Powered by
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia

Main article: "Westphalian sovereignty

Westphalian sovereignty is the concept of "nation-state sovereignty based on territoriality and the absence of a role for external agents in domestic structures. It is an international system of states, "multinational corporations, and organizations that began with the "Peace of Westphalia in 1648.

Sovereignty is a term that is frequently misused.[6][7] Up until the 19th century, the radicalised concept of a "standard of civilization" was routinely deployed to determine that certain peoples in the world were "uncivilised", and lacking organised societies. That position was reflected and constituted in the notion that their "sovereignty" was either completely lacking, or at least of an inferior character when compared to that of "civilised" people."[8] "Lassa Oppenheim said "There exists perhaps no conception the meaning of which is more controversial than that of sovereignty. It is an indisputable fact that this conception, from the moment when it was introduced into political science until the present day, has never had a meaning which was universally agreed upon."[9] In the opinion of "H. V. Evatt of the "High Court of Australia, "sovereignty is neither a question of fact, nor a question of law, but a question that does not arise at all."[10]

Sovereignty has taken on a different meaning with the development of the principle of "self-determination and the prohibition against the threat or use of force as "jus cogens norms of modern "international law. The "United Nations Charter, the Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States, and the charters of regional international organizations express the view that all states are juridically equal and enjoy the same rights and duties based upon the mere fact of their existence as persons under international law.[11][12] The right of nations to determine their own political status and exercise permanent sovereignty within the limits of their territorial jurisdictions is widely recognized.[13][14][15]


Named after the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, the Westphalian System of state sovereignty, which according to Bryan Turner is "made a more or less clear separation between religion and state, and recognised the right of princes 'to confessionalise' the state, that is, to determine the religious affiliation of their kingdoms on the pragmatic principle of "cuius regio eius religio."[17]

The Westphalian model of state sovereignty has increasingly come under fire from the "non-west" as a system imposed solely by Western Colonialism. What this model did was make religion a subordinate to politics,[17] a problem that has caused some issues in the Islamic world. This system does not fit in the Islamic world because concepts such as "separation of church and state" and "individual conscience" are not recognised in the Islamic religion as social systems.

In casual usage, the terms ""country", "nation", and "state" are often used as if they were "synonymous; but in stricter usage they can be distinguished:["citation needed]


State recognition signifies the decision of a sovereign state to treat another entity as also being a sovereign state.[18] Recognition can be either expressed or implied and is usually retroactive in its effects. It does not necessarily signify a desire to establish or maintain diplomatic relations.

There is no definition that is binding on all the members of the community of nations on the criteria for statehood. In actual practice, the criteria are mainly political, not legal.[19] L.C. Green cited the recognition of the unborn "Polish and "Czechoslovak states in World War I and explained that "since recognition of statehood is a matter of discretion, it is open to any existing State to accept as a state any entity it wishes, regardless of the existence of territory or of an established government."[20]

In "international law, however, there are several theories of when a state should be recognised as sovereign.[21]

Constitutive theory[edit]

The constitutive theory of statehood defines a state as a person of international law if, and only if, it is recognised as sovereign by other states. This theory of recognition was developed in the 14th century. Under it, a state was sovereign if another sovereign state recognised it as such. Because of this, new states could not immediately become part of the international community or be bound by international law, and recognised nations did not have to respect international law in their dealings with them.[22] In 1815 at the "Congress of Vienna the "Final Act recognised only 39 sovereign states in the European diplomatic system, and as a result it was firmly established that in the future new states would have to be recognised by other states, and that meant in practice recognition by one or more of the "great powers.[23]


In 1912, "L. F. L. Oppenheim had the following to say on constitutive theory:


Declarative theory[edit]

By contrast, the declarative theory of statehood defines a state as a "person in international law if it meets the following criteria: 1) a defined territory; 2) a permanent population; 3) a government and 4) a capacity to enter into relations with other states. According to declarative theory, an entity's statehood is independent of its recognition by other states. The declarative model was most famously expressed in the 1933 "Montevideo Convention.[25]

Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention declares that political statehood is independent of recognition by other states, and the state is not prohibited from defending itself.[26] In contrast, recognition is considered a requirement for statehood by the constitutive theory of statehood.

