Global Journal of Human Social Science, F: Political Science, Volume 22 Issue 5

International Law and the Politics of Diplomatic Recognition of States and Government: Crtical Discuss Vincent O.S. Okeke Abstract - A new state is born out from an existing State or an old State which disappeared and comes with a new name or by splitting an existing State into two States. If a new state enjoys certain rights, privileges and obligations then it must get recognition as a state, which is very essential. However, there are some minimum criteria required before a State is considered to be a State. A State must get the De Jure (when a state is legally recognized) recognition for considering a State as a sovereign State. Political thought plays an important role in this decision whether to grant recognition or not. For recognition as a State, it must enter into relations with the other existing States. Recognition is a unilateral act performed by the recognizing State’s government. The creation of states and their subsequent recognition remain among the most problematic, yet important, aspects of international law and politics. It may be express or implicit. The act of recognition does not necessarily require the use of the terms recognition or recognize. Recognition is more than a word. A State may simply say that it acknowledges, regards, considers, deals with, or treats a group in a certain capacity, in order to convey its recognition. Recognition will be stalled indefinitely and only granted once domestic sovereignty is definitively and irreversibly established. It is only under these circumstances that the international legal criteria, however ambiguous, rather accurately determine secessionist success (though recognition’s timing will remain uncertain). In sum, the international politics of recognition are essential in understanding which actors among the scores of potential new members will be accepted into the international community of States. To an important extent, nascent states are either elevated to State membership or excluded from it by powerful, existing members. In all, the essence of this paper is x-ray, among other things the position of law and politics in the diplomatic recognition of states and government in Africa. The paper addresses the concept of‘re-cognitionality’ to capture the reality and adequate nature of recognition practices in world politics. Finally the elements, theories, and processes of recognitions are reflected in this paper for purposes of clarity. Keywords: international law, politics, diplomacy, recognition of state and government. I. I ntroduction tate recognition is one of the oldest practices in international law and relations, and one of the most vexed concepts in international law. Since the middle Ages, political communities have interacted with each other as sovereign territorial states under an accepted system of rules (Brierly, 1955, Gëzim, 2021, Neff 2005, Schoiswohl 2004, Shaw 2003). To determine which entities are to be recognized as states subject to these rules has hence been a basic component of international relations? With the recent secession of South Sudan, the long-running discussion of state recognition is once again a pressing concern of foreign offices and topic of interest for international lawyers and political theorists. State recognition is currently a matter handled exclusively by the UN Security Council. In order for a political entity to be recognized as a state, a majority of members in the Council must vote in favor of recognition, without any of the permanent members vetoing this decision. As others have pointed out, the veto power as it presently works is morally arbitrary in that it distributes decision-making power inequitably. Furthermore, it prevents constructive deliberation by freezing discussions about recognition whenever it is clear that a permanent member will veto the decision (Keohane and Buchanan, 2004, Baylis, Steve; and Patricia, 2008). The question of the legal effect of recognition of new entities claiming to be “States” has been characterized for over a century by the “great debate” between the “constitutive” and “declaratory” schools of thought. While the former contends that a State only becomes a State by virtue of recognition, the latter - which is now widely accepted - argues that a State is a State because it is a State, that is, because it meets all the international legal criteria for statehood. In the first case recognition is status-creating; in the latter it is merely status-confirming. International lawyers and States do not always distinguish clearly between the requirements for recognition of an entity as a State (the criteria for statehood) and the requirements for recognition of a State, that is, the preconditions for entering into optional or discretionary - diplomatic, political, cultural or economic - relations with the entity (the conditions for recognition). While the former are prescribed by international law, the latter may vary from State to State (Talmon, 2008, Neff 2005, Schoiswohl 2004, Shaw 2003, Lauterpacht, 1947, Talmon, 2004). The subject of recognition has been complicated by the use of several variants of the term, such as “ de facto recognition,” “diplomatic recognition,” “ de jure recognition,” and “full recognition”. Like “recognition,” these terms can be given meaning only by establishing the intention of the State using them within the factual and legal context of each case. “Diplomatic recognition” is usually used to indicate a willingness to enter into formal diplomatic relations (i.e., exchange ambassadors, establish embassies, and so forth) S © 2022 Global Journals Volume XXII Issue V Version I 35 ( ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2022 F Author: Ph.D is a teaching staff of the Department of Political science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University, Anambra state, Nigeria. e-mail: unitychambers01@gmail.com