Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:44:07.874Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The paradox of state identification: de facto states, recognition, and the (re-)production of the international

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 October 2019

Janis Grzybowski Open the ORCID record for Janis Grzybowski [Opens in a new window]
Janis Grzybowski*
Affiliation:
European School of Political and Social Sciences (ESPOL), Catholic University of Lille, Lille, France Centre de Recherches Internationales (CERI), Sciences Po, Paris, France
*
*Corresponding author. Email: Janis.grzybowski@univ-catholille.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The literature on de facto states challenges the conventional identification of states by legal recognition, proposing to identify states based on their effectiveness instead. Yet, as I argue in this paper, rather than turning the tables on recognition, the de facto state challenge ultimately reveals all state identification in International Relations and international law to be essentially indeterminate. This lacuna, I suggest, is not an accidental omission, but an expression of the foundational paradox of modern political order that is rooted in the intertwined ontology of the state system and the individual states constituting it, with each presupposing the other. As a result, the opposition between empirical facts, political decisions, and legal norms invoked in attempts to identify states cannot but remain irresolvable. This should not be regarded as a problem to be overcome, however, but as a source of social order. Although states cannot be substantively identified, any effort to do so in practice naturalizes the state as the very form through which we articulate and shape political claims, conflicts, and settlements. In performatively enacting states precisely at the contested margins, state identification thus both invokes and (re-)produces the statist international as the central imaginary of modern political order.

Keywords

de facto statesrecognitionstate identityperformativityinternational lawstate system
Type
Original Papers
Information
International Theory , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , November 2019 , pp. 241 - 263
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelman, Jeremy. 2006. Sovereignty and Revolution in the Iberian Atlantic. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, Emmanuel, and Pouliot, Vincent. 2011. “International Practices.” International Theory 3(1):1–36.Google Scholar
Alexandrowicz, Charles H. 1958. “The Theory of Recognition in Fieri.” British Yearbook of International Law 34: 176.Google Scholar
Anghie, Antony. 1999. “Finding the Peripheries: Sovereignty and Colonialism in Nineteenth-Century International Law.” Harvard International Law Journal 40(1):1–71.Google Scholar
Armitage, David. 2013. Foundations of Modern International Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bartelson, Jens. 1995. A Genealogy of Sovereignty. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bartelson, Jens. 2001. The Critique of the State. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bartelson, Jens. 2013. “Three Concepts of Recognition.” International Theory 5(1):107–29.Google Scholar
Bartelson, Jens. 2014. Sovereignty as Symbolic Form. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Benton, Lauren. 2010. A Search for Sovereignty: Law and Geography in European Empires, 1400–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Benton, Lauren, and Ford, Lisa. 2016. Rage for Order: The British Empire and the Origins of International Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Berg, Eiki, and Mölder, Martin. 2012. “Who is Entitled to Earn Sovereignty? Legitimacy and Regime Support in Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh.” Nations and Nationalism 18(3):527–45.Google Scholar
Biersteker, Thomas J., and Weber, Cynthia, eds. 1996. State Sovereignty as Social Construct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brierly, James L. 1944. The Outlook for International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley, and Watson, Adam, eds. 1984. The Expansion of International Society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Byman, Daniel L., and King, Charles. 2011. “The Phantom Menace.” The New York Times, August 15. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/opinion/the-phantom-menace.html?_r=0. Accessed August 20, 2018.Google Scholar
Caspersen, Nina. 2011. “Democracy, Nationalism and (Lack of) Sovereignty: The Complex Dynamics of Democratisation in Unrecognized States.” Nations and Nationalism 17(2): 337–56.Google Scholar
Caspersen, Nina. 2012. Unrecognized States. The Struggle for Sovereignty in the Modern International System. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Caspersen, Nina, and Stansfield, Gareth. 2011. “Introduction: Unrecognized States in the International System.” In Unrecognized States in the International System, edited by Caspersen, Nina, and Stansfield, Gareth. London, UK: Routledge, 1–8.Google Scholar
Chan, Phil C. W. 2009. “The Legal Status of Taiwan and the Legality of the Use of Force in a Cross-Taiwan Strait Conflict.” Chinese Journal of International Law 8(2):455–92.Google Scholar
