What Are De Facto States? | And why is it so hard to create an agreed list of them?
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 06. 2024
- De facto states - otherwise known as 'contested states', 'unrecognised states', 'partially recognised states' or 'states with limited recognition' - have become a real source of fascination for many working on statehood, secession and independence. However, while the concept of de facto statehood is easy to grasp, it is incredibly difficult to define which territories qualify as de facto states - let alone put together a single definitive list of them. In this video, I explain why.
Welcome to Independent Thinking. A channel dedicated to international relations, independence disputes, secession and the origins of countries.
De facto states are now generally understood to be territories that have state-like qualities, but are not members of the United Nations. However, beyond that, there is little agreement about which territories qualify. There are now a plethora of entities that would claim to be regarded as de facto states, including, but not limited to: Kosovo, Palestine, Western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Taiwan, Somaliland and Kurdistan. However, few scholars agree on which territories really qualify as de facto states and which don't. In this video, I try to explain the various problems involved with trying to draw up a definitive list of de facto states.
I hope you found this video useful. If you did, please do press the 'Like' button. And don't forget to subscribe and press the notification bell if you would like to be alerted to my future videos. Also, if you have any suggestions for topics that you would like to see me cover, please leave a comment below. Thank you.
SHARE THIS VIDEO • What are DE FACTO STAT...
CHANNEL LINK czcams.com/users/JamesKerLind...
RELATED VIDEOS
What is a Country • What is a country? | T...
How does a Country join the UN? • How does a country joi...
What is Recognition? • How and Why do Countri...
RELATED PLAYLISTS
Current Issues and Disputes • CURRENT ISSUES AND DIS...
International Relations, Independence and Secession
• INTERNATIONAL RELATION...
=======================================
FURTHER READING & USEFUL SOURCES
International Society and the De Facto State amzn.to/2xuKuqQ
Unrecognised States amzn.to/3fa7rAx
Contested States in World Politics amzn.to/2YjHM2m
Secession and State Creation: What Everyone Needs to Know amzn.to/2MPY3W2 [PRE-ORDER]
Ashgate Research Companion to Secession amzn.to/2FabXyh
The Creation of States in International Law amzn.to/2Fc5ouO
Satow's Diplomatic Practice amzn.to/2sF1Kak
Recognition in International Relations amzn.to/2SJJmaY
=======================================
MY BOOKS
Secession and State Creation: What Everyone Needs to Know amzn.to/2MPY3W2 [PRE-ORDER]
The Cyprus Problem: What Everyone Needs to Know amzn.to/2FaaBU2
Kosovo: The Path to Contested Statehood in the Balkans amzn.to/35jiBN2
The Foreign Policy of Counter-Secession amzn.to/2Qinm5t
My other books amzn.to/2MlP13u
=======================================
MY PROFILES & SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS
Twitter / jameskerlindsay
LinkedIn / james-ker-lindsay-b31b...
Academia.edu lse.academia.edu/JamesKerLindsay
Research Gate www.researchgate.net/profile/...
=======================================
EQUIPMENT& TOOL USED TO MAKE THIS VIDEO
Camera: Canon M50 amzn.to/35Hqc9y
Microphone: Boya BY-M1 amzn.to/2VNO7Q4
Key Light: StudioPRO 1050W Softbox amzn.to/2okZAKW
Fill Light: Viltrox L116T amzn.to/2Mia86y
Teleprompter: Parrot 2 amzn.to/2VLcRsm
Tripod: Geekoto 79" Carbon Fibre amzn.to/2wWMNT1
Channel Analytics: TubeBuddy www.tubebuddy.com/JKL
=======================================
KEYWORDS
#DeFactoStates #UnrecognisedStates #ContestedStates
#InternationalPolitics #CurrentAffairs #InternationalRelations
#Secession #Statehood #Independence
#InternationalLaw #InternationalHistory
DISCLAIMER: Some of the links above are affiliate links. These pay a small commission if you make a purchase. This helps to support the channel and will be at no additional cost to you.
Watching from SOMALILAND, a country that the world ignored for almost 30 years , my greetings bro ✌ you're doing a great work keep it up .
Thank you so much! Really appreciated! 🙏🏻👍 I hope all is well over there.
somaliland is the most based de facto state because it gained independence on its own without any country helping it (aka a patron state)
@@Trolligiyou white people always are disrespecting African countries sovereignty!! Mind your business somalia is one and will stay that way why do want to split our country??!! Matter of fact Texas is the next most “Based” De facto they deserve independence and should leave the United States yall first then we’ll let Somaliland go
De facto states are fascinating. However, there is enormous disagreement over which territories should, or shouldn't, be included in any list of them. I'd be really keen to hear your thoughts on what territories should be included. Do post comments below.
Thanks for watching. If you found it interesting, please do give it a 'Like', and perhaps share it with others who might be interested. And perhaps consider subscribing to the channel, if you haven't already. it helps it grow!
ogaden region in eithiopia.pls discuss this too.in future videos
@@alinurmohamudhajji2768 Thank you. I certainly plan to look at Ogaden in a future video. I have touched on it a little in my video on Somalia. But I want to do more on it.
Somaliland and Taiwan should included they outperform their counterpart.
Thanks. Yes. I would certainly include them both in my line up.
as is Iraqi Kurdistan!
So should Azawad. They seem much more stable then Mali *cough cough* Malian Civil War *cough cough*
If someone were to ask me what kind of de facto (or contested) states I would list, I would say: Kurdistan, Somaliland, Nagorno-Karabakh, Rojava and South Ossetia and Kosovo because those would be the ones I know best. I might even include Taiwan, but I would add a disclaimer that Taiwan could be it's own category entirely.
I would also mention 'extinct' de facto states like the Republic of Acre (a Bolivian province that declared independence on two occasions and was annexed by Brazil) and the various Bantustans that existed in South Africa during Apartheid before the 1990s. The Bantustans (to my knowledge) were supposed to be sovereign states but the international community saw them as territory of South Africa.
