Public International Law - Research Paper Example

Public International Law hood has been, quite unsurprisingly, a non-issue for most nations of the world. However, presently many political entities and ‘states’ are struggling to gain recognition as independent nations. History has been littered with many revolutions and uprisings fought in the name of statehood, independence from foreign rule, and freedom. The question raised in this paper contains various discussion areas related to state and statehood. This paper shall discuss the qualities and elements of a state and why many nations desire statehood; it shall distinguish the state from other legal and non-legal entities; it shall explore the differences between recognizing a state and recognizing the government of a state; it shall also discuss the practical effects of the fact that only some states recognize Kosovo’s statehood; it shall explore the two theoretical underpinnings of the statehood theory-the declaratory and constitutive theories; and discuss the alternatives to a state-based model in public international law and how these manifest in practice. State-defined; elements thereof There are various reasons why the United Kingdom recognizes Kosovo as a state, but does not recognize Kurdistan, the Palestinian Authority Area, or the Antarctica as states. These reasons are very much founded on the basic tenets of public international law and on how the latter defines a ‘state’. State is defined as “an isolated, static phenomenon on the basis of its constituent elements” 1. The elements of a state are set under different conventions and treaties that now comprise the bulk of our international laws. The main and primary convention in defining the elements of a state is the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States which entered into force on December 1934. This convention laid down the elements of a state, which are: “(a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states” 2. Defined Territory Two of the elements (territory and population) of a state comprise its physical characteristics. In order for an entity to be considered a state, it should have control over the territory it claims as its own. A defined territory implies boundaries which are laid in accordance with international laws. “It includes the air space above the land…and the earth beneath it, in theory, reaching to the globe”3. This defined territory also includes up to twelve miles of territorial sea which is adjacent to the coast. Maritime jurisdiction, which is part of territorial jurisdiction, has been an issue for many states, especially those with overlapping territorial seas, continental shelves, and maritime territories. The International Court of Justice had occasion to rule on the issue of continental shelves and in the Libya v. Tunisia case, it helped define the territories rightly owned by the two disputing countries. The case was basically about the principle of natural prolongation of land territory, which was being used by both nations as the basis of their claims. The ICJ later ruled in the issue of continental shelves, the natural prolongation of the land cannot be used as the sole basis for maritime jurisdiction. The court instead defined the “delimitation area relevant to the present case as the area enclosed by the parallel passing through Ras Kaboudia (Tunisia) and the meridian passing through Ras Tajoura(Libya), ignored the arguments of geology and the physical features of the seabed, gave primacy to equitable principles, assessed the relevant circumstances which characterise the area...”4. Kurdistan Kurdistan is not recognized by the United Kingdom as a state. The Kurds claim an area which is presently also being claimed by Iraq, Turkey, and Iran. In the 1920s, the Turks denied independence for the Kurds, refusing their geographic and cultural claims as a political entity separate and distinct from their state. As a result, the Turkish-Kurdish conflicts began. In the 1960’s, the Kurds living in Iraq had their own trouble with the Iraqi government, which escalated when Saddam Hussein entered into power in the 1970s. “Over the next fifteen years, the Iraqi army bombed Kurdish villages, and poisoned the Kurds with cyanide and mustard gas”5. Many issues surround the Kurdistan statehood question. One is its geographical location. Its territory is being claimed by Turkey and Iraq, which have chosen to ignore Kurdistan’s claims over these areas. On a cultural sense, Kurdistan claims that it is vastly different in culture, traditions, and language from its Iraqi and Turkish neighbours. It is for this very reason that Kurds claim that they should be given an independent status. In an economic sense, the area being claimed by the Kurds is rich in oil and water. For this reason, Turkey is reluctant to relinquish its claim over the area. The Kurds also have their own internal political problems, with different political factions having opposing ideas on how to resolve the conflicts with Turkey and Iraq. The United States is quick to support the Kurds, as far as opposing Saddam Hussein’s actions are concerned, however it is reluctant to oppose Turkey’s claims over the Kurdistan because it is reluctant to oppose its own NATO ally. Antarctica The United Kingdom does not recognize Antarctica as a state because it does not have a defined territory, nor does it have a permanent population, and consequently it does