I will undertake this analysis of the sovereignty case in five steps by: 1) providing an overview of sovereignty; 2) offering a brief explaining of non-intervention and it's correlation with sovereignty 3) analyzing the principle of self-determination; 4) describing the evolution of the disagreement from September to December of 2012; and 5) Conclusion
Sovereignty .
Historians date the modern concept of sovereignty back to the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, which conferred privileges upon territorial rulers with little attention to the ethnic and religious affiliations of their peoples. Prior to Westphalia, there was no sovereignty. For example, during the Middle Ages, the organization of politics and society is probably best described by the Pauline metaphor of the Body of Christ. During this period, popes and emperors intervened regularly in the territorial affairs of kings and nobles, while the same kings and nobles held rights and privileges against the pope. The Treaty of Westphalia severely weakened papal authority throughout much of Europe; it marked the transition from feudal principalities to sovereign states.
There is little consensus in the literature on definitions of sovereignty. Some definitions emphasize the power and supreme authority of the sovereign, while others stress the sovereign's legitimate authority over territory. Political scientist Daniel Philpot names authority, legitimacy, supremacy and territoriality as the central components of sovereignty, defining sovereignty as "supreme legitimate authority within a territory ". Another political scientist Gottlieb notes the weaknesses of the definitions which stress power and authority to the near exclusion of territoriality: .
"The right to exclusive control over territory has long been a central ingredient of the sovereignty of states. Indeed, much of the international law governing the jurisdiction of states is premised upon it.
