THE CITY'S RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, PARS PRO TOTO?

International law does not recognize the city as a holder of the right to self-determination because it continues to see the city as an artificial entity. As a result, decolonization has been confined to the overseas territories of twentieth-century empires-the periphery. The surviving metropole of these empires, what became the modern nation-state, is not recognized as part of the same colonization process. Colonization, however, is the craftmanship of cities that amass enough military and economic powers to subjugate other human settlements. The city has been able to grow its influence incessantly. First, it succeeded in conquering surrounding territories and later on in expanding overseas. Today, the twenty-first century version of the metropolis, what is known as the global city, is embarking on a new form of colonization. International law needs to respond to this challenge. This Article explains that the city is capable of holding rights because it is a superorganism, with rights similar to those of nature. It also explains why U.N. pronouncements of the right to self-determination are not prohibitive of the city being a subject of this right. The envisaged recognition of the city 's right to self-determination does not necessarily entail secession from the metropole. Internal self-determination can deliver to the city its due freedom, justice, and democracy. On the other hand, not recognizing this right could destabilize these global cities.