The Right to Self Determination

Yes. The Australian founding fathers had the example of the US civil war (which had taken place some 30 years before) very much in mind when they began drawing up the Australian constitution.

Probably too much info, but this article discusses the issue
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/1983/20.pdf

2 Likes

I was using “you” in the sentence “If you really want to know…” as a synonym for “one” i.e. “If one wants to know…” I wasn’t addressing you specifically.

My point is that there are also many post ww2 examples, some still occurring, of people being denied the so called right of self-determination by the US and its allies. There’s an obvious double standard if one ignores these cases and focuses only on the actions of the US’ geopolitical opponents. Likewise if one calls Putin a war criminal (I think he is) while admiring the arguably yet more egregious examples of Kennedy and Reagan.

To respond specifically to you, Marco, there was never any doubt based on various independent polls etc that a majority of Crimeans wanted to join with Russia and that an overwhelming majority wanted to cede from Ukraine. Nor is there any doubt the majority of Crimeans continued to approve of the “annexation” afterwards.

I personally disapproved of the way the referendum and the unification with was carried out, but Ukraine and the West were not likely to approve of unification or independence taking place under any circumstances. Ukraine’s argument and the argument of other countries for not recognising the annexation of Crimea has nothing to do with the will of the Crimean people but is that Crimea can only join with Russia if the Ukrainian people as a whole vote for that as per the Ukrainian constitution.

1 Like

If people notice, I think it means your posts are interesting.

I change my posts with a fair frequency, and sometimes drastically, and I don’t remember anyone ever calling me on it. Pretty sure that’s 'cause they don’t read 'em. :slight_smile:

I read your posts. They’re often great!

Guy

2 Likes

Cause I happened to be in the topic when he replied, started replying immediately after he posted. :rofl:

Then I look up and it’s different.

1 Like

Well, thanks! And I read your posts too, and they are also often great!

2 Likes

Yeah, I often correct grammar or spelling errors, but that one I should have put new thoughts in the next post.

Right , which is the opposite process for the referendum for Scottish independence held in the UK when only Scotland could vote.

Vote leave probably would have won if the rest of the UK could have voted.

4 Likes

David Cameron

Aka real life monthy python.

My name is David Cameron and my bright idea was to break up the EU and the UK and then drive a truck with supplies after Russia invades

You could call it the right to self determination, but that presumes the state as the ‘self’.

2 Likes

Good on this Radio NZ journalist for not being bought on this thorny issue:

Guy

1 Like

Not from a trade perspective. It is a signatory to the BC-Alberta-Saskatchewan-Manitoba New West Partnership Trade Agreement. Even if it became independent, such treaties would still be respected (as they usually are with successor states). If there are any barriers to trade, investment or labour mobility, there is a robust dispute resolution mechanism where provinces are liable to pay millions of dollars in penalties by a panel if they don’t remove such barriers. I helped to negotiate it and it has survived during left and right wing changes in government. Which was exactly the intent in negotiating. In populist swings to the left or right, a stable business/labour mobility environment is needed that withstands political meddling.

I don’t think Alberta ever will separate (either with Quebec as they are heavily subsidized to stay in Canada and economic realists such as Bouchard have understood this in recent years) but to think a landlocked country would be a bad place to live? Does Switzerland ring a bell? :clown_face: :laughing: :cowboy_hat_face:

Alberta is dynamic enough that it would be a leader alone or within Canada as it is (in terms of transfer payment gifts to the less economically strong). I prefer it to stay in Canada as it adds diversity to a really statist country. :laughing: Just as Quebec provides a dose of Latin joie de vivre to a really Protestant Toronto! :clown_face:

More like Kazakhstan

Toronto the Good is long gone.

1 Like

How not to manage a colony in the Pacific:

Guy