This research aims to find out the reasons why Palestine and Kosovo could not get general international recognition and become members of the UN and also to assess the plausibility of two theories regarding their explanations for states’ decisions toward the recognition of new states (Palestine and Kosovo in our case).
This master thesis elaborates the issue of new states and their struggle for gaining general international recognition. It fits in the field of International Relations since it deals with the issue of possible new members in the international society of states, which can have an impact on global issues and threats that are of common relevance.
Some states that have been created since the end of the 1980s have achieved to gain general recognition like Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Moldova, and Timor-Leste. Some other states, also created (or separated from a parent state) have not achieved to gain general recognition. Such states are Palestine, Kosovo, Abkhazia, and Somaliland.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF STATES
2.2.1 THE DECLARATORY THEORY OF RECOGNITION
2.2.2 THE CONSTITUTIVE THEORY OF RECOGNITION
2.2.3 A MIDDLE GROUND THEORY ON RECOGNITION
2.3 REALISM
2.3.1 CLASSICAL REALISM
2.3.2 STRUCTURAL REALISM (NEOREALISM)
2.3.3 CLASSICAL REALISM VS. STRUCTURAL REALISM
2.3.4 A (NEO)REALIST THEORY OF STATE ACTION IN FOREIGN POLICY
2.4 THE FRAME FOR ANALYSIS
2.5 CONCLUSION
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 POSSIBILITY OF CHOICES
3.2 THE CHOSEN RESEARCH DESIGN
3.3 DETAILED REPORT ON METHODOLOGY
4. PALESTINE, KOSOVO AND TIMOR-LESTE – BACKGROUND ON STATE CREATION AND CURRENT SITUATION REGARDING RECOGNITION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 PALESTINE
4.3 KOSOVO
4.4 TIMOR-LESTE
4.5 CONCLUSION
5. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 PALESTINE’S NON-RECOGNIZERS AND THEIR REASONS
5.2.1 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT VOTED ‘PRO’ PALESTINE
5.2.2 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT ABSTAINED IN THE VOTING FOR PALESTINE
5.2.3 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT VOTED AGAINST PALESTINE
5.3 KOSOVO’S NON-RECOGNIZERS AND THEIR REASONS
5.3.1 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT VOTED ‘PRO’ KOSOVO IN UNESCO
5.3.2 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT ABSTAINED FOR KOSOVO IN UNESCO
5.3.3 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT VOTED AGAINST KOSOVO IN UNESCO
5.3.4 ‘NON-RECOGNIZERS’ THAT DID NOT VOTE AT ALL FOR KOSOVO IN UNESCO
5.4 EVALUATION OF HYPOTHESES AND DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
5.4.1 EVALUATION OF THE HYPOTHESES
5.4.2 DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE RESULTS
5.5 CONCLUSION
6. CONCLUSION
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Objectives and Topics
This thesis aims to investigate why Palestine and Kosovo have failed to gain general international recognition and UN membership. It seeks to test the plausibility of two primary theoretical frameworks—recognition theories (declaratory and constitutive) and (neo)realist international relations theory—in explaining state behavior regarding the recognition of new entities.
- Analysis of the declaratory versus constitutive theories of state recognition.
- Application of classical realism and structural realism to foreign policy decisions regarding new states.
- Case study comparison of Palestine, Kosovo, and Timor-Leste.
- Investigation into state-specific motivations for non-recognition, including domestic separatist concerns and alliance interests.
- Predictive modeling for future conditions under which Palestine and Kosovo might achieve UN membership.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Introduction
This master thesis elaborates the issue of new states and their struggle for gaining general international recognition. It fits in the field of International Relations since it deals with the issue of possible new members in the international society of states, which can have an impact on global issues and threats that are of common relevance.
