Introduction to Sovereignty

The desire of a people for a homeland, self-government, or tribal or national sovereignty is among the leading instigators for protest, conflict, and war throughout recorded history. In the modern age, pleas for autonomy often begin as protests of government policy. When such appeals are repeatedly suppressed, when declarations of independence and self-government are ignored, sovereignty movements often wage war. Religion, ethnicity, history, imperialism, and race often fan the fires of many of these conflicts. Great nations and peoples have begun their quest for independence with protest. The American Revolution gained momentum from colonial protests over the Sugar and Stamp Acts. Two of the seminal events of the era, the Boston Tea Party (featured in this chapter) and the signing of the Declaration of Independence are both examples of protests for sovereignty.

While many such movements have led to bloodshed and war, a few have achieved their goals through non-violent revolution. Included in this chapter is the Dandi March, a peaceful protest of British imperial policies in India that sparked the movement for Indian independence.

Also profiled in this chapter are several sources on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, from the formation of the nation of Israel to the 2005 removal of Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip. Settlers resisting removal by members of the Israeli Defense Force invoked haunting images of the Holocaust to peacefully protest Israeli disengagement policies.

Since sovereignty movements often culminate with violent conflict, some individuals who were once dissidents or protesters are likely to later be called separatists, combatants, insurgents, freedom fighters, or terrorists. Though it may be cliché to claim "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter," the maxim does hold some truth. Much of how protests— and even warfare—for sovereignty are memorialized in history books depends on the perspective of the author. "The IRA Hunger Strikers" illustrates this grave juxta-position of protest, terrorism, and the fight for autonomy.

The editors do not condone terrorism; violent acts against innocent civilians intended to induce fear are not legitimate acts of protest. However, it is left to readers to decide when actions move beyond justified protest into acts of riot or terrorism. The reader should understand that with many of these issues there are varying degrees of opposition—from non-violent protest to paramilitary action—and that acts of the most extremist and violent fringes should not dilute the message or actions of peaceful protesters who espouse the same cause.