Also, another state I would mention would be Republika Srspka. Even though it is part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the state really does seem to aspire to be independent (a point you made in your video about Republika Srspka independence, the first vid you made that I watched).
Biafra. 😊
Thanks. A great list. I would probably swap South Ossetia with Abkhazia. And I would always have Northern Cyprus in there. (It’s how I got into all this in the first place!) Rojava is a fascinating suggestion. A recent contender. And I know what you mean about Taiwan. It really is sui generis. And I love the idea of looking at extinct de facto states! 👍👏
Thank you again for clear explanations. Interesting information. Thought provoking topics
Prof, James, one of the very best informative utube videos out there!
Excellent vid James! CZcams needed your channel! Very informative and educative.
Thanks so much, Dimitrije! I really appreciate it. I’ve been really amazed at all the great comments, suggestions and contributions the videos have received. It is brilliant to see so many others interested in the subject. Thanks so much for the support! 🙏🏻👏👏👏
For me, any territory that can decide their political economic and social affairs about this area and have their own army, should be considerate like a the facto estate.
Thanks. You’re right. Being able to control territory does seem to be key. But what about only being able to do so with direct support from an external actor. Here the picture seems to be a little less clear. This is why I raised the point about the quality of independent government and the real aspiration to statehood. Are Abkhazia and Donetsk both de facto states? I’d say not. Abkhazia qualifies in my books. Donetsk doesn’t.
@@JamesKerLindsay I'm unclear about the focus on semantics. Is it important to have a bright line to recognize defacto states? Defacto states are already a fuzzy line between sates and non-states. It seems silly to spill ink over the line between defacto states and non-states. Or is this debate a clever way to get engagement ;)
OTB Having an army or a military shouldn't be a criteria. Costa Rica had no army while Bhutan is militarily dependent on India and don't forget nation-states that are in "free association" such as Micronesia.
Please make a video about Commonwealth Realm. Why some countries like Canada, Australia, etc. are under the Queen but are still considered sovereign?
Thanks. Great suggestion! The idea of independent countries sharing a head of state is certainly fascinating and confusing!
I don't know how do You do this, but You always take such an interesting topic.
Great video indeed. Thanks for all the valuable information you have shared dear James ker-Lindsay. You have summarised many important points that would normally take a semester long course within 10 mins. Actually I have been following (and benefiitng from) your work for quite a some time on the subject but I have discovered your channel just few weeks ago and became a good follower. I would love to see more videos on de facto states since I am living in one of the entities partaking on your list :)
I asked the same question in one of my classes and the majority of the class argued that in total eight entities should be considered as de facto states, namely: Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Northern Cyprus, South Ossetia, Somaliland, Transnistria, and most recently, Luhansk and Donetsk. I am looking forward to hear your opinion. Best,
İbrahim Ayberk Hello Ibrahim, thank you so much for the incredibly kind message. I really appreciate it, especially coming from a fellow scholar! I’m certainly hoping to do more on de facto states. As you can imagine, I have to mix things up a bit. Interesting to hear the list of de facto states. I’d agree with all of them except Luhansk and Donetsk. I know opinion is really split on them, but I rather view them as wholly artificial Russian proxy entities. I’m open to the idea that they may eventually become de facto states. But not yet. I really should do something on them! 😀 I’m guessing you’re in Cyprus. I hope all is well over there. I haven’t been for ages. I would have loved to go this summer. I miss it enormously.
@@JamesKerLindsay Hello James,
Thanks for sparing your valuable time to answer and sharing your perspective. Yes, I am living in Northern Cyprus. Actually, things are getting worser day by day since we are witnessing an increasing number of Covid-19 cases in the last few weeks which brought us on the verge of a second lockdown. Hopefully in the coming days I will publish a brief with one of my fellow scholars focusing on some of the latest developments in Northern Cyprus. I hope you are safe and doing better!
I would be honored to meet you the next time you visit Cyprus. I'm looking forward to watch your next videos!
Best regards,
Thank u sir, u really helped me with my research! Keep the great work up!
Brilliant indeed, educational and informative. Once again, keep up the good work. Thanks Mr Ker-Lindsay.
Thank you so much! Always appreciated.
There's an area of unclaimed land on the Sudanese and Egyptian border that neither countries want so is it theoretically possible for let's say a rich person to move in and legally create a country? Remember, neither Egypt nor Sudan claim that area so no border dispute and I appreciate the work you put into this channel.
Tau ceti
This already happened before , a man claimed it for his daughter but then he got arrested or it didn’t work out for him something like that I remember
Afaik neither claims it, but one of them controls it
@@omaralkayal7598 That sucks
Where is this land? Any articles on it? Thanks
@@markward3981 Bir Tawil
I think UN should consider those countries who are making progress and peace. Some unrecognized countries are outperforming recognize countries.
Like Taiwan
Like Somaliland
And then South Yemen came back to life...
Another great video!
Oh wow! Oh WOW! You already have 1690 subscriptions! I remember when you had 90 subscriptions :D I wish you fast and good development!
Well explained.. thank u ser for ur vLog.🙂
Thanks so much. I’m really glad it was helpful.
Thank you, very interesting! Have you had a lot of free time now since this is the third video you posted in a week?
One interesting video topic could be how countries can combat secessionist movements.
Also Anguilla, it declared independence but the UK sent troops there some years later to take control over the island. Why didn't the UK let Anguilla become independent like most of its other Caribbean territories?
Thanks so much. The subject of counter-secession is actually a topic really close to my heart. (In fact, it’s probably my precise area of academic specialisation.) I’m certainly planning to do something on it. As for the extra time, I don’t have a lot. But I thought to try to see if I could do a few more videos at the moment. I’m trying to stick to my Friday schedule, but I also thought to try to put up occasional extra ones in the week, usually on a Tuesday evening. My hope is to use this for the Origins of Countries series and other more random bits and pieces, such as the recent Bougainville update. What do you think?
@@JamesKerLindsay The extra videos are always interesting to watch! If you have time and motivation, continue to make them
Also what about my question about Anguilla? Why did their independence fail?
@@JamesKerLindsay In your article I was confused about the role of IDP's in counter-secession. How does secession even create IDP's?
Hey, i saw your comment on Cathrin Mannings video and decided to stop by. hi!
At the beginning for which would you list I would say:
Transnistria
Somaliland
Taiwan
South Ossetia
Abkhazia
Nagorno-Karabakh
Azawad
(and lastly) Northern Cyprus
Edit: I’d also say that any unrecognized country that controls any form of territory should be considered a De Facto State. If they have territory and a government, they’re De Facto Stated in my opinion. That’s why I included Azawad. By my definition, then Kurdistan is not a De Facto State, but two separate De Facto States (Rojava and Peshmerga).
Azawad is not independent yet.
It's such a shame Somaliland remains on this list. Quite a few others deserve recognition too, but more than any other, its status as a stable, independent state is an obvious, undeniable fait accompli.
According to the international law montevidoe convention Article 51 SOMALILAND fullfilling criteria of statehood
Professor Lindsay, your lectures are precise, informative, and interesting. I do agree with you that these matters are not only sensitive but also controversial: However, as in the case of Somaliland, both independence and de factor statehood conditions do exist. Keep in mind that Somaliland attained independance from the UK and not Somalia. Also, it withdrew from a Union with Somalia, hence regaining its pre union statehood status as a sovereign independent state. I look forward to keep watching your presentation.
Thank you.
Thank you again for these amazing videos , I would suggest you do a separate video about each of those frozen conflicts including like Nagorno-Karabakh or Abkhazia and South Ossetia. However, maybe leave it out for the future because as of right now these conflicts as much as they are interesting but nothing new has happened with them for quit a while now.
As for the topic of the video I think that both Palestine and Chinese Taipei deserve full independence while Abkhazia , Ossetia , Transnistria and Donetsk are all just Russian puppets or occupied territories in which I think that Russia should just let them go their separate ways and just return them to their rightful owners
And by the rightful owners I mean Georgia , Ukraine and Moldova
Thanks so much, as ever, Omar! I certainly plan to look at the various disputes you mentioned in the post-Soviet space. In terms of the issues, I would usually list Transnistria, Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh as de facto states. I tend to be agnostic on South Ossetia. However, I don’t usually count Donetsk and Luhansk. They just strike me a Russian proxies.
‘Rightful owner’ is such a ambiguous statement. According to research done by University of Colorado Boulder in 2010
a big majority of Abkhazians want independence, including ethnic Georgians in Abkhazia. And lets also not forget it was Georgian Stalin that downgraded Abkhazia’s SSR status, which made Abkhazia a ‘right-full owner’ of Georgia, despite the outcry of the Abkhaz
@@rogueprince0 Complicating this picture, many ethnic Georgians were expelled from their homes in the region. That makes a referendum a lot less meaningful.
@@jeejbeej There are up to half a million (I know this is an exaggeration but there are more Abkhaz in Turkey, and thats a fact) Abkhaz in Turkey. So many more Abkhaz has been expelled from this region before Georgians colonized Abkhazia (see Soviet and Russian empire censuses). Pls reach about Circassian genocide and its aftermath before making comments about Abkhazia.
Hi James,
How do you, if at all, distinguish btw state and country? You seem to use the two terms interchangeably. For me, a state is more an administrative unit, while a country is a geographical and cultural one.
For example, when in San Marino, I didn't think I had left Italy at all; at the same time San Marino does have attributes of statehood but does it have more of that than, let's say, the city of Milan?
You ask the question whether Scotland is a de facto state? By that do you mean how independent its government is? I think there are degrees of independence vs just independence or the lack of it. Is Belarus a state? I guess it is. Is its government independent? It is to a degree: it would have limits internationally but it could easily improve its people's standard of living. Is its people independent? Not so much. Then is it a state? How does statehood relate to independent action? How does modern statehood relate to democracy?
Municipalities are part of state administration of countries but by gaining more autonomy, they also gaín degrees of independence, and devolution might lead to full blown statehood (if such thing exists). How do you look at this?
I might be mixing a lot of things that might only be loosely related but that is how my thoughts have developed on the topic after watching your video.
I find your channel great, thank you for sharing your knowledge with us.
Thanks so much for the really kind words about the channel Laszlo. I really appreciate it!
This is a really great question. Technically, and more properly from a legal point of view, you are right. We should use the term state, not country. All states are countries, but not all countries are states. (I believe that the UN's lust of countries stands at around 220 or so, whereas the actual membership is at 193.) However, stylistically, it can sometime be a bit jarring to use the word state time and time again. Country just adds a bit of variation. The understanding comes from the context. And great point about municipalities. This is a really interesting emerging dimension in international relations. Sub-state units, including cities, are indeed gaining greater prominence.
I have my own rules for a de facto state and what is a de jure state. Both categories have to be entities that have formally declared independence, have “permanent” control over territory with a permanent population.
For me a de jure state is a UN Member or Observer or any other that otherwise participates in the international community (through UN agencies, treaty making capacity, the Olympics) which is usually only possible through recognition or more informal acknowledgement (e.g. Kosovo and Taiwan have somewhat normalized economic relations with Serbia and China).
A de facto state lacks these properties. Donetsk and Luhansk didn’t even take part in the Minsk agreements for example despite supposedly being states. However, I’m reluctant to call those places states rather than blatant puppets recognized by Russia and its friends
My list of de jure and de facto states
De jure: 193 UN members + 2 UN observer states + Kosovo (recognized by half of UN members and has normalized relations with some others) + Taiwan (has normalized relations with most states)
De facto: Abkhazia, Artsakh, Donetsk, Luhansk (both clear Russian puppets), Northern Cyprus (Turkish puppet) South Ossetia, Transnistria, Somaliland (its informal relations are still quite limited)
Ambiguous: Cook Islands, Niue (membership of UN agencies whilst NZ stops them from applying to UN itself and having no passports of their own) and SADR (member of the African Union, but it doesn’t really have a permanent population in the territory it controls so I can’t really call it a state)
what about your opinion? which countries would make it to your de facto state list?
