Venezuela has become the 3rd country to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia

Scroll to see replies

UGeNe

China is against Taiwan's separation, so We-the-West must support it.

Not really. The US pretty much sits on the fence when it comes to Taiwan - it neither supports nor opposes Taiwanese independence. Same goes for the UK.
Just look at the countries who have formal diplomatic relations with the RoC - excluding the Vatican City there isn't a single one from Europe or North America.

Reply 21

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

L i b

Why?

Since you've cunningly avoided justifying your position, I can only assume you believe what you are hinting at and where your arguments, if applied consistently, lead. That is to suggest areas of land can simply 'declare independence' or select which country to be part of on a whim.

This would, of course, be ridiculous and lead to effective anarchy.

They've clearly expressed themselves to the world that they want to become independent from Georgia, doesn't that say it all?

The referendum was hugely popular, winning between 98 and 99 percent of the ballots

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia

It's pretty obvious that these two countries want to become independent, and attempting to deny it would be daft.

Reply 22

L i b

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

They've clearly expressed themselves to the world that they want to become independent from Georgia, doesn't that say it all?

No, it says nothing. Indeed, the territorial integrity of states is a fundamental precept of international relations and law.

It's pretty obvious that these two countries want to become independent, and attempting to deny it would be daft.

Why? Try to substantiate your points, at least a bit.

Reply 23

UGeNe

L i b

No, it says nothing. Indeed, the territorial integrity of states is a fundamental precept of international relations and law.

Why? Try to substantiate your points, at least a bit.

I guess Kosovo is the exception...prickster

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prickster

Reply 24

L i b

UGeNe

I guess Kosovo is the exception...prickster

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prickster

Kosovo is indeed an exception, and a damn poor one at that. What's your point? Or am I giving you too much credit in assuming that you even have one?

Reply 25

Student2806

UGeNe

I guess Kosovo is the exception...prickster

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prickster

Yes, we really needed a definition for that... :rolleyes:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/that

Reply 26

Craig_D

L i b

I can sort of see what EnthusiasticEnthusiast is saying. If the majority of people in a certain area want independence then how can you fairly stop them? All that would be doing would be suppressing people under a dictatorship, which itself could lead to anarchy.

Reply 27

Communist Daughter

L i b

No, it says nothing. Indeed, the territorial integrity of states is a fundamental precept of international relations and law.

Why? Try to substantiate your points, at least a bit.

Whilst this is true, there are certain areas with a complex history of oppression and subjugation by more dominant powers. South Ossetia and Abkhazia clearly belong in this category, even a cursory glance at their history reveals this.

The basic facts are not seriously in dispute. South Ossetia, along with the much more significant region of Abkhazia, were assigned by Stalin to his native Georgia. Western leaders sternly admonish that Stalin’s directives must be respected, despite the strong opposition of Ossetians and Abkhazians. The provinces enjoyed relative autonomy until the collapse of the USSR. In 1990, Georgia’s ultranationalist president Zviad Gamsakhurdia abolished autonomous regions and invaded South Ossetia. The bitter war that followed left 1000 dead and tens of thousands of refugees, with the capital city Tskhinvali “battered and depopulated” (New York Times).

Reply 28

L i b

Craig_D

I can sort of see what EnthusiasticEnthusiast is saying. If the majority of people in a certain area want independence then how can you fairly stop them?

By simply not giving it to them.

Indeed, the alternative is ridiculous. Say I robbed a post office. With my ill-gotten gains I bought the sole house on an isolated Hebridean island and moved there with my family. When the police come sniffing about, I declare it independent and become immune from prosecution. Fair?

Or how about when one economically successful part of a state has been financially propping up another for generations, investing heavily in infrastructure. When that investment starts paying off, the poorer part declares independence and reaps the rewards, raising their own living conditions vastly beyond that of the originally successful part. Fair?

There is no credible or decent reason for parts of states to want to become independent, save for a few extreme examples where there are massive human rights abuses or something equivalent targeted against a certain ethnic group. Even then, I simply think it is the lesser of two evils rather than being actually commendable.

All that would be doing would be suppressing people under a dictatorship, which itself could lead to anarchy.

You wouldn't be 'suppressing' anyone - the whole notion of civilised government requires the use of force against unwilling people, in order to uphold the legal order.

Indeed, very often secession is used to subjugate people and deny them their legitimate rights to self-determine. Case in point: Rhodesia.

Reply 29

gigantor

Characteristically, it lasted two and a half hours and included a tirade against the United States as well as a singalong, with Mr Chavez on maracas.

Any president that playes the maracas is ok in my book (Y)

Reply 30

L i b

Communist Daughter

In 1990, Georgia’s ultranationalist president Zviad Gamsakhurdia abolished autonomous regions and invaded South Ossetia.

One cannot 'invade' part of one's own territory. The abolition of a local government unit is not good cause to take up arms in rebellion against the state.

Reply 31

Craig_D

L i b

Well, that is a little different. For a start you gained ownership of the island illegally, therefore the legitimacy of your ownership would be in doubt :dontknow:

Either way, call in Interpol perhaps.

