On Collective Self-Determination and a Palestinian State
2 3 Acknowledgments This thesis is the product of the incredible education that I have received during my time at Claremont McKenna College. As a philosophic paper that has practical application to the world in which we live, I feel that it reflects the best of what makes this college so special. Not only did learn how to approach problems of any type or complexity by studying philosophy with under the careful eyes of caring professors, but I was able to go out into the world and learn from the source about issues of collective self-determination generally and the Palestinian case in particular. During my time here, I have received help from so many people in the CMC community, but there are a few people whose help has been invaluable. First, I would like to thank Professor Edward Haley, who has continually played an instrumental role in helping me find the resources to conduct the research that most interested me. His door has always been open and he has always greeting me with a smile and excitement about what I have been doing. Additionally, I would like to thank Professor Paul Hurley, whose guidance was instrumental on this project. He helped me find a topic that I enjoyed writing and gave me the tools to write it. Finally, I would like to thank my family, who I seldom have seen during my time here, but has understood my desire to explore and grow.
Self‐Determination, Wellbeing, and Threats of Harm
David Rodin argues that the right of national-defence as conceived in international law cannot be grounded in the end of defending the lives of individuals. Firstly, having this end is not necessary because there is a right of defence against an invasion that threatens no lives. However, in this context we are to understand that ‘defending lives’ includes defending against certain non-lethal threats. I will argue that threats to national-self determination and self-government are significant non-lethal threats to the wellbeing of individuals that can justify lethal defensive force. Therefore the end of defending individuals can ground a right of national-defence against a ‘bloodless invasion’. Secondly, Rodin argues that defending lives is not a sufficient condition for military action to be national self-defence, because humanitarian intervention is military action to defend individuals, and such action is in deep tension with national self-defence. I will argue that a reductive account, grounded in claims of need and threats of harm, can justify principles of both intervention and non-intervention on the same grounds; that is, protecting the wellbeing of individuals.
Theories of Secession
Approche systematique des differents types de theories normatives de la secession. Distinguant les arguments en faveur d'une justification d'un droit moral de la secession et les arguments en faveur d'une justification des prescriptions du droit international, l'A. compare les theories du droit reperateur et les theories du droit originaire en vertu du principe de l'integrite territoriale et de l'integrite de la participation politique en democratie