Self-determination or rights? : problems for nations, states and international relations

The subject of this thesis is national self-determination. Nations claim self-determination when they fear for their culture, their place in the landscape and their survival. This is the romantic impetus, and it is fuelled by fear and grievance. Self-determination is also a political demand made against the sovereignty of the state, and this duality is a source of confusion. States and International Relations are adept at politics, but less sure when it comes to matters of sentiment. This thesis traces the source and development of the duality of the nation in its liberal and romantic aspects. The modem Weltanschauung is dominant. Although there are states with pre-modern domestic social institutions, the sovereignty game is definitively modem, and played by modem rules, which are essentially liberal. However, rational theories of the state do not entirely explain nations. Ideas, events and contingency are intricately linked in shaping the social reality of nations, and I do not believe that a single explanatory approach can encompass their richness. Accordingly, my methodology is multi-disciplinary and goes some way to revealing the complexity of nations. Nations are political and cultural; only by paying attention to both elements can the nation’s story be understood. There is a gulf in understanding between nations and states, but nations are supplicants, and they must use the discourse of the powerful. My conclusion is that the discourse of rights may provide an avenue for communication. If nationals were secure in their fundamental rights their grievances may seem less urgent and their claims less pressing. States may resent the limits to their freedom that rights observance would entail, but this might seem a lesser evil than the challenge to their sovereignty that claims to self-determination represent