The International Community Faced with Illegal Secessions by Sub-State Units

  • Juan Francisco Escudero Espinosa


In the pages above an attempt has been made to show how events developed, and to analyse the fundamentals asserted, with regard to the unilateral declarations of independence by Kosovo and Crimea from the viewpoint of international law. This chapter will endeavour to study the scope of these declarations within the international community and the consequences they may have on the impact of secession in international law.


  1. Anzilotti, D. 1999. Cours de droit international. Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et Jurisprudence.Google Scholar
  2. Berlin, A.H. 2009. Recognition as Sanction: Using International Recognition of New States to Deter, Punish, and Contain Bad Actors. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 31: 531–591.Google Scholar
  3. Bismuth, R. 2014. Odysée dans le conundrum des réactions décentralisées à l’illicite. JDI 141: 719–731.Google Scholar
  4. Briggs, H.W. 1949. Recognition of States: Some Reflections on Doctrine and Practice. AJIL 43: 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brownlie, I. 1982. Recognition in Theory and Practice. BYIL 53: 197–211.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 1990. Principles of Public International Law. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Christakis, T. 1999. Le droit à l’autodétermination en dehors des situations de décolonisation. Paris: La Documentation française.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2005. L’obligation de non-reconnaissance des situations créées par le recours illicite à la force ou d’autres actes enfreignant des règles fondamentales. In The Fundamental Rules of the International Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, ed. C. Tomuschat and J.M. Thouvenin, 127–166. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2006. The State as ‘Primary Fact’. Some Thoughts on the Principle of Effectiveness. In Secession. International Law Perspectives, ed. M.G. Kohen, 138–170. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. ———. 2011. The ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo: Has International Law Something to Say about Secession? LJIL 24: 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ———. 2014. Les conflits de sécession en Crimée et dans l’Est de l’Ukraine et le droit international (The Conflicts of Secession in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine and International Law). JDI 141: 733–764.Google Scholar
  12. Cimiotta, E. 2014. Le reazioni alla ‘sottrazione’ della Crimea all’Ucraina. Quali garanzie del diritto internazionale di fronte a gravi illeciti imputati a grandi potenze? DUDI 8: 491–504.Google Scholar
  13. Craven, M. 1995. The European Community Arbitration Commission on Yugoslavia. BYIL 66: 333–413.Google Scholar
  14. Crawford, J. 2007. The Creation of States in International Law. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Current, R.N. 1954. The Stimson Doctrine and the Hoover Doctrine. American Historical Review 59: 513–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Visscher, C. 1967. Les effectivités du droit international public. Paris: Pedone.Google Scholar
  17. Dugard, J. 1987. Recognition and the United Nations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. ———. 2011. The Secession of States and their Recognition in the Wake of Kosovo. Recueil des cours 357: 9–222.Google Scholar
  19. Dugard, J., and D. Raič. 2006. The Role of Recognition in the Law and Practice of Secession. In Secession: International Law Perspectives, ed. M.G. Kohen, 94–137. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frowein, J.A. 2010. Recognition. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford Public International Law, Online edition.
  21. Gowlland-Debbas, V. 1990. Collective Responses to Illegal Acts in International Law: United Nations Action in the Question of Southern Rhodesia. Dordrecht, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  22. Grant, T. 1999. The Recognition of States: Law and Practice in Debate and Evolution. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.Google Scholar
  23. Grant, T.D. 2014. Doctrines (Monroe, Hallstein, Brezhnev, Stimson). Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford Public International Law, Online edition.
  24. Hilpold, P. 2009. The Kosovo Case and International Law: Looking for Applicable Theories. Chinese JIL 8: 47–61.Google Scholar
  25. ———. 2015. Ukraine, Crimea and New International Law: Balancing International Law with Arguments Drawn from History. Chinese JIL 14: 237–270.Google Scholar
  26. Himmer, S.E. 1992. The Achievement of Independence in the Baltic States and Its Justification. EILR 6: 253–291.Google Scholar
  27. Jia, B.B. 2009. The Independence of Kosovo: A Unique Case of Secession? Chinese JIL 8: 27–46.Google Scholar
  28. Kelsen, H. 1941. Recognition in International Law: Theoretical Observations. AJIL 35: 605–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kohen, M.G. 2006. Introduction. In Secession. International Law Perspectives, ed. M. Kohen, 1–20. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lagerwall, A. 2014. L’agression et l’annexion de la Crimée para la Fédération de Russie: Quels enseignements au sujet du droit international. Questions of International Law, Zoom Out I 57–72.
