> On Aug 15, 5:23 am, Cormagh yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>

>> On Aug 14, 11:03 pm, turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:

>

>>> On Aug 14, 4:47 pm, Ed earthlink.net> wrote:

>

>>>> The recent events in Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia and the
>>>> earlier dust-up in Kosovo have prompted me to wonder if there is any
>>>> philosophically justifiable moral ground for judging when a territiory
>>>> or its inhabitants ought to be free to determine their own government
>>>> and destiny and when its appropriate for small (or large) territories
>>>> to be administered by a central government even when some, maybe even
>>>> a majority, wish to be separate.

>

>>>> In this country we fought a bitter civil war to enforce the principal
>>>> that secession was not allowable, but we have also fought for the
>>>> right of Kosovo to secede from Serbia.  Of course it’s pointless to
>>>> draw moral lessons from the actions of governments, governments are
>>>> rarely consistent.

>

>>>> The temptation is to just say that any group has the right to self
>>>> determination but that leads to very complex questions.  Does it the
>>>> group have to be a certain size?  What if a small town in Texas with a
>>>> predominantly latino population wanted to secede?  What if, like South
>>>> Ossetia, they wanted to join another country, say, Mexico?

>

>>>> I’ve not been able to come up with a self consistent set of moral
>>>> guidelines here; any ideas?

>

>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_determination

>

>> South Ossetia's northern border and economy merges with Georgia's,
>> which causes it to be synchronous with the concept of Georgian
>> Territorial Integrity. However, there is the argument that Self-
>> determination should trump Territorial Integrity, which is mostly
>> based on Liberal United Nations la-la-la. DIrectly north of South
>> Ossetia is North Ossetia, which is separated by a mountain range, but
>> where they speak the same language (Ossetian), and where Ossetian
>> nationals are also a majority. Why not connect these two territories
>> into an independent nation and remove territories from Russia and
>> Georgia equally?

>
> Because there's stupid irrational greedy humans involved in any deals?
>
>
>

>> Abkhazia seems unrelated to Ossetia as a self-determination issue, but
>> it is similar in that it represents a threat to Georgia's Territorial
>> Integrity. Abkhazians are a plurality in Abkhazia, but only because of
>> Ethnic Cleansing that took place after they won their war (with the
>> help of "Russian Peacekeepers") in 1993. Because Abkhazians are a
>> national entity, Georgia has always offered them Autonomy and there
>> have been no challenges to their independence by Georgia. It appears
>> that in both cases, it is the relationship with Russia that is at the
>> bottom of attacks and threats made against Georgia by these
>> Independent Republics.

>

>> Realists like Stephen Waltz and John Mearsheimer hold that Territorial
>> Integrity is paramount to a State's need and rights to defend its
>> borders. The Liberal view is that the Right of Self-determination
>> trumps Territorial Integrity.

>

>> Cormagh

>
> "Cosmopolitan liberalism calls for political power to shift to a world
> government which would make secession and change of boundaries a
> relatively easy administrative matter. However, also would mean the de
> facto end of self-determination of national groups."
>
> "coo-coo ca-choo"