1.4 Literature Review
1.4.1 Theoretical Analysis of Globalization and Separatism
1.4.1.2 Separatism
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), and Agreements on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights and Trade-Related Investment (TRIPS and TRIMS, respectively);13 demonstrate the global movement to a free trade market, elucidating the economic depth of globalization.
As can be understood from above, the general gist of globalization is an interconnectedness of people all around the world be it through the economy, trade, communication, travel, investment, migration and so on. It could be argued that the ideal of globalization is to have no boundaries worldwide for fluid movement of both people and goods.
This thesis aims to discover where globalization fits into the argument of separatism and how the meanings behind globalization will aid in the debate of the globalization-separatism relationship.
1.4.1.2 Separatism
As aforementioned, several terms are encompassed within the concept of separatism. For a full comprehension on separatism, we have to understand the meanings behind the terms first due to the fact that separatism is all of these terms combined. To understand one term without the other will not allow for a complete understanding of separatism. This thesis will review the terms of nationalism, national separatism, secession, autonomy and national self-determination for the study of separatism.
Nationalism/National Separatism. Nationalism and separatism go hand-in-hand, some scholars even dub it “national separatism.”14 Nationalism and national separatism still differ in their meanings though as Michael Hechter explains nationalism to be a “collective action
13 Irwin, D. A., The Concise Encyclopaedia of Economics – International Trade Agreements,
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/InternationalTradeAgreements.html, [Last Accessed: October 19th 2015]
14 Hale, H. E. (2008), The Foundations of Ethnic Politics: Separatism of States and Nations in Eurasia and the World, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, p. 3
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
designed to render the boundaries of the nation congruent with those of its governance unit,”15 which Hechter has also explained to mean that there is no need for that unit to be an independent country, it could similarly be an autonomous region encompassed within a larger state.
National separatism, on the other hand, is more a form of nationalism where either one of two means occurs: (1) separation of a smaller autonomous territorial unit from the metropolitan state, or (2) opposing the integration of one autonomous territorial unit into a larger entity. In other words, the term “national separatism” includes both “an ethnic region’s secessionism and a state’s opposition to joining an international integration project.”16 Separatism can occur in one state, it does not necessarily have to involve distinct nations for it to happen. Both terms differ slightly but essentially they have similar meanings. We will see that the terms of secession, autonomy and national self-determination are very much alike to nationalism and national separatism with only a few variations.
Secession. Often described as a branch of separatism, but at the same time, secession is not necessarily identical to separatism. In political situations, secession of a state could lead to a sovereign political unit being constructed and separated from the metropolitan state. “A separatist movement differs from a secessionist movement insofar as the demands of the former consist of increased autonomy in one or many areas, whereas in the latter, full independence is part of the definition of success,”17 as explained by Bookman. Secession movements are more extreme and they do not simply mean separation. Buchanan elaborates upon this, “In many, perhaps most cases, the secessionists desire not only independence from the existing state but also sovereignty for the new political unit they seek to create.”18 To go even further, secession is
“the formal withdrawal from an established internationally recognized state by a constituent unit
15 Hechter, M. (2000), Containing Nationalism, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 7-14
16 Hale, H. E. (2008), The Foundations of Ethnic Politics: Separatism of States and Nations in Eurasia and the World, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, p. 3
17 Bookman, M. Z. (1992), The Economics of Secession, New York: St. Martin’s Press, p. 4
18 Buchanan, A. (1991), Secession: The Morality of Political Divorce from Fort Sumter to Lithuania and Quebec, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, p. 18
‧
to create a new sovereign state”19 as stated by Bartkus. The term “secessionism” is therefore a further step up from separatism in the sense that it aims for full separation and autonomy. The case study of Scotland is most akin to the term of secessionism considering both seek full autonomy away from their metropolitan counterpart. Scotland seeks to form their own nation-state away from their existing nation-nation-state. Autonomy and national self-determination will be explored first before depicting the term for use in this thesis.
