Secessionist Self-Determination: Some Lessons from Katanga, Biafra and Bangladesh

The existing world order is frequently interrupted by secessionist claims. The present state-oriented solidarity for 'territorial integrity under all circumstances at any cost' has not succeeded in solving the problem. It has now become imperative for the international community to formulate principles and guidelines to cope with this problem. This paper examines three of the major separatist attempts since the Second World War and the way the rest of the world community reacted to them. The failure of Katanga and Biafra secessions and the success of the Bangladesh one were not isolated incidents. Rather these are probably normative for future claims in the sense that some lessons worthy of imitation may be derived from these experiences. Whilst the right to secession was denied in case of Katanga and Biafra, the Bangladesh situation indicates that the world community is willing to recognise a limited and orderly right to secession as the ultimate remedy under certain circumstances, particularly in extreme cases of the abuse and misuse of territorial integrity. Several factors distinguish the Bangladesh situation from the other two cases. In addition to a comparative study of these factors the paper develops certain common and influential criteria which the world community may increasingly recognise in responding to a future secessionist claim. This would in turn assist the international community in its concern for the establishment of a legal order to deal with post-colonial self-determination claims.