Great videos as usual, is it possible if I copy your videos and share it with my community on CZcams especially videos about Somaliland I will mention your channel to the originality of the video
Thank you. I really appreciate the fact that you asked. In principle, I would be willing to consider it. However, as you will understand, this potentially affects my views (and subscriber numbers). I would want to get very clear credit for the video including a direct link to my channel in the video description and in your pinned comment at the top. Also, could you give me a better idea of what you would do with it? For example, are you proposing to translate it? Many thanks.
@@JamesKerLindsay thanks for replying to my message. The idea is to translate the video i haven't decided to translate it in subtitle or voice over but it will be definitely be translated and all the request you have made will be full addressed
Thanks so much. Could you let me know when you have done it? So I don’t miss your message, it would perhaps be best to send me an email via the link on my about page.
@@JamesKerLindsay thanks very much, I will definitely let you know. Again thank you
Interesting video. What abput Niue? It is a member of some international organizations.
Great point! Niue is usually understood to fall into the category of free association. But thinking about it, they could also be thought of as de facto states in one way or another. I’m actually planning to do something on free association. It’s a really confusing field as well!
@@JamesKerLindsay Niue is an interesting point yet, I have to agree with your view of Niue (like Tokelau)
@@tennis501tennis501 Niue, as well as the Cook Islands, are independent countries in free association with New Zealand. They are neither UN members nor observers, but they are a part of many UN committees and organizations, and their independence is not disputed. On the other side, Tokelau is a territory of New Zealand, not independent beyond that. Tokelau and Niue are not of the same status, one is a territory, the other is a country.
i subscrib after taiwan and somalilan make history and you deserve keep the good info bro
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it!
Freedom for life thank you
As the National Sovereign State of Borinken (Formerly Puerto Rico) declares its independence in 2012 from the United States of America, it should be considered a De Facto State, because we comply with the Montevideo Convention definition of what a State is.
do you think Wa state is really de facto independent?
Love you form Kurdistan ✊🏻❤️☀️
Are you from Turkey or Iraq?
Another political entity that may be considered a de facto state is the Wa State in Burma/Myanmar, an autonomous region that's practically more or less an independent state complete with its own military, a different form of currency (the Chinese Renminbi) and government (a one party Maoist state) with its ruling party, the United Wa State Party having effective control over its claimed territory. It can be described as sort of a mixture between Abkhazia and Kurdistan, a territory that's de facto independent and is closely interlinked with a foreign power, in this China like Abkhazia but hasn't actually made a declaration of independence like Iraqi Kurdistan.
Thanks James again for yet another educational video. To your question, i think Lugansk and Donetsk have well-defined populations and territory, and can enter into relations, and have independent governments and very independent leaders. In addition they've really had a trial by fire. So i think they are de facto states. I don't think Scotland is a de facto state, although i think the world would be a better place if it were a de facto and a de jure state. :)
Thanks. I would actually disagree on Donetsk and Luhansk. I don’t think they aspire to real statehood in the way that Abkhazia and Transnistria do. To my kind, they feel too much like proxies. However, I know that opinions differ on this. And, as I noted, this may change with time. I tend to agree on Scotland. I wouldn’t put it on a list of de facto states. However, it seems odd to include Kurdistan and then not apply the same arguments to Scotland.
is Kashmir , Juna Garh , Hyderabad Dakhan are the De-Facto states in sub-continent of India .
Hi,
What about Taliban regime, are they coming under de facto?
Very interesting topic and the bottom line is that "de facto" status doesn't have anything to do with legality and the reason why people can't agree is because the status is measured by power or whos behind it and not by justice and law. So with regards to that, if you want to take justice as a measurement:
DNR and LNR should be taken as de facto states
Taiwan shouldn't be taken as de facto state. Taiwan should be a part of Chinese confederation.
Somaliland shouldn't be taken as a de facto state. It should be a part of Somali confederation with Somalia.
Transnistria shouldn't be de facto state
Karabagh shouldn't be a de facto state
Kurdish region of Iraq could be seen as a de facto state, but the Turkish and Iranian one shouldn't
Scotland already is a state, only its in a union with another state. It could break the union and become fully recognized state, not just de facto one.
Abkhazia could be de facto state
Northern Cyprus shouldn't be a de facto state.
Kosovo shouldn't be a de facto state.
My opinion
I'm very ignorant of these European questions, especially south-eastern Europe. So . . . why is Transnistria not de facto? It's been around for almost 30 years, so at least it has a settled population and a territory. Is the government too shaky? Thanks for any clues . . . :)
@@danhitt167 Well this is how I see it... Transnistrias biggest problem is its territory. Its highly disfunctional. Its less than 30km in average width but almost 1000km long. So from logistical and strategic point of view, such territory is disfunctional. There is also the problem of legitimacy since its basically the last standing "Soviet/Communist" state which also adds to already complicated situation. Further more that country would find itself into very hostile surrounding, meaning that it would be left without bordering any "friendly" state. There is also the problem of infrastructure. If you make the border between Transnistria and Moldova a state one, that border would cut all important roads and grids, highways, dams, water ways and pipes. Basically you would make a humanitarian catastrophe by pulling out such move. There is also a problem of identity...What does Transnistria want? Is it a Russian state? Slavic state? Communist? Eurasian? What is the path of that region and the people that live within it? There is also the point of it being a landlocked region.
I for example love Transnistrians, I consider them as my brothers and sisters and I would love for them to achieve their goals but from logistical and strategical point of view I don't see it as plausible.
