ABSTRACT
Cases of secession, or a process of withdrawal of a territory and its population from an existing state and the creation of a new state in that territory (Pavković with Radan 2007: 1), nearly always elicit some type of outside involvement. This is because such withdrawal is organically linked to the external environment of the existing or host state. While secession originates within the domestic jurisdiction of the host state, its goal is to establish a new sovereign, independent state not only vis-à-vis the host state but also vis-à-vis other states. A secessionist entity cannot hope to be treated as a state internationally without a prior determination by external, third party states that it is in fact a new sovereign, independent entity as opposed to a continuing part of the host state. Thus, at minimum, an attempt at secession requires third party states to make judgments with respect to the status of the secessionist entity. Even when the attempt is not contested by the host state – and the overwhelming majority of secessions since the 16th century has been launched unilaterally against the will of the host government – a mere public intimation of this judgment constitutes external involvement capable of carrying material consequences for the outcome of the breakaway bid. Still, many cases of unilateral secession have led to a variety of additional forms of external involvement, including good offices, intercession, conciliation and mediation efforts to cease or to resolve the confrontation between the secessionists and the host state, humanitarian aid, cease-fire monitoring, peacekeeping, economic, diplomatic and military assistance to one of the parties, full-scale use of armed force, and international territorial administration. Secessionist conflicts involving multiple forms of external involvement over the course of their duration have been quite common (see also Chapters 1, 2, 8, 9, 11 and 14).
