Irredentism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cydebot (talk | contribs) at 22:37, 18 May 2012 (Robot - Speedily moving category Pan movements to Category:Pan-nationalism per CFDS.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Example of recent expressions of Bolivian irredentism over territorial losses in the War of the Pacific (1879–1884). In the mural it is written; "What once was ours, will be ours once again", and "Hold fast rotos (Chileans), for here come the Colorados of Bolivia". Eduardo Avaroa's statue on top points toward the sea.

Irredentism (from Italian irredento, "unredeemed") is any position advocating annexation of territories administered by another state on the grounds of common ethnicity or prior historical possession, actual or alleged. It is often advocated by pan-nationalist movements and a feature of identity politics, cultural and political geography. Because most borders have been moved and redrawn over time, a great many countries could theoretically present irredentist claims to their neighbors. Germany's Anschluss of Austria and annexation of German-speaking Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia in 1938 and a return of territory from Czechoslovakia to Hungary as a result of the First Vienna Award are perhaps historical examples of this idea in practice.

However, some states are the subject of potential irredentism from their inception. Post–World War I Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and the Near East had borders carved out by the Allies that left many of the new states in that region unsatisfied due to minority populations and conflicting historical claims. Many of Africa's borders were artificially imposed by European colonial powers. The result split ethnic groups between different countries, such as the Yoruba who are divided between Nigeria and Benin. In some cases, the irredentist argumentation continued well past the Second World War and on to the present day.

An area that may be subjected to a potential claim is therefore sometimes called an irredenta. Not all irredentas are involved in actual irredentism.[1]

Origins

Main article: Italia irredenta

The word was coined in Italy from the phrase Italia irredenta ("unredeemed Italy"). This originally referred to Austro-Hungarian rule over mostly or partly Italian-inhabited territories such as Trentino, Trieste, Istria and Dalmatia during the 19th and early 20th century.

A common way to express a claim to adjacent territories on the grounds of historical or ethnic association is by using the epithet "Greater" before the country name. This conveys the image of national territory at its maximum conceivable extent with the country "proper" at its core. It must be noted that the use of "Greater" does not always convey an irredentistic meaning.

During the unification of Germany, the term Großdeutschland (or greater Germany) referred to a possible German nation consisting of the states that later comprised the Second German Empire and Austria; the term lesser Germany, or small Germany, or Kleindeutschland, referred to a possible German state without Austria. The term was also used by Germans referring to Greater Germany, a state consisting of pre World War I Germany, actual Austria and the Sudetenland.

Constitutional irredentism

Some states formalize their irredentist claims by including them in their constitutional documents.

Afghanistan

The Afghan border with Pakistan, known as the Durand Line, was arbitrarily drawn by colonial officials of the British Empire in 1893 following the Second Afghan War. Accordingly, the Pashtun tribes inhabiting the border areas were arbitrarily divided; the tribes have never accepted the still-porous border. The Durand Line was not intended as a permanent border, and clashes broke out in the 1950s and 1960s between Afghanistan and Pakistan over the issue. All Afghan governments of the past century have declared, with varying intensity, a long-term goal of re-uniting all Pashtun-dominated areas under Afghan rule.[2][3]

Argentina

See also: Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute
File:Malvinas-cartel.JPG
A sign at the Argentine-Brazilian border, translated into English, proclaims "The Falklands are Argentine" to visitors entering the country from Brazil.

The Argentine government has maintained a claim over the Falkland Islands since 1833, and renewed it as recently as June 2009.[4] It considers the archipelago part of the Tierra del Fuego Province, along with South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.

The Argentine claim is included in the transitional provisions of the Constitution of Argentina as amended in 1994:[5][6]

The Argentine Nation ratifies its legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over the Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur Islands and over the corresponding maritime and insular zones, as they are an integral part of the National territory. The recovery of these territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life for its inhabitants and according to the principles of international law, constitute a permanent and unwavering goal of the Argentine people.

Bolivia

The 2009 constitution of Bolivia states that the country has an unrenounceable right over the territory that gives it access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space.[7] This is understood as Chilean territory that Bolivia and Peru ceded after the War of the Pacific which left Bolivia a landlocked country.

People's Republic of China

Official territorial claims according to the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan).

The preamble to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China states "Taiwan is part of the sacred territory of the People's Republic of China. It is the lofty duty of the entire Chinese people, including our compatriots in Taiwan, to accomplish the great task of reunifying the motherland." The PRC claim to sovereignty over Taiwan is generally based on the successor state theory, with the PRC claiming that it is the successor state to the Republic of China.[8]

Republic of China (Taiwan)

Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of China originally stated that "[t]he territory of the Republic of China within its existing national boundaries shall not be altered except by a resolution of the National Assembly", although recent constitutional changes have moved this power to that of a national referendum.[citation needed] The PRC's influence in international organizations prevents Taiwan from participating in many such organizations. In some organizations the Republic of China is able to participate as Chinese Taipei. The PRC has an extensive missile build-up near Taiwan and passed an Anti-Secession Law in 2005 threatening to use force.

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the ROC government on Taiwan maintained itself to be the legitimate ruler of Mainland China. As part of its current policy of 'status quo', the ROC has not renounced claims over the territories currently controlled by the People's Republic of China, Mongolia, and Tuvan Republic in Russia, Northern Burma and some Central Asian states bordering areas. However, the ROC does not actively pursue these claims in practice; the remaining claims that the ROC are actively seeking are the Diaoyu Islands, whose sovereignty is also asserted by Japan and the PRC; and the Spratly Islands in South China Sea, with multiple claimants.

Comoros

Article 1 of the Constitution of the Union of the Comoros begins: "The Union of the Comoros is a republic, composed of the autonomous islands of Mohéli, Mayotte, Anjouan, and Grande Comore." Mayotte, geographically a part of the Comoro Islands, was the only island of the four to vote against independence from France (independence losing 37%-63%) in the referendum held December 22, 1974. The total vote was 94%-5% in favor of independence. Mayotte is currently a "departmental collectivity" of the French Republic.[9][10]

India

All of the European colonies on the Indian subcontinent which were not part of the British Raj have been annexed by the Republic of India since it gained its independence from the British Empire. An example of such territories was the 1961 Indian annexation of Goa and Indian integration of Junagadh.

Akhand Bharat is another irridentist call for "undivided India" to include Pakistan and Bangladesh into India to form a Hindu Rashtra raised by mainstream Indian political organization Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).[11][12][13]

From 1956 after King of Kashmir ceded to India entirely resulting from a Pakistani invasion of Kashmir earlier, India has claimed the entire area of Kashmir as part of their state's "national territory." Meanwhile Pakistan has claimed almost all of the state except for the portion of the state Pakistan ceded to China. Both currently administer large sections of the area, and the two countries have fought multiple wars over the area. India and Pakistan aspire to take Pakistan-administered Kashmir, and Indian-administered Kashmir, respectively, so that Kashmir may be re-united under their respective rule.

Indonesia

Indonesia claimed all territories of the former Dutch East Indies, and previously viewed British plans to group the Straits Settlements, the Federated Malay States, the Unfederated Malay States, Sarawak and British North Borneo into a new independent federation of Malaysia as a threat to its objective to create a united state called Greater Indonesia. The Indonesian opposition of Malaysian formation has led to Indonesia-Malaysia confrontation in early 1960s. It had also held Portuguese Timor from 1975 to 2002, based on irredentist claims.

The idea of uniting former British and Dutch colonial possessions in Southeast Asia actually have its roots in early 20th century, as the concept of Greater Malay (Melayu Raya) was coined in British Malaya espoused by students and graduates of Sultan Idris Training College for Malay Teachers in the late 1920s.[14] Some of political figures in Indonesia including Muhammad Yamin and Sukarno revived the idea in the 1950s and named the political union concept as Greater Indonesia.

