International Regimes and State Implementation

Abstract

The European minority rights regime is a construction by states for states and as we see in Chapter 3, state preferences are key determining factors in the regime’s effectiveness. Nevertheless, as highlighted in Chapter 4, there exists a tension within the prominent minority rights narrative that pits state against minority. This narrative runs that states are the holders of ultimate authority over the territory on which they sit while minorities naturally seek to change the nature of this authority, at the least, or reject it altogether, at the most. The end of the Cold War witnessed a great deal of border changes and unfulfilled claims. Some of these claims still exist today in the former Yugoslavia, such as Kosovo, and the former Soviet Union, such as those breakaway regions in Moldova, Georgia and Azerbaijan. Thus, first and foremost, the European minority rights regime was established to maintain these boundaries as far as they could be maintained. For instance, there was very little outcry in the international system to the dismantlement of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. At the same time, that from the beginning that ethno-nationalism was best checked by democratic institutions and principles (not just elections). And in this way, Central and Eastern Europe states would be required to meet certain criteria to accede to the Council of Europe firstly and the European Union and NATO secondly.