TY - JOUR
T1 - Recognition, Status Quo or Reintegration
T2 - Engagement with de facto States
AU - Caspersen, Nina Fallentin
N1 - © 2018 The Editor of Ethnopolitics. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - De facto states and their parent states usually have very different reasons for backing engagement policies, based on their respective claims to self-determination and territorial integrity. Drawing on four case studies—Abkhazia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Northern Cyprus—this article examines how this underlying tension is negotiated. It demonstrates the need to distinguish between different forms of engagement and finds that engagement is significantly constrained by parent state insistence on territorial integrity. Yet the issue of status can sometimes be fudged, depending on the degree of patron state support for the de facto state and its commitment to independence.
AB - De facto states and their parent states usually have very different reasons for backing engagement policies, based on their respective claims to self-determination and territorial integrity. Drawing on four case studies—Abkhazia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Northern Cyprus—this article examines how this underlying tension is negotiated. It demonstrates the need to distinguish between different forms of engagement and finds that engagement is significantly constrained by parent state insistence on territorial integrity. Yet the issue of status can sometimes be fudged, depending on the degree of patron state support for the de facto state and its commitment to independence.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052093452&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/17449057.2018.1495360
DO - 10.1080/17449057.2018.1495360
M3 - Article
VL - 17
SP - 373
EP - 389
JO - Ethnopolitics
JF - Ethnopolitics
SN - 1744-9057
IS - 4
ER -