Diplomatic recognition
Diplomatic recognition in
A vote by a country in the United Nations in favour of the membership of another country is an implicit recognition of that country by the country so voting, as only states may be members of the UN. On the other hand, a negative vote for UN membership does not necessarily mean non-recognition of the applicant as a state, as other criteria, requirements or special circumstances may be considered relevant for UN membership. Similarly, a country may choose not to apply for UN membership for its own reasons, as is the case with Vatican City, and Switzerland was not a member until 2002 because of its concerns to maintain its neutrality policy.
The non-recognition of particular acts of a state does not normally affect the recognition of the state itself. For example, the international rejection of the occupation of particular territory by a recognised state does not imply non-recognition of the state itself, nor a rejection of a change of government by illegal means.
Recognition of states and governments
Diplomatic recognition must be distinguished from formal recognition of states or their governments.[2] The fact that states do not maintain bilateral diplomatic relations does not mean that they do not recognize or treat one another as states. A state is not required to accord formal bilateral recognition to any other state, and some have a general policy of not doing so, considering that a vote for its membership of an international organisation restricted to states, such as the United Nations, is an act of recognition.
History
Some consider that a state has a responsibility not to recognize as a state any entity that has attained the qualifications for statehood by a violation of basic principles of the
States can exercise their recognition powers either explicitly or implicitly.[5] The recognition of a government implies recognition of the state it governs, but even countries which have a policy of formally recognising states may not have a policy of doing the same regarding governments.
De facto recognition of states, rather than de jure, is rare. De jure recognition is stronger, while de facto recognition is more tentative and recognizes only that a government exercises control over a territory. An example of the difference is when the
Renewing recognition of a government is not necessary when it changes in a normal, constitutional way (such as an
Recognition can be implied by other acts, such as a visit of the head of state, or the signing of a bilateral treaty. If implicit recognition is possible, a state may feel the need to explicitly proclaim that its acts do not constitute diplomatic recognition, like when the United States commenced its dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1988.
Formal diplomatic recognition can be used as a tool of political influence with examples including
Withdrawal of recognition
A state may withdraw diplomatic recognition of another state or simply refuse to deal with that other country, after withdrawing from all diplomatic relations with that country, such as embassies and consulates, and requiring the other country to do the same. The state will appoint a protecting power to represent its interests in the other state.
The doctrine of non-recognition of illegal or immoral situations, like territorial gains achieved by
Recognition of governments
Besides recognizing other states, states also can recognize the governments of states. This can be problematic particularly when a new government comes to power by illegal means, such as a coup d'état, or when an existing government stays in power by fixing an election. States once formally recognized both the government of a state and the state itself, but many no longer follow that practice,[7] even though, if diplomatic relations are to be maintained, it is necessary that there be a government with which to engage in diplomatic relations.[8] Countries such as the United States answer queries over the recognition of governments with the statement: "The question of recognition does not arise: we are conducting our relations with the new government."[9]
Unrecognized state
Several of the world's
Most are subnational
The word "control" in this list refers to control over the area occupied, not occupation of the area claimed. Unrecognized countries may have either full control over their occupied territory (such as Northern Cyprus), or only partial control (such as Western Sahara). In the former, the de jure governments have little or no influence in the areas they claim to rule, whereas in the latter they have varying degrees of control, and may provide essential services to people living in the areas.
Other types of recognition
Other elements that may be recognized include occupation or annexation of territory, or belligerent rights of a party in a conflict. Recognition of the latter does not imply recognition of a state.
Formal recognition of
Examples of recognition of belligerent status include:
- In 1823, the United Kingdom recognized the Greek revolutionaries against the Ottoman Empire as belligerents during the Greek War of Independence.[12]
- The United Kingdom issued a
- During the Nicaraguan Civil War, the Andean Group (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela) "declared that 'a state of belligerency' existed in Nicaragua and that the forces of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) represented a 'legitimate army.'"[15] The declaration, made over the strong U.S. opposition, stated that the Sandinistas were eligible for "treatment and prerogatives" accorded to belligerents under international law.[16] This declaration allowed the Andean countries to provide arms to the FSLN.[15]
- During the Salvadoran Civil War, France and Mexico recognized the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front in El Salvador as a belligerent in August 1981.[17]
See also
- Constitutive theory of statehood
- Declarative theory of statehood
- Diplomacy
- Montevideo Convention
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
- International relations
- Jus legationis
- List of states with limited recognition
- Micronation
- Non-recognition
References
- ISBN 85-7164-837-9.
- ^ See Stefan Talmon, Recognition of Governments in International Law: With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) pages 1–4
- ^ Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory Opinion Archived 2010-08-21 at the Wayback Machine, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 403, para. 84.
- ^ ICJ Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, para. 81.
- ISBN 0-314-30138-0, § 202 (Recognition or Acceptance of States), § 203 (Recognition or Acceptance of Governments); and § 204 (Recognition and Maintaining Diplomatic Relations).
- .
- ^ See for example, the oral arguments in the International Court of Justice case on Kosovo's declaration of independence. CR 2009/32, page 39 "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-06-05. Retrieved 2009-12-10.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ Since the 1970s the United States Department of State has moved away from the practice of recognizing governments. See: [1977] Digest of U.S. Practice in International Law 19–21.
- ^ [1974] Digest of U.S. Practice in International Law at 13; [1975] Digest of U.S. Practice in International Law at 34.
- ^ a b Gary D. Solis, The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War (2d ed.: Cambridge University Press, 2016), p. 163.
- Government Printing Office, 1907), p. 262.
- ^ Roscoe Ralph Oglesby, Internal War and the Search for Normative Order (Martinus Nijhoff, 1971), p. 21.
- ^ U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian.
- ^ Burrus M. Carnahan, Act of Justice: Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and the Law of War (University Press of Kentucky 2007), p. 50.
- ^ a b Gerhard von Glahn & James Larry Taulbee, Law Among Nations: An Introduction to Public International Law, 11th ed. (Taylor & Francis, 2017), p. 167.
- ^ Robert Kagan, A Twilight Struggle: American Power and Nicaragua, 1977–1990 (The Free Press, 1996), p. 93.
- ^ Sewall H. Menzel, Bullets Vs. Ballots: Political Violence and Revolutionary War in El Salvador, 1979–1991 (Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1994), p. 22.
- Tozun Bahcheli, Barry Bartmann, and Henry Srebrnik; De Facto States: The Quest for Sovereignty , Routledge, (2004) online edition Archived 2011-06-04 at the Wayback Machine
- Edgars Dunsdorfs (1975). The Baltic Dilemma, The case of the de jure recognition of incorporation of the Baltic States into the Soviet Unions by Australia. Robert Speller & Sons, New York. ISBN 0-8315-0148-0.
- Gerhard von Glahn (1992). Law Among Nations: An Introduction to Public International Law. Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-423175-4.
- Daniel Högger (2015). The Recognition of States: A Study on the Historical Development in Doctrine and Practice with a Special Focus on the Requirements. LIT. ISBN 978-3-643-80196-8.
- Malcolm N. Shaw (2003). International Law. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-53183-7.
- Stefan Talmon; Recognition of Governments in International Law: With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile Clarendon Press, (1998) online edition Archived 2011-06-04 at the Wayback Machine
- Gregory Weeks; "Almost Jeffersonian: U.S. Recognition Policy toward Latin America", Presidential Studies Quarterly, Vol. 31, 2001 online edition
- Schwarcz, Lilia Moritz (1998). As barbas do imperador: D. Pedro II, um monarca nos trópicos (in Portuguese). São Paulo: Companhia das Letras. ISBN 85-7164-837-9.