Under the Shadow of Precedent: Justifying Recognition of Statehood

• In Event: Identity Frames, Standing, and Conflict

Abstract

What determines the justification strategy used in the recognition decisions by third-party states in the event of a claim for statehood? While legal scholars have often grappled with this phenomenon on a case-by-case basis, Political Scientists have only just started to theorize about international recognition and the political consequences of setting a precedent. Given that sovereignty is a key principle of the international structure and it is, in significant part, granted by other states through recognition; when a state recognizes the new or recovered sovereignty of another, it impacts the status quo by entrenching or eroding existing norms. For both recognition and non-recognition decisions, the variation in the rhetoric can be either cost-benefit or norms-based in nature, as well as express support for either the host state or the rebel group that is seceding. From this, there are four types of rhetorical strategies that recognizers may use: Strong Status Quo, Sympathetic Status Quo, Revisionist Recognition, and Reluctant Recognition. I argue that the rhetoric will vary if the recognizing state is vulnerable to domestic secession and based on its geopolitical alignments in the region of secession. If a recognizing state faces domestic or international pressures to avoid setting a dangerous precedent for themselves or their allies, they are more likely to avoid norms-based rhetoric that could be broadly applicable to other cases of secession. By understanding the variation in the rhetoric of recognition we can observe how states consider the consequences of their actions and how these set precedents that ultimately alter or erode international norms of recognition and the status quo of the international system. I use a mixed-methods approach to test my theory. Utilizing an original dataset of recognition statements from major powers, from 1990 to the present, I observe significant variation in the decision, form, and framing of their recognitions. With the additional collection of indexed measures for the independent variables, I test this original theory of recognition rhetoric as part of a broader research agenda on international recognition and international validation.

Author

• Elsy Gonzalez, University of Chicago