If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | ||||||||||||||
![]() Ethics & International AffairsVolume 20 Issue 1, Pages 55 - 78 Published Online: 5 May 2006 © 2009 Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs Published on behalf of the Carnegie Council
Abstract | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 196K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking The Ethics of Secession and Postinvasion Iraq Copyright © 2006 Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs ABSTRACTThis article outlines the two central theories in the ethics of secession and examines whether or under what conditions these normative theories would be satisfied in a post-invasion Iraq. I argue that the two dominant normative theories of secession focus on the secessionist group, which national self-determination theories conceive as a nation holding a right to self-determination, and just-cause theories conceive as having a remedial right to secession as a victim of injustice. The Iraq case suggests that this is a flawed way of thinking about the issue. I argue that secession is more legitimate when fair multinational arrangements are not on offer; and that the fairness requirement involves examining constitutional arrangements from the point of view of all groups. |
|
IT'S TIME TO RENEW
|
![]() | |||||||||||