Tag: <span>con-federalism</span>

Alexandre Marc Rapprochement of Cultures.

Alexandre Marc: Con-federalism, Cultural Renewal and Trans-frontier Cooperation

Featured Image: Through the Russian Revolution. By Internet Archive Book Images, No restrictions, via Wikimedia Commons.

Alexandre Marc ; (19 January 1904 – 22 February 2000) was born as Alexandre Markovitch Lipiansky in Odessa, Russia in 1904.  He later simplified his name by dropping Lipiansky; (which his sons have reclaimed) and modifying his father’s first name to Marc; which he used as a family name.  His father was a Jewish banker and a non-communist socialist. 

Alexandre was a precocious activist. He was influenced by his early reading of F. Nietzsche; especially Thus Spoke Zarathustra.  He started a non-conformist student journal; while still in secondary school during the Russian Revolution; asking for greater democracy and opposed to Marxist thought.  This led to death threats made against him by the Communist authorities.

Also sprach Zarathustra. Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen. In drei Theilen. By Unknown authorUnknown author, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Forerunners of the Nazi Movement

The family left Russia in 1919 for France; but not before Alexandre had seen some of the fighting and disorder of the Russian civil war.  These impressions left a deep mark; and he was never tempted by the Russian communist effort as were other intellectuals in France; who had not seen events close up. 

During part of the 1920s; Marc was in Germany studying philosophy; where intellectual and philosophical debates were intense after the German defeat in the First World War; and the great difficulties of the Weimar Republic.  He saw the forerunners of the Nazi movement. 

Anti-Nazi German Youth

Marc was always one to try to join thought and action; and he had gone back to Germany in 1932 to try to organize anti-Nazi German youth; but ideological divisions in Germany were strong.  The Nazi were already too well organized and came to power the next year. Marc; having seen the destructive power of Nazi thought; was also never tempted by Right Wing or Fascist thought.

Seeing the destructive potential of both Communist and Fascist thought and sensing the deep crisis of Western civilization; Marc was looking for new values that would include order, revolution, and the dignity of the person.

Friedrich Nietzsche, circa 1875. By Friedrich Hartmann, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

L’Ordre Nouveau

  There was no ready-made ideology; which included all these elements; though two French thinkers — difficult to classify — did serve as models to Marc and to Denis de Rougemont and some of the other editors of L’Ordre Nouveau: Charles Péguy and  J Proudhon . Marc wrote a book on the importance of Péguy at the start of the Second World War. 

Marc was living in Aix-en-Provence at the time; and the book was published in still unoccupied Marseilles in 1941. He also met in Paris Nicolas Berdiaeff, Jacques Maritain and Gabriel Marcel.  It was from these meetings that the personalist doctrine of L’Ordre Nouveau was born. The rallying cry of personalism was “We are neither collectivists nor individualists but personalists …the spiritual first and foremost, then the economic, with politics at the service of both of them”.

Denis de Rougemont. By Erling Mandelmann / photo©ErlingMandelmann.ch.

once a Jew, always a Jew

In 1943 when all of France was occupied, he was in danger of arrest both for his views and his Jewish origins. Although in 1933; Marc had become a Roman Catholic in part under the influence of intellectual Dominicans; for the Nazi occupiers — as well as for some of the French Vichy government — “once a Jew, always a Jew”. Therefore he left for Switzerland where he was able to study the working of Swiss federalism with its emphasis on democracy at the village and city level.  He was also able to meet other exiles from all over Europe who had managed to get to Switzerland.

Alexandre Marc seemed destined to use words which took on other meanings when used by more popular writers.  The name of the journal L’Ordre Nouveau was taken over after the Second World War by a French far-right nationalist movement influenced by a sort of neo-Celtic ideology and was widely known for painting Celtic cross graffiti on walls in the days before graffiti art filled up all the space. 

French writer Charles Péguy (1873 – 1914) Painted by Jean-Pierre Laurens (1875-1932).

The Jewish philosophers

Revolution, especially after the Nazi-Fascist defeat, could only be considered in the broader society in its Marxist version.  Person, which as a term had been developed by the Roman stoic philosophers could never carry the complexity of meanings which Marc, de Rougemont, and E. Mounier wanted to give it. 

Personalism.

