Routledge Handbook of State Recognition

Gëzim Visoka, John Doyle, Edward Newman

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781351131735
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Asian History
• Index: History

This new handbook provides a comprehensive and multidisciplinary overview of the theoretical and empirical aspects of state recognition in international politics.

Although the recognition of states plays a central role in shaping global politics, it remains an under-researched and widely dispersed subject. Coherently and innovatively structured, the handbook brings together a group of international scholars who examine the most important theoretical and comparative perspectives on state recognition, including debates about pathways to secession and self-determination, the broad range of actors and strategies that shape the recognition of states and a significant number of contemporary case studies.

The handbook is organised into four key sections:

• Theoretical and normative perspectives
• Pathways to independent statehood
• Actors, forms and the process of state recognition
• Case studies of contemporary state recognition

This handbook will be of great interest to students of foreign policy, international relations, international law, comparative politics and area studies.

Chapter 19 of this book is freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF at http://www.taylorfrancis.com under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

1

INTRODUCTION

Statehood and recognition in world politics

Gëzim Visoka, Edward Newman and John Doyle

Introduction

The creation of new states and their subsequent recognition remain among the most problematic, yet important, aspects of international politics. The privileges that come from independent statehood, including the sole authority within a territory as well as rights and protection in international affairs, have attracted many groups to seek the creation of separate states (Crawford 2007). Historically, the emergence of new states has been met with considerable resistance because any attempt to redraw the cartography of states not only affects the territorial integrity of existing states but can also have destabilising systemic consequences in international politics. Yet, the 20th century saw the emergence of over 150 new states that emerged as a result of tectonic changes in world politics caused by major world wars, the decolonisation process, the dissolution of large federal states, and the escalation of protracted ethnic and civil wars (Coggins 2014). Despite the fact that many ethnic groups, movements, and regions have sought to create their own sovereign statehood, only a very small fraction of ethnic groups seeking independence have managed to become recognised states (Griffiths 2016: 5). Recognition of states plays a vital role in their ability to function as a sovereign and independent state and have relatively equal access, rights and obligations in the international system.

The political tapestry of the world is primarily organised around states that are members of the United Nations organisations (UN), which have different degrees of bilateral recognition. This international ‘society’ of states overshadows many other state-like entities, partially independent territories, and non-self-governing territories, which enjoy different degrees and forms of political autonomy, effective authority, and de facto international recognition. The number of sovereign states has come to be associated with the number of UN member states, which is 193 (as of August 2019). Palestine has the status of UN observer state while enjoying wide international recognition. Six ‘states’ are neither UN member states nor UN observers, widely labelled as unrecognised or partially recognised states. In this category there are Kosovo, Western Sahara, Taiwan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. There are two states, namely Nagorno-Karabakh and Transdniestria, that are only recognised by a handful of other non-UN member states, as well as states – such as Somaliland – that are not recognised by any other state. There are also 47 partially independent territories, which have not proclaimed independence yet but enjoy autonomous status and often act like states (Rezvani 2014). In addition, the UN registers 17 non-self-governing territories which remain to be decolonised and are potential candidates for independent statehood. Thus, the politics of international recognition presents a picture far more complex than a simple distinction between UN member states and non-member states would convey, and millions of people live in independent societies which are not formally recognised as sovereign states.

Nevertheless, recognition of states is fundamentally important. It has become a core criterion for determining matters concerning statehood, sovereignty, subjectivity in international law, and membership in multilateral bodies. International recognition plays a vital role in the political, security, legal, economic, and sociocultural development of states. It enables states protection under international law, access to multilateral bodies, and the possibility to develop diplomatic and trade relations with other states. It enhances human mobility, cultural exchange, and social development. Most importantly, it nourishes state identity, self-regard, and ontological security, which are crucial for the normal functioning of society. While international recognition might not guarantee successful statehood, its absence certainly poses many challenges for surviving an inhospitable international environment. States which lack full international recognition are more likely to become the subject of foreign military occupation and hybrid wars. Limited diplomatic relations – an inherent condition of unrecognised states – undermines the capacity of these entities to enhance their political, security, and trade relations with other recognised states, leading to economic stagnation, poverty, and social isolation. Limited recognition obstructs democratic development, the consolidation of human rights and freedoms, and the legitimate control of national resources, because these states are often beyond the reach of contemporary international norms and regulatory networks.

