“The international community—which includes many multi-tribal, ethnic, racial, or sectarian states—frowns on solutions that formally or implicitly break up states. Many have their own minorities that might be encouraged to break away. Thus, arguments are used that it’s a form of apartheid or that boundaries cannot be drawn exactly and will always leave some unfortunate souls on the other side of the line. In South Africa, apartheid was forced separation using armed might of a minority against a majority. In Iraq and Libya, such decentralized governance would have to be voluntary and would reflect existing ethno-sectarian or tribal areas, respectively.”
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=4700
(Visited 24 times, 1 visits today)
Related posts:
The last days of the IRS
John Kerry, Organization Man
Top Terrorism Experts Say that Mass Spying Doesn’t Work to Prevent Terrorism
The Never-Ending Story of Government Cost Overruns
The Chart of the Century
Debt addiction, USA: How much debt reduction has the crisis caused?
A Common-Sense View of the Stock Market
The Pentagon's Bases of Confusion
Rahm Emanuel's Gun Free Zones
Hubris Isn't the Half of It
How the Nazis Used Gun Control
An Expatriate's View of Vietnam
Michael Scheuer: The price of U.S. interventionism in Syria and Israel
Internationalize to Escape Obamacare
The Real Reverse Robin Hood: Ben Bernanke and his Merry Band of Thieves