Hsieh: Rethinking Non-Recognition: The EU’s Investment Agreement with Taiwan under the One-China Policy

Pasha L. Hsieh (Singapore Management Univ. - Law) has posted Rethinking Non-Recognition: The EU’s Investment Agreement with Taiwan under the One-China Policy (Leiden Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

The article reexamines the theories of recognition and non-recognition in the context of the evolving framework of the European Union (EU)’s trade and investment relations with Taiwan from legal and international relations perspectives. Notwithstanding its one-China policy, the EU has developed a pragmatic approach to engaging Taiwan under bilateral consultations and World Trade Organization negotiations that have built the foundation for the bilateral investment agreement (BIA). The article argues that since the 1980s, the EU has accorded diverse forms of recognition to Taiwan and the BIA will buttress the process. To substantiate the contention, the article systemically explores the political and trade policies of European states and EU institutions in line with their strategies toward cross-strait relations.

Advertisement

By deciphering the new momentum that has galvanized the European Commission’s strategy towards the EU-Taiwan BIA, the research sheds light on the implications of European Parliament resolutions and the EU’s investment talks with China. The structure and impact of the BIA are also analyzed in light of EU investment protection agreements with Singapore and Vietnam. Hence, the findings contribute to the interdisciplinary study of international law and international relations and enhance the understanding of the EU’s Asia-Pacific trade and investment agreements.

Geslin & Tourme Jouannet: Le droit international de la reconnaissance, un instrument de décolonisation et de refondation du droit international ?

Albane Geslin (Sciences Po Aix) & Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet (Sciences Po) have published Le droit international de la reconnaissance, un instrument de décolonisation et de refondation du droit international ? (UMR Droits International, Comparé et Européen 2019). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Lorsqu’en 2011 est publié Qu’est-ce qu’une société internationale juste ? Le droit international entre développement et reconnaissance, d’Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet, puis que paraît, l’année suivante son article « Le droit international de la reconnaissance », surgit dans le champ de la recherche française – et plus largement francophone – en droit international un nouveau paradigme, celui de la « reconnaissance ». Les réactions suscitées par ces publications furent vives. Il y eu quelques mécompréhensions du concept même de reconnaissance, et diverses critiques se firent entendre. C’est à l’occasion du premier workshop international du groupe de recherche Justice/Injustice Globale, les 8 et 9 septembre 2016, que fut abordée la question de savoir si le droit international de la reconnaissance pouvait être un instrument de décolonisation et de refondation du droit international.

Hsieh: Rethinking Non-Recognition: Taiwan’s New Pivot to ASEAN and the One-China Policy

Pasha L. Hsieh (Singapore Management Univ. - Law) has posted Rethinking Non-Recognition: Taiwan’s New Pivot to ASEAN and the One-China Policy (Cambridge Review of International Affairs, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The article examines the evolution of Taiwan’s engagement in Southeast Asia since the 1990s as a unique case study in international law and international relations (IR). Under the one-China policy, the evolution of bilateral relations with Taiwan highlights the theoretical concept of recognition premised on identity and status in interstate affairs. The article argues that the states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have established diverse forms of recognition of Taiwan in line with a policy of non-recognition. While such recognition has not amounted to recognition of statehood in international law, it demonstrates the IR concept of recognition as a gradual process in state practice. To substantiate the contention, the article examines the diplomatic privileges and immunities that ASEAN countries have accorded to Taiwan. The conclusion of bilateral trade and investment agreements has also galvanized various modes of recognizing Taiwan’s treaty-making capacity and the legitimacy of official cooperation. Hence, the findings not only enrich the study of IR, but also contribute to a broader understanding of the role of China and contemporary Asia-Pacific politics.

