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

recognition. It will not be afforded the resources, exclusively reserved for States, which might ensure its survival (Herbst, 2000). The Eritrean War of Independence (September 1, 1961 - May 29, 1991) was a conflict fought between the Ethiopian government and Eritrean separatists, both before and during the Ethiopian Civil War. The war started when Eritrea’s autonomy within Ethiopia, where troops were already stationed, was unilaterally revoked. Eritrea had become part of Ethiopia after World War II, when both territories were liberated from Italian occupation. Ethiopia claimed that Eritrea was part of Ethiopia. Following the Marxist- Leninist coup in Ethiopia in 1974 which toppled its ancient monarchy, the Ethiopians enjoyed Soviet Union support until the end of the 1980s, when glasnost and perestroika started to impact Moscow’s foreign policies, resulting in a withdrawal of help. The war went on for 30 years until 1991 when the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF), having defeated the Ethiopian forces in Eritrea, took control of the country. In April 1993, in a referendum supported by Ethiopia, the Eritrean people voted almost unanimously in favor of independence. Formal international recognition of an independent and sovereign Eritrea followed later the same year (Connell, 2005). Biafra, officially the Republic of Biafra, was a secessionist state in south-eastern Nigeria that existed from May 30, 1967 to January 15, 1970, taking its name from the Bight of Biafra (the Atlantic bay to its south). The inhabitants were mostly the Ibo people who led the secession due to economic, ethnic, cultural and religious tensions among the various peoples of Nigeria. The creation of the new country was among the causes of the Nigerian Civil War, also known as the Nigerian- Biafran War. The Land of Rising Sun was chosen for Biafra's national anthem, and the state was formally recognised by Gabon, Haiti, Cote d’Ivoire, Tanzania and Zambia. Other nations which did not give official recognition but which did provide support and assistance to Biafra included Israel, France, Portugal, Rhodesia, South Africa and the Vatican City (Douglas, 1994; Room, 2006). Over a dozen states has recently declared their recognition of the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC). Germany became the 13th state to “recognize” the NTC following Australia, Britain, France, Gambia, Italy, Jordan, Malta, Qatar, Senegal, Spain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the United States. France became the first country to recognize the NTC as “the legitimate representative of the Libyan people.” Similar recognition was accorded by Qatar, the Maldives, Gambia, Senegal, Turkey, Jordan, Spain, and Germany. While a State cannot have two de jure governments at the same time, it can have a de jure government and a local de facto government or a representative of the State’s people. This explains why States, which have recognized the NTC as legitimate representative of the Libyan people, can nevertheless continue to recognize the diplomatic role and status of Qaddafi-appointed ambassadors and accept his representatives in international organizations as the representatives of Libya (Talmon, 2011, Caspersen & Stansfield 2011). Italy’s statement on April 4, 2011, that it recognized the NTC “as the country’s only legitimate interlocutor on bilateral relations,” thus seems to have gone beyond the recognition by France and others. This was confirmed later when Italy declared that it recognized the NTC as holding governmental authority in the territory which it controls. France also upgraded its recognition, stating that from now on it considered the NTC as the only holder of governmental authority in the contacts between France and Libya and its related entities. This, in effect, amounted to recognition of the NTC as the government of Libya. On June 12, the UAE also recognized the NTC as a legitimate Libyan government. The country’s foreign minister explained: “Based on this, UAE’s dealing with the Transitional National Council (TNC) will take the form of a government-to-government relationship in all issues relating to Libya (Talmon, 2011). Whilst politics and law are closely intertwined in the question of recognition, this does not mean that recognition, in the sense of expressing an opinion on the legal status of a rebel group, is a purely political act within the unfettered discretion of the recognizing State. In the 1960s, the Organization of African Unity’s Coordinating Committee for the Liberation of Africa developed certain standards, albeit vague, for the recognition of national liberation movements fighting the incumbent government as the sole legitimate representative of a people which, it is suggested, may equally be applied to the recognition of the NTC. Thus, for the NTC to be recognized as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people, it must be the United Action Front against the Qaddafi government, i.e., it must be broadly based, have effective following and popular support throughout Libya, and must have reasonable fighting strength (Talmon, 2011, Verma, 2014,). The main criterion in international law for the recognition of a rebel group as the government of a State is its exercise of effective control over the State’s territory. As long as the NTC’s control is limited to the eastern parts of Libya, with the capital Tripoli and western parts remaining under the control of Qaddafi forces, it may be recognized only as the local de facto government of the territory which it controls. Any recognition of the NTC as the de jure government of the State of Libya, while Qaddafi forces are still in control of the capital, seems premature and would arguably constitute an illegal interference in the internal affairs of Libya (Talmon, 2011). As in the first four months of the Libyan civil war the factual and political situation in Libya was uncertain, States were very reluctant to grant any legally relevant recognition to the NTC. This led States to invent a new form of © 2022 Global Journals Volume XXII Issue V Version I 44 ( ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2022 F International Law and the Politics of Diplomatic Recognition of States and Government: Crtical Discuss