A similar opinion about "the conditions on which an entity constitutes a state" is expressed by the "European Economic Community Opinions of the "Badinter Arbitration Committee, which found that a state was defined by having a territory, a population, and a political authority.["citation needed]

State recognition[edit]

State practice relating to the recognition of states typically falls somewhere between the declaratory and constitutive approaches.[27] International law does not require a state to recognise other states.[28] Recognition is often withheld when a new state is seen as illegitimate or has come about in breach of international law. Almost universal non-recognition by the international community of "Rhodesia and "Northern Cyprus are good examples of this, the former only having been recognized by "South Africa, and the latter only recognized by "Turkey. In the case of Rhodesia, recognition was widely withheld when the white minority seized power and attempted to form a state along the lines of "Apartheid South Africa, a move that the "United Nations Security Council described as the creation of an "illegal racist minority régime".[29] In the case of Northern Cycprus, recognition was withheld from a state created in Northern Cyprus.[30] International law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence,[31] and the recognition of a country is a political issue.[32] As a result, "Turkish Cypriots gained "observer status" in the "PACE, and their representatives are elected in the Assembly of "Northern Cyprus;[33] and "Northern Cyprus became an observer member of the "OIC and the "ECO.

"Formosa or "Taiwan is also the same situation. Only 21 countries on the world recognize "Republic of China(the official name of Formosa). [34] "People's Republic of China proclaims that Formosa is a part of it.

De facto and de jure states[edit]

Most sovereign states are states "de jure and "de facto (i.e., they exist both in law and in reality). However, a state may be recognised only as a de jure state, in that it is recognised as being the legitimate government of a territory over which it has no actual control. For example, during the "Second World War, "governments-in-exile of a number of continental European states continued to enjoy diplomatic relations with the "Allies, notwithstanding that their countries were under Nazi occupation. The "PLO and "Palestinian Authority claim that the "State of Palestine is a sovereign state, a claim which has been "recognised by most states, though the territory it claims is under the de facto control of "Israel.[35][49] Other entities may have de facto control over a territory but lack international recognition; these may be considered by the "international community to be only de facto states. They are considered de jure states only according to their own law and by states that recognise them. For example, "Somaliland is commonly considered to be such a state.[50][51][52][53] For a list of entities that wish to be universally recognised as sovereign states, but do not have complete worldwide "diplomatic recognition, see the "list of states with limited recognition.

Relationship between state and government[edit]

Although the terms "state" and "government" are often used interchangeably,[54] international law distinguishes between a non-physical state and its government; and in fact, the concept of ""government-in-exile" is predicated upon that distinction.[55] States are non-physical juridical entities, and not organisations of any kind.[56] However, ordinarily, only the government of a state can obligate or bind the state, for example by treaty.[55]

State extinction[edit]

Generally speaking, states are durable entities, though it is possible for them to become extinguished, either through voluntary means or outside forces, such as military conquest. According to a 2004 study, violent state death has virtually ceased since the end of World War II.[57] Because states are non-physical juridical entities, it has been argued their extinction cannot be due to physical force alone.[58] Instead, the physical actions of the military must be associated with the correct social or judiciary actions in order to abolish a state.

Ontological status of the state[edit]

The "ontological status of the state has been the subject of debate,[59] specially, whether or not the state, being an object that no one can see, taste, touch, or otherwise detect,[60] actually exists.

The state as "quasi-abstract"[edit]

It has been argued that one potential reason as to why the existence of states has been controversial is because states do not have a place in the traditional Platonist duality of the concrete and the abstract.[61] Characteristically, concrete objects are those that have position in time and space, which states do not have (though their territories have spatial position, but states are distinct from their territories), and abstract objects have position in neither time nor space, which does not fit the supposed characteristics of states either, since states do have temporal position (they can be created at certain times and then become extinct at a future time). Also, abstract objects are characteristically completely non-causal, which is also not a characteristics of states, since states can act in the world and can cause certain events (though only by actions taken on their behalf through a representative).[62] Therefore, it has been argued that states belong to a third category, the quasi-abstract, that has recently begun to garner philosophical attention, specially in the area of "documentality, an ontological theory that seeks to understand the role of documents in understanding all of social reality. Quasi-abstract objects, such as states, can be brought into being through document acts, and can also be used to manipulate them, such as by binding them by treaty or surrendering them as the result of a war.[61]


The state as "spiritual entity"[edit]

Another theory of the ontology of the state is that the state is a spiritual[64] or "mystical entity"[64] with its own being, distinct from the members of the state.[64] The German "Idealist philosopher "Georg Hegel (1770-1831) was perhaps the greatest proponent of this theory.[64] The Hegelian definition of the state is "the Divine Idea as it exists on "Earth."[65]

Trends in the number of states[edit]

Since the end of World War II, the number of sovereign states in the international system has surged.[66] Some research suggests that the existence of international and regional organizations, the greater availability of economic aid, and greater acceptance of the norm of self-determination have increased the desire of political units to secede and can be credited for the increase in the number of states in the international system.[67][68] Harvard economist "Alberto Alesina and Tufts economist Enrico Spolaore argue in their book, Size of Nations, that the increase in the number of states can partly be credited to a more peaceful world, greater free trade and international economic integration, democratization, and the presence of international organizations that coordinate economic and political policies.[69]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ See the following:
  2. ^ See the following:
    • "sovereign", The "New Oxford American Dictionary (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, "ISBN "0-19-517077-6, adjective ... [ attrib. ] (of a nation or state) fully independent and determining its own affairs. 
  3. ^ Lalonde, Suzanne (2002). "Notes to pages". Determining boundaries in a conflicted world: the role of uti possidetis. McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. p. 181. "ISBN "978-0-7735-2424-8. 
  4. ^ Glassner, Martin Ira; Fahrer, Chuck (2004). Political Geography (3rd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. p. 14. "ISBN "0-471-35266-7. 
  5. ^ Spruyt, H. (1994). The Sovereign State and its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. "ISBN "0-691-03356-0. 
  6. ^ Krasner, Stephen D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organised Hypocrisy. Princeton University Press. "ISBN "0-691-00711-X. 
  7. ^ Núñez, Jorge Emilio. "About the Impossibility of Absolute State Sovereignty". International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. 
  10. ^ Akweenda, Sackey (1997). "Sovereignty in cases of Mandated Territories". International law and the protection of Namibia's territorial integrity. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 40. "ISBN "90-411-0412-7. 
  13. ^ "General Assembly resolution 1803 (XVII) of 14 December 1962, "Permanent sovereignty over natural resources"". United Nations. Retrieved 21 November 2010. 
  17. ^ a b Turner, Bryan (July 2007). "Islam, Religious Revival and the Sovereign State". Muslim World. 97 (3): 405–418. 
  18. ^ "Recognition", Encyclopedia of American Foreign Policy.
  19. ^ See B. Broms, "IV Recognition of States", pp 47-48 in International law: achievements and prospects, UNESCO Series, Mohammed Bedjaoui(ed), Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1991, "ISBN 92-3-102716-6 [2]
  20. ^ See Israel Yearbook on Human Rights, 1989, "Yoram Dinstein, Mala Tabory eds., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1990, "ISBN 0-7923-0450-0, page 135-136 [3]
  22. ^ a b Hillier, Tim (1998). Sourcebook on Public International Law. Routledge. pp. 201–2. "ISBN "1-85941-050-2. 
  23. ^ Kalevi Jaakko Holsti Taming the Sovereigns p. 128.
  24. ^ Lassa Oppenheim, Ronald Roxburgh (2005). International Law: A Treatise. The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. p. 135. "ISBN "1-58477-609-9. 
  26. ^ http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-40.html
  27. ^ Shaw, Malcolm Nathan (2003). International law (5th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 369. "ISBN "0-521-53183-7. 
  28. ^ Opinion No. 10. of the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia.
  29. ^ United Nations Security Council Resolution 216
  30. ^ United Nations Security Council Resolution 541
  34. ^ http://www.mofa.gov.tw/en/AlliesIndex.aspx?n=DF6F8F246049F8D6&sms=A76B7230ADF29736
  35. ^ a b Staff writers (20 February 2008). "Palestinians 'may declare state'". BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 2011-01-22. :"Saeb Erekat, disagreed arguing that the Palestine Liberation Organisation had already declared independence in 1988. "Now we need real independence, not a declaration. We need real independence by ending the occupation. We are not Kosovo. We are under Israeli occupation and for independence we need to acquire independence".
  36. ^ a b "B'Tselem - The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories: Israel's control of the airspace and the territorial waters of the Gaza Strip, Retrieved 2012-03-24.
  37. ^ Map of Gaza fishing limits, "security zones"
  41. ^ "Address by Foreign Minister Livni to the 8th Herzliya Conference" (Press release). Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel. 22 January 2008. Retrieved 2010-07-16. 
  49. ^ Israel allows the "PNA to execute some functions in the "Palestinian territories, depending on "special area classification. Israel maintains "minimal interference (retaining control of borders: "air,[36] sea "beyond internal waters,[36][37] "land[38]) in the "Gaza strip and maximum in ""Area C".[39][40][41][42][43] See also "Israeli-occupied territories.
  50. ^ Arieff, Alexis (2008). "De facto Statehood? The Strange Case of Somaliland" (PDF). Yale Journal of International Affairs. 3: 60–79. Retrieved 2010-01-04. 
  52. ^ "Overview of De-facto States". "Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization. July 2008. Retrieved 2010-01-04. 
  55. ^ a b Crawford, J. (2006). The Creation of States in International Law (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. "ISBN "0-19-826002-4. 
  57. ^ Fazal, Tanisha M. (2004-04-01). "State Death in the International System". International Organization. 58 (2): 311–344. "doi:10.1017/S0020818304582048. "ISSN 1531-5088. 
  59. ^ Ringmar, Erik (1996). "On the ontological status of the state". European Journal of International Relations. 2 (4). "doi:10.1177/1354066196002004002. 
  61. ^ a b Robinson, Edward H. (2014). "A documentary theory of states and their existence as quasi-abstract entities" (PDF). Geopolitics. 19 (3): 1–29. "doi:10.1080/14650045.2014.913027. Retrieved 16 September 2014. 
  62. ^ Robinson, Edward H. (2011). "A theory of social agentivity and its integration into the descriptive ontology for linguistic and cognitive engineering" (PDF). International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems. 7 (4): 62–86. "doi:10.4018/jswis.2011100103. Retrieved 16 September 2014. 
  64. ^ a b c d Fundamentals of Government, pg. 71,
  65. ^ Fundamentals of Government, pg. 71 (citing Hegel's Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree [New York: Wiley Book Co., 1944]).
  66. ^ "The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy". SAGE Publications. pp. 294–295. Retrieved 2016-11-17. 
  67. ^ Fazal, Tanisha M.; Griffiths, Ryan D. (2014-03-01). "Membership Has Its Privileges: The Changing Benefits of Statehood". International Studies Review. 16 (1): 79–106. "doi:10.1111/misr.12099. "ISSN 1468-2486. 
  68. ^ "The State of Secession in International Politics". E-International Relations. Retrieved 2016-11-16. 
  69. ^ "The Size of Nations". MIT Press. Retrieved 2016-11-16. 


Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]

) )