Chen, Ti-Chiang. 1951. The International Law of Recognition. With Special Reference to Practice in Great Britain and the United States. London, UK: Stevens & Sons.Google Scholar
Clapham, Christopher. 1998. “Degrees of Statehood.” Review of International Studies 24(2):143–57.Google Scholar
Coggins, Bridget. 2014. Power Politics and State Formation in the Twentieth Century: The Dynamics of Recognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Court of Justice of the European Union. 2018. Judgment in Case C-266/16. The Queen, on the application of Western Sahara Campaign UK v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs and Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Press Release No. 21/18, Luxembourg, 27 February 2018. Available at https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2018-02/cp180021en.pdf. Accessed April 29, 2018.Google Scholar
Crawford, James. 2006. The Creation of States in International Law. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Daase, Christopher, Geis, Anna, Fehl, Caroline, and Kolliarakis, Georgios, eds. 2015. Recognition in International Relations: Rethinking a Political Concept in a Global Context. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Davis, Diane E. 2009. “Non-State Armed Actors, New Imagined Communities, and Shifting Patterns of Sovereignty and Insecurity in the Modern World.” Contemporary Security Policy 30(2):221–45.Google Scholar
Fabry, Mikulas. 2010. Recognizing States: International Society and the Establishment of New States Since 1776. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fabry, Mikulas. 2013. “Theorizing State Recognition.” International Theory 5(1):165–70.Google Scholar
Fazal, Tanisha M. 2004. “State Death in the International System.” International Organization 58(2): 311–44.Google Scholar
French, David, ed. 2013. Statehood and Self-Determination in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Geldenhuys, Deon. 2009. Contested States in World Politics. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Grant, Thomas D. 1999. The Recognition of States. Law and Practice in Debate and Evolution. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Grzybowski, Janis. 2017. “To Be or not to Be: The Ontological Predicament of State Creation in International Law.” European Journal of International Law 28(2):409–32.Google Scholar
Grzybowski, Janis, and Koskenniemi, Martti. 2015. “International Law and Statehood – A Performative View.” In The Concept of the State in International Relations, edited by Stirk, Peter and Schuett, Robert. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 23–46.Google Scholar
Hagmann, Tobias, and Hoehne, Markus. 2009. “Failures of the State Failure Debate. Evidence From the Somali Territories.” Journal of International Development 21(1):42–57.Google Scholar
International Criminal Court. 2014. Preliminary Examination Palestine. Available at https://www.icc-cpi.int/palestine. Accessed April 29, 2018.Google Scholar
Jackson, Patrick T. 2004. “Hegel's House, or ‘People Are States Too’.” Review of International Studies 30(2): 281–87.Google Scholar
Jackson, Patrick T., and Nexon, Daniel H.. 1999. “Relations Before States: Substance, Process and the Study of World Politics.” European Journal of International Relations 5(3):291–332.Google Scholar
Jackson, Robert H. 1990. Quasi-states. Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. 1928. Der Soziologische und der Juristische Staatsbegriff. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. 2005 [1934]. Pure Theory of Law. New Jersey: Lawbook Exchange.Google Scholar
Ker Lindsay, James. 2012. The Foreign Policy of Counter-Secession: Preventing the Recognition of Contested States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
King, Charles. 2001. “The Benefits of Ethnic War: Understanding Eurasia's Unrecognized States.” World Politics 53(4):524–52.Google Scholar
Kingston, Paul. 2004. “States-within-States. Historical and Theoretical Perspectives.” In States-Within- States. Incipient Political Entities in the Post-Cold-War Era, edited by Kingston, Paul and Spears, Ian S., 1–14. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kingston, Paul, and Spears, Ian S., eds. 2004. States-Within-States. Incipient Political Entities in the Post-Cold War Era. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kohen, Marcelo G., ed. 2004. Secession: International Law Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kolstø, Pål. 2006. “The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States.” Journal of Peace Research 43(6):723–40.Google Scholar
Kolstø, Pål, and Blakkisrud, Helge. 2008. “Living with Non-Recognition: State-and Nation-Building in South Caucasian Quasi-States.” Europe-Asia Studies 60(3):483–509.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2001. The Gentle Civilizer of Nations. The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2005. From Apology to Utopia. The Structure of International Legal Argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krasner, Stephen. 1998. Sovereignty. Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kreijen, Gérard. 2004. State Failure, Sovereignty and Effectiveness: Legal Lessons From the Decolonization of Sub-Saharan Africa. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Kunz, Josef L. 1950. “Critical Remarks on Lauterpacht's ‘Recognition in International Law’.” American Journal of International Law 44(4):713–19.Google Scholar