Ireland

From 1937 until 1998, Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution of Ireland provided that "[t]he national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland". However, "[p]ending the re-integration of the national territory", the powers of the state were restricted to legislate only for the area that had ceded from the United Kingdom. Arising from the Northern Ireland peace process, the matter was mutually resolved in 1998. The Republic of Ireland's constitution was altered by referendum and its territorial claim to Northern Ireland was dropped. The amended constitution asserts that while it is the entitlement of "every person born in the island of Ireland … to be part of the Irish Nation" and to hold Irish citizenship, "a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island." Certain joint policy and executive bodies were created between Northern Ireland, the part of the island that remained in the United Kingdom, and the Republic of Ireland, and these were given executive authority. The advisory and consultative role of the government of Ireland in the government of Northern Ireland granted by the United Kingdom, that had begun with the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement, was maintained. The two states also settled the long-running dispute concerning their respective names: Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with both governments agreeing to use those names.

Palestinian Territories

The entire area of the West Bank and Gaza, previously annexed by Jordan and occupied by Egypt respectively, was controlled by Israel from the 1967 war until August 2005, when Israel withdrew from Gaza. Israel never explicitly claimed any of the West Bank for its own state except the city of Jerusalem, which it unilaterally annexed in 1980. However, Israel has settled hundreds of thousands of its citizens in various Israeli controlled settlements in the West Bank.

Article 3 of the Basic Law of the Palestinian Authority, which was ratified in 2002 by the Palestinian National Authority and serves as an interim constitution, states that "Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine." The Israeli annexing instrument, the Jerusalem Law—one of the Basic Laws of Israel that "serve in the place of a constitution"—declares Jerusalem, "complete and united", to be the capital of Israel, creating a conflict with Palestinian claims. De facto, the Palestinian government administers the parts of the West Bank that Israel has granted it authority over from Ramallah, while the Gaza Strip is administered from Gaza.

According to United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338, East Jerusalem is part of the occupied territories. The United States does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem and maintains its embassy in Tel Aviv. In Jerusalem, the United States maintains a Consulate General as a diplomatic representation to the city of Jerusalem alone, separate from the US's representation to the state of Israel. The Consulate General maintains two buildings in the city as they were established before the 1967 war, one building on what was the Israeli side and one on what was the Jordanian-annexed side of Jerusalem.

United States

The first constitution of the United States, the Articles of Confederation, included a provision in Article 11 for the absorption of Canada.

European, Asian, African claims

Until the Nineteenth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland in 1998 the Irish Republic claimed the territory of six counties that form Northern Ireland. Spain claims the British overseas territory of Gibraltar, ceded to Britain in perpetuity in 1713 under the Treaty of Utrecht, and argues its case at the United Nations claiming its territorial integrity is affected. During World War II, the Spanish Falangist media agitated for irredentism claiming for Spain the French Navarre, French Basque Country and Roussillon (French Catalonia) as well. Morocco makes similar claims against Spain over the North African enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla. Portugal does not recognize as Spanish the territory of Olivenza conquered by Spain during the Napoleonic Wars. [4]

Some of the most violent irredentist conflicts of recent times in Europe flared up as a consequence of the break-up of the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s. The wars in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina were largely about creating a new political framework of states, each of which would be ethnically and politically homogeneous[dubious – discuss][clarification needed]. The conflict erupted further south with the ethnic Albanian majority in Kosovo seeking to switch allegiance to the adjoining state of Albania.[15] Greece claims that the use of the name Republic of Macedonia by its northern neighbor signifies an irredentist claim on the northern province of Macedonia in Greece.

South Asia too is another region in which armed irredentist movements have been active for almost a century, due to the Balkanization of North-East India, Burma and Bangladesh under British colonialism. [dubious – discuss][clarification needed] Most prominent amongst them are the Naga fight for Greater Nagaland, the Chin struggle for a unified Chinland and other self-determinist movements by the ethnic indigenous peoples of the erstwhile Assam both under the British and post-British Assam under India.[citation needed]

Irredentism is acute in the Caucasus region, too. The Nagorno-Karabakh movement’s original slogan of miatsum (‘union’) was explicitly oriented towards unification with Armenia, feeding an Azerbaijani understanding of the conflict as a bilateral one between itself and an irredentist Armenia.[16][17][18][19][20] According to Prof. Thomas Ambrosio, "Armenia's successful irredentist project in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan" and "From 1992 to the cease-fire in 1994, Armenia encountered a highly permissive or tolerant international environment that allowed its annexation of some 15 percent of Azerbaijani territory".[21] In the view of Nadia Milanova, Nagorno-Karabakh represents a combination of separatism and irredentism.[22]

The Syrian Social Nationalist Party, which operates in Lebanon and Syria, works for the unification of most modern states of the Levant and beyond in a single state referred to as Greater Syria.[citation needed] The proposed Syrian country includes Israel, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait; and southern Turkey, northern Egypt, and southwestern Iran.

Japan claims the Russian-administered Kuril Islands, the four southernmost isles of the island chain north of Hokkaido, annexed by the Soviet Union following World War II.[citation needed]

Irredentism is commonplace in Africa due to the political boundaries of former European colonial nation-states passing through tribal boundaries, and recent declarations of independence after civil war. For example, some Ethiopian nationalist circles still claim the former Ethiopian province of Eritrea (internationally recognized as the independent State of Eritrea in 1993 after a 30 year civil war). Ogaden in eastern Ethiopia has seen a movement seeking to make it part of Somalia.

North American issues

See also: Reconquista (Mexico)

Irredentism is also expressed by some Chicano "nationalists" and Mexican-American activists in the Aztlán movement. They call for the return of formerly Mexican-dominated lands in the Southwestern United States back to Mexico after the US annexed lands in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo to become the present-day states of California, Texas, Nevada and Utah; and parts of Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico.[23][24][25][26][27][28]

UK issues

A unique situation exists with that of Berwick. Part of the citizenry of the town support the transfer Berwick to Scotland.[attribution needed] However, due to the nature of the political union between Scotland and England forming the UK the reunification of Berwick goes largely unpursued. Various debates have arisen surrounding the constitutional future of Berwick, or Berwick-upon-Tweed as it is known in England, but have been largely academic.

Irrendentism was also one of main reasons for the People's Republic of China to strike to assume sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macau. The two territories had been British for over a century and Portuguese for four centuries respectively, until the United Kingdom and Portugal relinquished the territories in 1997 and 1999. However, in the case of Hong Kong, irrendentism was incidental: The New Territories part of the British colony were only on a lease expiring in 1997 anyway and, with their surrender, it was thought the Crown territory of Hong Kong itself would be unviable as an entity independent of mainland China. Of course, irrendentism could be considered to have played a role in that the People's Republic of China had no intention of renewing the lease on the New Territories.

