T i l b u r g U n i v e r s i t y – T i l b u r g L a w S c h o o l LL.M. in International and European Public Law Recognizing Kosovo: Theoretical and Practical Implications for Recognition Theory and the International Community Master’s Thesis Robin Taillefer Supervisor: S.F. van den Driest LLM MPhil Tilburg 2011 “…there is probably no other subject in the field of international relations in which law and politics appear to be more closely interwoven.”1 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1 Hersch Lauterpacht on the recognition of states, cited in Christian Hillgruber, “The Admission of New States to the International Community” (1998) 9 E.J.I.L. 491 at 491. 1 Table of Contents Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 3 1 Statehood....................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................7 1.2 Criteria for Statehood.......................................................................................................................................7 1.3 Criticisms.......................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.3.1 The Montevideo Criteria.................................................................................................................................... 11 1.3.2 Alternative Criteria............................................................................................................................................... 14 1.4 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 16 2 Recognition Theory ...................................................................................................................17 2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Constitutive Theory and its Criticisms....................................................................................................... 18 2.3 Declaratory Theory and its Criticisms ...................................................................................................... 21 2.4 Reconciling the two: an intermediary theory?......................................................................................... 25 2.5 Collective recognition and collective non-recognition.......................................................................... 27 2.6 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 32 3 Secession as a Means of External Self-Determination.........................................................33 3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 33 3.2 Self-Determination and Secession Outside the Colonial Context........................................................ 33 3.3 A ‘Remedial’ Right to Secession ................................................................................................................. 36 3.4 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 38 4 Recognizing Secession in Practice – The Example of Kosovo ............................................40 4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 40 4.2 Kosovo and Serbia: A Brief History........................................................................................................... 40 4.3 Kosovo after Milosevic: Straight Path to Independence?..................................................................... 41 4.4 A Case of ‘Remedial’ Secession?................................................................................................................ 42 4.5 Kosovo and Statehood ................................................................................................................................... 45 4.5.1 Kosovo and the Montevideo Criteria............................................................................................................ 45 4.5.2 Kosovo and Additional Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 47 4.5.3 Consequences for Statehood and Recognition.......................................................................................... 52 4.6 Kosovo and Recognition ............................................................................................................................... 53 4.6.1 Declaratory or Constitutive?............................................................................................................................. 54 4.6.2 A Mixing of Theories?........................................................................................................................................ 58 Conclusions: The Victory of Politics?...........................................................................................64 Bibliography .....................................................................................................................................67 2 Introduction In the law and practice of state secession the role of recognition has long been central. Closely intertwined with the requirements of statehood, recognition has been the international community’s primary mechanism for validating and conferring legitimacy on new claims to statehood. While historically states were rarely concerned with how a claim to statehood arose, since the end of the decolonization period the ongoing uncertainty regarding the status of a right to secession in international law has served to significantly alter the way states have exercised their discretion in recognizing ‘new’ entities.2 Specifically, the tension between the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity, which acts of secession inherently bring to the forefront, has been determinative in influencing the role recognition plays with respect to nascent states. Through an examination of Kosovo’s unilateral secession, it is clear that the principle of recognition in international law constitutes a contested space between law and politics. While in theory the principle of recognition provides for a strict division between a legal, constitutive framework, and a political, declaratory framework, in practice this can be quite illusory. Instead, the act of recognition has arguably become a mechanism by which states can control and produce desired outcomes.3 Consequentially, the legitimacy of secessionist claims can remain shrouded in controversy because the very act of recognition “while resulting in legal consequences, is primarily based on political or other non-legal considerations.”4 From the perspective of a seceding state this is problematic. Since international law neither explicitly acknowledges nor prohibits acts of secession, the success of a struggle for external self- determination is highly dependent on the garnering of recognition from the international community. However, if the very act of recognition itself is increasingly viewed as merely a tool in the hands of the governments to accomplish certain geo-political goals, then any legal legitimacy such an act of recognition may normally confer on a nascent state may be 2 James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law, 2d ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006) at 27 [Crawford, “Creation of States”]. 3 Jure Vidmar, “International Legal Responses to Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence” (2009) 42 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. 779 at 844-845. 4 Ibid. at 827. 3 undermined.5 The current uncertain status of Kosovo appears to be a clear example of this dilemma. Regardless of whether Kosovo can be considered a legal expression of external, or remedial, self- determination, the aim of this paper is to examine the manner in which the international community has chosen to exercise its discretion in recognizing Kosovo as a new state in order to determine if the principle of recognition itself has been manipulated and, ultimately, detached from its normative moorings. Specifically, this paper will attempt to provide an answer to the following question: In light of the ongoing debate surrounding the current legal status of Kosovo following its unilateral secession, what are the legal and practical implications of the international community’s response to this situation on the concept of recognition and its role as the primary legal instrument for validating new claims to statehood? As the question itself suggests, its elucidation is not only relevant for future secessionist states, but for the international community as a whole. While other papers have attempted to address the many legal and practical effects stemming from Kosovo’s unilateral act, few have focused