The term ‘recognition’ has three different meanings in social sciences broadly defined (see also Bartelson 2016). In philosophy and political theory, recognition is associated with Hegel’s work on the constitution of human agency, relationality, and status (Williams 2000). Recognition is also a prominent subject in social and normative theory associated with multiculturalism, identity, freedom, rights, justice, and equality (Taylor 1994; Honneth 1995). These accounts situate recognition at the heart of social justice and in the fulfilment of human needs for liveable existence. Drawing on this work, we have recently seen growing research on the second meaning of recognition, focusing mainly on state status and subjectivity, identification, and labels, as well as ontological (in)security in world politics (see Agné 2013; Lindemann and Ringmar 2014; Daase et al. 2015; Epstein, Lindemann and Sending 2018). The concept of recognition has recently been extended also in the in the field of gender studies, as well as postcolonial and indigenous politics to account for the restitution and distribution for past injustices (see McQueen 2015). The third meaning of the concept of recognition, which is the focus of this volume, is the recognition of states, which is associated with sovereignty, self-determination, legal entitlement within the international system, and diplomatic relations. While the first two meanings of recognition have more metatheoretical and universal application, the third meaning of recognition is much narrower and concerns the practice of states conferring recognition upon newcomers, which is considered to be an important element of independent statehood and a crucial blessing for admission to the international community of sovereign states. In order to delineate the specific meaning of recognition used in this volume, we use the notions of state recognition, diplomatic recognition, and international recognition interchangeably.

State recognition is a double-edged phenomenon in world politics. It can be a cause of state death, state resurrection, and state birth. It can be a source of war and peace. It can be a source of justice, but also of discrimination and subordination. It can a safeguard to state expansion and international order, but also can be a source of collective self-determination and liberation. It can reproduce the existing state system but also open up space for normative change and emancipation. The recognition of states has played and continues to play a crucial role in shaping world politics. The independence of Kosovo and its struggle for diplomatic recognition since 2008 has strained relations between the West and Russia and other emerging powers. The contested status of breakaway territories, such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and their inability to secure diplomatic recognition have deepened further the diplomatic hostility between the US, the EU, and Russia. The violent annexation of Crimea by Russia and its collective non-recognition by the rest of the international society is another illustrative case of the significant role that state recognition plays in world politics. Ongoing debates on the independence of Scotland, Catalonia, and Kurdistan, and their prospects for diplomatic recognition are gradually reshaping the political cartography and normative order in Europe.

Although the recognition of states plays a central role in shaping global politics and the cartography of states, it remains an under-researched, but also widely contested subject. The recognition of states is generally examined as a part of broader debates on self-determination, secession, and conflict resolution, which tend to instrumentalise it heuristically to examine questions of power, security, territorial integrity, and order in world politics. Notably, state recognition has been widely studied from the international law perspective, which usually offers a narrow and dogmatic understanding of statehood and recognition and is deeply influenced by state policies and legal and institutional practices (Lauterpacht 1947; Chen 1951; Talmon 1997; Raić 2002; Crawford 2007). State practices are mainly examined through institutional lenses and as such have remained state-centric, contributing to simultaneously codifying and reproducing practices of state recognition. In international relations and diplomatic studies, state recognition mainly seeks to reproduce existing state-centric orthodoxies regarding power politics, stability, order, and rules governing state recognition, while demonstrating a preference for understanding the status quo rather than opening up spaces for normative and political change in the international arena (see Caspersen and Stansfield 2011). Peace and conflict studies tend to approach the subject of state recognition from the perspective of how to prevent and manage secessionist conflicts (see Wolff and Yakinthou 2011).

Yet, decades of debate have not resolved deep divisions between scholars, practitioners, and lawyers on who has the right to recognise newcomers to the international society and under what circumstances new states gain diplomatic recognition. This is because state recognition remains unregulated in international law and there is no institutional mechanism to regulate this practice in world politics. As a discretionary state practice, it has been invoked and revoked by states in varied ways and for different purposes. Although the core requirements of sovereign statehood have, in principle, reflected general agreement since the first half of the 20th century, the practice of international recognition has often been ad hoc, sui generis, and highly political. In particular, where legal sovereignty is contested, the politics of international recognition are controversial and can have far-reaching implications for peace and security. In practice, the international recognition of new states is loaded with political and legal controversies, which can affect international stability, normative and legal order, and reshuffle geopolitical relations between states and alliances. As a result of these onto-political anomalies, there is still ambiguity on the quintessential question of who has the right to independent statehood and under what circumstances a distinct group can proclaim independence and secure recognition.

