(Berkaitan dengan upaya pemisahan diri seperti Kosovo kemarin, di bawah ini ada sebuah tulisan bagus. Semoga menambah wawasan Anda)
The Rules of Secession
Four Principles by Which to Judge Your Breakaway Brethren
(Economist, 27/01/00)
Is there a right to secede? Many Chechens, Acehnese, Montenegrins, to name but a few, evidently believe so, and it is not hard to see why. Governments exist to serve their peoples, not vice versa, so if a group of people wish to be governed in a unit different from the one presented to them by history, why should they not arrange their affairs according to their wishes? This is simply the principle of self-determination. Abe Lincoln disagreed with it, but times have moved on. Modern, sophisticated states are no longer neurotically attached to bits of territory. If Norway wants to leave Sweden (1905), Ireland to leave the United Kingdom (1921), 14 republics to leave a Russian-dominated Soviet Union (1991), Slovakia to leave Czechoslovakia (1993) or Eritrea to leave Ethiopia (1993), they can do so without a civil war. Good luck to them.
But what about the people they leave behind, and those they take with them against their will? If Catalonia pulled out of Spain, or “Padania” out of Italy, would it owe nothing to the country it had abandoned? If Quebec quit Canada against the wishes of its indigenous peoples, would it just be tough luck for the Crees, whose lands make up almost half the province? Or should they then secede? And who, incidentally, is “they”? Does any self-selected group anywhere have the right to declare independence? If so, the richest corners of many a country—the Acehs, Katangas, Biafras and Bougainvilles, maybe even the Belgravias and Beverly Hills—have a licence to go it alone, and thus to impoverish their ex-compatriots. Even if greed is ruled out as an acceptable motive for secession, in favour of mere nationalism, a new profusion of tiny tribal states might make the world an uglier place.
Continue reading ‘The Rules of Secession’

Komentar Bersama