分離自決的國際法內涵與實踐

「自決」一詞，在民主政治的發展上，主要是指人民享有選擇自己政府與統治形式的權利。而自決運動，在多元面貌的發展之下，卻是變得極為複雜而難解。國際政治與國際法在不同時空背景之下，賦予自決不同的定義與權利。而20世紀90年代以後的自決運動實踐，已經遠遠超過60年代殖民地解放運動的範圍。造成此一急遽發展，歸因於蘇聯解體與冷戰時代的結束、國際政治大環境對人權原則的重視，以及近來開放民主與自由經濟理論的提倡等三大因素。雖然當前的國際法多不願意明白承認殖民地以外分離自決的合法性，但晚近20年的分離自決實踐中，仍有許多非屬殖民地的國家分離運動得以在國際見證下成功。在主權國家實踐上，西方民主國家對於自決已逐漸採取民主與開放的政治態度。然而有共黨歷史背景的國家，對於分離自決運動，有些仍堅持傳統主權觀與不惜使用武力。以俄羅斯車臣共和國獨立事件為例，長期戰爭的嚴重代價，讓俄、車雙方的政府與人民均難以承受。要如何協調主權國家與分離自決者的嚴重衝突，國際社會迄今仍沒有發展出一套可被大多數接受的政治或法律準則。對於經常處理種族衝突與自決爭端的聯合國而言，維持國際和平與共同發展，或應是解決此類爭端的最高方針。就台灣的自決公投而論，必須注意的是，如果未經國際社會同意而單方貿然的採取政治行動，非但是有極為高度的國家安全風險，而且是要擔負影響區域安全的政治責任。

關鍵字

國家分離；國家主權；自決權；兩岸關係

並列摘要

Self-determination is a concept in principle, by which the people having rights to form their own state or government. However, the movement of self-determination of the 20th century is becoming a very complicated issue with various definitions under international politics and laws. Since the 1990s, the practice of self-determination movement has far exceeded the legal framework, as originally considered for the independence of post-war colonies in the 1960s. The increasing relevance and importance of the problem in secession are due to the changing international climate. The collapse of the bipolar world during the Cold War, together with a more persistent trend toward greater recognition of human right and the advocate of democracy and liberal market-economy, has created a unique opportunity to develop new legal and political approaches to the problems posed by the secessionist movement. Despite such claims to the right of secession is reluctant to be allowed under the current international law, there are still many successful recognized secession cases in the recent two decades. Most democratic states in the West are holding an open attitude toward self-determination or secessionism. Other sovereign states with communist background in the past still insist on traditional sovereignty and resort to force to cope with secessionism. For example, in the case of Chechnya Republic, the heavy price paid by Russia and Chechnya is borne by the two governments and their peoples. There are still, so far, no acceptable political or legal regulations in the international community to balance and mediate the conflict between sovereign states and secessionists. For the United Nations, to maintain international peace and common development are perhaps to be the key issue in dealing with those conflicts. Taiwan can not be too optimistic about its own self-determination campaign or the future of cross-strait conflict. If Taiwan pursues self-determination without international support, it will be criticized for ignoring international responsibility as it endangers the security of the region.