Author
Abstract
Purpose: The study sought to understand self-determination and the challenges posed to the borders in the Horn of Africa through a precise analysis of the notion and its application in the Horn of Africa.Methodology: The research used qualitative methodology via primary and secondary data. Primary data engaged historiography through archival materials, documents and field interviews while secondary data was from published journals and books. The study also used magazines, newspapers and internet materials, and films to synthesize the data for validation of the outcome.Result: Self-determination affects state borders and therefore confirms that borders are arbitrary constant formations. Borders include social-cultural norms which entail ethnic identities and state norms. The latter involves inviolability of borders, fixed territory, exclusive citizenship rights and sovereign rights. Therefore, challenges of the state borders in the Horn appears as a clash between the social-cultural norms and state norms. Whereas the first calls for accommodation and negotiated legal spaces, the latter retains a rigid notion of borders which resists a shift of the same. However, successful self-determination referendum by a group within a state followed by consent of the state and recognition by the United Nation (UN) legitimizes international border shifts through the formation of new unique states.A unique contribution to theory, practice, and policy: Self-determination is concomitant with border constructions. Therefore a need in the understanding that natural borders do not exist. States should appreciate a shift in any border as an attempt to self-govern where the hosting regime fails to uphold the same. Self-determination implies retaining a cultural identity and a norm unique from the existing states where annihilation threat towards a group is present. States should not necessarily interpret self-determination as a danger but a mode of negotiation as engrained in pre-colonial African borders. Furthermore, self-determination does not encourage the use of force against other states but promotes the idea of negotiated spaces through plebiscites the acceptance of which results in redrawn borders and the opposite retains status quo.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bfy:ojajir:v:3:y:2018:i:1:p:11-22:id:349. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chief Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ajpojournals.org/journals/index.php/AJIR/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.