I don't understand. Why should Donetsk and Luhansk be considered defacto states and not Kosovo? Certainly Kosovo has more recognition, has control over it's territory, has historical basis for at the very least holding autonomy as a former autonomous region of Serbia during Yugoslavia, largely conducts an independent domestic and foreign policy. Whereas Luhansk and Donetsk are little recognised, have no historical basis for statehood or autonomy, has control over only a fraction of the territory it claims and is occupied militarily by a larger neighbor that it seeks to become part of, how is this a better claim to statehood than Kosovo?
@@lunino4374 historical basis? What basis?
Donbass is a Russian land where Russians live since ancient times. Really the list is so long, starting from illegal coup in Kiev, shooting demonstrators in the back by Ukr regime, massacre of Russians in Odessa, Harkov etc, banning of Russian language in Ukraine, installation of NATO weapons and agents across western Ukraine. All with Ukraine being a part of Kievan Russia, Russian empire and Soviet union for almost 1000years.
Kosovo on the other hand is a region where Jihaddist invaders exterminated local Christan population through the 300 years period and then occupied the land with the help of imperialist forces.
The only thing Donbass and Kosovo have in common is that they are two breakaway regions. Absolutely everything else has no connection at all.
I really can't understand Westerners. Those same jihaddists make no-go zones in your countries, they have 0 respect for the West. They kill your children with drugs and pimp and groom your underage daughters and you go fight their wars...? Why...? Thats a pure case of Stockholm syndrome. That is why the Kosovo war happened because we didn't want to let Turco-Mongols do what they are doing to your kids all over UK and Cologne. 1300 of your daughters got sexually assaulted in one single night! Wake up...
Finally, a sane man..!
☆
Hi you all who searched for Luhansk and Donetsk as de facto states after February 21 and you found this video!
Well
The story about those two territories ,of Ukraine , IS very similar with the north occupied , by Turkey , areas of Cyprus..!
Turkey , as well and Russia , claims about the similar excuse ...
For to save their ..minority in those independent countries..!
..well..
This all situation IS WRONG..!
MINORITIES , should except their position where ever they are...!
AND..
their presence , should be respected for every state ..according to the human rights..!
.
I’m from kurdistan ❤️
I haven't watched the whole video yet, but wouldn't the simplest and most conservative strategy be to recognize all de facto states as de jure? Wouldn't that maximize the principle of self-determination?
Thanks. Unfortunately, that wouldn’t work. It would be a recipe for chaos. As one UN Secretary-General said, if every people’s that’s anted independence got, he’d be leading an organisation with 6000 members! Also, groups aren’t located in neat discrete areas. They often overlap. Who then has the right to their own state? This could be a recipe for conflict, ethnic cleansing and even genocide. Self-determination as we now understand it doesn’t mean a right to indecency except in colonial cases. It means a right to self-rule within the borders of existing states. Countries jealous guard their sovereignty - and usually stick together to protect it. That’s why unilateral secession almost always fails.
@@JamesKerLindsay Yeah, I know it's a "crazy" idea, but the principle of self-determination is crucial for the legitimacy of the legal order. Legitimacy comes from states truly representing the people that live within their territory and without self-determination states are not really legitimate. So what is more important - to protect the state-centric global order or the right of people to govern themselves? The problems you mention that arise from following the principle are an indication that the state-centric legal order is flawed. The appropriate response is not to disregard the principle but rather to build a global legal order that is capable of fulfilling fundamental requirements such as self-determination.
@@JamesKerLindsay Israel is a great example. The people of Palestine had no say on the Balfour declaration and the creation of the state of Israel. Palestine was INVADED, Palestinians were denied their right to self-determination, and then Israel was created. It's a completely illegitimate state, it's nothing but a colony of the UK and the US. Yet the international community recognizes Israel as a legitimate state. It's absurd! The principle of self-determination means NOTHING to the international legal order! It's constantly shoved aside to protect the interests of the powerful!
@@JamesKerLindsay just to be very clear, in case my last comment may be misinterpreted, I have no quarrel with you. You're cool and I like your videos. I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the international legal order.
United States is dejour defacto July 4th 2021.
I'm here when my country ( somaliland) get a political relationship with the Taiwan republic,,
Viva somaliland♥️⬜💚
Yes. Certainly big news, isn’t it! By the way, I’m hoping to do a video on this on Friday. Keep an eye out for it!
@@JamesKerLindsay
Thanks your news abt my nation made my day♥️💪
Yes, but they did NOT open embassies!! They open "representative offices" .... There are some offices of Somaliland abroad, bot NONE is an embassy or consulate and no representative has any diplomatic status. This fact is ignored by most Somalilanders. Yes, some Somalilanders have traveled abroad with showing their Somaliland passport, but that all was "illegal", because either the customs/border controll simply were not aware about and mixed this with Somalia (who did not had given any passports for nearly 30 years) or there was some money in the passport (what permanentely happens with the Somaliland/Ethiopian/Djiboutian border or at the Airports in Addis Ababa or Djibouti. -- The issue with Taiwan and Somaliland can be compared when Bavaria (Germany) opens a representative office in Texas (USA), but not two independent states. Sorry for my non-perfect English
What about for Texas. California. Guam . Hawaii. Puerto Rico. Alska ..........
Thanks. Watch my latest Q&A video. I discuss the US independence movements. They aren’t going far. Puerto Rico doesn’t want independence. (Polling shows just 5% support.) Guam is an interesting case that I hope to cover at some point.
#saharalibre 👍👍
For what it's worth, I would not include Scotland in any list of De Facto states. For better or worse, our current constitutional status was reached largely democratically (though there are definitely arguments to to had around the repatriation of certain powers post-Brexit). This may change depending on the outcome of any future Holyrood/Westminster discussions about a second referendum, but for now, we're not claiming to be an independent state so terminology other than De Facto should be used.
Damned if I can think what the right term should be though
If Scotland is considered a de facto state than effectively any entity with significant autonomy from the central government would also be de facto states? Certainly Quebec, which organised an independence referendum unilaterally, while Scotland's required Westminster approval...
@@charlesmadre5568 It's not entirely certain if Scotland did need Westminster approval or not. The 2012 Edinburgh Agreement was made to avoid ambiguity by saying "In this particular case, you definitely can"
What about somaliland?