Garcia: La reconnaissance du statut d'Etat à des entités contestées : approches de droits international, régional et interne

Thierry Garcia (Université Grenoble Alpes - Law) has published La reconnaissance du statut d'Etat à des entités contestées : approches de droits international, régional et interne (Pedone 2018). Contents include:

• Jean d’Aspremont, The International Law of Statehood and Recognition : A Post-Colonial Invention
• Antonello Tancredi, Evolution historique des critères de reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Catherine Maia, Les critères de l’obligation de non-reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Maurizio Arcari, Reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées et responsabilité internationale
• Béatrice Bonafé, La CIJ et la reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Emilie Legris & Dimitri Walas, La reconnaissance de la qualité d’Etat à « Daesh » dans le cyberespace
• Anne Hamonic & Cécile Rapoport, L’Union européenne et la reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Alexis Marie, La Cour de justice et les entités contestées : entre prudence et frilosité Mihaela Anca Ailinca, La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme et la reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Djacoba liva S. Tehindrazanarivelo & Makane Moïse Mbengue, L’Union africaine et la reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Sabine Lavorel, Les juridictions interaméricaines de protection des droits de l’Homme et le statut contesté des peuples autochtones
• Constance Chevallier-Govers, L’ASEAN et la reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées
• Laurent Trigeaud, Les reconnaissances d’Etat devant le Parlement français
• Alina Miron, La reconnaissance du statut d’Etat à des entités contestées au regard des autorités juridictionnelles françaises
• Paolo Palchetti, Juge interne et entités territoriales contestées : entre prérogatives des organes politiques et application du droit international
• Louis Balmond, Conclusions

Clark: A Conceptual History of Recognition in British International Legal Thought

Martin Clark (LSE - Law) has posted A Conceptual History of Recognition in British International Legal Thought (British Yearbook of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This article examines the development of the concept of recognition in the writings of British jurists. It first outlines methodologies of conceptual history as applied to international legal concepts, before examining four strands of development of the concept of recognition from the mid-nineteenth to mid-twentieth centuries. It shows how the concept of recognition moved from examining intra-European diplomatic disagreements, to a focus on Christianity, civilisation and progress that barred non-European communities, to a late colonial-era emphasis on technicalities of government and territory, and eventually a state-centric account that normalised inferiority into difference, before emerging in the interwar period as a ‘basic concept’ of international law: intensely debated and closely tied to a range of political projects. The article concludes with reflections on why British thinking turns away from recognition in the 1950s, as the decolonising world turns to a new international law and self-determination.

Symposium: Recognition of Governments and Customary International Law

AJIL Unbound is hosting a symposium this week on "Recognition of Governments and Customary International Law." James Gathii's introductory post is here.

Coggins: Power Politics and State Formation in the Twentieth Century

Bridget Coggins (Univ. of California, Santa Barbara - Political Science) has published Power Politics and State Formation in the Twentieth Century: The Dynamics of Recognition (Cambridge Univ. Press 2014). Here's the abstract:

From Kurdistan to Somaliland, Xinjiang to South Yemen, all secessionist movements hope to secure newly independent states of their own. Most will not prevail. The existing scholarly wisdom provides one explanation for success, based on authority and control within the nascent states. With the aid of an expansive new dataset and detailed case studies, this book provides an alternative account. It argues that the strongest members of the international community have a decisive influence over whether today's secessionists become countries tomorrow and that, most often, their support is conditioned on parochial political considerations.

Wyler: Théorie et pratique de la reconnaissance d'État : Une approche épistémologique du droit international

Eric Wyler (University of Geneva; Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies) has published Théorie et pratique de la reconnaissance d'État : Une approche épistémologique du droit international (Bruylant 2013). Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

À l’heure de la « globale gouvernance » et l’émergence de « nouveaux acteurs » dans les relations internationales et la production du droit international, il peut paraître surprenant de réexaminer le phénomène de la prise en compte de la naissance étatique par la reconnaissance. Pourtant, l’État n’est pas mort, faute probablement d’une alternative crédible, ainsi qu’en témoigne l’incessante quête de reconnaissance des entités étatiques en formation, illustrée par les mutations en ex-Yougoslavie, en ex-URSS ou, plus récemment, au Kosovo et au Soudan.

L’ouvrage propose une étude globale de la reconnaissance d’État, institution essentielle dans les relations internationales en raison de l’absence d’une juridiction obligatoire et centralisée appelée à trancher de cas en cas toute controverse juridique, notamment celle liée à la naissance d’un État au sens du droit international. Le point de vue adopté montre que la reconnaissance d’État n’est pas qu’une décision politique des gouvernements, mais a des effets juridiques dépassant la volonté de ses auteurs et déterminés par le droit international lui-même en fonction du contexte spécifique d’émergence d’une nouvelle entité et des interactions entre celle-ci, les organisations internationales et tous les États de la communauté internationale.

