Gordon Chang, in his post below, takes the Kosovo case to a logical extreme: It is good, he writes, to encourage separatist movements to declare independence, even against the objection of their host countries. Let the dominoes fall.

At the risk of both offense and hyperbole, I have to wonder: Gordon, what you would have said about the secession of the South that triggered the Civil War? And though it may be reasonable to look to undermine the coherence of China and Russia–and certainly it is admirable to wish for Taiwanese independence–are you really willing to say the same thing about the parts of Georgia that Russia has its eyes on? About Spain? About Great Britain?

There is nothing good about undermining the basic idea of sovereignty and encouraging separatism universally. I too don’t like carping on about the dangers of “destabilizing” when peoples are living under oppression. But when there’s a big, scary neighbor next door, it will always be in their interest to encourage separatists in your country. This is what Hitler’s Germany did with the Sudetens. It’s what Putin’s doing now in Georgia. (Some might even say it’s what Egypt and Syria did in setting up Arab separatist groups in Israel in the early 1960’s.) The bottom line is that good peoples looking for self-rule in the face of serious oppression should be supported. At the same time, peaceful states that grant rights to their citizens should be kept coherent and stable, even if all their sub-groups don’t get political independence. Take it case-by-case. And be careful what you wish for.