Appendix I
1. In case of initiating a new independent state: which rights must be ensured for the minority that wishes to keep the original citizenship and rights?
When a region or group aims to establish a new independent state, it is crucial to guarantee the rights of minorities who want to maintain their original citizenship and associated rights. These rights are commonly safeguarded through international pacts, constitutional clauses, and bilateral agreements.
Key Rights for Minorities Wishing to Retain Original Citizenship
Right to Citizenship and Residency:
Individuals should have the right to keep their original citizenship and, if they choose, obtain dual citizenship.
They should be permitted to live in the new state without encountering discrimination or forced displacement.
Political and Civil Rights:
Minority individuals should have the same political and civil rights as other citizens, including the right to vote, stand for election, and engage in political processes.
Freedom of speech, assembly, and association should be ensured.
Cultural and Linguistic Rights:
Preservation and advancement of cultural, linguistic, and religious rights.
Acknowledgment of minority languages in education, media, and public life.
Property and Economic Rights:
Safeguarding of property rights, including the right to possess, utilize, and transfer property.
Non-discrimination in employment, access to public services, and economic opportunities.
Legal Protections:
Access to just and unbiased legal systems, including the right to appeal to courts of the original country if agreed upon.
Legal frameworks should guarantee protection against discrimination and harassment.
Social and Educational Rights:
Equal access to education, healthcare, and social services.
Incorporation of minority history and culture in educational curricula.
Country Case of Czech Republic:
The peaceful split of Czechoslovakia into the Czech Republic and Slovakia on January 1, 1993, commonly known as the "Velvet Divorce," serves as a significant example of a nonviolent political separation. This division was marked by several essential measures that safeguarded the rights of the citizens of the newly established nations:
Citizenship Laws: The transition ensured that individuals had the freedom to choose their nationality. People were able to decide whether to become citizens of the Czech Republic or Slovakia, and provisions were made for the potential of holding dual nationality. This flexibility allowed individuals to maintain connections to both nations if they wished, reflecting the interconnectedness of the populations.
Property Rights: The splitting of property and assets was carefully managed to protect individual and collective property rights. Both countries negotiated a fair distribution of state assets, guaranteeing that citizens' property rights were upheld and that there was no sudden disruption to personal and business property ownership.
The division of federal assets was determined by a 2:1 ratio, reflecting the distribution of the population, with roughly two-thirds allocated to the Czech Republic and one-third to Slovakia.
This ratio applied to a wide range of assets, including federal institutions, military equipment, and national reserves.
National Debt:
Czechoslovakia's national debt was divided using the same 2:1 ratio. The Czech Republic took on approximately 66% of the debt, while Slovakia assumed the remaining 34%.
Infrastructure and State Enterprises:
Important infrastructure such as railroads, roads, and public services were divided based on location. Each newly formed country assumed responsibility for the infrastructure within its borders.
State-owned businesses were also split up. Companies with operations in both countries were often divided, while those located solely within one of the new states were completely transferred to that state.
2. In the face of rising regional autonomy movements, what role does diplomacy play in facilitating peaceful dialogue and negotiations between central governments and regions seeking greater independence?
Case study of UK and Scotland:
The Edinburgh Agreement was signed on October 15, 2012, between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government, setting the stage for the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum. It provided a legal framework that ensured the referendum's validity, fairness, and transparency. The agreement was significant in several ways.
First, it facilitated a temporary transfer of power from the UK Parliament to the Scottish Parliament under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998, allowing the Scottish Parliament to hold a referendum on independence.
The agreement specified the referendum date to take place before the end of 2014, allowing sufficient time for preparation and public debate.
It also addressed the referendum question, with the proposed question "Should Scotland be an independent country?" being reviewed and approved by the Electoral Commission for clarity and neutrality.
The Electoral Commission was tasked with overseeing the referendum process, including setting campaign spending limits and ensuring fair and transparent procedures.
The agreement outlined rules for campaign financing and conduct to ensure a fair playing field for both sides of the debate.
It extended the franchise to include 16 and 17-year-olds, enabling younger voters to participate in the historic decision.
The Edinburgh Agreement provided legitimacy and legal clarity by establishing a legal framework for the referendum, avoiding potential disputes and ensuring the process was constitutionally valid.
It also demonstrated a peaceful and democratic resolution to regional autonomy movements, managing political aspirations through diplomatic negotiation and avoiding potential conflict.
After the referendum, Scotland voted to remain in the United Kingdom with 2,001,926 votes against 1,617,989. Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond called for unity, while Prime Minister David Cameron expressed delight at the decision. The three main unionist parties at Westminster pledged to grant more powers to the Scottish Parliament, including control over income tax rates and bands from April 2017.
The Scottish Government established Social Security Scotland to administer devolved benefits, creating new benefits and modifying existing ones to better serve the needs of Scots. Additionally, the new powers enabled the Scottish Government to take measures to support economic growth, invest in infrastructure, and tailor policies to Scotland's specific economic circumstances. Overall, the referendum results led to significant changes in the allocation of powers, particularly in the areas of taxation, social security, and economic development.
3. How can international actors and organisations contribute to conflict resolution and the peaceful resolution of disputes?
The conflict between Serbia and Kosovo dates back to historical roots, with the Kosovo War of 1998-1999 representing a significant event in their history. Kosovo unilaterally declared independence in 2008, a move opposed by Serbia. International actors and organisations have played a crucial role in conflict resolution by providing mediation, negotiation facilitation, technical and financial support, and deploying peacekeeping forces. The European Union has been actively involved in facilitating dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo since 2011, aiming to normalise relations between the two countries. Despite ongoing tensions, diplomatic efforts persist in addressing the strained relationship between Serbia and Kosovo. Serbia's persistent refusal to recognize Kosovo's independence adds complexity to the situation
The European Union initiated the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue in 2011 to promote stability in the Western Balkans. The EU serves as a neutral platform for dialogue between Serbian and Kosovar leaders. In 2013, the Brussels Agreement was signed, aiming to normalise relations and integrate Serb-majority municipalities in northern Kosovo into the Kosovar legal framework. Key points of the agreement included the establishment of the Association/Community of Serb-majority Municipalities, integration of Serbian Police and Judiciary in Kosovo, and energy and telecom arrangements reflecting new realities on the ground. The EU uses the prospect of EU membership as an incentive for both Serbia and Kosovo to engage in the dialogue process. For Serbia, progress in the dialogue is a precondition for opening and advancing in EU accession negotiations, while for Kosovo, the dialogue is crucial for advancing its EU integration prospects. The EU continues to monitor the implementation of agreements and provides support to both sides to help overcome challenges in the process, including technical assistance, funding, and expertise. Positive outcomes of the dialogue process include improved communication and cooperation between Serbian and Kosovar authorities, as well as practical improvements in integrated border management and freedom of movement. However, challenges remain, including uneven implementation of agreements, delays, and resistance, particularly regarding the establishment of the Association/Community of Serb-majority Municipalities. Political changes and nationalist sentiments in both Serbia and Kosovo continue to pose significant challenges to the dialogue process. Additionally, deep-seated historical grievances and issues of mutual recognition have not yet been resolved.