National Minorities and the International System
| Published date | 01 February 1998 |
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-9256.00056 |
| Date | 01 February 1998 |
| Author | Jennifer Jackson Preece |
| Subject Matter | Article |
National Minorities and
the International
System1
Jennifer Jackson Preece
National minorities are collectivities who pos-
dence is not easily obtainable and in many
sess that trait which is the current normative
instances will never be achieved because of
underpinning of states, namely nationhood,
inherent diculties in the territorial redis-
and yet for practical purposes cannot enjoy
tribution that it requires.
outright political independence. Because
Membership in the existing club of nation-
national minorities bear these normatively
states is only revised at moments of far-reach-
signi®cant characteristics they may be
ing international change wherein it is practi-
deemed to have legitimate international
cally and normatively possible to challenge
claims to certain special rights even if these
and overcome the previous territorial status
fall short of statehood. Yet although this ratio-
quo. Not surprisingly it is precisely at these
nale may be logically sound and morally
moments when problems of national mino-
justi®ed, pursuing it nevertheless raises ser-
rities have come to the fore in international
ious problems with regard to state sover-
politics. The membership of nations in the
eignty.
international club of states has been rede-
®ned on three occasions in this century: after
the First World War, after the Second World
Nations and states
War, and after the Cold War. On each of
these occasions, new nation-states were
Since the end of World War I, the nation-state
formed out of defeated, discredited or disin-
has emerged as the uncontested normative
tegrated multinational empires whose lands
grounding for political independence. The
were comparatively easy to parcel out to new
nation-states system is justi®ed by the doc-
or reborn states because they failed to satisfy
trine of national self-determination, which
the normative criterion of national self-deter-
asserts that every nation has a right to inde-
mination. Thus from 1919 to 1920, new
pendent political control over a given territory
nation-states were created in East Central
and its people. Yet despite this doctrine,
Europe. Out of the defeated Austro-Hungar-
national minorities do not possess political
ian Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Prussian
independence and thus are living proof that
Kingdom emerged a dozen new or recon-
the practice of state sovereignty often does
stituted states all of which claimed legitimacy
not conform to the principle which legit-
on grounds of nationality; Poland, Czechoslo-
imates it. Moreover, this political indepen-
vakia, Austria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania,
Jennifer Jackson Preece, London School of Economics and Political Science.
# Political Studies Association 1998. Published by Blackwell Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK
and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
17
National Minorities . Jennifer Jackson Preece
Politics (1998) 18(1) pp. 17±23
Bulgaria, and Albania. Added to these, were
slavia in 1991/92 or the more recent military
the Baltic states which emerged out of the
eorts of General Dudaev's forces in 1994/
disintegrating Russian Empire; Estonia, Latvia,
95 to wrest Chechnya free of political con-
and Lithuania. A similar event occurred in the
trol from Moscow, acts of international ter-
period following the Second World War when
rorism like the highly publicised bombings
new multi-ethnic states were created out of
carried out by the Irish Republican Army in
the European colonies in Asia and Africa.
the United Kingdom or the Kurdistan Work-
And, most recently, after 1989, multinational
ers' Party in Turkey, and other actions all in
states in Central and Eastern Europe ± Cze-
order to achieve the ultimate goal of inde-
choslovakia, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union
pendent statehood.
± were replaced by new nation-states that had
Such actions may disrupt international
previously been units within the larger jur-
peace and stability (and are often committed
isdictions; Slovakia and the Czech Republic
with this goal in mind so as to encourage the
replaced Czechoslovakia; Slovenia, Croatia,
redistribution of state sovereignty) by creating
Bosnia, Macedonia, and a rump Yugoslavia
violence within the state, by drawing in neigh-
consisting of Serbia-Montenegro replaced
boring states or by inspiring similar move-
former Yugoslavia; and Estonia, Latvia, Lithua-
ments of national liberation elsewhere. The
nia, Belorussia, Moldavia, Ukraine, the Russian
redistribution of sovereignty to national mino-
Republic,
Georgia,
Azerbaijan,
Armenia,
rities in multinational Czechoslovakia, Yugo-
Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tadzi-
slavia and the Soviet Union after the Cold
kistan, and Kirgizia all replaced the Soviet
War by no means removed the problem of
Union. The new states created after 1989, as
national minorities in Central and Eastern
after 1945, followed existing `colonial' or
Europe. There remain very many East Central
internal boundaries. Yet, regardless of how
European states whose jurisdiction encom-
borders are drawn, in most cases there will
passes regionally concentrated national mino-
remain `entrapped' national minorities ±
rities that might come to demand their own,
hence the problem.
independent political units ± Romania, Bul-
Such redistribution of sovereign statehood
garia, Hungary,...
To continue reading
Request your trial