Autonomy. Autonomy is normally associated with the independence of an individual or a group from other individuals. Similar to the other terms, scholars voice diverse opinions on the definition of autonomy. Brydon and Coleman identify autonomy as, “the capacity for self-determination and the conditions enabling it.”20 Furthermore, they also emphasize upon collective autonomy as well; “For the greater the collective autonomy the greater the sovereignty.”21 Other scholars do not make it as clear cut that autonomy necessarily leads to self-determination, considering Lapidoth states, “A territorial political autonomy is an arrangement aimed at granting to a group that differs from the majority of the population in the state, but that constitutes the majority in a specific region, a means by which it can express its distinct identity.”22 It can be argued that the term of autonomy seems vaguer when dealing with separatism, secessionism or national self-determination, as compared to the other terminology found under separatism. It does not perfectly fit the situation of Scotland to use this term unless it was only used for describing the group of individuals, such as using “autonomous unit,” aiming for secession. The separatist movement from Scotland can be depicted as autonomous but it does not seem appropriate when discussing the goals of the movements; separatism would be a more suitable term in this case.
19 Bartkus, V. O. (1999), The Dynamic of Secession, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 3
20 Brydon, D., and Coleman, W. (2008), “Globalization, Autonomy, and Community,” in Brydon, D., and Coleman, W., eds., Renegotiating Community, Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Global Contexts, Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press, p. 5
21 Coleman, W., Pauly, L., and Brydon, D. (2008), “Globalization, Autonomy and Institutional Change,” in Pauly, L., and Coleman, W., eds., Global Ordering, Institutions and Autonomy in a Changing World, Vancouver: UBC Press, p. 10
22 Lapidoth, R. (1996), Autonomy, Flexible Solutions to Ethnic Conflicts, Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press, p. 33
‧
National Self-Determination. National self-determination is comparable to autonomy because it refers to the right of individuals or groups to separate and form their own political entity. However, some scholars have deemed national self-determination to be subordinate to that of state sovereignty. National self-determination can be understood in a multitude of ways.
“National self-determination can be understood in a strong or weak sense. In the strong sense it insists that a nation be given statehood, whereas in the weak sense it requires only that a nation be given some form of self-government. Weak national self-determination is thus compatible with a multinational state in which nations are given some political autonomy.”23 Most scholars definitions have opted for national self-determination in the weak sense as can be exemplified by Halperin and Scheffer, “The principle of self-determination is best viewed as entitling a people to choose its political allegiance, to influence the political order under which it lives, and to preserve its cultural, ethnic, historical, or territorial identity. Often, although not always, these objectives can be achieved with less than full independence.”24 C. Lloyd Brown-John further expounds that, “Self-determination does not in any manner imply a right to independence…it is a concept that international law acknowledges must be secondary to the integrity of democratic states.”25 As can be shown by the examples above, it is evident that most scholars do not believe that national self-determination will lead to independence for the chosen separatist movement.
Both terms of “globalization” and “separatism,” are not perfect in their construction considering as both contain a magnitude of meanings and every scholar has their own interpretation of the concept. Globalization is a vital international relations theory needed for this thesis in the ensuing debate and case studies which will be explored. Separatism will be the term which will continue to be used throughout this thesis since separatism encompasses all the terms that fully define the separatist movement of Scotland and is the contrasting term against globalization. By using only globalization and separatism through this whole thesis, it will allow for a clearer explanation and clarification for the debate on globalization and separatism.
23 Caney, S. (1998), “National Self-determination and National Secession, Individualist and Communitarian Approaches,” in Lehning, P., ed., Theories of Secession, London: Routledge, p. 152
24 Halperin, M. and Scheffer, D. (1992), Self-Determination in the New World Order, Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, p. 47
25 Brown-John, C. L. (September, 1997), “Self-Determination and Separation,” Options Politiques/Policy Options, 40-43, p. 43