This article, published in the Washington Post, does a terrific job in
drawing parallels between Russia's prospective annexation of Crimea and the
secession of Kosovo in 1999. The article actually covers an ongoing argument
among academics about the reasoning behind the annexation of Crimea, and the
tenets of each argument as they relate to the separation of Kosovo from Serbia.
In one school of thought, some feel that the two situations are entirely
different and, therefore, do not warrant even being compared to one another (an
apples and oranges argument, if you will). While the two situations mirror one
another in respect to the simple concept of secession, the context and stakes
of the two are notably different.
First off, the situation in Crimea, at least at this point, does pose the
same threat of extreme violence that resulted from the attempts at independence
that took place in the late-1990s in Kosovo. In fact, the primary concerns
surrounding the situation in Crimea are those of an economic nature. The
article points out that the newly formed Ukrainian government faces a series of
notable economic challenges, and the annexation of Crimea to Ukraine could
cause economic strain on the region.
The other side of the argument poses a more straightforward perspective and
is grounded in nationalism. Many feel that Crimea belongs to the Ukrainian
people and, according the realist principle of self determination, should have
the choice of whether or not to join this recently transformed state.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/28/more-on-crimea-kosovo-and-the-morality-of-secession/
drawing parallels between Russia's prospective annexation of Crimea and the
secession of Kosovo in 1999. The article actually covers an ongoing argument
among academics about the reasoning behind the annexation of Crimea, and the
tenets of each argument as they relate to the separation of Kosovo from Serbia.
In one school of thought, some feel that the two situations are entirely
different and, therefore, do not warrant even being compared to one another (an
apples and oranges argument, if you will). While the two situations mirror one
another in respect to the simple concept of secession, the context and stakes
of the two are notably different.
First off, the situation in Crimea, at least at this point, does pose the
same threat of extreme violence that resulted from the attempts at independence
that took place in the late-1990s in Kosovo. In fact, the primary concerns
surrounding the situation in Crimea are those of an economic nature. The
article points out that the newly formed Ukrainian government faces a series of
notable economic challenges, and the annexation of Crimea to Ukraine could
cause economic strain on the region.
The other side of the argument poses a more straightforward perspective and
is grounded in nationalism. Many feel that Crimea belongs to the Ukrainian
people and, according the realist principle of self determination, should have
the choice of whether or not to join this recently transformed state.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/28/more-on-crimea-kosovo-and-the-morality-of-secession/