When Do We Grant a People the Right to a Home?

The ongoing conflict and the endless debates over land and identity made me reflect. Recently, a small piece of my birthright was taken away - a tiny patch of land, barely visible on a map, yet priceless to those who have roots there. How hard can it be to give each other space to live? Why does the desire of some peoples for their own state so often remain unresolved?

Around the world, countless peoples without their own sovereign state cling to their identity and autonomy. Take the Kurds, spread across Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran, who have struggled for decades with political repression and conflict, yet hold firmly to their dream of an independent Kurdish state. This recalls the former Yugoslavia, where ethnic groups fought to form their own countries, with long-lasting and painful consequences.

Yet there are also examples of peoples who succeeded in establishing their own independent state. These successes are rare but all the more meaningful. Norway peacefully separated from Sweden in 1905, after nearly a century of union. The split happened orderly, through a referendum, without bloodshed. The "Velvet Divorce" of Czechoslovakia in 1993 - from which the Czech Republic and Slovakia emerged - also shows how ethnic issues can be resolved without violence, despite cultural differences.

Ireland is another example. After a long, painful struggle, it gained partial independence from the United Kingdom in 1922 as the Irish Free State, with Northern Ireland remaining an exception. This later led to full sovereignty.

Israel was declared a Jewish state in 1948, after a long period of diaspora and Zionist mobilization. Its establishment took place under the British Mandate in Palestine and a UN partition plan that called for two states: one Jewish and one Palestinian. Only the Jewish state was realized. What followed was war, mass displacement or expulsion of Palestinians, and a long-standing conflict that continues to this day. For the Jewish people, the founding was a historic homecoming; for Palestinians, it marked the beginning of a lasting sense of loss. Two peoples, one land - and a state that became both a symbol of belonging and displacement.

The independence of India and Pakistan in 1947 marked another turning point. British India was partitioned along religious lines, resulting in massive population movements and violence, but ultimately two new states that still exist today. In Africa, Eritrea gained independence from Ethiopia in 1993 after years of war and oppression. In Southeast Asia, East Timor became a sovereign state in 2002 after a long Indonesian occupation, with international mediation. Finally, in 2011, South Sudan seceded from Sudan via referendum, following decades of civil war - though the country remains fragile due to internal conflicts and ethnic rivalries.

Besides these recognized cases, there are lesser-known and unrecognized attempts at self-determination. The Republic of South Maluku (RMS) is a poignant example. In 1950, Moluccan soldiers and civilians declared independence from Indonesia, aspiring to create their own sovereign state. The Netherlands had promised autonomy to the Moluccans - former KNIL soldiers - during the transfer of sovereignty to Indonesia. When that promise was broken and the Moluccas remained part of Indonesia without self-rule, this community felt deeply betrayed. Although the RMS never gained international recognition, Moluccan identity and the quest for independence still live on, especially within the diaspora. The RMS story illustrates the profound yearning for self-determination, even among relatively small and politically vulnerable groups, and the painful consequences of broken promises.

A special case within this theme is that of the Roma and Sinti, peoples without their own state, scattered throughout Europe. Unlike many other groups, they generally do not seek territorial separation or a nation-state of their own. Their identity is historically not tied to a single geographic location but to shared culture, language variants, and often a nomadic way of life. Rather than an independent state, Roma and Sinti primarily seek cultural recognition, protection against discrimination, and equal access to education, employment, and housing within the countries where they live. There have been symbolic proposals for a so-called "state" of Romanistan, but these have found little resonance within the community itself. Their lack of a classic nationalist claim makes their position particularly vulnerable: a people without fixed ground beneath their feet, still fighting for their right to exist - not through separation, but through inclusion.

So what determines whether a people receive recognition and their own state, or not? The answer lies in a complex interplay of factors. Political power and international support play a major role. Peoples with allies among influential states often have a better chance of recognition. Support from global powers can be decisive, as with South Sudan. Smaller peoples without such allies often remain on the margins.

Economic and strategic value of the territory also matters. Areas rich in natural resources or with a favorable location attract more international attention. This can lead either to support for independence or resistance, depending on geopolitical interests.

Historical claims and cultural continuity are important as well. Peoples long connected to a specific territory with a recognizable identity have stronger claims to self-rule. Yet this is no guarantee, as other interests can overshadow these claims.

Internal cohesion of a people is crucial. Well-organized peoples with clear leadership can more effectively advocate their cause internationally. Internal divisions weaken their position.

The attitude of the parent state cannot be ignored. Some countries allow autonomy or even independence, while others fiercely defend their territory. This can lead to violent conflicts requiring international mediation.

Finally, international law plays a complicated role. The right to self-determination of peoples sometimes clashes with the principle of territorial integrity of states, making the recognition of new states a political and legal struggle.

This complex mix explains why some peoples gain their own state and others do not, despite sometimes equally strong historical and cultural rights. In the end, it's not only about borders on a map but about the feeling of being allowed to exist somewhere. What fascinates me about all these stories is how fundamental the desire to belong is - to not have to constantly explain why you are there. I myself experienced how quickly something once taken for granted can suddenly be out of reach. A small piece of land, nothing grand, but it was mine. Now I have to book a hotel if I want to return. I have become a visitor in the place I once belonged. Maybe that's what it's really about in the end: not power or borders, but the simple question of who is allowed to be somewhere. And how often, against better knowledge, that is still denied.