not have a government and the capacity to relate with other nations. “There are no recognized borders in the continent…[and] the ‘inhabitants of Antarctica are scientists mostly from states other than claimants-who visit only for a limited duration”6. There is also no government authority established to govern over the territory. Antarctica is not a state because it lacks all the elements to constitute an independent nation. The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea created by the United Nations specified that anyone wanting to lay claim to the Arctic region must have scientific data to support their claim. Only scientific expeditions are allowed in the region. Countries with coastlines bordering the Antarctic are only allowed up to 200 nautical miles beyond their shorelines. The Antarctic Treaty set forth in 1959 by 43 nations laid out that there shall be no military-related experiments in Antarctica; participating nations shall be allowed to freely explore the area; no nation is allowed to make any territorial claims on the area. The treaty covers land below 60 degrees latitude, excluding the seas. This agreement was laid down by participating nations in the hope of keeping the peace in the region and to prevent exploitation of the area7. Permanent Population A permanent population is defined by Oppenheim (1955) as an “aggregate of individuals of both sexes who live together as a community in spite of the fact that they may belong to different races or creeds, or be of different colour”8. Permanency must also be fulfilled as a requirement for statehood. The population must be willing to live in the area (the territory) on a permanent basis. Their intention in moving into an area must be with the goal of dwelling there permanently, and not for any short-term goal (such as establishing a business). The fact that a certain population is moving in and out of their territory is not sufficient reason to ‘disqualify’ their statehood. In the case of Somalia, (where their people move in and out of the country on a regular basis) as long as there remains a substantial number of permanent inhabitants, they are still very much considered a state with a permanent population. The International Court of Justice, in an advisory opinion in the Western Sahara case recognized that the Sahrawis constituted a qualified population capable of determining their statehood9. Government Another element of the state is government. The effective control by a government over population and territory is essential to the existence of a state. Two elements characterize control by the government; these are internal and external control. Internal control exists when the government has the power to establish legal order over its territory and its constituents. External control is the power of a state to act in the international arena without being dependent on the say-so of another nation. The requirement of effective control over its territory is not an absolute requirement of statehood. Upheavals or civil strife in the state which may temporarily depose the government and cause chaos and confusion will not diminish the legitimacy of the state. “Even when all of its territory is occupied by the enemy in wartime, the state continues to exist, provided that its allies continue to struggle against the enemy, as in the case of the occupation of the European states by Germany in the Second World War”10. The status of Finland from 1917-1918 was an issue brought before the International Council of Jurists (League of Nations) where the Court later ruled that Finland had no legitimate and effective government during such period. “In the midst of revolution and anarchy, certain elements essential to the existence of a state, even some elements of fact, were lacking for a considerable period”11. There was no effective control by the government over its territories and its people; therefore Finland did not attain statehood during the war. Capacity to enter into relations with other states The final element of a state is its capacity to enter into relations with other states. This requirement calls for a state’s “competence, within its own constitutional system, to conduct international relations with other states, as well as the political, technical, and financial capabilities to do so”12. This element implies that a state has to be capable of establishing and maintaining international relations with other states. In order for it to be involved in international relations, it has to have the political know-how and the financial capabilities to do so. The first article of the Montevideo Convention makes mention of the fact that in order for a state to be considered as such, it has to be recognized by other nations as a state. Many nations and political analysts have taken issue with this. The requirement of recognition has been a great factor in determining the statehood status of Taiwan, which is not recognized by China; the Principality of Sealand, which is not recognized by Britain or by any United Nations member; and the Palestinian Authority which is not recognized by Israel. And, in the case of Chloride Industrial Batteries v. F & W. Freight, Ltd., the International Court of Justice declared that the island of Jersey was not a sovereign state because the United Kingdom was responsible for its foreign relations and for its transactions with other states13. On its own, it does not have the