Lindemann, Thomas. 2013. “The Case for an Empirical and Social-Psychological Study of Recognition in International Relations.” International Theory 5(1):150–55.Google Scholar
Lindemann, Thomas, and Ringmar, Eric, eds. 2014. The International Politics of Recognition. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas. 1993. “Deconstruction as Second-Order Observing.” New Literary History 24(4): 763–82.Google Scholar
Lynch, David. 2004. Engaging Eurasia's Separatist States: Unresolved Conflicts and de Facto States. Washington, D.C.: US Institute of Peace Press.Google Scholar
Mampilly, Zachariah C. 2011. Rebel Rulers: Insurgent Governance and Civilian Life During War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Mengin, Françoise. 2008. “Taiwan as the Westphalian Society's Foucaldian Heterotopia.” Sociétés politiques comparées 7:1–21.Google Scholar
Milanović, Marko, and Wood, Michael, eds. 2015. The Law and Politics of the Kosovo Advisory Opinion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Niemann, Michael. 2007. “War Making and State Making in Central Africa.” Africa Today 53(3):21–39.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, Lassa. 1905. International Law. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.Google Scholar
Pegg, Scott. 1998. International Society and the De Facto State. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Pegg, Scott, and Berg, Eiki. 2016. “Lost and Found: The WikiLeaks of De Facto State–Great Power Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 17(3):267–86.Google Scholar
Peters, Anne. 2010. “Statehood After 1989: ‘Effectivités’ Between Legality and Virtuality.” Proceedings of the European Society of International Law 3:1–13.Google Scholar
Prozorov, Sergei. 2009. “Generic Universalism in World Politics: Beyond International Anarchy and the World State.” International Theory 1(2):215–47.Google Scholar
Renders, Marleen, and Terlinden, Ulf. 2010. “Negotiating Statehood in A Hybrid Political Order: The Case of Somaliland.” Development and Change 41(4):723–46.Google Scholar
Reno, William. 2009. “Explaining Patterns of Violence in Collapsed States.” Contemporary Security Policy 30(2): 356–74.Google Scholar
Ringmar, Eric. 2016. “How the World Stage Makes its Subjects: An Embodied Critique of Constructivist IR Theory.” Journal of International Relations and Development 19(1):101–25.Google Scholar
Rotberg, Robert, ed. 2004. When States Fail. Causes and Consequences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sørensen, Georg. 2001. Changes in Statehood: The Transformation of International Relations. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Spears, Ian S. 2004. “States-within-States: An Introduction to Their Empirical Attributes.” In States-within-States: Incipient Political Entities in the Post-Cold War Era, edited by Kingston, Paul and Spears, Ian S.. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 15–34.Google Scholar
Stokke, Kristian. 2006. “Building the Tamil Eelam State: Emerging State Institutions and Forms of Governance in LTTE-Controlled Areas in Sri Lanka.” Third World Quarterly 27(6):1021–40.Google Scholar
Strang, David. 1991. “Anomaly and Commonplace in European Political Expansion: Realist and Institutional Accounts.” International Organization 45(2):143–62.Google Scholar
Tilly, Charles. 1992. Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990–1992. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vidmar, Jure. 2012. “Territorial Integrity and the Law of Statehood.” George Washington International Law Review 44(4):697–747.Google Scholar
Visoka, Gëzim. 2018. Acting Like A State: Kosovo and the Everyday Making of Statehood. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Walker, Rob B. J. 1993. Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, Rob B. J. 2010. After the Globe, Before the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Cynthia. 1995. Simulating Sovereignty: Intervention, the State and Symbolic Exchange. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Cynthia. 1998. “Performative States.” Millennium 27(1):77–95.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1978 [1921]. Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 2004 [1919]. The Vocation Lectures: Science as a Vocation and Politics as a Vocation. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 2004. “The State as Person in International Theory.” Review of International Studies 30(2):289–316.Google Scholar
Wille, Tobias. 2017. “Representation and Agency in Diplomacy: How Kosovo Came to Agree to the Rambouillet Accords.” Journal of International Relations and Development, 1–24.Google Scholar
Wills, Alexander G. 2012. “The Crime of Aggression and the Resort to Force Against Entities in Statu Nascendi.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 10(1):83–110.Google Scholar
Wright, Quincy. 1955. “The Chinese Recognition Problem.” American Journal of International Law 49(3): 320–38.Google Scholar
Zartman, William I. 1995. Collapsed States: The Disintegration and Restoration of Legitimate Authority. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Zierau, Tabea. 2003. “State Building Without Sovereignty: The Somaliland Republic.” Mondes en développement 123(3):57–62.Google Scholar