The Politics of Ethnicity and Secession: Lessons Learned from Eritrea and South Sudan.

This paper analyzes the effects of ethnic secession upon Eritrea and South Sudan, examining the purported benefits and the actual results. Ethnic conflict is a significant problem for many states, with the African continent suffering disproportionately. Proponents of ethnic secession argue that secession alleviates ethnic conflict by permitting individual ethnic groups to have their own state, stimulating ethnic homogeneity and social harmony. Opponents argue that ethnic secession creates greater ethnic fragmentation, fueling ethnic cleansing, and raises the prospects of renewed violence. Using the case studies of Eritrea and South Sudan, along with data from the Polity IV and Freedom House indices, this paper concludes that instead of generating ethnic harmony, ethnic secession is more likely to inflame ethnic conflict beyond even pre-partition levels, becoming far more detrimental than it is beneficial. The inherent ambiguity associated with defining ethnicity is a strong contributor here, as is the fallacious perception that any state can even be ethnically homogenous. The experiences of Eritrea and South Sudan underscore this point, demonstrating the need for a more objective basis for secession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]