Land Forces Academy Review Vol. XXIII, No 3(91), 2018

SOVEREIGNTY, A SWINGING CONCEPT BETWEEN AND POLITICAL REALITY Anca DINICU “Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy, Sibiu, Romania [email protected]

ABSTRACT The , as the fundamental unit of the international system, appeals to ultimate power and in order to control its own domestic affairs and claims equality as a legal basis regarding its relation with other legal political units. But the existence of the in the current international context, where the multiple interdependencies generate divergence and cooperation in the same, is subject to permanent challenges. And the issue is not easy approachable in theory, nor in practice. Like other concepts, as security or , the concept of needs to be updated according to the new rules revealed by the process of , rules that are defined not by the equal states, but by the powerful ones.

KEYWORDS: international law, , recognition, sovereignty.

1. Introduction granted by the As an independent entity, the State is with its confidence that the factual criteria defined by reference to three elements: a of statehood have been fulfilled indeed. fixed on which the state exercises its functions; a permanent population, 2. Methodology located within the national boundaries; and The paper aims to address the issue of a through which the state puts state sovereignty in the field of international into practice its sovereign power with the relations, where states, although theoretically ultimate scope of regulating ’s living equal among themselves, are hierarchically on its national territory. But according to ranked according to their national the Montevideo Convention (1933), which performances which are eventually converted had put the state in relation to the into power at the international level. It is international law, besides these three analyzed, based on exploring the existing elements there is a fourth one needed to be literature in the area of interest and with the taken into consideration – that is the help of direct observation, how the “capacity to enter into relations with the independent and sovereign states are able to other states” (The Montevideo Convention, integrate themselves into the international article 1). Thus, the statehood issue is political context. In this respect, it was closely connected with the idea of necessary to have the concept of sovereignty recognition meaning that, in order to clarified, taking into consideration the become integrated at the international level transformations and challenges of the as a legal standing entity characterized by environment at the rights and obligations, a state should be beginning of the 21st century.

DOI: 10.2478/raft-2018-0021 © 2017. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

181

3. The Concept of Sovereignty and “Is a state recognized by other states? Its Historical Roots Is it accepted as a juridical equal? Are Sovereignty is the attribute of the state its representatives entitled to that allows it to independently establish its ? Can it be a form of government, the relationship between member of international organizations? the branch and the legislative one, Can its representatives enter into the social order and the legal system which agreements with other entities?”. are considered to be the most appropriate to The key element is recognition; support the political survival and the ● and which economic development. This internal “is based on two principles: sovereignty is doubled by an external one that territoriality and the exclusion of allows each state to manifest itself as external actors from domestic authority independent actor having the same range of structures” due to the idea that rights like any other state, no matter how according to the of Westphalia large or small, powerful or weak it is. the domestic political are the But Stephen David Krasner, an only entitled to rule on a specific international relations professor at Stanford territory. In other words, this type of University, sovereignty has not two, but sovereignty is violated when a foreign four meanings or attributes (Krasner, 1999, entity tries to determine or influence the pp. 11-25): existing domestic authority, no matter ● Domestic sovereignty as the ability of a if through intervention or invitation. state to maintain the monopoly of the The key element is nonintervention use of violence within its territory: but the concept has nothing to do with “Domestic sovereignty, the organization the (Emmerich de and effectiveness of is Vattel (1714-1767), a Swiss Jurist, is the single most important question for considered to be the first who defined political analysis”. The key element is the principle of nonintervention, in authority; Droit des gens ou principes de la loi ● Interdependence sovereignty as the naturelle, 1758). “Nevertheless, the capacity of a government to control common terminology is used here the intra-borders movements of any because the Westphalian model has so kind. This attribute is somehow much entered into common usage, even related with the previous one – we are if it is historically inaccurate”. dealing not only with what is Traditionally when the problem of happening on the national territory, sovereignty is approached, academics but also with the state’s incapacity of usually explain it by bringing into attention disciplining all those issues that have the Peace of Westphalia (in 1648) which is emerged from the process of considered to be the starting point of the globalization: “atmospheric modern state existence or as Henry pollution, , the drug trade, Kissinger said “the path breaker of a new currency crises, and AIDs” (and, of concept of international order that has course, the examples might continue). spread around the world” (Kissinger, 2015, The key element is control; pp. 23-24). Based on two signed in ● International legal sovereignty which Münster (between the Holy Roman is brought into discussion when the and , along with their status of a political entity in the respective allies) and Osnabrück (between international system is established. the Holy Roman Empire and Sweden, along Thereby a few questions arise: with their respective allies), the Peace of

