Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T21:04:37.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Separation or Unity? A Model for Solving Ethnic Conflicts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Jan Tullberg  and
Birgitta S. Tullberg
Jan Tullberg
Affiliation:
Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden
Birgitta S. Tullberg
Affiliation:
University of Stockholm, Sweden

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

This article outlines a consistent and rational model for solving ethnic conflicts. We argue that ethnic separation should be regarded as an alternative to national unity, and not simply dismissed as impossible. A decision on separation or unity should be made democratically by the group whose separation has been proposed. If separation is approved, migration over the border between the newly formed states should be part of such a solution. The article has three main parts: (1) a model for solving separationist demands; (2) an analysis of the evolutionary background to ethnic conflicts; and (3) a discussion of principal objections to the proposed model. The present international impotence in situations of ethnic conflict is to a high degree caused by seeing most solutions as impossible—either realistically or morally. This article stresses the virtue of having one model instead of the “flexibility” that currently prevails under the disguise of generally acclaimed, but contradictory ideals.

Information

Type
Roundtable Article
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , September 1997 , pp. 237 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

References

Alexander, R.D. (1987). The Biology of Moral Systems. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W.D. (1981). “The Evolution of Cooperation.” Science 211:1390–96.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1986). Social Psychology. 2nd edition. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, A. (1991). Secession: The Morality of Political Divorce from Fort Sumter to Lithuania and Quebec. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Byrne, R. and Whiten, A., eds. (1988). Machiavellian Intelligence: Social Expertise and the Evolution of Intellect in Monkeys, Apes and Humans. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Connor, W. (1994). Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Darby, J. (1986). Intimidation and Control of the Conflict in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan.Google Scholar
Feger, H. (1991). “Cooperation between Groups.” In Hinde, R. and Groebel, J. (eds.), Cooperation and Prosocial Behaviour. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Foster, D. and Finchilescu, G. (1986). “Contact in a Non-Contact Society.” In Hewstone, M. and Brown, R. (eds.), Contact and Conflict in Intergroup Encounters. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Frank, R.H. (1985). Choosing the Right Pond. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Furnival, J.S. (1977). “Colonial Policy and Practice.” In Stone, J. (ed.), Race, Ethnicity and Social Change. London: Duxbury.Google Scholar
Gurr, T.R. and Harff, B. (1988). “Toward an Empirical Theory of Genocide and Politicides: Identification and Measurement of Cases Since 1945.” International Studies Quarterly 3:359–71.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. (1971). “Geometry for the Selfish Herd.” Journal of Theoretical Biology 31:295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, R. (1995). One for All: The Logic of Group Conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Heraclides, A. (1991). The Self-Determination of Minorities in International Politics. London: Cass.Google Scholar
Hewstone, M. and Brown, R. (1986). Contact and Conflict in Intergroup Encounters. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holper, J.J. (1996). “Kin Term Usage in The Federalist: Evolutionary Foundation of Publius's Rhetoric.” Politics and the Life Sciences 15:265–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (1985). Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (1991a). A Democratic South Africa. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Horowitz, D.L. (1991b). “Irredentas and Secessions: Adjacent Phenomena, Neglected Connections.” In Chazan, N. (ed.), Irredentism and International Politics. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner; London: Admantine Press.Google Scholar
Irwin, C.J. (1987). “A Study in the Evolution of Ethnocentrism.” In Reynolds, V. et al. (eds.), The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism: Evolutionary Dimensions of Xenophobia, Discrimination, Racism and Nationalism. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica 2:263–91.Google Scholar
Rochefoucauld, La (1665). Réflexions Morales.Google Scholar
Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in Plural Societies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lustick, I.S. (1993). Unsettled States, Disputed Lands. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Masters, R.D. (1983). “The Biological Nature of the State.” World Politics 35(29):161–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsson, G.P. (1985). “States and Nation-Groups: A Global Taxonomy.” In Tiryakian, E.A. and Ragowski, R. (eds.), New Nationalism of the Developed West. Boston: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, E.A. (1972). Conflict Regulation in Divided Societies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Center for International Affairs.Google Scholar
Patterson, O. (1977). Ethnic Chauvinism: The Reactionary Impulse. New York: Stein and Day.Google Scholar
Ross, M.H. (1991). “The Role of Evolution in Ethnocentric Conflict and Its Management.” The Journal of Social Issues 47(3):167–85.Google Scholar
Ryan, S. (1990). Ethnic Conflict and International Relations. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, A.M. Jr. (1992). The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Shaw, R.P. and Wong, Y. (1989). Genetic Seeds of Warfare: Evolution, Nationalism, and Patriotism. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Smith, M.G. (1971). “Some Developments in the Analytic Study of Pluralism.” In Kuper, L. and Smith, M.G. (eds.), Pluralism in Africa. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Smith, M.G. (1986). “Pluralism, Violence and the Modern State.” In Kazancigil, A. (ed.), The State in Global Perspective. Paris: Gower/UNESCO.Google Scholar
Smith, P. (1962). Origins of Modern Culture. New York: Collier Books.Google Scholar
Tullberg, J. and Tullberg, B.S. (1994). Naturlig Etik: En Uppgörelse med Altruismen [Natural Ethics: A Confrontation with Altruism]. Stockholm: Lykeion.Google Scholar
van den Berghe, P.L. (1987). The Ethnic Phenomenon. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
van den Berghe, P.L. (1990). Human Family Systems: An Evolutionary View. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
van der Dennen, J., ed. (1990). Sociobiology and Conflict: Evolutionary Perspectives on Competition, Cooperation, Violence and Warfare. New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Wilson, E.O. (1979). On Human Nature. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Wong, Y. (1994). “Impotence and Intransigence: State Behavior in the Throes of Deepening Global Crisis.” Politics and the Life Sciences 13:3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar