Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Recognition of Governments pp 77–85Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Other Proposed Criteria

  • Chapter

  • 61 Accesses

Part of the book series: Studies in Diplomacy ((STD))

Abstract

Popular support, ability and will to fulfil international obligations, and legitimacy do not exhaust the list of proposed additional criteria for recognition as a government. Legal scholars and policy-makers have also considered nondependence on foreign support in the exercise of control (‘local origins’), respect for other states’ rights, origins in conformity with international law, and respect for human rights. The first three were already discussed in the nineteenth century, and fitted comfortably with the prevailing view that states were the only entities having legal rights and duties, and legal capacity to act, under international law. The fourth is a twentieth-century development resting on newer beliefs that the protection of international law should extend to individuals and groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Bisschop, ‘London International Law Conference’ (1944): 204.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Marek, Identity (1954): 64–71

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brownlie, International Law (1966): 86

    Google Scholar 

  4. Feldman ‘Recognition’ (1969): 205

    Google Scholar 

  5. Blix, ‘Contemporary Aspects’ (1970): 591

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hingorani, Modern (1984): 87

    Google Scholar 

  7. Feldman, ‘International Personality’ (1985): 400

    Google Scholar 

  8. Tripathi, India’s (1990): 40.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Verhoeven, La Reconnaissance (1975): 93–5 was sympathetic but ultimately rejected it as too hard to apply.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Speech by President Truman, Department of State Bulletin, 13: 654 (1945).

    Google Scholar 

  11. The most elaborate statement came from the PRC in a lead article in Peking Review on 17 April 1970. Translation in Cohen and Chiu (eds), People’s China and International Law (1974), vol. 1: 291.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Elias, Africa and the Development of International Law (1972): 113.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Umozurike, Introduction (1993): 67–8.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rousseau, ‘Chronique’, RGDIP, 86: 549 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  15. E.g. 1976 Canadian statement in Canadian YBIL, 15: 340 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  16. US statement in US Practice, 1979: 110.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rousseau, ‘Chronique’, RGDIP, 84: 832–4 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  18. British statement in the UN General Assembly, 24 December 1981, noted in British YBIL, 52: 376 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  19. India, Tripathi, India’s (1990): 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  20. ‘Chronique’, Ann. française, 1980, p. 1009; Tripathi, India’s (1990): 123.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Which was quickly endorsed as the legitimate government of Cambodia by Bangladesh, China, Malaysia, Mauretania, North Korea and Pakistan, Australian YBIL, 10: 290 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  22. US statements in US Practice, 1980–88, pp. 299–310

    Google Scholar 

  23. British statement of 4 May 1988 in British YBIL, 59: 436 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Oppenheim, International Law (9th edn., 1992), vol. 1: 152.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Phillimore, Commentaries (1879), vol. 2: 20

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fiore, Nouveau droit (1885), vol. 1: 275

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hall, A Treatise (1890): 46.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stinson, ‘Recognition’ (1924): 20

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pergler, ‘Recognition’ (1925): 63

    Google Scholar 

  30. Anzilotti, Cours (1929), vol. 1: 180

    Google Scholar 

  31. McMahon, Recent Changes (1933), 115–16.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hornbeck, ‘Recognition’ (1950), 187

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sibert, Traité (1951), 1: 198, note 4

    Google Scholar 

  34. Patel, Recognition (1959), 71.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hence McMahon, Recent Changes (1933): 56–7 errs in crediting its invention to US opponents of recognizing the Soviet government.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Molotov’s report to the CPSU executive committee, December 1933, quoted in Degras (ed.), Soviet Documents, (1951), vol. 3: 56–7.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Newman, Recognition of Communist China? (1961) summarizes the debate.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Smith, Great Britain and the Law of Nations (1932), vol. 1: 232–3.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Cervenka, The Organization of African Unity (1969): 39.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rousseau, ‘Chronique’, RGDIP, 84: 390 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Comment on official French statements by Jean Charpentier, Ann. française, 1987, p. 975.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Umozurike, Introduction (1993): 69 did note that ‘there may be methods of change that fall below civilized standards of which other states should show approprate disapproval’ without saying that disapproval necessarily meant nonrecognition.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Feldman, ‘Recognition’ (1969): 205. His non-exhaustive list of basic norms included peaceful settlement of disputes with other states, respect for the political independence and territorial integrity of states, sovereign equality of states, international cooperation, the right of all states to participate in international cooperation, self-determination of peoples, and respect for human rights.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mirkine-Guetzévitch, ‘Droit international et droit constitutionnel’ (1931): 338.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Fiore, Nouveau droit (1885), vol. 1: 281, note 2.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Arendt, Anerkennung (1938): 90.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sibert, Traité (1951), vol. 1: 199

    Google Scholar 

  48. Azevedo, Aspects généraux (1953): 50

    Google Scholar 

  49. Patel, Recognition (1959): 77

    Google Scholar 

  50. Fenwick, ‘Recognition De Facto’ (1965): 965

    Google Scholar 

  51. Frowein, Das de facto Regime (1968): 231–2 for recognition beyond minimum ‘de facto regime’ status.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Lauterpacht, Recognition (1947): 170–4.

    Google Scholar 

  53. See discussion in Dugard, International Law (1994): 83.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA

    M. J. Peterson (Associate Professor of Political Science)

Authors
  1. M. J. Peterson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1997 M. J. Peterson

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Peterson, M.J. (1997). Other Proposed Criteria. In: Recognition of Governments. Studies in Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230375895_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation