Territorial integrity

In the post-World War years, there has been tension between this principle and the concept of humanitarian intervention under Article 73.b of the United Nations Charter "to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement.

[23] The recent (post-World War II) strict application of territorial integrity has given rise to a number of problems and, when faced with reality "on the ground", can be seen as too artificial a construct.

[25] The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1674, adopted by the United Nations Security Council on April 28, 2006, "Reaffirm[ed] the provisions of paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document regarding the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity".

[26] However, this responsibility to protect refers only to the ability of external powers to override sovereignty and does not explicitly involve the changing of borders.

Writing on the cross-border institutions created in Northern Ireland following the Good Friday Agreement, Cathal McCall observes how these configurations constituted a "functional transterritorial model of governance for Northern Ireland based on the principles of interdependence, inclusion and consent" as opposed to the previous "exclusivist territorial political pillars of modern Irish nationalism and Ulster unionism".

[27] That is, the exclusivist assumptions of territorial integrity, embodied in Irish nationalism and Ulster unionism were blurred by the Agreement's implementation of cross-border decision-making.