In the aftermath of the Russian seizure of Crimea and the
weeks leading up to the vote to secede from Ukraine, Western officials and
their stenographers in the Main Stream Media railed about the illegitimacy of
the vote. In that narrative they are probably on solid ground, the legality of
Crimea’s secession is dicey at best and probably would not hold up to scrutiny
under International Law. However the narrative has shifted to the vote being illegitimate
due to the overwhelming YES vote (over 95%) for secession from Ukraine and
re-unification with Russia. Western officials and media pundits should probably
steer away from this narrative and stick with the original legitimacy of the
vote occurring in the first place. Reason being given the Pro-Russian
sentiments in Crimea it is not so hard to imagine that an overwhelming majority
of the people there would seek to dissociate themselves from Ukraine (especially
given the makeup of the current government in Kiev). Let us examine some
national votes for secession or dissociation in the last few decades.
South Sudan: The plebiscite for the South Sudan to secede
from Sudan occurred after overwhelming Western pressure on the government in Khartoum,
even after South Sudan was given significant and far reaching national autonomy.
The result:
99% voted for
independence
Kosovo: This province of Serbia was carved out as a result
of a sustained NATO air campaign on the Serbia under the guise of humanitarian
intervention. This was in contravention of international law, Serbia’s national
sovereignty and conducted without UN Security Council approval. There result:
Their was actually no formal vote for independence in this
case, the ruling factions within Kosovo just unilaterally declared independence
( although the overwhelming majority Kosovar Albanians supported this move) and
was legitimized and recognized by the Western powers.
Falkland Islands (Malvinas): This group of tiny sparsely
populated islands in the South Atlantic have been the cause of a long running
dispute (200 years) between Argentina and Great Britain, which culminated in
the Falklands war in the early 1980s. The residents of the Island (who are
overwhelmingly British descended) were given the opportunity to decide if they
wanted to continue their association with Great Britain or chart a different
course (to the chagrin of Argentina). The result:
99.8 % voted to
remain a British overseas territory
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9925693/Falkland-islands-referendum-who-were-the-three-No-votes.html
East Timor: East Timor like the rest of Indonesia was part
of Dutch East India, after the Netherlands abandoned the colony it was occupied
and absorbed by Indonesia. Years of oppression and repression resulted in the
local population eventually revolting. After heavy international pressure and democratic
reforms in Indonesia, East Timor is given the opportunity to vote for autonomy
or full independence. The result:
78.5 % vote for full
independence
These are just some recent examples, is it so hard for
Western observers to believe that a region that is overwhelming Pro-Russian and
has been part of Russia for centuries would vote overwhelmingly to become part
of the Russian federation?
No comments:
Post a Comment