“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
Related posts:
Hidden Erosion of Corporate Worth Since U.S. Abandoned Money
ObamaCare Pushes Big Medical Practice Changes
Kill Lists Will Continue
Who Funds the War Party?
Hurricane Sandy and Gas Lines
Withdrawing Political Legitimacy
Elysium: The Technological Side of the American Police State
Themes for 2013: Eight trends to follow in 2013 and beyond.
The Hidden History of World War I
The Source of Systemic Crisis: Risk and Moral Hazard
Why NSA Snooping Is Bigger Deal in Germany
Jeffrey Tucker: Police Work Has Become a Racket
Who Really Started the Korean War?
"Homelanders" To U.S. Expatriates: Don't Come Back... Ever
Cyprus, The First Domino?
