Abstract
In the sphere of international relations, some political entities occupy a no man’s land on the demarcation line that divides those states and similar entities that are endowed with de jure sovereign status with ensuing possession of specific rights and liability to special obligations and those that lack such status. Belonging to no single category of juridically sovereign or non-sovereign entities, but having features of both, such entities constitute anomalies as regards juridical sovereignty: on the one hand they are not clear-cut subjects of international law in a manner that would enable them to display the usual traits of membership in the international society of states, on the other hand, they are not regarded as “an internal affair” of some other juridically sovereign entity, or simply “a source of concern” due to refugee flows or human rights violations in a fashion that would indicate their disentitlement to such membership. Thus, occupying an obscure position at the fringes of the international legal order, these territorial entities show symptoms of what may be called “the problem of juridical sovereignty”: they have a legal status that is uncertain, an international standing that is indefinite, a legal existence that is often relative, and a security situation that is at times precarious.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
See Leland M. Goodrich, Edvard Hambro, and Anne Patricia Simons, Charter of the United Nations—Commentary and Documents (New York and London: Columbia University Press, Third edition, 1969) p. 82.
John F. Copper, Taiwan—Nation-State or Province? (Colorado: Westview Press, Inc., Second edition, 1996) p. 172.
See D. P. O’Connell, “The Status of Formosa and the Chinese Recognition Problem,” The American Journal of International Law (Vol.50 1956) pp.409 and 414.
See also James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979) pp.149 and 151.
For a definition of the concept of “de facto government” see Stefan Talmon, Recognition of Governments in International Law: With Particular Reference to Governments in Exile (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) p.227; see also p.231.
J. E. S. Fawcett, The Law of Nations (New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1968) p. 44.
See H. E. Richardson, Tibet and Its History (London, Toronto, and Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1962) pp.173–176, 185–186, and 221.
Tsepon W. D. Shakabpa, Tibet -A Political History (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1967) pp. 255–256, 294, 305.
see also the list of Tibetan treaties on the index of this work in p.365. See also Tom A. Grunfeld, The Making of Modern Tibet (London: Zed Books Ltd., 1987) pp.94 and 105.
C. R. Bawden, The Modern History of Mongolia (London and New York: Kegan Paul International, Second edition, 1989) p.363; see also 362–363.
Cf. Louis Henkin, How Nations Behave-Law and Foreign Policy (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979) p. 304.
Robert W. Macdonald, The League of Arab States -A Study in the Dynamics of Regional Organization (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965) p. 285.
See William Edward Hall, A Treatise on International Law, edited by A. Pearce Higgins (Oxford: Clarendon Press, Eighth edition, 1924) p. 39.
and Hersch Lauterpacht, Recognition in International Law (Cambridge: The University Press, 1947) p. 175.
H. M. Blix, Contemporary Aspects of Recognition (Leyden: A. W. Sijthoff, Academy of International Law, Extract from the “Recueil des Cours” Vol. II, 1970) p.619. See also Schwarzenberger, A Manual of International Law, p.59.
James Leslie Brierly, The Law of Nations An Introduction to the International Law of Peace edited by Sir Humphrey Waldock (Oxford: Clarendon Press, Sixth edition, 1963) p.138; see also Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, p.90.
Lauterpacht, Recognition in International Law, p.67. See also M. J. Peterson, “Political Use of Recognition: The Influence of the International System,” World Politics (Vol. 34 1982) pp. 324–352.
Hans Kelsen, Principles of International Law, revised and edited by Robert W. Tucker (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., Second edition, 1967) p.394; see also pp.393–394 and 396; see also Schwarzenberger, A Manual of International Law, pp.57–58.
Malbone W. Graham, The League of Nations and the Recognition of States (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1933) pp.39–40. See also Kelsen, Principles of International Law, p.399.
See David A. Ijalaye, “Was ‘Biafra’ at Any Time a State in International Law,” The American Journal of International Law, (Vol.65 1971) pp.553–554 and 555.
Louis Henkin, International Law: Politics and Values (Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1995) pp. 13–14.
See Michael Shea, “Canada and East Germany,” International Perspectives (July/August 1986) p.10.
See Dilip Hiro, Lebanon, Fire and Embers —A History of the Lebanese Civil War (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1993) p. 98.
Copyright information
© 2005 Ersun N. Kurtulus
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kurtulus, E.N. (2005). The Problem of Juridical State Sovereignty. In: State Sovereignty. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403977083_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403977083_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-53155-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4039-7708-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)