ABSTRACT
Groups claiming self-determination usually interpret this international human right as if it were an absolute entitlement, i.e., a right to secession. Conversely, states trying to counter secession usually interpret territorial integrity as if it were an absolute entitlement of states. But neither right nor entitlement is absolute. Self-determination will be, in most circumstances, consummated internally, in the form of autonomy and self-government. At the same time, the principle of territorial integrity does not make secession illegal. International law is quite simply neutral on the question of unilateral secession: there is no entitlement to independence, but at the same time there is no prohibition of declarations of independence or even independence referendums. This is the case even where declarations of independence are extraconstitutional. Unilateral declarations of independence are rarely successful, however. A unilateral path to independence is therefore not illegal under international law, but it is politically very unlikely. This is because the international legal neutrality pertaining to secession puts the burden of changing the territorial status quo on the independence-seeking entity. In the absence of agreement with the parent state, the success of the independence claim is then pushed to the realm of international recognition.
