|
Discussion on UN decision on Kosovo
Independence
31.7.2010
By Bashdar Ismaeel,
a
longtime contributing writer for ekurd.net
|
|
|
|
July
31, 2010
The murky distinction between the principles of
self-determination and territorial integrity―as the
UN rules Kosovar unilateral independence legal, a
new precedent is set for nationalist struggles.
The secession of Kosovo from Serbia concluded the
bitter and bloody breakup of Yugoslavia. However,
the onset of independence for Europe's newest member
of the family has been the most contentious.
Kosovo Albanians clearly suffered great atrocities
under Serbian rule, leading to NATO intervention and
UN protection thereafter. Despite strong opposition
from a number of countries, including Russia and
China, Kosovar determination for statehood was
undeterred, resulting in its unilateral declaration
of independence in February 2008.
|
Bashdar Pusho Ismaeel, senior UK Editor |
Although, now recognized by more than 69 UN member
states, the issue of the legality of the Kosovar
independence drive, facilitated with the key support
of its American and British allies, has stirred
tension and debate ever since and crucially has left
a sense of weariness in a number of countries with
their own separatist headaches.
The recent ruling by the International Court of
Justice, the first case of secession raised before
the World Court, declared that Kosovo's declaration
of independence was in fact legal and did not
contravene international law. This was a highly
significant development for Kosovo on its quest for
full recognition and UN member status, but also
carries significant ramifications for future cases.
Key global powers in support of Kosovar rights have
continually pointed to the notion that Kosovo was a
special case, that Serbia's brutal campaign had
forfeited its sovereignty over the province and as a
separate ethnicity, the Kosovar's were free to
choose not to reside with their Serbian
counterparts.
However, no matter how this is masked, clearly a
strong precedent has been set for nationalist
struggles across the world. Furthermore, this is
another demonstration of the stark double standards
employed by Western powers that plague the notion of
a new world order and the ideals of freedom and
democracy that the West is desperately trying to
promote.
Nowhere in the world is the case of Kosovo more
significant than in Kurdistan. The similarities are
striking. Ethnic Albanians have suffered under the
hands of occupiers and dictatorships,www.ekurd.netas
have the Kurds. Albanians pose a minority in a
number of countries, including Serbia, Macedonia and
Greece, as do Kurds in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey.
However, while Albanians may have suffered great
crimes, their existence as a distinct ethnicity has
never been denied and they have an independent state
in the form of Albania. Not only was Kurdistan
forcibly assimilated, but Kurds in Iraq suffered
campaigns of genocide under the noses of the West
and in Turkey have never been officially recognized
as a separate identity.
To date, the Kurds still form the largest stateless
nation in the world. This begs the question of the
criteria for judging the merit of nationalist
struggles and just who has the authority to
determine and endorse such moves.
Clearly in the case of Kosovo, many countries still
refuse to recognize its independence, including
veto-holding powers of Russia and China. It was the
ardent support of the U.S. and key EU states that
was all that was necessary.
The concept of self-determination is not new and was
first championed by the then US President Woodrow
Wilson after the World War I. From colonialism and
the fall of great empires, suddenly arrived numerous
new countries on the international arena. Even
today, nationalist struggles rage in many countries,
including Russia, Spain and Georgia.
The issue of self-determination is evidently
complicated as it in direct contrast to the
principle of territorial integrity. According to
international law, nations have the right to full
sovereignty and the enforcement of their borders,
but as highlighted in the past, international law
can be misconstrued and misapplied based on the
strategic goals of global players.
The Kurds, like numerous other nations that
encompassed the Ottoman Empire, were afforded the
right of self-determination under the Treaty of
Sevres, but somewhat ironically within a few short
years, the Kurds were scrubbed off the map by the
Treaty of Lausanne.
No Kurd was ever consulted about the division of its
land or its people and the new boundaries that they
were suddenly bound to. This was the decision of
global powers and regional actors on the chessboard
who held the Kurdish population as inferior pawns
that could be ruled and subjugated. Once great
amounts of oil were discovered in Kurdistan, this
was the final nail in its quest for statehood as it
was carved up and powers sought to reap the benefits
of its immense wealth.
Ironically, although the Kurds have steadily risen
in prominence and strategic standing in recent
years, any notion of independence would gain no
support from the U.S. or other major power due to
geopolitical considerations. By the same token, it
is doubtful whether purely legal considerations saw
the U.S. support the secession of Kosovo or
strategic reasons.
More ironically, the same geopolitical constraints
that the West alludes to in justifying why Kurdish
independence would create instability and a
nightmare scenario was created by the West itself.
Evidently, anarchy would ensue if the principle of
self-determination was vaguely applied to all cases.
This would amount to great global instability and
further bloodshed. However, self-determination can
only be applied based on its own merits and not
double standards.
The basis of any nationalist struggle is primarily
ethnicity. Any established nation has the right to
peaceful existence, to decide its own affairs and to
express cultural freedom. No nation has the right to
subjugate, rule over or deny outright another
nation.
These fundamental principles are one of the main
reasons why the League of Nations, and later the UN,
was created and why many wars have been waged
against rogue regimes and dictators trespassing on
international charters.
No case demonstrates the lack of international
standards than that of Turkey. With a highly
nationalistic-driven constitution and an oppressive
military existence, the Kurds were historically
sidelined or merely referred to as "Mountain Turks."
Even today, Kurds do not enjoy key rights granted by
UN charters.
The best judge of a nationality is history, culture
and heritage. Kurds have existed in the areas that
they reside for thousands of years and have been
recognized as a distinct nationality throughout
history, with their own language, culture, customs
and traditions.
In the example of Turkey, the Kurds could benefit
immensely from a peaceful and prosperous coexistence
with their Turkish counterparts and with it possibly
the carrot of EU membership. However, this union, by
the virtue of international law, must be based on
voluntary association, democratic rights, cultural
freedom and an equal status.
It was highly significant that Turkey was one of the
first countries to recognize Kosovar independence.
It was also its flagship of Turkish Cypriot rights
that led to the invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the
establishment of a state in Northern Cyprus that was
widely condemned.
The Turkish Cypriot right to self-rule and peaceful
existence was the vehicle for Turkish intervention.
However, what the Turkish Cypriots' desire is hardly
clear given that they became outnumbered by Turkish
settlers brought in by the Turkish government.
The principle of self-determination is best
explained in the words itself. However, by clear
contradiction, it is still obvious that owing to the
colonial mentality of Western powers, it is not
"self" that determines such a principle but
"others."
As the old English saying goes, "What is good for
the goose is good for gander."
Bashdar Pusho Ismaeel is a London-based freelance
writer and analyst,
a regular
contributing writer for ekurd.net website.
Ismaeel whose primary focus and
expertise is on the Kurds, Iraq and Middle Eastern
current affairs. The main focus of his writing is to
promote peace, justice and increase awareness of the
diversity, suffering and at times explosive mix in
Iraq and the Middle East.
Most recently he has produced work for the
Washington Examiner, Asian Times, The Epoch Times,
Asia News, The Daily Star (Lebanon), Kurdish Globe,
Hewler Post, Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), KurdishMedia, PUK Online and OnlineOpinion.
He has achieved seminar recommended readings for Le
High University (Pennsylvania) and Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. His work has been
republished extensively elsewhere on the Internet.
You may reach the author via email at:
bashdar@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2010 ekurd.net. All rights
reserved
Top |
Kurd Net
does not take credit for and is not responsible for the content of news
information on this page
|
®