capacity to enter into relations with other nations; therefore, it cannot be considered a state. Recognition as an independent state serves as a chance to join international organizations. These international organizations can lend economic aid to independent nations and also gives them a chance to participate in treaties, economic activities, and other exercises that offer vast economic, political, and defensive advantages to member nations. In the case of Taiwan, it has trouble joining international organizations. “Although Taiwan’s diplomatic isolation has not prevented it from engaging in substantial economic and socio-cultural relations with other states, the diplomatic ostracism inevitably casts a shadow over other forms of international interactions”14. Declaratory Theory versus the Constitutive Theory There are two theories underpinning the issue of statehood. These are the declaratory and the constitutive theories. The declaratory theory “holds that the State’s existence as an international legal person is independent of its recognition by existing States”15. In effect, the declaratory theory prescribes to the more traditional interpretations of international law which only requires the basic elements of a state in order for an entity to be qualified as a state. The fact that other states do not recognize it as a state will not make a difference to an entity that has all the elements of a state. Oppenheim best describes the constitutive theory. He claims that “[t]hrough recognition only and exclusively a state becomes an International Person and a subject of International Law”16. The constitutive theory places prime importance on recognition by other states as a prerequisite to statehood. Constitutivists emphasize that international relations cannot exist with a political entity that it does not recognize. They emphasize that before rights and responsibilities can be demanded or bestowed upon a political entity, it has to be first recognized as a legitimate and independent state. Kosovo Kosovo is recognized by the United Kingdom as a state because it substantially has all the elements of a state. It fulfils the first two physical requirements of a state (territory and population), it has a government, and it is slowly gaining the capabilities of being able to participate in international relations. Although Serbia has yet to recognize the independent status of Kosovo, about 53 of the 192 nations of the world already recognize Kosovo’s statehood. Kosovo’s road to statehood has been long and bloody; highlighted by the Kosovo War (1996-1999) between the Kosovo Liberation Army and the Serbian and Yugoslav forces, and later by ethnic conflicts and civil unrest in 2004. In 2006, negotiations would soon follow regarding the possibility of granting statehood to Kosovo. Last year February, the country declared its independence. This was immediately backed by the United States, United Kingdom and other European nations17. Both Serbia and Russia claim that Kosovo is not ready to be an independent state. Serbian supporters claim that “the recognition of Kosovo’s independence itself amounts to an act of partition of an internationally recognized sovereign state – i.e. Serbia”18. Despite Russia and Serbia’s protests and lack of support, many nations have pledged their support for Kosovo, recognizing its status as an independent nation capable of ruling and governing its territories and its constituents. There are practical effects of the fact that some states recognize Kosovo while some do not. Russia’s refusal to recognize Kosovo’s statehood is a source of tension in the international arena. The superpower Russia has continually stated how it will exercise its powers to refuse Kosovo UN membership, effectually cutting off the Kosovo’s hopes of participating in international relations and in gaining support from other states. The fact that its neighbours do not yet recognize Kosovo’s statehood status is presently causing physical problems to its airspace (which are effectively being blocked by its neighbours). “Serbia considers Kosovo airspace closed and does not allow any traffic going through, to or from Kosovo, that also touches its airspace”19. Many airlines are being forced to take longer routes to get to Kosovo, consequently resulting to higher airline fees. Entry and exit into other countries is also awkward for Kosovars and other ‘citizens’ from other unrecognized states. “…[T]he EU and the United States keep most of the unrecognized countrys leadership on a visa-blacklist which prevent them from leaving the country and speaking up at international events where the future of their people is being decided”20. The fact that some nations recognize Kosovo as an independent state will open the floodgates for other unrecognized states. When Kosovo declared its independent status, unrecognized states expressed their hope of following suit. Unrecognized states -- Taiwan, Tibet, Chechnya, the Basque Region, and Abkhazia are now using the case of Kosovo as a point in their favour, in the hope of achieving and declaring statehood status in the future21. States that now recognize Kosovo’s statehood are more open to international relations with the nation; and they are more open to establishing economic trade and relations with the country. Military aid (from recognizing states) is also forthcoming in times where its statehood status is being disturbed by civil unrest or by external