Despite supporting Ukraine resisting the Russian aggression (more for the political orientation, my aversion to the antiquated patriotism and machismo and maffia that Russia represents in this conflict of the civilizations), I find difficulties with the whole notion of "territorial integrity". We live in a world with regions that have long historical and cultural distinction (e.g. Basques) that have no right to self-governance, while many nations (most of Europe) founding their independence on that qualitatively same distinction. We also have states that speak the same languages and have quite similar cultures (in the world-scale comparison) like in South America, but they are independent because of the historical "coincidence".
Moreover we have surreality of the "sovereign states" of the Andorra, Vatican, San Marino, Singapore scale - that on official diplomatic level can talk as equals to huge countries like Canada, Russia or India that represent more of a subcontinent and hundred times more population. That's absurd enough. Not to forget the fact that we have countries that are more or less ashamed of their colonial past who granted the independence to the descendants of their victims - and then "countries" that continue the existence of the colonial empires, occupying regions and ethnical groups conquered in the time when the colonialism had a free unapologetic ride. Russia, China - first on my list. The only difference for them is having their colonies not overseas (easier to secede) but as contiguous appendages to their territories.
The "territorial integrity" and the "sovereign states" are very tricky and artificial concepts, the results of some past aggressions and wars - won or lost - in history. Covering up the continuing historical injustices but even more acutely the current disrespect to the distinct ethnicities and unrecognized nations - as a diplomatic status quo of the United Nations. It somehow works (peace and prosperity), but it is unfair, unjust, and mis-founded in its very roots. I would be for a reconstruction and reconstitution of that organization, but on consistent and "applies to all equally" foundations.
In my own perspective, I am averse to the large states. Much in favor of using any random historical window of opportunity to fraction them. Be it Russia an its dozens of ethnic prisoners, Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Iraq, etc. And a right for self-determination as the preferred criterion. "If you want to be separate from us, be separate."
But obviously, it could not end with small territories and who knows if not city-states separating from larger countries. Rich regions separating from poor - creating new challenges. We'd maybe need to portion the larger countries to the comparably equal chunks. If that was ever possible.
Taking example of Europe, we have couple of unresolved skeletons in the closet: Basques, Scotts, Catalans, Bretons, Ruthenians ... I'd prefer EU as a federation of much smaller nations - somehow equal in size and power (thing Germany or France versus Luxembourg or Slovenia). Just because smaller nations, I believe, would be more helpless on their own and more pressured towards mutual dependence, cooperation (and federalization) than the big ones. In bigger view, a world of small nations freely federalizing into larger blocks. Aiming for more equality among the decently-sized nations within those blocks as much as between the federate blocks themselves.
All and all, I find the system, where everyone is playing the cards of "right for self-determination" versus "territorial integrity" according to their own situatinal self-intrest (and sometimes even switching these principles case by case), peppered with nationalist chauvinism that should have been abandoned in 19th century - as inherently fragile, if not unstable.
I would include countries that have self claimed independence and has active enforcement over that claim. While South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria and Ngorno-Karabakh may be subject to Kremlin influence, so are many other countries (see: Central Asia).
*Transnistria*
*Abkhazia*
*South Ossetia*
*Ngorno-Karabakh*
*Northern Cyprus*
*Kosovo*
*Taiwan* (only very few Taiwanese aspire to the notion of PRC land is a part of the ROC, people just view themselves as an independent unrecognized country)
*Somaliland*
*Sealand*
*(modern) Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan*
*Donetsk*
*Lugansk*
Countries are discluded if their statehood is not longstanding and uncertain to survive their ongoing wars.
IE
various armed groups in Syria
*South Yemen*
various Armed groups in Africa
Thanks so much! What an interesting line up. I agree on the role of patrons. This doesn’t necessarily work against de facto states. However, I think it is important to make an objective assessment about the degree of real and effective government the de facto state has over day-to-day affairs and how real it’s claim to statehood really is. I certainly include Transnistria and Abkhazia in my list. I’m on the fence about South Ossetia. And I don’t include Donetsk and Luhansk. Really fascinated to see you include Sealand. I usually put this in the category of micronation. I’m planning to do a video on these at some point.
Tamil eelam 🙏🐅❤,Tamilnadu and kerala
Somaliland deserves to be recognised as an independent state. The reason is that Somaliland has gained its independence on 26/06/ 1960 from Britian and merged voluntarily with so called Republic of Somalia that doesn't function and is considered globally failed state but just exist by name. However, Somaliland has fulfilled all national entities as a sovereign state. This include Military and security forces, its own currency, judiciary system, well governing system the existence Rule of Law, smooth democratic power transfer, elected president, Parliament, local government and upper house.
i really cant focus on what he s saying looking at him talk
From ACHEHNESE, not Indonesian penjajah 🇱🇺🇯🇵🇲🇨
I’m sorry but it’s not that difficult, recognition is a diplomatic tool not a geopolitical one, in the real world recognition doesn’t matter. This vid czcams.com/video/B0cOTXLJCvU/video.html I think illustrates it well
Thanks. But I’m a little unclear about the point you are making here. Perhaps you could spell it out in a little more detail. Recognition is obviously a complex area. And while some lawyers argue that statehood is not contingent on recognition, in the real world recognition certainly does matter. And thanks for the link. I will take a look.
James Ker-Lindsay recognition matters in terms of diplomacy and international relations, as it’s a political tool. The United Nations is similarly an inherently political institution, and while an invite is cool, one isn’t necessary to simply exist.
So publishing a world map based on the recognition granted by any particular country or the UN makes the map inherently incorrect and politically biased, even if it’s unintentional. These maps also often make showing or explaining current geopolitical events impossible without additional illustration, because in many cases the relevant border is simply a military frontline and not written into treaty, or the conflict involves state that has no recognition and thus doesn’t appear.
Yes you want friends to accept you, but it doesn’t mean you don’t exist at all if they don’t.