The Jewish philosophers Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas also used the term “personalism” in the same sense as Marc; but their influence was limited to small circles.  In fact, “individualism” either seen positively or negatively; has returned as the most widely used term.  In some ways; this difficulty with the popular perception of words exists with the way Marc uses “federalism” by which he really means “con-federalism”.

Martin Buber in Palestine/Israel (1940 – 1950). By See page for author, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Foundations of the European Movement and the European Federalists

Alexandre Marc and Denis de Rougemont met again in Switzerland at the end of the Second World War; when de Rougemont returned from spending the war years in the USA.  They started reconnecting people whom they knew in the pre-war years; who also saw the need for a total reformation of European society. 

Both de Rougemont and Marc were good organizers of meetings and committees; and they played an important role in 1947 and 1948; setting up the first meetings for the foundations of the European movement and the European federalists; especially the August 1947 meeting at Montreux, Switzerland; in which world citizens  and world federalists were also present.

Emmanuel Levinas. By Bracha L. Ettinger, CC BY-SA 2.5 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Cold War.

Both men stressed the need for education and highlighted the role of youth to move European unity; beyond the debates of the 1930s and the start of the Cold War; though both continued to stress the importance of the themes; which brought them together in the 1930s.

Centers for the Study of European Federalism

They were both founders of centers for the study of European federalism and an exploration of European values. It was in the context of seminars and publications of the two centers; that I worked with both in the 1970s.   Culture in the philosophical sense was crucial for both; and their efforts in Geneva and Nice were rather similar.

Marc and de Rougemont had a personal falling out that lasted nearly a decade; due, it seems, to the tensions surrounding the break up of de Rougemont’s first marriage.  But even during this break; de Rougemont always spoke to me highly of Marc and his ideas.

Distrust of European Integration

De Rougemont knew that I was seeing Marc and had an interest in the intellectual; currents of France in the 1930s.  The two men came together again later; especially after de Rougemont’s happy second marriage.  From his death be; de Rougemont spoke to Marc on the telephone concerning the need to reprint the issues of L’Order Nouveau; since the articles were still important. The reprinting has been done since.

Both de Rougemont and Marc shared a distrust of European integration; as it was being carried out within the European Community and later the European Union; Both men stressed the need for local democracy; and shared a strong distrust of the politicians prominent in the nation-state system. 

The Lobbying of Governments on Federalist Issues.

De Rougemont went on to give most of his attention to the role of regions; especially the trans-frontier Geneva area; which combines part of Switzerland and France and is an economic pole of attraction for the Italian Val d’Aoste.

Marc continued to stress what he called “global” or “integral” federalism; a federalism with great autonomy and initiative at every level as over against “Hamiltonian”; federalism which he saw as the creation of ever larger entities such as the United States; whose culture and form of government Marc distrusted.

Hamiltonian Federalism

Marc remarked that  ‘Hamiltonian federalism’; as a whole was turning its back on spiritual; cultural and social questions and devoting itself to a form of action that can be defined; as ‘political’ and underlined the contradiction that is inherent in the lobbying of governments on federalist issues.

The Future is within Us

De Rougemont was the better writer.  His last book The Future is within Us; though pessimistic; especially of political efforts, remains a useful summing up of his ideas. (2) Although Alexandre Marc wrote a good deal; his forms of expression; were too complex, too paradoxical, too filled with references to ideas; which are not fully explained to be popular. 

Marc’s influence was primarily verbal as stimulant to his students.  Having seen early in his life the dangers of totalitarian thought; he always stressed the need for dialogue and listening; for popular participation at all levels of decision-making. As with ‘order’ ‘revolution’ ‘the person’, ‘federalism’ was probably not the term he should have chosen to carry the weight  of his ideas.

A Complex Man

The other Alexander — Hamilton — has infused the word ‘federalism’ with the idea of unification of many smaller units.  ‘Popular participation’ is probably a better term for Marc’s ideas; if the word ‘popular’ could carry the complex structure; which Marc tried to give to the word ‘person’. Con-federation is probably the better term for the de-centralized administrative structures that Marc proposed.

Marc was a complex man; one of the bridges; who helped younger persons to understand the debates; which surrounded the Russian Revolution; the rise and decline of Fascism and Nazism; and the post-Second World War hopes for a United Europe.  As de Rougemont on his death bed said to Marc:

“We have been able to do nothing, start again, talk to the young and we must carry on.”

 Notes

  • For the 1930s period see: Christian Roy. Alexandre Marc et la Jeune Europe: L’Ordre nouveau aux origins du personnalisme (Presses d’Europe, 1998) J. Laubet del Bayle. Les non-conformistes des années 30 : Une Tentative de renouvellement de la pensée politique francaise (Seuil, 1969) Michel Winock. Esprit : Des intellectuels dans la cité 1930-1950 (Seuil, 1996)
  • Denis de Rougemont The Future is within US  (Pergamon Press, 1983).

Rene Wadlow, President, Association of World Citizens.

Here are other publications that may be of interest to you.

1 2 21
Donetsk and Luhansk Appeals

Vital Autonomy for the People’s Republic of Donetsk and…

Featured Image: Return of released citizens to the territory controlled by Ukraine, December 29, 2019. By President.gov.ua, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

There are many dimensions to the current tensions on the Ukraine-Donbas-Russia frontiers, both geopolitical and domestic considerations.  There are long historic and strategic aspects to the current crisis.  Security crises are deeply influenced both by a sense of history and by current perceptions.  There have been bilateral discussions between U.S. and Russian authorities, between Russian and French leaders, between Russian and Chinese  leaders, between the Ukrainian leader and a number of others and multilateral discussions within the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), within NATO, at the U.N. Security Council, and within the European Union.  For the moment, there has been no de-escalation of tensions nor a lowering  of troop levels.

Currently, there is only one permanent structure for multilateral negotiations on the Ukraine tensions – the “Normandy Format” which brings together the representatives of Ukraine and Russia, France and Germany primarily to negotiate on the status of the separatist People’s Republics.

Ukraine

The famous Independence Square in Kiev on a sunny day. Photo by Euan Cameron on Unsplash.

You might be interested in reading: Ukraine-Donbas-Russia: Can the Normandy Format Be Reactivated?.

Special Status.

The Minsk II Agreement of 12 February 2015 agreed that the areas covered by the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics would not be separated from Ukraine but would be given a “Special Status” set out in a new Ukrainian Constitution.  However, beyond some rather vague discussion on decentralization, the nature of the Special Status has not been agreed upon, and no Ukrainian government administrative measures have been put into place.

In the period since 2015, the socio-economic situation in the two People’s Republics has gotten worse.  Many people have left either for Ukraine or Russia.  There are constant violations of the ceasefire agreements which are monitored by observers of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.  Thus it its 15 December 2021 report the OSCE monitors noted that between 10-12 December, there were 444 ceasefire violations in the Donetsk region and 104 in the Luhansk region. However, the freedom of movement of the OSCE observers is restricted.  The number of violations, usually exchanges of small arms fire, is probably higher.

The Association of World Citizens.

Solving the Donbas aspect of the conflict on the basis of  a real and vital autonomy and trans-frontier cooperation should be a top priority for action. The Association of World Citizens has always stressed the importance of developing appropriate forms of government as a crucial aspect of the resolution of armed conflicts.  The Association has particularly highlighted the possiblities of con-federalism and the need for trans-frontier cooperation. The Association was involved at the start of the Abkhazia-Georgia conflict in August 1992 and the  first efforts at negotiations carried out in Geneva with representatives from Abkhazia who were in Geneva and officials from the United Nations and the  International Committee of the Red Cross.  Thus we know how a cycle of action-reaction can deepen a conflict and how difficult it is to re-establish structures of government once separation has been established.

The need to  progress on the structure of Ukraine stands out sharply at this time when there are real possibilities of escalatory risks.  There is a need for confidence-building measures reaching out to different layers of society in a cumulative process.  Advances on the Special Status would be an important step in the de-escalation of tensions.   As long as the two People’s Republics are kept weak, they will be dependent on support from Russia.  It is when they are economically and socially strong that they can have useful trans-frontier relations both with Russia and the rest of Ukraine. Discussions on the Special Status must be carried out by those living in Ukraine. 

However, government representatives as well as non-governmental organizations in Russia, Germany, and France can also contribute actively.  The new German Foreign Minister, the ecologist Annalena Baerbach, coming from a federalist-structured State with many local initiatives possible, may bring new visions to these discussions which are increasingly under way.

Annalena Baerbock

The new German Foreign Minister, the ecologist Annalena Baerbock.  By Stefan Kaminski (photography), Annalena Baerbock (full rights of use), CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.

Rene Wadlow, President, Association of World Citizens.

Here are other publications that may be of interest to you.

World Refugee Day.

June 20 is the United Nations (UN)-designated World Refugee Day;  marking the signing in 1951 of the Convention on Refugees. The condition of refugees and migrants has become a “hot”…

1 2 11

Ukraine Appeals

Ukraine-Donbas-Russia: Can the Normandy Format Be Reactivated?

Featured Image: The famous Independence Square in Kiev on a sunny day. Photo by Euan Cameron on Unsplash.
There has been of late a good deal of sabre-rattling along the Russian-Ukrainian frontier.  There has been talk of war if the Russian troops were to invade Ukraine or to reinforce the separatist areas of Ukraine that call themselves the People’s Republic of Donetsk and the People’s Republic of Luhansk.
    President Putin has created a strawman against which to fight – the most unlikely event of Ukraine joining NATO.  He has recently shown his resolve for public appreciation  by saying:
 

“We are concerned over prospects of Ukraine’s possible accession to NATO, as it will definitely result in the deployment of military contingents, bases

and weapons posing a threat to us.”

 
The sabre-rattling has been loud enough that the Ukraine situation was an important part of the 7 December videoconference call between Presidents Biden and Putin, and  the subsequent mission of U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Karen Donfried, responsible for European and Eurasian affairs, to Ukraine and Russia and then to Brussels  to meet European Foreign Ministers and others.
 
Karen Donfried
  Portrait of Karen Donfried as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs under President Biden. By United States Department of State, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
 
There are long historic and strategic roots to the current crisis.  The external and internal roots of the situation in Ukraine run deep.  Security crises are deeply influenced both by a sense of history and by current perceptions.  Nevertheless, we can use 2014 as a crucial starting point with the annexation by Russia of Crimea.
 

“Crimea has always been an inseparable part of Russia” said President Putin at the time. 

 
The  Western response to the annexation has been to impose economic sanctions which are still in place and have had important consequence of the Russian economy.
    Shortly after the Crimea annexation, there was a change in government leadership in Ukraine leading to a policy that some felt was unjust to the people in eastern Ukraine;  who were largely Russian speaking and turned economically and culturally toward Russia.  Thus a violent separatist movement took form, most likely helped by Russia, leading to the creation of the People’s Republic of Donetsk and the People’s Republic of Luhansk.  Fighting broke out between the armed sparatists and the regular Ukrainian army and police.
 
Vladimir Putin
 Photograph of Russian Vladimir Putin at 2017 G20 Summit in Hamburg. Cropped and size increased by Emiya1980. By Пресс-служба Президента Российской Федерации, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.
   
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) quickly sent a Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine to monitor the situation.  The Mission is still in place and issues daily reports on the violations of ceasefires.  Thus in its 15 December 2021 report in the Donetsk region between 10-12 December there were 444 ceasefire violations and in the Luhansk region 104.  However, the freedom of movement of the Mission’s observers is restricted.  The number of violations , usually exchanges of small arms fire, is probably higher.
 
Joe Biden
U.S. President Joe Biden’s official portrait, 2021. By Adam Schultz, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Special Status.

 
    In 2014, the mandate of the OSCE included not only observation but also efforts at negotiations.  Thus on 12 February 2015, there was negotiated what has been called the Minsk Agreement. Under this Agreement, Ukraine would not be divided but the the areas covered by the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics would be given a “special status” set out in a new constitution. Beyond a rather vague discussion on decentralization, the nature of the “Special Status” has never been made clear, and no administrative measures have been put into place.
 

Normandy Format.

 
    In order to facilitate negotiations, there was created the “Normandy Format”, growing out of a meeting of government leaders in Normandy to mark the Allied landing in 1944.  The  Normandy Format brings together the representatives of Ukraine and Russia and France and Germany to facilitate negotiations.  So far, there has been no visible advance on the special status discussions within the Normandy Format.
 
However, with the new German Foreign Minister, the ecologist Annalena Baerbock, recently in Paris, there may be new initiatives. It is also likely that as a result of the discussions between Presidents Putin and Biden, the U.S.A. will play a more active advisory role.
 
Annalena Baerbock
 
  German Foreign Minister, the ecologist Annalena Baerbock. By Stefan Kaminski (photography), Annalena Baerbock (full rights of use), CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons.
 
The Association of World Citizens has always stressed the importance of developing appropriate forms of government as a crucial aspects of the resolution of armed conflicts.  The Association has particularly highlighted the possibilities of con-federalism and the need for trans-frontier cooperation.  The need to progress on the structure of Ukraine stands out sharply at this time when there are real possibilities of ecalatory risks.  There is a need for confidence-building measures to reach out to different layers of society in a cumulative process.
 
Advances on the Special Status would be an important step in the de-escalation of tensions.  Discussions on the Special Status must be carried out by those living in Ukraine.  However, government representatives as well as non-governmental organizations in Russia, Germany and France  can also contribute actively.
 
 
  Rene Wadlow, President, Association of World Citizens.

Here are other publications that may be of interest to you.

World Refugee Day.

June 20 is the United Nations (UN)-designated World Refugee Day;  marking the signing in 1951 of the Convention on Refugees. The condition of refugees and migrants has become a “hot”…

1 2 11

Ethiopia Appeals

Urgent Appeal for Ceasefire in Ethiopia Armed Conflict.

Featured Image: Church, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Photo by Mesfin Tesfaye on Unsplash.
The Association of World Citizens (AWC) reiterates its urgent Appeal for an immediate ceasefire and the start of negotiations in good faith in the Tigray conflict which has spread to other areas of Ethiopia and is impacting neighboring countries.
 
   When in November 2020, Ethiopian  federal troops entered Tigray Province, the Association of World Citizens, knowing the fragile nature of the Ethiopian  federation foresaw the dangers and called for a ceasefire and the start of negotiations. Ethiopia is a federal republic structured on the basis of 10 provinces. The provinces have the name of the major ethnic group within the province. 
 
Tigray
Administrative Zones of Tigray. By USAID, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

 

Second Class Citizens.

 
However, no province is populated exclusively by one ethnic group.  Through history and economic development people have moved to areas beyond their original “homeland”.  People from a “foreign” ethnic group can be made to feel as “second class citizens”, and there may be violence used against them in times of acute tension or  violence.
 
   The Association of World Citizens has been concerned to detect the roots and dynamics of intra-state conflicts and to propose appropriate structures of government, often based on con-federalism, decentralization, and trans-frontier cooperation. Unfortunately in the nearly one year of armed conflict no such negotiations on the structures of the Ethiopian Federation have taken place.
 

The Armed Conflict.

 
   The AWC has also stressed the need for effective mediation to establish good communications between conflicting parties.  Today, many intra-state conflicts are secession-related.  Many states are the result of past conquests involving diverse ethnic groups. Thus, there is ample potential for lines of fracture especially when there are leaders who can use identity issues coupled with a sense of injustice as a base for mobilization.  Thus far all offers of mediation have been refused.
 
   The armed conflict has led to the destruction of the largely rural economy of Tigray. There are United Nations estimates that some 400,000 persons are in famine conditions.  Many persons are displaced, and there are refugee flows to neighboring countries.  Recently, U.N. humanitarian staff have been expelled from Ethiopia.  It is difficult to measure the extent of human needs, but they are great.
 
   Only dialogue can resolve the core issues of the structure of the Ethiopian state. Thus the Association of World Citizens reiterates its Appeal for an immediate ceasefire and the start of negotiations in good faith, helped if requested by international mediators.

USAID workers aiding displaced people from Tigray (15 March 2021). By USAID, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Here are other publications that may be of interest to you.

World Refugee Day.

June 20 is the United Nations (UN)-designated World Refugee Day;  marking the signing in 1951 of the Convention on Refugees. The condition of refugees and migrants has become a “hot”…

1 2 11

Yemen Appeals

Yemen and Somalia. The Armed Conflict Continue.