While there is fragmented research on the politics, legality and ethics of supporting or opposing state recognition, so far there is no single, wide-ranging scholarly companion on the broad theoretical, conceptual, and empirical aspects related to state recognition in world politics. There are many ambiguities, tensions, and dilemmas surrounding state recognition, which primarily deal with core questions: whether recognition contributes to peace, justice, and security or promotes global disorder and intrastate conflict; whether state recognition is constitutive – or rather an expression – of statehood; whether states should recognise unilateral secession or not; whether international and regional organisations can recognise states; whether recognition should be explicit or not; whether certain claimant groups or territories are entitled to independent statehood or not; whether great powers and the diplomatic agency of claimant states play a central role in securing recognition or not; whether the international recognition of remedial secession is strengthening as a norm; whether de facto recognition is a rigorous concept; and many other intriguing questions.

Notably, there are several good monographs and collections on various dimensions of state recognition (for example, Dugard 1987; Grant 1999; Crawford 2007; Coggins 2014; Lindemann and Ringmar 2014; Visoka 2018) – and many of their authors are the contributors to this volume. But there is no single volume that brings together, in an interdisciplinary and comprehensive fashion, the theoretical, conceptual, thematic, and empirical dimensions of state recognition. Accordingly, this handbook is the first of its kind, offering a comprehensive analysis of theoretical and comparative debates, as well as empirical aspects underpinning state recognition in international politics. While we seek to develop a more consolidated, yet comprehensive, understanding of state recognition in world politics, we do not intend to develop a unified account of this deeply contested practice and concept. In pursuit of this commitment, this volume brings together various aspects of state recognition that have so far been discussed separately in different disciplinary debates, ranging from international law and political theory to diplomacy and area studies. This handbook is truly interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary. It contains contributions spanning different political science, international relations, and political theory debates, as well as works which blend together different disciplines, written from scholars coming from different parts of the world, which is crucial to develop critical accounts of complex entanglements underlining state recognition. In addition to bringing together a wide array of disciplines and perspectives, the handbook examines for the first time a number of topics only marginally studied in the past, such as the derecognition of states, parliamentary practices of state recognition, the everyday politics of state recognition, and the role of regional organisations in the recognition of states. In this regard, the handbook is the first effort to try to encourage epistemic dialogue and break the disciplinary boundaries in order to rethink state recognition and search for new research avenues that would offer a deeper understanding of this contested practice in world politics. Although the handbook examines a wide range of state policies and approaches, it is not intended to prescribe policymaking – and even less so to pursue a political agenda – but instead to serve as an introductory and essential companion that can be used by both the academic community and foreign policy practitioners to enhance their knowledge on the theory and practice of state recognition.

This handbook is divided into four parts and contains 36 chapters. Part I, ‘Theoretical and normative perspectives’, explores core theoretical, normative, and conceptual knowledge on state recognition. Part II, ‘Pathways to independent statehood’, looks at the main pathways through which new states come to existence, including deliberative, consensual, unilateral, and remedial modes of secession. Part III, ‘Actors, forms and the process of state recognition’, seeks to open up our perspectives on who can recognise states and how states can be recognised. This section explores a broad range of diplomatic actors and forms of recognition, including bilateral recognition, collective recognition and non-recognition, and the derecognition of states, as well as new practices of state recognition by parliaments, international and regional organisations, and global judicial institutions. This section accounts for the diplomatic practices of claimant states and their tactics and strategies for securing international recognition. Part IV, ‘Case studies of contemporary state recognition’, looks at a number of contemporary cases of state recognition which have secured different degrees and forms of international recognition as well as invoked different discourses and strategies for securing international affirmation, acceptance, and recognition (such as Palestine, Taiwan, Kosovo, South Sudan, Somaliland, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transdniestria, and Nagorno-Karabakh). The remainder of this introductory chapter outlines the core contributions of each chapter, which examine theoretical perspectives, conceptual approaches, diplomatic practices and actors, and contemporary cases of state recognition in world politics.

