Replies

"Wherever there is a definite territory, and we can make a plebiscite on this territory, and ask the people who live there, if the want to be an independent nation or not, then, if the answer is yes, they should have an independent state, no matter what. That's what I think.
Chechens want it? Let them have it. Taiwan wants it? Let them have it."

Sounds nice, but utopian. What if some ethnic groups consider their borders unjust and want piece of their neighbors ? I.e. once Chechnya and Dagestan were united under Imam Shamil in 19th century during a war against Russian Empire. Chechnya in its present borders was drawn by Stalin and then redrawn by Kruschev. What if some Chechen Nationalists will demand return to Chechnya "historic borders". What if Islamists in Chechnya will say that Chechnya is only the first step of the "Jihad" against Russia and will call for "liberation" (read Islamic revolution) of the entire North Caucasus and beyond ?

What about American Southwest that is increasingly Hispanic ? Some Mexicans and their supporters who are illegally entering US through US-Mexico border are claiming that they are settling on the "historic Mexican homeland" that was "stolen" during Mexican-American war of 1848-1849.

What happens if Germans will demand return to previously German lands in Western Poland from which they or their ancestors were expelled at the end or after World War II ?
What if they want to secede from Poland and reunite with Germany ?

Who will determine which claims to which land are more valid ? On what basis ?

You see what happens when respect to currently internationally recognized borders (no matter how they came to be previously) is completely substituted by emotions about history and sympathies to this or that ethnic or national group? We may open Pandorra box of historical claims and counterclaims.

Sounds nice, but utopian

This is not utopian. This is just a norm of decent behaviour, like: "Thou shall not kill". Has anybody in the human history complied wholly to this norm ?

What if some ethnic groups consider their borders unjust and want piece of their neighbors ?

Yes, this is a real problem. But I think it can be solved. First of all, they have to establish what lands they want to put to the plebiscite. This is of course a part of the negotiation. If there are disagreements, they can always divide the disputed territory into very small parts, and put every part to plebiscite separately. This has been tried out in the history: e.g. Polish-German plebiscites in 1918-1922 (I hope the dates are correct: I don't have my history book at hand).

What if some Chechen Nationalists will demand return to Chechnya "historic borders"

This is a real problem too. But you have the same problem with Basque nationalists for example, and Serb nationalists. All extremistts should be treated equally: i.e. harshly. But first make the referendum, then fight the extremists.

What happens if Germans will demand return to previously German lands in Western Poland from which they or their ancestors were expelled at the end or after World War II ? What if they want to secede from Poland and reunite with Germany ?

You found my raw nerve, because I'm Polish. But I'll tell you this: if there was a solid territory in Poland, inhabited by a majority of Germans, and those Germans would be in favour of independence, or the reunification with Germany, I would say (mind you, I'm risking banishment now) : yes, let them have it.

Who will determine which claims to which land are more valid ? On what basis ?

I think my criteria are very clear. The basis is the will of the nation.

You see what happens when respect to currently internationally recognized borders (no matter how they came to be previously) is completely substituted by emotions about history and sympathies to this or that ethnic or national group? We may open Pandorra box of historical claims and counterclaims.

I do not think so. My theory is fully rational. No emotions at all. I think that the situation when the internationally recognized borders are unjust is far more dangerous.