Talmon: Recognition of Opposition Groups as the Legitimate Representative of a People

Stefan A.G. Talmon (Universität Bonn - Law) has posted Recognition of Opposition Groups as the Legitimate Representative of a People. Here's the abstract:

During the civil wars in Libya and Syria, the rebel opposition groups were recognized as ‘the (sole) legitimate representative of the people' of these States. This paper, using the situation in Syria as a case study, examines what it means to recognize an opposition group as ‘the legitimate representative of a people’, while the State’s government is still in place. It is shown that with regard to recognition statements wording is all important and that the Syrian Opposition Council has been recognized in at least six different capacities of varying legal significance. The paper sets out the difference between the ‘legal’ and the ‘political’ act of recognition and finds that recognition as ‘the legitimate representative of a people’ is a political act. Although four normative criteria for the status of ‘legitimate representative of a people’ can be identified what is lacking are clear standards for their application. The paper outlines the consequences of political recognition and examines its legality in terms of international law and its suitability as a political tool.

Conference: Le Droit International de la Reconnaissance

On January 26, 2013, the École de Droit de la Sorbonne at L'Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne will host "Le Droit International de la Reconnaissance," a conference that will reflect upon Emmanuelle Jouannet's book Qu'est-ce qu'une société internationale juste ? Le droit international entre développement et reconnaissance (Pedone 2011). The program is here.

Conference: Contemporary Issues in Statehood and Recognition

On April 30, 2012, the Society of Legal Scholars and the British Institute of International and Comparative Law will co-host a conference on "Contemporary Issues in Statehood and Recognition," in London. The program is here. Here's the idea:

Panels will explore both contemporary situations in which international disputes have given rise to questions of recognition of Statehood, governments and other entities, and situations, and new issues applicable horizontally in such contexts. Relevant differences between different types of recogntion will be sought. The role of international institutions and of normative factors will be considered.

Issues discussed will include European practice on recognition, the effect of collective non-recognition, and the legal effects of recognition. Speakers will address examples of state practice in relation to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Kosovo, Palestine and Western Sahara, and there will be a panel devoted to the issue of recognition of governments and other entities in the light of recent (and developing) practice.

Talmon: Recognition of the Libyan National Transitional Council

Stefan Talmon (Univ. of Oxford - Law) has posted an ASIL Insight on Recognition of the Libyan National Transitional Council.

Caspersen & Stansfield: Unrecognized States in the International System

Nina Caspersen (Lancaster Univ.) & Gareth Stansfield (Univ. of Exeter) have published Unrecognized States in the International System (Routledge 2010). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Unrecognized states are territories that have achieved de facto independence, yet have failed to gain international recognition as independent states. These territories constitute anomalies in the international system of sovereign states and often present significant challenges to policy makers, as evidenced by the war in Georgia and the continued debate over Kosovo’s independence.

This book draws on both theory and case studies to better understand the phenomenon of unrecognized states, demonstrating that the existence of such entities is less unusual than previously assumed. Moving away from an overt focus on case studies, the chapters present various themes that link the emergence, operations, and development of unrecognized states and assess how the established order of states responds to the challenges they present: How do unrecognized interact with the international system of sovereign states? How does it shape their emergence, operations and development? How do these entities develop in a context of non-recognition? Are we witnessing a new form of statehood, or are these entities better understood as states-in-waiting? What are the strategies available for dealing with unrecognized states? Could power-sharing or autonomy provide a solution or are more innovative strategies necessary?