Some states that have been created since the end of the 1980s have achieved to gain general recognition like Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Moldova, and Timor-Leste. Some other states, also created (or separated from a parent state) have not achieved to gain general recognition. Such states are Palestine, Kosovo, Abkhazia, and Somaliland.1
Three cases are the focus of this master thesis: Palestine2, Kosovo3 and Timor-Leste. 4 As mentioned above, Timor-Leste has achieved general recognition and the membership in the UN, while Kosovo and Palestine, despite having more than 100 recognitions (out of 193) from UN member states (136 Palestine and 108 Kosovo) have not achieved yet to become members of the United Nations Organization (UN), even though Palestine is a ‘non-member observer state’ since 2012. I have been aware that Palestine and Kosovo, in general, are not analog cases due to their great differences regarding the state creation. However, since these both are the countries with more recognitions than any other state (except UN member states), and both seek to gain general recognition and membership to the UN, in the context of this thesis they are comparable.
This research aims to find out the reasons why Palestine and Kosovo could not get general international recognition and become members of the UN and also to assess the plausibility of two theories regarding their explanations for states’ decisions toward the recognition of new states (Palestine and Kosovo in our case). The theories that will be used in this thesis are the recognition theories (declaratory and constitutive) and the
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: Provides an overview of the thesis objectives, the cases of Palestine, Kosovo, and Timor-Leste, and the central research question regarding their lack of general international recognition.
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW: Discusses the declaratory and constitutive theories of state recognition alongside realist international relations theories to build an analytical framework for state behavior.
3. METHODOLOGY: Explains the choice of a 'least-similar cases' research design and justifies the qualitative approach used to analyze state recognition patterns.
4. PALESTINE, KOSOVO AND TIMOR-LESTE – BACKGROUND ON STATE CREATION AND CURRENT SITUATION REGARDING RECOGNITION: Details the historical paths to statehood, conflict backgrounds, and current recognition status for the three chosen case studies.
5. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Analyzes the official statements of non-recognizing countries and evaluates the proposed hypotheses against the gathered data.
6. CONCLUSION: Summarizes the study's findings, confirming that (neo)realist theory is more effective than traditional recognition theories in explaining why states do or do not recognize new entities.
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lists the academic sources, governmental documents, and media reports used to conduct the research.
Keywords
International Recognition, New States, Palestine, Kosovo, Timor-Leste, Realism, Structural Realism, Montevideo Criteria, Statehood, United Nations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Secessionist Movements, International Relations, Sovereignty.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The research focuses on the lack of general international recognition for Palestine and Kosovo and aims to understand why these states have not yet become full members of the United Nations.
What are the main thematic areas covered?
The study covers theories of international state recognition, the realist theory of international relations, historical backgrounds of the selected new states, and an analysis of current diplomatic recognition patterns.
What is the central research question?
The central question is: Why do Kosovo and Palestine remain as not generally recognized countries, and what factors determine whether an existing state will recognize these entities?
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The work employs a qualitative 'least-similar cases' research design to compare the chosen states and trace the processes behind international recognition decisions.
What does the main body of the work treat?
The main body includes a theoretical analysis of statehood, detailed case histories of the three focus regions, and a comprehensive analysis of the official statements from countries that have not recognized Palestine or Kosovo.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include International Recognition, Statehood, Realism, Sovereignty, and the specific case studies of Palestine, Kosovo, and Timor-Leste.
Why are Kosovo and Palestine considered comparable in this thesis?
Despite their different historical paths to state creation, they are considered comparable because both seek full membership in the UN and possess significantly higher levels of recognition than any other non-UN member state.
How does this study evaluate the role of the Montevideo criteria?
The research examines whether existing states strictly follow the Montevideo criteria (population, territory, government, capacity to enter relations) when granting recognition, ultimately finding that these criteria are rarely cited in official state reasons for non-recognition.
What role does the 'parent state' play in this analysis?
The relation between the new state and the parent state (Israel, Serbia, or Indonesia) is identified as the independent variable, serving as a primary determinant for whether international recognition is granted.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Tahir Lushi (Autor:in), 2016, State Creation and the International Recognition of New States. The Examples of Palestine, Kosovo and Timor-Leste, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1025369