In the vid, he says he gets why most maps are like that, as countries want mapmakers on their soil to produce maps showing that country’s own version of recognition (gives the examples of a modern Chinese map showing total control of the S China Sea, an American map from the Cold War showing the Baltics as independent when they weren’t, a current American map showing Crimea as part of Ukraine, etc, all of these situations are/were different on the ground than these maps claim).
The map feature in the video I linked above (here’s the link to the map itself: i.ibb.co/wcmMtJv/AWM-1-0-4.png) displays all territorial control over land in the world, as of May 1. Military control on the ground of a given area (ie. borders on the ground) are the only factor considered for inclusion, (only areas actually under control), factions that meet this criteria but who don’t proclaim a state are labeled as such.
This is extremity helpful for several things: to understand conflicts better, to display the true nature of geopolitics which is that borders constantly move and change (and that getting caught up in the diplomacy they talk about on the news or the recognition referred to by most maps is really just your own country’s window dressing on the real world where borders move and change all the time), to serve as the only accurate template for displaying international spheres of influence (or really any other color-coded map where normally some countries that are part of a sphere of influence would be inaccurately left out entirely, due to the country where the map was published not recognizing it), to better display island and archipelago counties without reducing them to blue, geometrically shaped outlines of their exclusive economic zones, and finally to more coherently display the overseas possessions of powers in a fair end equitable manner regardless of their relationship to the mother country (which is detailed in the text label).
From what I understand those are the goals of the map and video, however I’ll personally say these are all ideas that I’ve agreed with and have made sense to me for years, but I never knew how to tie them together or that they were really all connected until this “apolitical world map” which I feel hits on all these points, the only downside being that frontlines can change and as such Libya’s borders for example are a little outdated due to the recent offensive there, however he says he may make a new update of the map every 3-6 months to keep it current with the frontlines.
Thanks for such a long an interesting reply. Again, I think you play down recognition too much. Yes, there are territories that aren’t under the effective control of the state that is recognised as having sovereignty over them. But the number is actually relatively small. As that map showed, most borders are in fact pretty stable. And most if the territory that is disputed is help by rebel groups rather than other states. As I’ve noted, military occupation is not accepted under international law. But even then the reality if these territories is isolation. Their ability to participate in international relations is severely restricted. Recognition isn’t just about a country saying “we accept you” (and it is worth stressing that the UN can’t recognise states), it is about saying “we accept you and you can join the club and get all the benefits of membership of that club” such as bilateral treaties, trade deals, telephone dialling codes, extradition treaties, economic assistance, formal diplomatic relations, direct flights, top level internet domains, accepted passports, etc. This all matters in very real terms. So, a geographer would say that they’re mere artificial lines on a map. A political scientist would say they’re the very real markers between human communities that are recognised as exerting legitimate control over particular areas - and can thus enjoy the benefits of that accepted sovereignty.
James Ker-Lindsay I thank you for the thoughtful reply, I do agree that it‘s an issue of differing viewpoints. Because in my mind, international law is not a legitimate form of law but merely a political one, as it does not extend very far back in history plus there is no world government and as such there is no mechanism for enforcing these laws unless a country that plays by The Hague’s rules happens to get you and drag you there, and there is especially no mechanism for enforcing these laws on entire countries. So I’ve always felt “international law” was more like a set of written norms rather than actual enforceable law.
Plus again the biggest weakness is that the idea didn’t even really exist until the late 1940s, meaning that maps were always accurate (if of course you could somehow get your hands on a recent enough copy) up until 1945 or so, but we just decided one day that the UN, an inherently political bloc that at the time only included like half the world’s counties (even if the UN dominates the world today with 195 members, it’s still a bloc, just a really big and dominant one, the 23 countries outside its jurisdiction can tell you that - this is what you called the “benefits of legitimacy” whereas I simply see it as the “benefits of membership” which then can give you that clout and legitimacy most UN members enjoy, but as you know places like Kosovo don’t enjoy the type of legitimacy you speak of despite being in the UN, again showing that the UN and The Hague court is really just part of a gigantic, but not exclusive, political bloc). And now, ever since we decided that maps and nomenclature would be based on the UN’s or The Hague court’s political opinions, we’ve been reduced to using inaccurate politically biased nomenclature and maps.
It’s like a dumbing down of a world that used to acknowledge realpolitik as the unpleasant way the world operates, and leads to a naïvety about war where the closest thing to hell on earth is often subject to moral debates when the reality is borders change all the time (I think your reply does downplay this, numerous borders are slightly different than shown on most maps, also many of those insurgent “governmentless areas” are caused by or themselves cause border conflicts, plus I’d argue that border changes have really been happening again more since Putin’s Crimea annexation in 2014, the early 2000s were kind of a lull for border changes) and every time they do there are usually war crimes committed, often by both sides and usually involving rape, torture, and murder of civilians, thus nullifying the other role of “international law” which is supposedly to create “clean warfare”, despite providing almost no legal grounds for warfare in the first place. Name me a war fought without war crimes? I’ll be waiting for a while for that answer.
Basically international law is a set of impossible standards for declaring and conducting war, that nobody follows or has ever followed (at least too closely - I understand that rules of engagement are a huge deal in the armed forces, but I’d argue that this has way more to do with being worried about upsetting anything diplomatically with specific countries, rather than being worries about upsetting the UN or The Hague). Oh they pay it plenty of lip service, it goes a long way at home to sell “international cooperation” (and other human rights related interests such as “decolonization”, which wasn’t really for the human rights of subjects so much as it was a way to strategically give colonies under communist threat independence) but the reality is whatever world power is in control of a sphere of influence has essentially full control over what happens in that sphere, no matter what the UN says, while the wars conducted within those spheres are usually illegal according to the UN and are usually prosecuted in ways that would be considered war crimes by the UN.
The UN is a political bloc that is dominant to the point of near exclusivity over inhabited land in the world, but in fact is completely powerless unless a great power decides to use it to make itself look responsible or just, by prosecuting some enemy leader at The Hague. It’s the same way that the “clean war” idea, that war crimes aren’t nearly universal in live war, is just to make nations currently at war look responsible and just.
