Correlation of the principles of territorial integrity of states and self-determination of peoples in international law

Abstract

The article presents a comparative analysis of the principles of territorial integrity of states and self-determination of peoples in terms of international law. The principle of equality and self-determination of peoples, as well as the territorial integrity and inviolability of state borders, are among the basic principles of international law.
 At first glance, there is a certain contradiction between the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination and the principle of territorial integrity of states, which provides that the territory of the state cannot be changed without its consent. The inability of the parties to find a peaceful solution to such a conflict leads to an increase in national conflicts, which often escalate into a military confrontation.
 From the content of the provisions of international law, it becomes clear that the principle of territorial integrity is aimed solely at protecting the state from external aggression. It does not apply only to those states that do not ensure the equality of the peoples living in them and do not allow free self-determination of such peoples. Conversely, if the state adheres to this principle in its activities, it is impossible to dismember it and violate its territorial integrity, "hiding" under this principle, because this state has already given peoples the right to express themselves within its borders.
 The right of the people to self-determination means that each nation is free to determine, without outside interference, its political status and to pursue its economic, social, and cultural development.
 In turn, the UN Millennium Declaration in fact spoke in favor of an only anti-colonial and anti-occupation interpretation of the principle of self-determination of peoples.
 Thus, the principle of the right to equality and self-determination of peoples does not encourage separatism and secession as a mandatory form of self-determination; on the contrary, the right to secession is directly limited to special cases, such as decolonization, the struggle against occupation and the racist regime.
 The same is confirmed in the practice of constitutional courts of states.