A States Declaration of Independence - Term Paper Example

Introduction The recognition of one state as an independent and another as not largely comes through international agencies, such as the European Union (EU) and external states like the United States. Decisions of whether international bodies and external states recognise the independence of a state is related to international law, state-to-state alliances and situations specific to that state. A state’s declaration of independence means little if it is not recognised internationally, especially when the state that they are seeking independence from does not support the move. International law tries wherever possible to take a non-biased stance, not favouring one region or another during conflict. However, this is difficult where two regions are in conflict with one another and have different views and desires. This type of problem was the case for both Kosovo and Palestine. Kosovo was a territory of Serbia although it declared its independence in 2008 and was subsequently accepted by the international community, while Palestine remains a territory of Israel. This has become a difficult international relations issue, and Palestine continues to be a territory of Israel, which has been the source of much violence instigated by both sides. The difference in approaches by the international players has occurred because of the warfare that is occurring between Israel and Palestine, and the terrorism component of the Palestinian government. This makes it difficult for international organisations and external states to support Palestine. An additional important aspect is the fact that Kosovo deliberately manipulated their position in order to gain international sympathy and assistance. Background Kosovo is located in southeast Europe with a land area of 10,887 square kilometres and a population of approximately 1.8 million people. It gained its independence from Serbia in February of 2008 and is now recognised as an independent state. Although the US and the EU have recognised the independence of Kosovo, some states, including Serbia, contest this and do not feel that the state should be considered as independent . The decision to grant Kosovo independence in the international arena was unusual, as conflict has been occurring between Kosovo and Serbia. Nevertheless, the move of Kosovo was considered to be legal under international law and the state consequently became independent . However, the same is not true of the Palestinian territories. The Palestine territories are not recognised as an independent state, instead they are considered to be part of Israel. The conflict between Israel and Palestine has been ongoing, with external states and international agencies attempting to facilitate resolution. External states hoped that eventually Palestine could be recognised as an independent, democratic state, however, this has not come to pass. In 1993, Israel agreed to allow a period of self-rule for Palestinian territories. However, they maintain military, maritime and airspace control of the region, as well as restricting access. The Palestinian territories are areas of continued violence and debate. The territories consist of two main regions, the larger West Bank and the smaller Gaza Strip. The regions are controlled separately. Mahmud Abbas, the elected Palestinian president in 2005 governs the West Bank, while members of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) control the Gaza strip. As Palestine seeks to gain its independence to be recognised internationally, violence continues to rage between the two sides . Israel’s approach to Palestine has resulted in occupation for close to 30 years, and economic initiatives that have damaged Palestine while strengthening Israel . Conflict continues to grow between Palestine and Israel and the situation is now that of a civil war . While President Abbas attempts to seek a peaceful solution between Palestine and Israel, Hamas has been determined to persist in violence and attacks against Israel . International Relations There is no international precedent for how cases of independence are handled, and these remain strongly dependent on the factors and actors surrounding them. International groups attempt to balance the needs of the different groups involved, and to not take sides, but in almost all cases, when one region is seeking to become and independent state, there is at least one other region opposing the desire. Consequently, whether it is desirable or not, the decision on whether an area becomes independent is strongly dependent on the relationships that each of the regions involved has with the international environment. This was the case for both Palestine and Kosovo, and the differing outcomes of each of these states are strongly dependent on international relationships. The case of Palestine There are four key international groups involved in attempting to find a resolution to the situation of Palestine and Israel. These are the UN, US, European Union (EU) and Russia. Here, the international actors have two sides to consider, whose desires they are attempting to balance . The US has exhibited strong loyalty to Israel, and has hindered many efforts of the UN to produce an interim government because of this. In contrast, the other international actors that are involved are attempting to find a solution that is equitable to both parties and prevents the outbreak of further fighting . A crucial international relations issue that is faced by these groups is that all four have internal counter-terrorism measures that prevent them from providing funding or assistance to a terrorist group. In 2006, the Hamas group, which is internationally recognised as being terrorists, achieved the majority of seats in the Palestinian elections. Consequently, international groups are limited in the ways in which they can assist Palestine .The elections which placed the Hamas group in power were funded by the EU and considered to be a fair and free election. However, since the elections occurred, the US and Europeans have refused to trade or work with Palestine in helping them to obtain their independence . This has been a major limiting factor to the fight for Palestinian independence and for Palestine to gain any international support, they have been required to step down from any violence or plans of violence. An example of this is the controversy concerning a war crimes report which was being suppored by President Abbas. Under pressure from the US and UN, as well as from Israel, Palestinian President Abbas has withdrawn support for a report into war crimes committed by Israel and Habas during the war on Gaza in 2008 and 2009. He is considered a ‘partner for peace’ by these groups, and the move is thought to be a considerable step forward in finding permanent peace between the two regions, and eventually ensuring the independence of Pakistan. Yet, the decision has drawn anger from Palestinian citizens, and it is likely that he will not have another term as president as a result . Finding a balance between the needs of Palestine and Israel in the international arena has proven to be difficult, in part due to the limited legal precedents that are in place, and the varying desires of the international bodies involved as well as the Israel