Political Autonomy And Divided Societies

An all star cast of academic experts offer an important and timely analysis of the pursuit of autonomy. They argue that it is key to move beyond the primarily normative debate about the rights or wrongs of autonomous regions on the basis of cultural concerns, instead focusing on understanding what makes autonomy function successfully.

Non-territorial autonomy is an unusual method of government based on the notion of the devolution of power to entities within the state which exercise jurisdiction over a population defined by personal features (such as opting for a particular ethnic nationality) rather than by geographical location (such as the region in which they live). Developed theoretically by Karl Renner in the early twentieth century as a mechanism for responding to demands for self-government from dispersed minorities within the Austro-Hungarian empire, it had earlier roots in the Ottoman empire, and later formed the basis for constitutional experiments in Estonia, in Belgium, and in states with sizeable but dispersed indigenous minorities. More recently, efforts have been made to apply it in indigenous communities. This approach to the management of ethnic conflict has attracted a small literature, but there is no comprehensive overview of its application. The intention of this special issue is to fill this gap, for the first time offering a comparative assessment of the significance of this political institutional device. Authors of case studies follow a common framework. This book was published as a special issue of Ethnopolitics.

This edited volume examines the form and operation of intergovernmental relations in divided societies. Using eight country case studies, it explores the interplay between politicised ethno-cultural diversity and intergovernmental relations (IGR) in countries where the distinctive identity of at least one subnational unit is acknowledged in a form of territorial autonomy. The book examines whether and how the distinctive identity of particular subnational units and the attending competing constitutional visions shape the dynamics of IGR. The goal here is not simply to determine whether intergovernmental interactions in such societies are less cordial and more conflictual than in other societies. Such interaction in any society could be strained as a result of disagreement over specific policy objectives. The question is whether the distinctive identity of particular subnational units and the attending competing constitutional visions themselves have been a primary source of intergovernmental tension. The book also examines the impact of identity politics on institutions and instruments of IGR, determining whether the ethno-cultural divide and the tension it creates have the tendency to affect the type of institutions and instruments employed in IGR. It is also about the relevance and effectiveness of institutions and instruments of IGR in acknowledging and accommodating the distinctive identities and specific demands of subnational units, thereby contributing to the peaceful management of divided societies.

Conflicts over the rights of self-defined population groups to determine their own destiny within the boundaries of existing states are among the most violent forms of inter-communal conflict. Many experts agree that autonomy regimes are a useful framework within which competing claims to self-determination can be accommodated. This volume explores and analyses the different options available. The contributors assess the current state of the theory and practice of institutional design for the settlement of self-determination conflicts, and also compare and contrast detailed case studies on autonomous regimes in the former Yugoslavia, the Crimea, Åland, Northern Ireland, Latin America, Indonesia and Vietnam.

In a world where the impact of internal conflicts is spreading ever wider, there is a real need to rethink how democratic ideals and institutions can best be implemented. This book responds to this challenge by showing that deliberative democracy has crucial, but largely untapped, normative implications for societies deeply divided along ethnic lines. Its central claim is that deliberative norms and procedures can enable the citizens of such societies to build and sustain a stronger sense of common national identity. More specifically, it argues that the deliberative requirements of reciprocity and publicity can enable citizens and representatives to strike an appropriate balance between the need to recognise competing ethnic identities and the need to develop a common civic identity centred on the institutions of the state.Although the book is primarily normative, it supports its claims with a broad range of empirical examples, drawn from cases such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Lebanon, Macedonia, Northern Ireland and South Africa. It also considers the normative implications of deliberative democracy for questions of institutional design. It argues that power-sharing institutions should be conceived in a way that allows citizens as much freedom as possible to shape their own relation to the polity. Crucially, this freedom can enable them to reconstruct their relationship to each other and to the state in ways that ultimately strengthen and sustain the transition from ethnic conflict to democracy.

An all star cast of academic experts offer an important and timely analysis of the pursuit of autonomy. They argue that it is key to move beyond the primarily normative debate about the rights or wrongs of autonomous regions on the basis of cultural concerns, instead focusing on understanding what makes autonomy function successfully.

Nearly all the peace accords signed in the last two decades have included power-sharing in one form or another. The notion of both majority and minority segments co-operating for the purposes of political stability has informed both international policy prescriptions for post-conflict zones and home-grown power-sharing pacts across the globe. This book examines the effect of power-sharing forms of governance in bringing about political stability amid deep divisions. It is the first major comparison of two power-sharing designs – consociationalism and centripetalism - and it assesses a number of cases central to the debate, including Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Fiji, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi and Northern Ireland. Drawing on information from a variety of sources, such as political party manifestoes and websites, media coverage, think tank reports, and election results, the author reaches significant conclusions about power-sharing as an invaluable conflict-management device. This text will be of key interest to students and scholars of ethnic conflict management, power-sharing, ethnic politics, democracy and democratization, comparative constitutional design, comparative politics, intervention and peace-building.

Conflicts over the rights of self-defined population groups to determine their own destiny within the boundaries of existing states are among the most violent forms of inter-communal conflict. Many experts agree that autonomy regimes are a useful framework within which competing claims to self-determination can be accommodated. This volume explores and analyses the different options available. The contributors assess the current state of the theory and practice of institutional design for the settlement of self-determination conflicts, and also compare and contrast detailed case studies on autonomous regimes in the former Yugoslavia, the Crimea, Åland, Northern Ireland, Latin America, Indonesia and Vietnam.

Working from the basis of Arend Lijphart's 1968 work on divided societies, the authors go on to look at such cultures and subcultures thirty years on, bringing in new evidence and analysis to bear on the issue. They also examine the essential role of party politics within and between these ^D", framing comparisons with a number of countries from Belgium to Israel.

How can conflicts between various nationalist/ethnic groups be reduced? Combining theory with case studies of Spain and Ireland, Neal G. Jesse and Kristen P. Williams develop an argument favoring a solution that links resolving issues of identity and perceptions of inequality to the establishment of cross-national, democratic institutions. These institutions can affect deeply held attitudes by promoting overlapping identities and pooling sovereignty. Overlapping identities reduce tension by creating an atmosphere where different ethnic groups lose their strict definitions of Self and Other. Pooling sovereignty across a number of international (and national) representative bodies leads to increased access to governmental policymaking for all parties involved, with each nationalist/ethnic group having a stake in government. Increased access, moreover, reduces threat perceptions and ethnic security dilemmas, and increases trust—all of which play an important role in overcoming such conflicts.