province autonome sous l’ère de Tito de 1974 - 1989, le Kosovo avait des prérogatives similaires à une république. Le régime de Milosevic supprima cette autonomie déclenchant ainsi des violences et des tensions. Face aux incessantes violations de leurs droits fondamentaux, les Albanais du Kosovo ont d’abord opté pour une résistance pacifique, toutes en boycottant les institutions serbes et yougoslaves. Ils ont réussi à crée une véritable société parallèle, une sorte d’Etat dans l’Etat. Les guerres yougoslaves ont initié la création des nouveaux Etats, il s’agit d’un processus de redéfinition des identités nationales de l’ex-Yougoslavie qui met en relation plusieurs conceptions de la nation et de la citoyenneté. Il y a de bonnes raisons de penser que la naissance d’un Etat du Kosovo peut amener la création d’une nouvelle Nation, cependant la création de cette nation suppose une conscience partagée et des circonstances politiques favorables. L’objectif de cette recherche était d’argumenter les causes de l’effondrement violent de l’ex-Yougoslavie et de tirer les enseignements d’une accession mouvementée et parfois tragique du Kosovo à l’indépendance et consistait aussi à analyser les difficultés, pour une société composite et fragmentée, d’accéder au XXIème siècle à la souveraineté nationale. Il ressort de cette thèse que la cause principale de l’effondrement violent de l’ancienne Yougoslavie était le programme national serbe qui cherchait à créer la Grande Serbie et que l’indépendance du Kosovo, au lendemain de la désintégration yougoslave, était la seule solution possible qui pouvait assurer la paix et la stabilité dans la région
Many people believe that the dissolution of Yugoslavia begins and ends in Kosovo. This is a logical continuation of the Yugoslav breakup a fragile federation composed of various nationalities. Autonomous province under the Tito’s era of 1974 - 1989, Kosovo had similar powers to a republic. Milosevic 's regime abolished Kosovo’s autonomy triggering violence and tensions. Faced with constant violations of their human rights, Kosovo Albanians opted for a peaceful resistance, all by boycotting Serbian and Yugoslav institutions. They managed to create a real parallel society, a kind of State in the State. The Yugoslav wars initiated the creation of new States, it is a process of redefining of the national identities of the former Yugoslavia which connects several conceptions of nation and citizenship. There are good reasons to belive that the birth of Kosovo State can cause the creation of a new nation, however, the creation of this nation requires a shared awareness and favorable political circumstances. This thesis aims to argue the causes of the violent collapse of the former Yugoslavia and to learn of a turbulent and sometimes tragic accession of Kosovo to independence and also to analyze the challenge and difficulties for a composite and fragmented society, to access in the 21st century to national sovereignty. This research showed that the main cause of the violent collapse of the former Yugoslavia was the Serbian national program that sought to create a Greater Serbia and that Kosovo's independence after the disintegration of Yougoslavia was the only possible solution that could ensure peace and stability in the region

La présente thèse veut fonder le droit moral à faire sécession, en analysant le principe de souveraineté nationale, le concept de peuple, celui de nation et de nationalisme, pour arriver à considérer la sécession en tant que phénomène inévitable suivant la dissolution de l'Etat en tant que principe absolu, et en tant que conséquence parfois souhaitable dans les conflits inter-ethniques qui n'arrivent pas à être résolus. Notre point de vue ne sera pas celui de qui veut forcer une minorité ou un groupe à demeurer dans une situation de status quo, afin de ne pas déranger les équilibres politiques internationaux ou de ne pas trahir le principe de la souveraineté d’un État sur son territoire ou celui de la non-ingérence. Nous aurons plutôt à cœur d’établir la réalité des faits derrière le mouvement sécessionniste, pour garantir au peuple demandeur de sécession une impartialité de traitement et l’avènement de meilleures conditions de vie pour sa population. Nos considérations seront pragmatiques, réalistes, marginalisant les fondements de droit international comme le principe de non-ingérence et le respect de la souveraineté étatique ainsi que les considérations d’ordre politique et stratégique.

Ce qui nous intéresse est la fondation d’un droit moral qui puisse se révéler capital dans la résolution de conflits et crises interethniques, et qui puisse faciliter les prises de décisions dans les crises sécessionnistes – quand la sécession en cours sera justifiable – pour aboutir à la création d’un nouvel État pour des raisons biens fondées, raisons qui n’ont pas pu être accommodées à travers des instruments tels quels l’octroi de droits spéciaux, les tentatives de pacification, la cohabitation forcée, l’autonomie, le fédéralisme.

Les événements qui portent une minorité ou un groupe national à contempler une solution sécessionniste sont en général marqués par une tension politique plus ou moins forte, des problèmes d’ordre social ou économique, parfois des violations de droits collectifs ou, pire, des conflits armés, violence de masse, génocide. Ce n’est jamais, ou seulement dans de très rares cas, une situation de bien-être qui génère une demande d’indépendance, et ce sera donc avec une encore plus grande humanité et de sentiments d’impartialité et de bienveillance qu’on devra considérer la situation en question.

Le droit à faire sécession existe parce qu’il appartient à chaque peuple de pouvoir se donner l’organisation politique et juridique de son choix. La référence juridique ne tournera plus autour des droits de l’homme (les droits fondamentaux des individus) mais autour des droits des gens (les droits fondamentaux des peuples) :ce droit, dans lequel ont cru aussi des philosophes comme Walzer, Livingstone, Boykin et Sandel, est une priorité éthique très forte pour la communauté internationale. C’est un droit fondamental et inaliénable, et comme tel il appartient à la sphère de la praxis humaine qui a à faire avec le comportement social, l’organisation politique et l’action civile pour une meilleure survie anthropologique du groupe.

La norme qui devrait sanctionner la fondation du droit moral à faire sécession est l’application effective du droit des peuples à choisir librement leur organisation politique et à poursuivre leur développement économique, social et culturel. Cette norme est reconnue à l’article 1er du Pacte international sur les droits politiques et civils, et à l’article 55 de la Charte des Nations Unies. Mais notre interprétation est très utopiste et elle se place très loin de la pratique de la politique internationale, qui veut voir dans le droit à l’autodétermination des peuples la seule autodétermination politique des peuples avec un État national bien défini :ce magnifique droit collectif est ainsi réduit à la seule possibilité de choisir son régime politique par les élections.

Doctorat en Philosophie
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

The main objectives of this study are: 1) To critically appraise the supposed tension between ‘territorial integrity’ on the one hand, and the peoples’ right to self-determination as a basis for secession. 2) To demonstrate that the current position of the law is tactically vague and crippling to the international efforts for a better and peaceful world for all. 3) To draw lessons from the practice of the United Nations and other regional bodies in diffusing violent conflict and maintaining peace where secession claims have taken violent forms. 4) To suggest an edifice for the permanent mandate of the United Nations to deal with secession claims.
A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Law University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Law (LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). Prepared under the supervision of Dr Ben Twinomugisha, Faculty of Law, Makerere University, Uganda.
LLM Dissertation (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa -- University of Pretoria, 2009.
http://www.chr.up.ac.za/
Centre for Human Rights
LLM

This paper explores the current understanding of the right of peoples to self-determination and its impact on international relations. A number of new states have gained international recognition outside the scope of decolonisation, several of which have not fulfilled the usual criteria for statehood, based on existing state practice. In addition, the parent states of Bangladesh, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as Kosovo have not consented to the secession of these territories. The main purpose of this paper is to determine whether based on the stipulations of international documents and mainly on existing state practice, it is possible to verify the existence of a customary law enabling peoples to unilaterally secede. Such a right would pose a threat to the future application of the principle of territorial integrity as one of the basic principles of international relations. In order to answer this question I compare case studies of successful and unsuccessful nations striving for their own state outside the realm of decolonisation. Based on this comparison I analyse the current understanding of the right to self-determination and its impact on international relations. I conclude by stating that it is not possible to unambiguously confirm the existence of such a right. However, in practice the principle of territorial integrity is being breached nonetheless, due to persisting uncertainties regarding the possible application of secession by peoples whose internal right to self-determination was not respected. Together with the fact that the current concept of self-determination ignores collective rights of national groups, this poses a threat to international stability.

碩士
國立政治大學
外交學系
107
The right to self-determination was after the first World War proposed by former American president, Woodrow Wilson. Its subject, which was derived from the concept of natural rights, expresses that people should possess the right to freely determine their international political status without interference. However, development in past decades, including resolutions of United Nations, practices of nations, judgements of ICJ and national courts, have been imposing limitations and conditions upon this right. Thus, many ethnic groups attempting to become independent have been considered separatism and forcibly suppressed. Actors in international society have been differently reacting toward implementation of the right to self-determination and national practices. Therefore, the author looks forward to scrutinizing the iconic cases of Crimea and Kosovo, and analyzes attitudinal differences between United States, Russian, and other strong powers. By doing so, it can be possible to summarize the criteria of decisions made by these nations. Data gathered and analyzed in this thesis include the development of the right to national self-determination, the effectiveness and necessity of plebiscites, the fundamental causes of these two cases, violations of international laws, and different attitude of strong powers. In conclusion, international regimes concerning the right to national self-determination are still unspecific. It sums up that the paradox of national acknowledgement in different cases represents international relations still resorts to supremacy of interests, derived from realism. As for international regimes promoted by neoliberalism, it turns out only countries that are capable of affording the costs would dare to confront them.