So the issues I have with the current widespread practice is that, geographically, it’s only applicable since 1945 because before that maps were always accurate if you could access the most recent version and were based on the acknowledged world order of realpolitik, and that socio-politically, the world order that these inaccurate maps pretend to be upholding doesn’t even exist, because out in the actual word itself, the realpolitik we all accepted pre-1945 has continued all the way through the Cold War, through the Pax Americana, and through to the new America-China rivalry, right to the present day.
There is a self declared "Embassy" of a "Republic of Cabinda" (Angola) in London...., Bougainville (Papua New Guinea) is 5 minutes before declairing independence. There are special agreements from New Zealand with Niue, Cook Islands and Tokelau. Cook Islands even have some honorary consuls abroad. Lot of Islands belong to the "Crown", the Queen, not to England, not to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Isle of Man and all the individual Channel Islands. The channel Islands are just a geographical something, but each island has his own rules and all are no members of the EU. Ok, now with this stupid Brexit they maybe should become members of the EU ...... Also the Aland Islands between Sweden and Finland have a special status. The Order of Malta have just a little territory, but somehow they are a "state". There have been movements for independence, like the northern Part of Sri Lanka, or the northern Part of Sumatra (Aceh). Aceh even have had an government in exile in Stocholm, but they have given up. So far I know also the Karen State of Myanmar (Burma) is seeking for independence somehow.
Great video...
It seems like the comments section is burning...
Well as a right politician every single peace of land deserves the right to go on his own...
But they should follow God rules and keep the traditional values and get rid of the "political correct nonsense"
A New Conservative Age Is Rising!
In The Name Of God! #DeusVult!
Thanks. So sorry about replying so late. I only just saw the comment. The comments section do sometimes feel like they are ablaze! 😀 The problem with a free and unfettered right to go it alone is where do we draw the line? This has always been the difficulty with the idea.
@@JamesKerLindsay I assume the reason that the bar for independence is so high is in service to political elites around the globe. You tend to only discuss ethnic classes so that might be out of scope for the channel.
I'm from somaliland and am feeling sad for my country
somaliland
Nagorno Karabakh and Armenians in general suffered a lot between Turkic-Tatar nations. Once they suffered the Armenian genocide by ottomans (Turks), then Sumgayit massacres from their west (azerbaijan). Then sovet collapse where nagorno Karabakh awarded to azerbaijan by fault (where majority were Armenians). Been hurt a lot of the neo ottoman and turan dreams (expanding from Turkey to Turkic Nations in central Asia). They so much deserve independence. Especially being between 2 oligarchy fascist dictatorships (Turkey and Azerbaijan).
Let me further confuse the situation. Just take what I'm about to say as fact...
I have established a nation that is within what we all perceive as the United States. This isn't just a high school class project, it's a bona-fide foundation of a nation. I have an adjudicated claim against the United States that they have agreed to. My claim comes with land, it also comes with recognized sovereignty. This land issued by the land patent office will be stricken from the territory of the US. So...
I am also owed a vast monetary return, so much infact that I could purchase millions of square miles to further enlarge my sovereign territory.
Here's the question... if someone owes you a million dollars, are you considered a millionaire? Because the US owes me this award, I consider that a good indication that my nation exists even without the physical property lines drawn on the map.
Guess we'll see soon the outcome of this mine field. It'll be interesting to look back at this CZcams post of mine in a year or so.
Blessings to all of you.
My list would be:
Taiwan 🇹🇼
Somaliland*
Palestine 🇵🇸
Kosovo 🇽🇰
Northern Cyprus*
🏴 I'm Scottish, pro independence, but I would nit include Scotland because we have clearly defined shared structures with the rUK. Scots are too pragmatic to declare unilateral independence.
* Maybe you need to do a video on emoji independence.
These things like TLDs, ISO codes and online drop-down list of countries are infuriating if you are Scottish. Scotland is not there, but Pitcairn - population 50, NOT sovereign and not even a feasible state is always represented.
Why are dependencies considered sovereign by these bodies and by the Olympic committee!
Thanks so much. I completely agree. I think Scotland is being careful about how it approaches independence - and rightfully so after what happened with Catalonia. That was an instructive tale about how not to do things! (In case you haven’t seen it, this was my take on it czcams.com/video/-8khg82Bk_Q/video.html) And great point about dependencies! I do want to do more on that issue.
The north part of CYPRUS is OCCUPIED by Turkey since 1974..!
MILITARY OCCUPIED AREA..!
TODAY.
just their military put people in costumes to play political games.!
The majority of ALL those are still our STOLEN lands and proberties. !
..Can ,those lands ,become independence ..?
..from whom they are going to be.. for..!
..STOLEN LAND .!
is the north part of the island..?
..So ,
How , and you considered the north occupied part of Cyprus , as a future ..state ..?
If I may ask you ..?
You should of known that the north occupied part of Cyprus , is under Turkey's occupation since 1974..!
MILITARY OCCUPIED AREAS..!
The majority of all those are still our stolen lands..!
..YES , we Cypriots , lost a SET UP war against us , on 1974 , and Turkey , finally put a step on the island ..!
Can you imagine ,today ,
, after the Russians invasion in Ukraine , ..the Crimea ,and the Russian speaking areas of Ukraine to becomes a separate state..!
PLEASE ..estimate better the ducts..
RECOGNISE SOMALILAND *DEFACTO COUNTRY*
Nagorno-Karabakh is recognized by Armenia.
To all of these states I believe truly that Taiwan and Kosovo deserve UN-Membership
Serbia Stronk Intensifies 🇷🇸
@@danielpeter3834 Serbia = Mut
Never 🇷🇸
@@prkifly5957 Serbia is nobody in the UN.
@@merxho95 But Mother Russia is and Russians stands for us so deal with it 🇷🇸🇷🇺