Re Nizam Farsakh's questions below, I do not recall seeing any such
discussion, but I have been abroad a lot recently.
There seems to me to be a great deal of difference between cantons and
Bantustans. "Canton" is, as far as I know, normally only used of the
component units of the Helvetic (Swiss) Confederation, which is a
federation of units which retain sovereignty or something like it for
certain purposes. Analogies (none exact) would be the component units of,
say, the USA, Canada, Australia. There must be many books on federalism
in the King's College library, incl. an excellent one by Sir Kenneth
Wheare. Bantustans were quite different. They were ostensibly fully
sovereign states which were created by (apartheid) South Africa. But
although ostensibly sovereign, they were amongst other things not
economically viable without SA - all of them, as I recall, were enclaved
entirely within SA. They were in fact (to varying degrees) what have
traditionally been called "puppet States" - cf. pre-WWII Manchukuo. Puppet
states are discussed in most general international law books, as well as in
specialist works on sovereignty, recognition etc.
Nizam Farsakh's proposed distinction between "boundary" and "border" seems
to me not to be viable. Not only does it not correspond to usage; but it
does not contain any clear distinction. An internationally recognized
limit to a state's jurisdiction/authority would be a border (as well as a
boundary); a self=proclaimed but unrecognized limit would be just that, and
neither word would connote that difference.
Maurice Mendelson
At 10:07 19/01/04 +0000, Nizar Farsakh wrote:
>The other day we had a discussion on the difference between Bantustans
>and Cantons. I was arguing that, although both have to do with levels
>of autonomy, the Bantustan is a system imposed by a regional hegemon
>while Cantons develop through agreement and consent. Then again, I
>suppose these two terms are used interchangeably just like Borders,
>Boundaries, and Frontiers not withstanding the fact that they are
>actually different.
>
>I would appreciate it if anyone on the list can add to this
>disscussion or lead us to any useful references on the issue.
>
>Come to think of it, I have another question. Can we authoritatively
>say that a Border is a line limiting state sovereignty/authority while
>a Boundary is a border that has been agreed and recognized
>internationally?
>
>Thanking you in advance,
>
>Nizar
>
>
>Nizar Farsakh
>mailto:[log in to unmask]
Maurice Mendelson, Q.C.
Blackstone Chambers
Blackstone House
Temple, London EC4Y 9BW,
England.
Tel. +44 20 7583 1770; fax +4420 7822 7350; email
[log in to unmask]
website www.blackstonechambers.com
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and legally
privileged. This e-mail is intended to be read only by the addressee. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any review,
dissemination or copying of this e-mail is prohibited and that privilege has
not been waived. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify
the sender by replying by email or by telephone and
then delete the e-mail.
|