Or how about when one economically successful part of a state has been financially propping up another for generations, investing heavily in infrastructure. When that investment starts paying off, the poorer part declares independence and reaps the rewards, raising their own living conditions vastly beyond that of the originally successful part. Fair?

Maybe not, but it still happens. India, Canada, Australia and the United States leaving the British empire for example. Agreed, it could be argued that the empire was sucking them dry, but I think you can agree that all of those countries have far more prosperity than if they had never been under British command.

There is no credible or decent reason for parts of states to want to become independent, save for a few extreme examples where there are massive human rights abuses or something equivalent targeted against a certain ethnic group. Even then, I simply think it is the lesser of two evils rather than being actually commendable.

Well, why not make the world one united country? That answer suggests that would be a good thing.

You wouldn't be 'suppressing' anyone - the whole notion of civilised government requires the use of force against unwilling people, in order to uphold the legal order.

Define "unwilling people" people, when I speak of independence I mean solely where that proposal is agreed to by the majority. In which case it would would be those that support remaining united that are the unwilling ones.

To prevent this would be a government thinking solely of maintaining itself and not submitting to the will of the people. The government must be answerable to the people, that is cornerstone of democracy. Why not just let the government choose their own leaders? If the average person wishes for a certain region to be independent then it must be so.

Indeed, very often secession is used to subjugate people and deny them their legitimate rights to self-determine. Case in point: Rhodesia.

And speaking of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, it just shows you what a happens when a dictator like Mugabe gets too much strength over the people and is no longer answerable to them, anarchy.

Reply 32

maths-enthusiast

Good news.

Hugo Chavez is a visionary leader, I heard he is ordering more arms and weaponry from Russian Federation.

Reply 33

spartakist

EnthusiasticEnthusiast

South Ossetia wanted to join the USSR see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian-Ossetian_conflict_(1918-1920)

As for Abkhazia, they've been wanting to become independent since the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Abkhazia When the Soviet Union collapsed the Georgians(yet again) more or less took them over(even though Abkhazia was a country part of the Soviet Union until 1931 when it became part of the Georgian SSR).

Neither region wants to be a part of Georgia so why force them to stay?

They should be recognised independent countries.

It's not quite as simple as that though. I assume you're Russian, or at least russophile? Would you apply the same principle to Chechnya?

Call me pessimistic but I don't really trust 'referenda' taking place in warzones, so the 99% figure should definitely arouse some degree of suspicion. It's a bit too idealist to believe in any region wanting independence should get it. Where do you draw the line? Cities?

Reply 34

Psyk

Craig_D

Well, that is a little different. For a start you gained ownership of the island illegally, therefore the legitimacy of your ownership would be in doubt :dontknow:

Either way, call in Interpol perhaps.

What if it the ownership was legal? If you're saying any region should be able to become independent if the majority want it, then surely that means I could declare my own land as an independent country? That's clearly ridiculous, but where do you draw the line for how big a region has to be before it counts?

Craig_D

Well, why not make the world one united country? That answer suggests that would be a good thing.

It would be a great thing if you could get people to largely agree with each other.

Reply 35

Communist Daughter

L i b

In most cases, it is secessionist tendencies which bring about oppression, or at least prolongs it into the modern world.

Or is it opression and a complete disregard for the individual needs of an area that brings about secessionist tendencies?

L i b

One cannot 'invade' part of one's own territory. The abolition of a local government unit is not good cause to take up arms in rebellion against the state.

Utter tosh. Have you heard of the American war of independance? They fought for much less. You're claim that if these regions were given independence the world would descend into anarchy with every region with it's own cultural identity seeking independence is also ludicrous. If you can name me another region (aside from perhaps gaza) with a greater claim to sovereignty feel free.

Reply 36

UGeNe

L i b

In most cases, it is secessionist tendencies which bring about oppression, or at least prolongs it into the modern world. Whilst I will certainly not condone it, suspicion of an ethnic/national/religious/etc group with a history of attempting to undermine the state is at the very least understandable.

One cannot 'invade' part of one's own territory. The abolition of a local government unit is not good cause to take up arms in rebellion against the state.

You must have really detested the collapse of the Soviet Union. Separatist rebels toying with the Socialist program.

Reply 37

UGeNe

Communist Daughter

Or is it opression and a complete disregard for the individual needs of an area that brings about secessionist tendencies?

Utter tosh. Have you heard of the American war of independance? They fought for much less. You're claim that if these regions were given independence the world would descend into anarchy with every region with it's own cultural identity seeking independence is also ludicrous. If you can name me another region (aside from perhaps gaza) with a greater claim to sovereignty feel free.

Quebec?

Reply 38

Communist Daughter

UGeNe

Quebec?

They certainly have a good case, and I don't claim to be an expert on the subject however a cursory look at Wikipedia reveals

'a slightly larger faction of Quebecers are satisfied with the status quo and wish their province to remain within a united Canadian federation.'

when a poll was conducted. This is far cry from SO and Abkhazia were independence polls register results in the high 90s voting yes.