See also

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ The Unholy Durand Line, Buffering the Buffer by Dr. G. Rauf Roashan. August 11, 2001.
  3. ^ Pakistan's Ethnic Fault Line by Selig S. Harrison, The Washington Post. May 11, 2009.
  4. ^ "Malvinas: la ONU hará más gestiones para abrir el diálogo". Lanacion.com.ar. Retrieved 2010-03-15.
  5. ^ {{cite web url = http://www.senado.gov.ar/web/interes/constitucion/cuerpo1.php title = Constitución Nacional lang = Spanish date = 22 August 1994 accessdate = 17 June 2011}}
  6. ^ {{cite web url = http://www.senado.gov.ar/web/interes/constitucion/english.php title = Constitution of the Argentine Nation date = 22 August 1994 accessdate = 17 June 2011}}
  7. ^ CAPÍTULO CUARTO, REIVINDICACIÓN MARÍTIMA. Artículo 267. I. El Estado boliviano declara su derecho irrenunciable e imprescriptible sobre el territorio que le dé acceso al océano Pacífico y su espacio marítimo. II. La solución efectiva al diferendo marítimo a través de medios pacíficos y el ejercicio pleno de la soberanía sobre dicho territorio constituyen objetivos permanentes e irrenunciables del Estado boliviano.Constitution of Bolivia
  8. ^ "The One-China Principle and the Taiwan Issue". PRC Taiwan Affairs Office and the Information Office of the State Council. 2005. Retrieved 2006-03-06.
  9. ^ UN General Assembly, Forty-ninth session: Agenda item 36
  10. ^ Security Council S/PV. 1888 para 247 S/11967 [2] [3] Template:Wayback
  11. ^ Yale H. Ferguson and R. J. Barry Jones, Political space: frontiers of change and governance in a globalizing world, page 155, SUNY Press, 2002, ISBN 978-0-7914-5460-2
  12. ^ Sucheta Majumder, "Right Wing Mobilization in India", Feminist Review, issue 49, page 17, Routledge, 1995, ISBN 978-0-415-12375-4
  13. ^ Ulrika Mårtensson and Jennifer Bailey, Fundamentalism in the Modern World (Volume 1), page 97, I.B.Tauris, 2011, ISBN 978-1-84885-330-0
  14. ^ McIntyre, Angus (1973). "The 'Greater Indonesia' Idea of Nationalism in Malaysia and Indonesia". Modern Asian Studies. 7 (1): 75–83. doi:10.1017/S0026749X0000439X. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month= and |coauthors= (help)
  15. ^ See Naomi Chazan 1991, Irredentism and international politics
  16. ^ Dr Laurence Broers, The resources for peace: comparing the Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia peace processes, Conciliation Resources, 2006
  17. ^ Fareed Shafee, Inspired from Abroad: The External Sources of Separatism in Azerbaijan, Caucasian Review of International Affairs, Vol. 2 (4) - Autumn 2008, pp. 200-211
  18. ^ What is Irredentism? SEMP, Biot Report #224, USA, June 21, 2005
  19. ^ Saideman, Stephen M. and R. William Ayres, For Kin and Country: Xenophobia, Nationalism and War, New York, N.Y.: Columbia University Press, 2008
  20. ^ IRREDENTISM ENTERS ARMENIA'S FOREIGN POLICY, Jamestown Foundation Monitor Volume: 4 Issue: 77, Washington DC, April 22, 1998
  21. ^ Prof. Thomas Ambrosio, Irredentism: ethnic conflict and international politics, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001
  22. ^ Nadia Milanova. The Territory-Identity Nexus in the Conflict over Nagorno Karabakh: Implications for OSCE Peace Efforts, Human Rights Without Frontiers International, 2003
  23. ^ Navarro, Armando (2005). Mexicano political experience in occupied Aztlán: struggles and change. Walnut Creek, California: AltaMira Press. p. 753. ISBN 978-0-7591-0567-6. Retrieved 28 February 2012. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  24. ^ Congressional Record, V. 149, Pt. 9, May 14, 2003 to May 21, 2003. Government Printing Office. p. 11990. Retrieved 28 February 2012. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  25. ^ "Chapter Two:Border Clashes in Aztlán". International Studies Association. University of Arizona. Retrieved 28 February 2012. Some leaders, particularly during the early years of El Movimiento, were political nationalists who advocated the secession of the Southwest from the Anglo-republic of the United States of America, if not fully, at least locally with regard to Chicano self-determination in local governance, education, and means of production.
  26. ^ "Chicano Nationalism, Revanchism and the Aztlan Myth". Federation for American Immigration Reform. January 2005. Retrieved 28 February 2012.
  27. ^ Gilchrist, Jim; Corsi, Jerome R. (27 July 2006). "The Reconquista Movement: Mexico's Plan for the American Southwest". Human Events. Eagle Publishing, Inc. Retrieved 28 February 2012.
  28. ^ "Backgrounder: Nation of Aztlan". Anti-Defamation League. 2001. Retrieved 28 February 2012.

External links

Look up irredentism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Irredentism.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irredentism&oldid=493262695"