  31. Lauterpacht, H. 1947. Recognition in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Milano, E. 2014. The Non-Recognition of Russia’s Annexation of Crimea: Three Different Legal Approaches and One Unanswered Question. Questions of International Law, Zoom Out I 35–55.
  33. Müllerson, R.A. 2009. Precedents in the Mountains: On the Parallels and Uniqueness of the Cases of Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Chinese JIL 8: 2–25.Google Scholar
  34. Oeter, S. 2014. The Role of Recognition and Non-Recognition with Regard to Secession. In Self-Determination and Secession in International Law, ed. C. Walter et al., 45–67. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oppenheim, L., R.Y. Jennings, and A.D. Watts. 1992. Oppenheim’s International Law. 9th ed. Harlow, England: Longman.Google Scholar
  36. Pegg, S. 1998. International Society and the De Facto State. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  37. Pronin, A. 2015. Republic of Crimea A Two-Day State. Russian LJ 3: 133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rich, R. 1993. Recognition of States: The Collapse of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. EJIL 4: 36–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roth, B.R. 2010. Secessions, Coups and the International Rule of Law: Assessing the Decline of the Effective Control Doctrine. Melbourne Journal of International Law 11: 393–440.Google Scholar
  40. Ryngaert, C., and C. Griffioen. 2009. The Relevance of the Right to Self-determination in the Kosovo Matter: In Partial Response to the Agora Papers. Chinese JIL 8: 573–587.Google Scholar
  41. Ryngaert, C., and S. Sobrie. 2011. Recognition of States: International Law or Realpolitik? The practice of recognition in the wake of Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. LJIL 24: 467–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Talmon, S. 2005a. The Constitutive versus the Declaratory Theory of Recognition: Tertium non Datur? BYIL 76: 101–181.Google Scholar
  43. ———. 2005b. The Duty Not to ‘Recognize as Lawful’ a Situation Created by the Illegal Use of Force or Other Serious Breaches of a Jus Cogens Obligation: An Obligation without Real Substance? In The Fundamental Rules of the International Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, ed. Ch. Tomuschat and J.M. Thouvenin, 99–126. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tancredi, A. 2006. A Normative Due Process in the Creation of States Through Secession. In Secession. International Law Perspectives, ed. M. Kohen, 171–207. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. ———. 2008. Neither Authorized nor Prohibited? Secession and International Law after Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Italian YIL 18: 37–62.Google Scholar
  46. ———. 2012. Some Remarks on the Relationship Between Secession and General International Law in the Light of the ICJs Kosovo Advisory Opinion. In Kosovo and International Law: The ICJ Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, ed. P. Hilpold, 79–108. Leiden; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tolstykh, V. 2015. Three Ideas of Self-Determination in International Law and the Reunification of Crimea with Russia. ZaöRV/HJIL 75: 119–139.Google Scholar
  48. Tomuschat, C. 2012. Recognition of New States – The Case of Premature Recognition. In Kosovo and International Law: The ICJ Advisory Opinion of 22 July 2010, ed. P. Hilpold, 31–46. Leiden; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  49. Türk, D. 1993. Recognition of States: A Comment. EJIL 4: 66–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Turns, D. 2003. The Stimson Doctrine of Non-Recognition: Its Historical Genesis and Influence on Contemporary International Law. Chinese JIL 2: 105–143.Google Scholar
  51. Verhoeven, J. 1975. La reconnaissance internationale dans la pratique contemporaine: les relations publiques internationales. Paris: A. Pedone.Google Scholar
  52. Vidmar, J. 2010. Remedial Secession in International Law: Theory and (Lack of) Practice. St Antony’s International Review 6: 37–56.Google Scholar
  53. ———. 2011. The Kosovo Advisory Opinion Scrutinized. LJIL 24: 355–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. ———. 2012. Conceptualizing Declarations of Independence in International Law. Oxford JLS 32: 153–177.Google Scholar
  55. ———. 2015. The Annexation of Crimea and the Boundaries of the Will of the People. German LJ 16: 365–383.Google Scholar
  56. Wilson, G. 2009. Self-Determination, Recognition and the Problem of Kosovo. NILR 56: 455–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. ———. 2015. Crimea: Some Observations on Secession and Intervention in Partial Response to Müllerson and Tolstykh. Chinese JIL 14: 217–223.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan Francisco Escudero Espinosa
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of LeonLeonSpain

Personalised recommendations