182

Westphalia recognized the right of each 4.1. Sovereignty and Domestic signatory part to decide in connection with Affairs its own domestic structure and to act freely The state indeed is responsible for from any religious intervention. what is happening on its national territory While some revisionist scholars but this does not mean that it can do what it attacked the two documents, considering wishes or what it considers being proper for them being almost identical and dealing in ensuring a specific government and way of fact with the Holy Roman Empire internal governing, although history is full with of affairs (Osiander, 2001) and not providing examples, including after the Second World the solid elements of the “principle” of which should have remained a warning sovereignty, the Peace of Westphalia is signal to the consciousness of humanity. considered to be the turning point in the In this respect, a reasonable question arises: history being the beginning of the is, for example, mass murder an internal modern international system. issue? Three million people were killed in So, if the state is the most important (1975-1979) under the Pol Pot international actor then, obviously, regime, and other 800.00 were massacred in sovereignty, as a concept but also as a Rwanda in 1994. matter of putting into practice the national Anyway, it seems that today the interest in the international context, has a internal sovereignty is under the pressure key role in understanding the theory of generated by the globalization process, international relations and also in being forced to adapt itself at a new reality explaining the international affairs. – the national economies are dominated by But what is, in fact, sovereignty? It is the private enterprises and are being influenced state’s full right to enforce the ultimate by transnational trends and phenomena; the power and authority within the boundaries organizations have a great of its national territory and to act as an desire and willingness to get access at the independent entity on the international decision making process; the international stage, according to its national interest. law is spread all over the world; the communication and 4. Adapting the Concept of transportation advances are evident and Sovereignty to Nowadays Political available for more and more people; the Reality state itself not only that has become more The above mentioned definition and more resourceless, being forced to should be considered in general terms. cooperate with private entities, but through The contemporary international legal mechanisms part of its sovereign system is subject to the most various rights can be transferred to a supranational transformations due to the process of organization (like the ). globalization which implies integration and This means that the internal sovereignty is interdependence. It means that even the less exclusive and no longer unlimited. State, which continues to be the building Decisions are still the result of the political block of the world order, has been in the authority but the number and type of actors last decades the target of multiple involved in the process have challenges. In this context, some concepts expanded. used to explain the political community must be enriched with attributes derived 4.2. Sovereignty and International from reality. Relations Two aspects are brought into discussion here in connection with the

183 external sovereignty; state recognition and ● Is “the determination of the nature state power. The issue concerning the and the extent of the relations relationship between sovereignty and between states” (Brown, 1950); international relations is not only complex, ● “Provides pivotal from the but also debatable. The picture can be top-down, cementing a nascent extended by analyzing problems like State’s claim to sovereign authority in contemporary international law, the outside world” (Coggins, 2006); international democracy, human rights, ● “Is an act that confers a status … a intervention, foreign aid, international (new) state is not born, but chosen as organization, and globalization. a subject of international law” If the internal sovereignty is based on (Krasner, 1999). the state’s authority, the external one implies It can be said that recognition is the equality among states, at least from the entrance gate for a new state to the international law perspective and from the international system. Sovereignty provides theory of international relations. In this case, state the freedom of action, including to its the dimension of territory or the GDP “greatest” extent – that is to make war. per capita have no relevance. Dealing with Sovereignty is based on power but it equality in a legal manner means dealing with does not exclude the lack of power. When the a certain status that arises from the same raw power does not exist its place is taken by rights. In this respect, very suggestive is what an ally or other institutional arrangements Kenneth Waltz wrote in one of his books: meant to guarantee if not a comfortable between sovereign states “none is entitled to position at the international level, somewhat a command; none is required to obey” (Waltz, peaceful and tranquil existence. For a 2006, p.130). But the fact that they are equal developed , external sovereignty is a does not mean that they are entitled to act certainty and is measurable through the according to their own desires, nor that they results obtained in projecting the national can resort to any means them like in order to interest. Wealthy and powerful states fulfil their national interest. frequently influence or even dominate weak Sovereignty characterizes a political and poor states. One of the most common entity that has achieved statehood which in its examples is the relationship established turn is connected with the issue of recognition. between a former colonial power and its There are two competing theories former colony which is now an independent applied on this matter: if for the country. The tools are not only economic, but “declarative” theory the supreme element to military too, like in 1979 when the Soviets statehood is a government than can invaded or in 1990 when effectively rule the indigenous population violated the sovereignty of by located on a bordered territory, for the occupying it. “constitutive” approach the cardinal And even under such circumstances, element is the legal status of the being not so well developed and lacking the government or state translated in terms of instruments for a proper action at the being accepted by the others. Therefore, a international level, sovereignty remains subject of international law, recognition is attractive, desirable and offering. also a political act done by states individually according to their interest. 5. Conclusions Bearing great responsibility (for the As a concept that seems to resonate international stability) and generating mainly with the international law, important consequences (for the sovereignty cannot be excluded from the international system), recognition: international relations. Being a feature of the

184 modern state, it will continue to be subject of never forget that the state “has a keen instinct debates and analysis as long as the state will for survival and has so far adapted to new rock the international system. One should challenges” (Krasner, 2009).

REFERENCES

Brown, P. M. (1950). The Legal Effects of Recognition, available at: https://www.jstor.org/ Coggins, B. L. (2006). , Recognition & the International of Statehood, available at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ Hillgruber, C. (1998). The Admission of New States to the International Community, available at: http://www.ejil.org/ Kissinger, H. (2015). World Order. London: Penguin Random House UK. Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Krasner, S. D. (2009). Think Again: Sovereignty, available at: https://foreignpolicy. com/2009/11/20/think-again-sovereignty/ (Stephen D. Krasner) Osiander, A. (2001). Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth. International Organization, 55(2), 251-287. The Montevideo Convention, available at: https://www.jus.uio.no/english/services/ library/treaties/01/1-02/rights-duties-states.xml. Waltz, K. N. (2006). Teoria politicii internaționale. București: Editura Polirom.

185