The Contemporary Relevance of István Bibó’s Theoretical Framework for Analyzing and Settling Territorial and State-Formation Conflicts
International policy makers, even those with a genuine resolve for peacemaking, often shy away from getting involved with political conflicts where the principle of self-determination clashes with that of the territorial integrity of a state, or devise ad hoc plans that don’t have the potential to become a lasting solution. In the Cold War context of the 1970s social scientist Istvan Bibó observed and explained this phenomenon and suggested a mechanism to correct it. His idea was to set up a special international court for impartial political arbitration and to solve “territorial and state-formation conflicts” by the principle of national self-determination. He proposed to recognize the global territorial status quo as the “constitution of international relations” but to “amend it” by fostering ethnic-linguistic separation in the special case of irreconcilable conflicts. Viewed from today Bibó’s case studies of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Cyprus question have shown remarkable foresight and several of his specific suggestions have become core elements in roadmaps for solving them. Additionally, in contemporary political and scientific discourses on other ethnic-territorial conflicts, opinions seem to shift in line with his views as experiences of the last decades seem to corroborate the validity of his analytical framework and general policy recommendations.
Baskin, G. (2002) The Oslo Peace Process – Lessons Learned. http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000017.htm Accessed: 30-01-2015
Bibó, I. (1976) The Paralysis of International Institutions and the Remedies. A Study of Self-Determination, Concord among the Major Powers, and Political Arbitration. Hassocks: Harvester Press
Bibó, I. (1986) A kelet-európai kisállamok nyomorúsága [The Misery of the East European Small States]. In: Bibó István Válogatott tanulmányok II. [Selected Essays II.] Budapest: Magvető. 158-265.
Bibó, I. (1990a) A nemzetközi államközösség bénultsága és annak orvosságai – Önrendelkezés, nagyhatalmi egyetértés, politikai döntőbíráskodás [The Paralysis of the international community and its remedies. Self-determination, concord among the great powers, political arbitration]. In: Bibó István Válogatott tanulmányok IV. [Selected Essays IV.] 1935-1979, Budapest: Magvető. 283-681.
Bibó, I. (1990b) Észak-Írország kérdése egy lehetséges pártatlan politikai döntőbírósági döntés fényében. [The question of Northern-Ireland in light of a possible impartial political arbitration] In: Bibó István: Válogatott tanulmányok IV. [Selected Essays IV.] 1935-1979, Budapest: Magvető. 683-710.
Bibó, I. (2013) Document. The Dispute over Cyprus: Facts and Interpretations. European Review. 21 (4). 564-593.
Bunce, V. (1999) Peaceful versus Violent State Dismemberment: A Comparison of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia. Politics and Society. 27 (2) 217-237.
Carpenter, T. G. (2011) Time to Reconsider Partition for Bosnia. European Affairs, The European Institute, http://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/118-european-affairs/ea-february-2011/1242-time-to-reconsider-partition-for-bosnia Accessed: 30-01-2015
Cohen, T. (May 20, 2011) Obama calls for Israel's return to pre-1967 borders. CNN, http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/05/19/obama.israel.palestinians/ Accessed: 30-01-2015
Cyprus Mail (January 12, 2014) Our View: Gas role in talks the latest in long line of fantasies. http://cyprus-mail.com/2014/01/12/our-view-gas-role-in-talks-the-latest-in-long-line-of-fantasies/ Accessed: 30-01-2015
Dénes, I. Z. (2013) Bibó István ellenálló és embermentő tevékenysége 1944-ben. [István Bibó – a resistant saving lives in 1944] Aetas, 28 (4). 131-144.
Doyle, D. H. (2010) (ed.) Secession as an International Phenomenon – From America’s Civil War to Contemporary Separatist Movements. Athens-London: The University of Georgia Press.
Downes, A. (2001) The Holy Land Divided: Defending Partition as a Solution to Ethnic Wars. Security Studies, Summer. 10 (4). 58-116
Jenne, E. K. (2009) The Paradox of Ethnic Partition: Lessons from de facto Partition in Bosnia and Kosovo. Regional and Federal Studies. 19 (2). 273-289.
Kaufmann, Ch. (1996) Possible and Impossible Solutions to Ethnic Wars. International Security. 20 (4). 136-75
Kaufmann, Ch. (1998) When all Else Fails: Ethnic Population Transfers and Partitions in the Twentieth Century. International Security, 23 (2). 120-56
Ker-Lindsay, J. (September 3, 2007) The unmentionable solution – part 2. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/03/theunmentionablesolutionpart2 Accessed: 30-01-2015
Khan, R. (November 18, 2010) Cyprus: time for formal partition? Al-Jazeera. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/rizkhan/2010/11/2010111792144257228.html Accessed: 30-01-2015
Morse, E. L. (1977) The Paralysis of International Institutions and the Remedies by Istvan Bibo. Capsule Review. Foreign Affairs, January. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/30870/edward-l-morse/the-paralysis-of-international-institutions-and-the-remedies Accessed: 30-01-2015
Sadowski, Y. (1998) Ethnic conflict. Foreign Policy. (111). Summer. 12-23.
Sambanis, N. (2000) Partition as a Solution to Ethnic War. An Empirical Critique of the Theoretical Literature. World Politics 52 (July). 437-483
Shavit, A. (2001) Interview with Yossi Beilin on the Oslo Peace Process. Haaretz, June 15.
Siroky, D. S. – Cuffe, J. (2015) Lost Autonomy, Nationalism and Separatism. Comparative Political Studies. 48 (1). 3-34
Wimmer, A. (2013) States of War. How the Nation-State Made Modern Conflict. Foreign Affairs, 7th November http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/140245/andreas-wimmer/states-of-war Accessed: 30-01-2015
Wolff, S. (2003) The Transnational Dynamics of Ethnic Conflict Settlement. Disputed Territories. Studies in Ethnopolitics. New York – Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work three months after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. This acknowledgement is not automatic, it should be asked from the editors and can usually be obtained one year after its first publication in the journal.