and Palestine. The case of Kosovo The progression of events for Kosovo has also been complex and marred by failure. Kosovo first expressed the desire for peace in 1981 where the state attempted to develop and maintain autonomy through passive resistance and peaceful disobedience. However, this was not successful and their approach as generally ignored. This led to a change in approach, where the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) attempted to gain international attention through the use of armed engagements, with the specific aim of provoking atrocities against them. This method made Kosovo an area of international attention and it began to be recognised by international diplomatic processes . The submission for Kosovo’s independence was made to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) following their statement of independence on 17 February 2008. The ICJ overwhelmingly found in favour of the state, considering its actions to be legal, or at least, not in violation of international law . Kosovo’s declaration of independence was rejected by Serbia, which maintained that it held sovereignty over the region. This issue is significant and the actions of Kosovo set a precedent that may have ramifications throughout the world. However, one important factor that secured the independence of Kosovo was the support that it had achieved from western states, and the state still largely depends on western powers and their interventions . An ethical dilemma States engaging in international relations attempt to forward peace wherever possible and not to take sides in conflicts. Yet, when faced with warring territories, as was the case with Kosovo and Serbia, as well as for Palestine and Israel, keeping a strictly neutral viewpoint is difficult if not impossible. The actions of the US, EU, UN and Russia in the conflict between Palestine and Israel and the negations for peace, are considered by many to be one-sided and misrepresented . For example, they supported the 2006 election process in Palestine, including providing funding and ensuring the process was fair. Yet, when the results of the election were undesirable, a boycott was enacted on Palestine. This did not hurt only the ‘terrorist’ component of the region, but also citizens and those fighting for peace. Another component of ethical dilemma comes from the difference in perspectives between the international groups involved in helping Israel and Palestine find peace. The US has a significant amount of support for Israel, to the extent that it blocks many peacekeeping moves by the UN which attempt to create a Palestinian government . One of the factors that is limiting Palestine becoming an independent state is the fact that Israeli occupation and restrictions prevents Palestine from building much of the infrastructure that it requires. There have been many factors restricting Palestinians from creating an independent government that is supported by international agencies, including, but not limited to, the presence of the terrorist faction which seeks revenge on Israel. Public anger at the failure of the peace process has been significant, and many prefer the return to a warlike situation, where they are able to use violent resistance . This significantly limits the power of any government, such as the current one lead by Abbas, which seeks to work with international groups and promote peace between Israel and Palestine. There is a significant amount of asymmetry in the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Israel has been recognised as a state for a long time, has borders that are recognised internationally and has a well-developed army and political body. In contrast, Palestine has had to rise from being nothing and are still not recognised legally as being an independent entity . Because of this, they have limited rights under law. Despite the desire for peace in Palestine, the conflict appears destined to continue unless some significant change is made. Currently it is more than 15 years since the first stage of peace negations were made, and the cycle of confrontation and negotiation continues, with no overall progress being made . In the case of Kosovo, what was ‘right’ for the state was clear. It was evident that the state needed to be made independent in order to stop further atrocities from occurring. This remains true despite the fact that the actions of the KLA were specifically designed to provoke a humanitarian action in the first place. However, for Palestine, it is difficult to determine how best to respond to the problems that are occurring, and where a solution can be found. International Law and Statebuilding Throughout history, there has been a precedent of international groups becoming involved in statebuilding and the gaining of independence for regions. This is particularly strong when a conflict is present in the region and statebuilding is thought to be a key component in the development of peace. One alternative perspective that has been suggested, but not pursued in the case of Palestine and Israel is the presence of an interim UN- or US-led government to establish the infrastructure necessary for a successful government. This would then be turned over to the Palestine people at a later time, and the US officials replaced with Palestine ones . There is significant irony in the way in which international relations have occurred for Kosovo and Palestine. Kosovo achieved its independence through manipulating the international environment, deliberately taking a course of action that cost the lives of many civilians. In contrast, while a large amount of atrocities and deaths have occurred to citizens of Palestine, they have inflicted as many back. There is significant resistance in the international community to assisting the state, with the US directly siding with Israel, while other states and groups are prepared only to help Palestine only if it stops its violence and makes overtures towards peace. Thus, despite the fact that Palestine is a well-known region, with many countries throughout the world considering it independent, it remains locked in a battle with Israel where little headway is being made. Palestine is high on the international agenda, however, the region is perceived more as an instigator than as being a victim. It is ironic that Kosovo, who intentionally instigated violence against them, have succeeded in gaining their independence while Palestine continues to fail. Conclusion There are few precedents in place for how the international environment should manage states that are seeking to gain independence against those that rule over them. For some states, such as Kosovo, the solution is to gain international sympathy and support, and thus to force international groups to begin statebuilding and peacekeeping methods. This is not an option for Palestine, which is frequently seen as an instigator, due to the presence of a terrorist faction within its government. Here, moves to create an independent government and for the state to be recognised independently are both facilitated and blocked by international groups. These situations suggest that much progress needs to be made in the international environment to determine how to manage these situations, as there will undoubtedly be more. Works Cited Read More