Bridging the divide between parent states and secessionist entities: a new perspective for conflict management?

ABSTRACT

This paper departs from the contested nature of the border that separates each side in secessionist conflict – the parent state considers this as an internal administrative line; the de facto state, conversely, sees this as an international border. The argument made builds upon the theoretical aspects of the bordering practices in the current literature, and then examines three cross-border cases – Mainland China-Taiwan, Cyprus-Northern Cyprus and Moldova-Transnistria, to demonstrate different patterns of cross-border interactions and their achieved outcomes. It questions why border-crossing practices have either brought about normalization in degrees, or with a questionable value? This paper makes the conclusion that although border-crossing practices have normalized relations between adversaries, they have also simultaneously brought along self-perpetuating separation as most of the divisions still persist today. Redefining borders and facilitating cross-border interactions has only had a limited contribution to conflict management.

KEYWORDS:

• Secessionist conflicts
• de facto states; borders
• bordering practices
• conflict management

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Eoin McNamara for English language editing as well as two anonymous referees for useful comments and criticism to various drafts of this paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributor

Eiki Berg is Professor of International Relations at the Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies, University of Tartu, Estonia.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by institutional research funding (IUT20-39) of the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research, and the EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [Grant Agreement No 691818].