Elizabeth Chadwick, Self-Determination in the Post-9/11 Era, Oxford: Routledge; Simultaniously, New York: Routledge, 2011, $160.00; ISBN: 978-0-415-55004-8.
Recognition of self-determination in international law is new. International law has adopted self-determination as a right in 1941 by UN charter, but from the beginning of the civilization the desire for self-determination was there. Debate over this topic is like never ending saga, as it’s related to government, peace, war, right, aggression etc. The book I have chosen to review is a research monograph, written by Elizabeth Chadwick, entitled as “Self-determination in the Post 9/11 Era”. Where she wanted to argue that- the position of “self-determination”became more complex…show more content… In her research she wanted to discuss the related matters separately which is good for reader to understand. In her first part of the book which she named as Part 1 she discussed two chapter named as “Introduction” and “Perspective on self-determination in the post 9/11 era”. In this part Elizabeth gave a sharp and elaborate idea of self-determination in historical, political and legal context. She said- historically political power triumph over social principle most of the time and modern states are result of prior territorial conquest. She emphasised on post 9/11 era as she said- 9/11 created a wider gap between democratic accountability and administrative arrangement, and hampered social spontaneity. She asserted- new anti-terrorist laws and policies since 9/11 resurrected the old conflation of terrorist act with liberation tools. In this part also discussed about the status of self-determination in time of the outbreak ofSecond World War. States who has survived their boundaries and those who did not in First World War took different track for self-determination. The latter one had to sign minority rights treaties as a pre-condition to membership in the League of Nations but other states carried out as it was. She argued that- very few states succeeded in acquiring rights of self-determination without the consent of their state. In the later part of Part A she differentiate-…show more content… In France, their penal code specifically provides measures against terrorist offences. Though they listed so many cases after 2001 but only one case has connection to traditional liberationist group. In Russia, they have adopted anti-terrorist measures in their constitution. There is a resolution which describe that all elements of crimes should be first established in national law. International crimes should not be directly applied until the criminal code requires it. As we all know United Kingdom has no written constitution. Though they have some cases considered as evidence but they are allegedly obtained under torture. Lastly, United States suffered least from home-grown terrorist rampancy. But, they have a history of civil right movement, challenges from certain tribes and Hispanic immigration. US constitution gives the legitimacy to declare and wage war. After 9/11, US got super power to use force, and they re-designed certain liberation groups as foreign terrorist organization by anti-terrorist legislation since 2001. Author gave some importance on Kosovo’s Independence. She explained it in analytical manner to examine the positive and negative effect of Kosovo’s independence in international arena. As we know