Theoretical and normative perspectives

While state recognition has been widely studied as a part of different bodies of knowledge, it lacks consensus and clarity on a number of crucial conceptual and definitional segments. Notably, there is no single and unitary definition of state recognition, precisely because there is wide epistemic dissent on what actually recognition means, who is entitled to it, and how it can be practised. The first part of this handbook seeks to shed light on the theoretical and conceptual perspectives on state recognition.

Rowan Nicholson and Thomas D. Grant’s chapter (‘Theories of state recognition’) offers an overview of the main legal theories on state recognition, namely the traditional declaratory and constitutive theories, as well as more recent hybrid approaches. From the outset, they stress that, although recognition is not regulated in international law, the sum of state practices accompanied by the opinions of jurists has set customary rules on the function of recognition in international affairs. According to them, the declaratory theory is not primarily a theory of state recognition; it is rather a theory outlining the criteria of independent statehood, where the criterion of effective authority plays a more decisive role than international recognition, which is not considered to be an essential criterion for state emergence and endurance. In their examination, Nicholson and Grant trace legal thinking and adjudication of state practices to ascertain the merits and limits of declaratory theory. In turn, they explore constitutive theory, which holds that recognition is a necessary condition for enacting sovereign statehood internationally. Here they tease out the main propositions of and tensions within constitutive theory to highlight some its problematic claims. In the third and final part, they explore the hybrid approaches to state recognition, highlighting the complementarity between both declarative and constitutive theories to show that recognition and criteria of effectiveness both play necessary roles in the normal functioning of states. Even if it may not always be necessary, recognition plays an important role in the exercise of sovereignty. Yet, Nicholson and Grant maintain that, although scholars continue to diverge radically about the legal significance of recognition, in certain circumstances non-recognition is considered a necessary and compulsory measure, especially when a new state is unable to exercise effective authority over the claimed territory and it has emerged from unlawful intervention. In conclusion, they stipulate that as long as recognition remains unregulated in international law there will be significant disagreement on the legal significance of recognition.

Central to understanding state recognition is to trace its historical origins and evolution over time. The origins of state recognition can be traced back to the early days of modern states whereby mutual recognition among European powers emerged as a crucial mainstay of international order and peace among competing regional powers. Mikulas Fabry’s chapter (‘The evolution of state recognition’) offers a detailed overview of the evaluation of state recognition since the birth of modern state system. It charts the changing norms, politics, and practices of state recognition, ranging from mutual recognition between states to collective recognition and non-recognition by states and international organisations. Fabry highlights that state recognition has emerged as an institutionalised practice which has been dominated by great powers to control the expansion of the society of states and maintain international order. Fabry suggests that, although historically recognition has not played a major role in the birth of states, over time it has preceded new emerging states and thus become a significant criterion for certifying sovereign statehood. By tracing different historical and normative practices of state recognition since 1815, he demonstrates the changing nature and contingent meaning of state recognition in world politics. Fabry concludes that the lack of political consensus among powerful states on self-determination and state recognition continuously undermines international order and the norms and laws associated with it.

Although state recognition is a fundamental feature of the state-based international system, there is no universal legal and institutional regime that can objectively rule on the criteria for the recognition, non-recognition, or derecognition of newly proclaimed states. The law of state recognition is characterised as the weakest link in the international legal system and is deeply influenced by political arbitrariness. Peter Radan’s chapter (‘Recognition of states in international law’) offers an authoritative account of the international law of recognition. He argues that when we refer to the international law of recognition we generally talk about a number of principles, comprised of domestic legislation, legal opinions, and customary norms governing the case-by-case conduct of state and international organisations’ policy on recognition. Radan shows that, although the fulfilment of objective and subjective criteria of statehood could play a role in guiding states’ legal stance on recognition, in practice international law does not oblige states to recognise any other state. There is an exception, however, when states are required not to recognise those states that emerge through acts of aggression and the use of force. In turn, as a discretionary diplo...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• List of editors
• List of contributors
• 1. Introduction: statehood and recognition in world politics
• PART I: Theoretical and normative perspectives
• PART II: Pathways to independent statehood
• PART III: Actors, forms and the process of state recognition
• PART IV: Case studies of contemporary state recognition
• Index