Decentralization,Regional Political Parties And Secessionist Governance

Many countries around the world face the challenge of regional separatism,which is a matter of national unity and social stability and is an important topic of study in political science.To mitigate regional separatism,countries have adopted a variety of measures,including social and political power-sharing,democratic legal constraints and violent repression.Decentralisation is one of the specific models of social and political power-sharing,giving localities a greater degree of autonomy and self-determination.Can this approach,which aims to draw regions together,effectively contribute to the governance of regional separatism? In fact,most regions have achieved stability and harmony for a longer period of time after the introduction of decentralisation,but the trend towards secession has not changed in some places,and the acquisition of greater power by localities has in turn led to more serious secessionist activities,such as seeking independence from the home country in the form of secession referendums,as in the case of Quebec in Canada,Scotland in the UK and Quebec in Spain.How,then,can the failure of decentralisation to achieve good secessionist governance be explained?This paper argues that such phenomena are somewhat universal and typical.To answer this central question,this paper selects Quebec,Scotland and Catalonia for a multi-case comparison and uses the research method of comparative historical analysis to elucidate the causal mechanisms between devolution and separatist governance.Due to the multitude of factors involved in the phenomenon of separatism and its intertwined spatial and temporal complexity,this study analyses the role of regional political parties as mediating factors between decentralisation and separatist governance,based on a thorough understanding of each case.Conducting the study from the perspective of political parties allows for a combination of institutionalism and dynamism factors,and the induction of a theory that is more in line with the functioning of realpolitik.The lessons learnt on this basis are of high practical significance and provide a policy reference for the governance of secessionist issues in various countries.By combing through the historical data of the three regions,this paper has conducted a comparative analysis of the political factors in the period between the introduction of decentralisation and the re-activation of secessionist activities in them,and concluded the following causal mechanisms: Firstly,decentralisation set up local councils and governments.This was an important manifestation of the devolution of political power from the centre to the local level.Along with the establishment and functioning of local institutions,regional political parties were given a legal space to operate.In the process of running for local councils,regional parties have a natural advantage over national parties,as they only need to consider local interests and local people’s demands,which allows them to get more votes from the people and become the ruling party in local councils through elections.Once in power,local councils,governments,police and media become the organisational and mobilising resources for regional parties to launch secessionist activities,greatly enhancing their capacity and influence.Secondly,the decentralisation of power,which recognises the specificity of the regions and gives them linguistic and cultural autonomy,can,over time,reinforce the local identity of the people and consolidate their sense of identity as the ’we’ and the ’other’.This provides a sufficient basis for regional political parties to develop their ideas of secession.In line with this,regional parties,in order to gain a greater electoral advantage,emphasise regional distinctiveness through their daily propaganda and election manifestos.Through this series of activities,public sentiment for secession is further mobilised.Thirdly,power is expansive;there is no end to the devolution of power from the central government to the local level,and it is inevitable that the regions will seek greater power.Once such demands are rejected by the central government,they can easily be used by regional parties as a pretext to organise secessionist activities.At this point,the organisational and mobilising tools at the disposal of the regional parties come into play and a new wave of secession is inevitable.It is important to note that this study aims to provide a necessary but not sufficient explanation of the mechanism,i.e.that decentralisation does not necessarily lead to a renewed activism and polarisation of secessionist activities.However,under certain conditions,particularly the interaction of local elections,regional party mobilisation and the strengthening of regional identities,decentralisation can deviate from the original design of the system,and it is necessary to re-examine it.Decentralisation can still be an important way of mitigating separatism,and it would be more effective if the central government were to design the system more adequately to limit the boundaries within which regional parties can develop and to take control of the most important decisions on regional matters.