[EL] Rights to secession: Does size matter?

[Mark Rush]

I guess that's one way to look at it.

Yes, Russia seceded from the Soviet Union.  But, were the rest of Spain to
have said "enough" and sought to throw Catalonia out or were the Albertans
finally to saddle up and lead the rest of Canada in a charge to expel
Quebec (sans Hydro Quebec, western Montreal, etc. of course), there would
be recriminations and, perhaps, claims of ethnic cleansing--especially if
those being expelled were poor, less monied, etc..

I think the Canadian Supreme Court put it well (but not as elegantly as it
might have) in the Secession reference.  SCOTUS was more blunt about an
indestructible union of indestructible states in Texas v. White, (I
believe).  Either way, it seems that secession from a union--as with
entrance into it--requires consent of both parties, no?

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 7:20 AM, David Lublin <lublinau at gmail.com> wrote:

> This is a question in search of a problem.  Let's think about cases:
>
> Russia did secede from the Soviet Union to the ultimate relief of several
> other republics.
>
> Czechoslovakia's dissolution was complicated.  Though initiated by
> Slovakia, the Czech Republic's leadership was willing to see it go so it
> could pursue it's own agenda of market reform.
>
> There is a major secessionist movement in Flanders--the larger unit in
> Belgium.  The largest party in Flanders is now the N-VA (New Flemish
> Alliance).  Belgium's party system is completely divided along ethnic lines
> but the major secessionist party is Flemish.
>
> In the UK, England doesn't have an autonomous regional government to
> initiate secession.  Many other countries follow the UK format with no
> autonomy for the larger unit but for the ethnoregional minority (Nevis in
> St. Kitts and Nevis, Barbuda in Antigua and Barbuda, Rodrigues in
> Mauritius, Aland in Finland).  Nevis has an explicit right to
> secession--2/3 vote of the people (it failed in the low 60s once) after a
> vote in favor by the Nevis Island Assembly.  The others do not--Aland's
> autonomy arrangements were crafted explicitly to preclude secession and
> avoid war between Finland and Sweden.
>
> In Spain, there is no larger unit to demand secession in the sense that
> there is no majority unit.  The Castillian areas are broken among many
> different autonomous communities--the regional units in Spain.  The same
> would be true in India--another federation organized on linguistic lines
> but with multiple Hindi (largest, though not majority, language) units.
>  Canada has multiple Anglophone majority provinces.  Similarly, Malaysia
> has multiple Malay-majority regions and only two (Sabah and Sarawak)
> without Malay majorities since the expulsion of Singapore.
>
> In Switzerland, the German cantons are broken down into many units and
> have very strong regional identities, often based on local dialects.
>  Francophones are also broken into multiple units.  Most Italian Swiss live
> in Ticino--the only canton with a regional party, the extreme right/right
> populist Ticino League, but Italian Swiss also live in Graubunden/Grigioni.
>
> In South Africa, there is no dominant linguistic group.  There is one
> province (Western Cape) without a black majority but the black majority is
> divided among the remaining provinces.
>
> Most other multinational federations that come to mind are not democratic.
>  The UAE is not divided by nationality (Mark, you still there?)  Ethiopia
> is complicated; though its leadership is perceived as Tigrayan, the Oromo
> and Amhara are by far larger groups.  Nigeria is now divided into states
> far smaller than any national group.
>
> If you're interested in the impact of decentralization on ethnic and
> regional parties, you can read more in my recent article in the Journal of
> Politics:
>
> David Lublin, "Dispersing Authority or Deepening Divisions?
> Decentralization and Ethnoregional Party Success," *Journal of Politics* 74:
> 4(October).
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Nov 27, 2012, at 8:36 PM, Mark Rush <markrush7983 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Question for observers of the Catalonia (Quebec, Scotland, etc.) secession
> movement:  What if the tables were turned and the larger part of a
> nation, decided to “secede” from the smaller part?  My guess is that this
> would not be deemed “secession” but, instead, would gain no sympathy.
>
>
> Just 2 uncaffeinated bits of thought.  Offline comments welcome
>
>
> cheers
>
>
> --
> Mark Rush
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>


-- 
Mark Rush
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121128/eadfa70c/attachment.html>