Featured Image Photo by Anthony Beck in Pexels.
The Association of World Citizens strives to respond to situations in this turbulent and frequently violent world by making proposals for the resolution of armed conflicts through negotiations in good faith and by making proposals for developing appropriate forms of government, often based on con-federalism, decentralization, and transfrontier cooperation. A current focus is on the situations in Yemen (1) and Somalia. (2)
   In March 2015, a military coalition led by Saudi Arabia attacked Sanaa, the capital of Yemen, held by a rebal force, the Ansar Allah Movement, commonly called the Houthis.  Since that date, the armed conflict has continued, destroying the fragile economy, displacing a large number of persons, creating a humanitarian tragedy.  So far, all mediation efforts have failed. The situation becomes more complex each day due in part to the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
 
the Houthis
A calligraphic logo used by Ansar Allah, a Shia movement in Yemen commonly called the Houthis, with Arabic text: “Oh ye who believe, be supporters of God” (Quran 61:14). By Ansar Allah (Houthis), Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
 

The state of Yemen was the creation of two separate units. 

 
One was the southern part originally known as the Aden Colony and the Eastern and Western Aden Protectorates under British rule. The northern part of the country had been under Ottoman rule until the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1918.  From 1918 until 1962, it was ruled by Imams. In 1962, there was a military coup organized by officers who had been trained in Egypt and were influenced by Nasser’s views on Arab nationalism.  The coup was followed by an eight-year-long civil war between the military forces called “republicans” and the forces of the Imam Bader.  The republicans won, but the government was weak and unstable.
 
   The south of the country after the British left took the name of the Prople’s Democratic Republic of Yemen.  In 1990, the two segments of Yemen were united, and the Republic of Yemen was established. However, the euphoria which had existed at the start was short-lived.  The people in the south had been promised that their lives would be bettered after unification. Life did not improve, and many in the south felt marginalized.  Today, there is a strong sentiment in the south for separation and independence.
 
   When the fighting in Yemen stops, the creation of appropriate forms of government will have to be found. The return to two separate states presents real difficulties as people have moved from their original home areas due to changing economic conditions and to the armed conflict. Yet a single centralized government also seems impossible.  As Martin Dent points out, where there is strong identity politics, there must be forms of government that fill the gap between unity and independence.(3)  There is a need for Track II  efforts to discuss possible structures of government in Yemen.
 
Muhammad Al-Badr
Muhammad Al-Badr was the last king of the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen (North Yemen) and leader of the monarchist regions during the North Yemen Civil War (1962–1970). By Unknown photographer, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
 

Somalia. Similar Conditions.

 
In Somalia, we have very similar conditions. The two Somali colonial areas, one under the control of Britan and the other under that of Italy were combined into one state in 1961. There had been a period of U.N. trusteeship after the end of the Second World War when the area of Italian colonial status had ended and before the two colonial territories were united. The political culture of the two territories was different.  This impact of the colonial legacy  was an element leading to the current situation.  In January 1991, the military government of Siyad Barre was overthrown, and now different parts of the country demand independence, in particular Somaliland and Puntland, though their boundary claims overlap.
 
In addition to regional demands for independence, there is an armed Islamist movement, Al-Shabaab, which poses regional and international security issues which continue.  Mediation efforts by the United Nations have not progressed.  Again Track II efforts may be helpful to find governmental structures able to provide autonomy without dividing the Somalia state into three or more independent states.
 
 
(4) The Association of World Citizens stresses the need for creative thinking on the structure of a state, on the need for regional cooperation and a willingness to negotiate in good faith.
 
 
Siyad Barre
Military portrait of Major General Mohamed Siad Barre, Somalia’s longest-serving President. By Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.   
 
 

Notes:

(1) Helen Lackner. Yemen in Crisis: Autocracy, Neo-Liberalism and the Disintegration of a State.
(London: Saqi Books, 2017, 330pp).
 
(2) Sarah G. Phillips. When There Was No Aid: War and Peace in Somaliland ( Ithica: Cornell University Press, 2020, 227pp.)
 
(3) Martin J. Dent. Identity Politics: Filling the Gap Between Federalism and Independence.
(Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2004, 232 pp.)
 
(4) Hurst Hannum. Autonomy, Sovereignty and Self-Determination: The Accommodation of Conflicting Rights
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990, 503 pp.)
 
 
 
Rene Wadlow, President, Association of World Citizens.
 
 
 

Here are other publications that may be of interest to you.

World Refugee Day.

June 20 is the United Nations (UN)-designated World Refugee Day;  marking the signing in 1951 of the Convention on Refugees. The condition of refugees and migrants has become a “hot”…

1 2 11