IMHO,

Essentially it means that arguments of the form "we must ___ because the [Palestians/Chechnians] have the Right To Their Own State" are, on the face of it, nonsensical and false.

You mention that there are factions in each place who talk about wanting a secular, democratic government. That's very nice to hear. What will it take to put such a faction in power? Keep them in power? Will they be able to stay in power? Can they be believed about what they say they want? Can they be trusted (rather, to what extent can they be trusted)? Will they become corrupt (rather, to what extent will they become corrupt)? What are the realistic outlooks for the country if all this is attempted? Will it become a failed state? terrorist haven? will factions inside launch attacks on neighbors [Israel/Russia resp.]? will the newly-made government be able to stop this effectively? Will third-party nations such as Iran Syria Jordan Pakistan whoever attempt to influence matters? in what way? with what results, broadly speaking?

Answer those questions and if the answers sound good to me (like if I come to believe that your plan can actually create a Chechnya which doesn't contain gangs which regularly kidnap and ransom Russians, or a Palestine from which guerrillas won't be regularly firing mortars into Israel), you might start to build a case which I could support that e.g. yes we ought to support the creation of a [Palestinian/Chechenian] state with the properties you just described. The devil is in the details, *all* in the details. This is why "Right to their own state!" is such a dangerous principle; it ignores details (all of them) as if they are unimportant, when they are *everything*.

-Blixa