Quigley: The Statehood of Palestine: International Law in the Middle East Conflict

John Quigley (Ohio State Univ. - Law) has published The Statehood of Palestine: International Law in the Middle East Conflict (Cambridge Univ. Press 2010). Here's the abstract:

Palestine as a territorial entity has experienced a curious history. Until World War I, Palestine was part of the sprawling Ottoman Empire. After the war, Palestine came under the administration of Great Britain by an arrangement with the League of Nations. In 1948 Israel established itself in part of Palestine’s territory, and Egypt and Jordan assumed administration of the remainder. By 1967 Israel took control of the sectors administered by Egypt and Jordan and by 1988 Palestine reasserted itself as a state. Recent years saw the international community acknowledging Palestinian statehood as it promotes the goal of two independent states, Israel and Palestine, co-existing peacefully. This book draws on evidence from the 1924 League of Nations mandate to suggest that Palestine was constituted as a state at that time. Palestine remained a state after 1948, even as its territory underwent permutation, and this book provides a detailed account of how Palestine has been recognized until the present day.

Fabry: Recognizing States: International Society and the Establishment of New States Since 1776

Mikulas Fabry (George Institute of Technology - Nunn School of International Affairs) has published Recognizing States: International Society and the Establishment of New States Since 1776 (Oxford Univ. Press 2010). Here's the abstract:

This book examines recognition of new states, the practice historically employed to regulate membership in international society. The last twenty years have witnessed new or lingering demands for statehood in different areas of the world. The claims of some, like those of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Croatia, Georgia and East Timor, have achieved general recognition; those of others, like Kosovo, Tamil Eelam, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Somaliland, have not. However, even as most of these claims gave rise to major conflicts and international controversies, the criteria for acknowledgment of new states have elicited little systematic scholarship. Drawing upon writings of English School theorists, this study charts the practice from the late eighteenth century until the present. Its central argument is that for the past two hundred years state recognition has been tied to the idea of self-determination of peoples. Two versions of the idea have underpinned the practice throughout most of this period - self-determination as a negative and a positive right. The negative idea, dominant from 1815 to 1950, took state recognition to be acknowledgment of an achievement of de facto statehood by a people desiring independence. Self-determination was expressed through, and externally gauged by, self-attainment. The positive idea, prevalent since the 1950s, took state recognition to be acknowledgment of an entitlement to independence in international law. The development of self-determination as a positive international right, however, has not led to a disappearance of claims of statehood that stand outside of its confines. Groups that are deeply dissatisfied with the countries in which they presently find themselves continue to make demands for independence even though they may have no positive entitlement to it. The book concludes by expressing doubt that contemporary international society can find a sustainable basis for recognizing new states other than the original standard of de facto statehood.

Kosovo: To Recognize or Not to Recognize - That is the Question

Tonight (very shortly), the British Institute of International and Comparative Law will host a discussion on "Kosovo: To Recognize or Not to Recognize - That is the Question." Speakers will include Stefan Talmon (Univ. of Oxford - Law) and Ralph Wilde (University College London - Law).

Roth: The Entity That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Brad R. Roth (Wayne State Univ. - Law) has posted The Entity that Dare Not Speak its Name: Unrecognized Taiwan as a Right-Bearer in the International Legal Order. Here's the abstract:

James Crawford's magisterial 2006 second edition of The Creation of States in International Law, updating his 1979 text in light of the intervening period's vast accumulation of international practice, was much awaited in Taiwan, which has seen a major transformation in its external relations over the last quarter-century. Though Crawford asserts that "the suppression by force of 23 million people cannot be consistent with the [United Nations] Charter," and that therefore "[t]o that extent there must be a cross-Strait boundary for the purposes of the use of force,” he finds that "Taiwan is not a State because it still has not unequivocally asserted its separation form China and is not recognized as a State distinct from China." Apart from its dysfunctionality in encouraging Taiwanese to believe that a more definitive expression of their desire for statehood is all that stands in the way of their goal, Crawford's analysis is not persuasive on the merits. Contrary to the prevailing objective theory of statehood that Crawford reaffirms, it is the tacit positions adopted by reacting states, whether in coordination or simply in the aggregate, that determine whether an entity possesses the rights, powers, obligations, and immunities of statehood. By this gauge, Taiwan's legal status is indeterminate. There is much concrete behavior of the community of states toward Taiwan that confutes the official rhetoric of non-recognition of Taiwan's independence. The case for attributing to Taiwan the properties of statehood improves the more that Taipei can establish external relationships beyond the permissible confines of mere de facto recognition and inconsistent with the PRC assertions of sovereign prerogative over Taiwan's external affairs.