threats. Palestinian Authority As far as the Palestinian Authority area is concerned, the United Kingdom does not recognize it as a state because it lacks certain elements essential for statehood. The Palestinian Authority area is an autonomous region “comprising the territories of Gaza (formerly under Egyptian sovereignty) and West Bank (formerly under Jordan sovereignty), which were occupied by the Israeli Defense Forces in June 1967”22. It was created as an interim governing body in preparation for an independent Palestinian State. There are currently territorial conflicts regarding the areas covered by the Palestinian Authority with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip being occupied by the Israelis. Hamas forces also seized control of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority has no defined territory, and because of this, the other elements of a state also have no chance of becoming firmly established and maintained. The International Court of Justice has recently had the occasion to rule against Israel for its territorial acquisition of the area. Israel has no recognized authority on the occupied Palestinian territory. The Court reaffirmed the responsibility of the United Nations to decide on the Palestinian issue until the status of the area is finally resolved. In the meantime, acts of violence by contending parties are condemned by the UN. The UN also reaffirmed “the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to their independent State of Palestine”23. Therefore, acts of aggression by involved parties are subject to the authority of the ICJ and the UN. States versus legal and non-legal entities States can easily participate in international law and relations. Non-legal entities and other legal entities have difficulties in being recognized in the international scene as participants in international relations. Being recognized as a state or having the international legal personality meant that one had the “…capacity to both speak up and be spoken to…”24. Legal entities, which have yet to reach statehood status like the Palestinian Authority, have to rely on the rights given to it by the United Nations. It cannot also seek recognition and definitively ask its refugee citizens to return to their ‘homeland’. These refugees are usually under the aid and control of the United Nations. Their status and their lives are very much in the hands of other entities which have independent status. In the international scene, independent entities have more chances of seeking protection under international law. In times of war and conflict, foreign aid and protection especially from the United Nations and other international organizations can be easily dispersed in support of independent states. This was seen in the Philippines, where the United States helped in the capture of Abu Sayyaf terrorists25; and in Sudan, where UN peace-keeping forces were sent to help keep the peace and settle civil unrest in the area26. Recognition of a state versus recognition of a government Recognition of a state and recognition of a government mean two different things. The recognition of a state implies that the state in question is legitimate-has all the elements of a state and is recognized as such by other states. It is a de jure government. The issue of recognition usually comes up when a government is installed and takes power and control over the state through illegal or unconstitutional means. In this sense, it is a de facto government. The de facto and de jure terms do not actually refer to the act of recognition, but to the legitimacy of the entity in question. Recognition of a state (de jure recognition) implies that the government was firmly established and in control; and the state also has all the attributes of sovereignty over its territory. On the other hand, recognition of a government of a state (recognition de facto) implies that the government has effective control over its territory while possessing most of the characteristics of a sovereign entity. “The advantage of the distinction was that it enabled cognizance to be taken of factual circumstances while still acknowledging the de jure government-even if that territory was not in physical control of every part of the State’s territory…”27. Non state-based alternatives to international law There are some alternatives to the state-based model of public international law. These alternatives are founded on basic principles of human rights and world society. International laws used to deal with states only, but there have been changes in recent years. In violations of human rights, international laws deal with violators regardless of their non-state status. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations and in effect laid out, among other things that the “inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”28. The protection here is based on the violation of human rights, not on any principles founded on statehood. Human rights violations based on international laws are tried under the International Court of Justice which has jurisdiction over acts of individuals and entities that are found guilty of violating human rights and international laws. The concept of world society is also non-state based. It “is used widely to bring non-state actors into the social structure of the international system”29. The concept of world society seeks to study the relations between states and other legal or non-legal entities based on their interplay with other entities, based on their shared values, and based on capitalism and modernity. The principles of world society do away with state-centric ideologies in studying legal entities and analyzing how they fit in the bigger picture, in the bigger society, and in the wider world. This term and concept has been adopted “as a way of questioning the narrowness inherent in the state-centric quality of international society”30. The concept of world society is applied in terms of offering socioeconomic and medical aid to countries and legal entities that need it. This is usually apparent in times of natural calamities (China-earthquake; Indonesia-Tsunami disaster; United States-hurricanes); and other tragic and disastrous events (Rwanda genocide). Aid was extended by the United States to the Kurds who were being tortured by Saddam Hussein. Kurdistan is not recognized by the U.S. as a state, nevertheless aid was extended to them because of the human rights violations they suffered, and because the state lines do not matter in the name of socioeconomic and medical aid. United Kingdom’s position in the recognition of states The United Kingdom’s position as far as recognizing states are concerned is similar to the United States. “The general rule is that a new governmental regime will be recognized if it has effective control over the territory it claims to represent and is likely to maintain its control”31. UK’s method of recognition hinges on whether or not the government will be able to effectively control the territory it is claiming. This method of recognition is also based on four determinants. The first is whether or not the entity is the constitutional government of the state; second, the degree, nature, stability or administrative control, if any, which are exercised over the territory of the state; third, whether the British government has any dealings with that government, and if so, the nature of those dealings; and finally, the extent of international recognition that has been accorded the government of that state. These are set principles that help guide the British courts in deciding whether an entity is worthy of recognition as the legitimate government of a state. The United Kingdom recognizes Kosovo as a state because the latter has all the elements of a state. However, it does not recognize Kurdistan, Palestinian Authority, and Antarctica as states because they do not possess all the constitutive elements of a state. It must be mentioned though, that the issue of statehood is largely a political one. Many nations often choose to either stay away or to participate in the issue only if it serves their interests. This unfortunate political scheme often leaves many unrecognized states in the unfortunate position of being very much under the whims of their more independent counterparts. Statehood is not anymore a question of qualifications, but is now very much about recognition by other states, or more to the point, recognition by a superpower. Works Cited Al-Maeena, K. (8 March 2008). Kosovo Implications. Arab News. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=107605&d=8&m=3&y=2008 Arctic Claims History (2008) Georgia Tech Model United Nations. Retrieved 02 February 2009 from http://www.gtmun.org/documents/2008/GA%20Plen/Artic_History.pdf. Blocked air routes through Serbia cost Kosovo (19 December 2008). New Kosova Report. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.newkosovareport.com/200812191504/Business-and-Economy/Blocked-air-routes-through-Serbia-cost-Kosovo-environment.html Buzan, B. (2004) From International to World Society?: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cahoon, B. (2000) Palestinian National Authority. World Statesmen. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Palestinian_National_Authority.htm Conde, H. (2004) A Handbook of International Human Rights Terminology. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press. Cooper, J. (28 March 2008) Kosovo Advisory Seeks Voice for Non-members at the UN. Tiraspol Times. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/kosovo_advisory_seeks_voice_for_non_members_at_the_u_n.html Gashi, K. (15 May 2007) Kosovo Albanians Worry About Russia’s Veto. Balkan Investigative Reporting Network. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://kosovo.birn.eu.com/en/1/70/2934/ Haven, P. (22 February 2008) Kosovo Recognition a Tricky Question. Fox News. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb22/0,4670,KosovoTheRecognitionGame,00.html Henckaerts, J. (1996) The International Status of Taiwan in the New World Order: Legal and Political Considerations. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Hoare, M. (n.d) The Serbia Kosovo Dispute as a Factor of Instability in the Balkans. HUMSEC. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.humsec.eu/cms/fileadmin/user_upload/humsec/Workin_Paper_Series/WP_Hoare.pdf. Independence for Kosovo Will Open the Floodgate for all Unrecognized Provinces and Regions (24 November 2006) Equipo Nizkor. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/europa/kosovo/vuk.html Jagota, S. (1985) Maritime Boundary. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Joyner, C. (1992) Antarctica and the Law of the Sea. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Kosovo MPs proclaim independence (17 February 2008) BBC News. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7249034.stm Kosovo State Inevitable, Says Nobel Laureate (17 October 2008) Guardian News and Media. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/230500.html Kindred, H., et.al. (2006). International Law, Chiefly Interpreted and Applied in Canada. Canada: Emond Publications Kurds-A People Without a State. (n.d) Cyberessays. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.cyberessays.com/History/65.htm Lauterpacht, E. (1999) International Law Reports. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Malanczuk, P. & Akehurst, M. (1997) Akehursts Modern Introduction to International Law. New York: Routledge Publishers Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States of 1934 (n.d) Taiwan Documents. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.taiwandocuments.org/montevideo01.htm Nijman, J. (2004) The Concept of International Legal Personality: An Inquiry Into the History and Theory of International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Niksch, L. (24 January 2007) Abu Sayyaf: Target of Philippine-US Anti Terrorism Cooperation. University of Maryland. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/crsreports/crsdocuments/RL31265_01242007.pdf Polgreen, L. (2 August 2007) Sudan Agrees to U.N. Peacekeepers to Complement African Union Force. New York Times. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/02/world/africa/02darfur.html?_r=1 Raic, D. (2002) Statehood and the Law of Self-determination: Statehood and the Law of Self- Determination. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Russia Warns Kosovo on Independence (17 January 2008) The Associated Press. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/17/news/UN-GEN-UN-Kosovo.php Statehood for Puerto Rico (n.d) Puerto Rico Statehood Society. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://prssa51.wordpress.com/why-statehood/ The Recognition of States and Governments (16 April 2007). Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/intla/cintla/recco.html The United Nations and Non-Governmental Organizations on the Question of Palestine (13 September 2002) United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/3822b5e39951876a85256b6e0058a478/fad095b10eec14f285256c37006cbd06!OpenDocument Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). United Nations. Retrieved 13 January 2009 from http://un.org/Overview/rights.html Vote on Right of Palestinian People to Self-Determination (20 November 2007) United Nations General Assembly. Retrieved 02 February 2009 from http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/6416e13891a2f0628525739a004fddf0!OpenDocument Wallace, R. (2005) International Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell Western Sahara country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1996. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved 02 February 2009 from http://www.arso.org/US96.htm Research Trail Texts: Library Search for Public International Law Texts: Buzan Conde Henckaerts Jagota Joyner Kindred Lauterpacht Malanczuk Nijman Raic Wallace Contents Search of Malanczuk: on elements of a state Chapter 5: States and Governments Contents Search of Raic: on elements of a state Chapter 4: International Law and Municipal Law Contents Search of Jagota: on maritime jurisdiction-international law International Court of Justice Cases Contents Search of Joyner: on elements of a state Chapter 8: Antarctica Contents Search of Kindred: on elements of a state Chapter 2: International Legal Persons Contents Search of Nijman: benefits of being a state Chapter I: General Introduction International Legal Personality Contents Search of Wallace: benefits of being a state Chapter 4: International Personality Contents Search of Henckaerts: consequences of not being recognized as a state Limitations and Prospects of Taiwan’s Informal Diplomacy Contents Search of Buzan: alternatives to state-based models Chapter 3: Concepts of world society outside English school thinking Contents Search of Conde: non-state alternatives Definition of Terms: Non-state Alternatives Contents Search of Lauterpacht: non-state alternatives ICJ: Bosnia & Herzegovina Internet Resources: Google Search: Elements of a State: ‘Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States’ at http://www.taiwandocuments.org/montevideo01.htm last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: International Court of Justice Antarctica claims: Arctic Claims History at http://www.gtmun.org/documents/2008/GA%20Plen/Artic_History.pdf last visited 02 February 2009 Google Search: Permanent Population International Court of Justice: Western Sahara country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1996 at http://www.arso.org/US96.htm last visited 02 February 2009 Google Search: Kosovo independence: Kosovo MPs proclaim independence at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7249034.stm last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo independence: Kosovo State Inevitable, Says Nobel Laureate at http://www.buzzle.com/articles/230500.html last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo State Implications: Kosovo Implications at http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=107605&d=8&m=3&y=2008 last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo statehood implications: Blocked air routes through Serbia cost Kosovo http://www.newkosovareport.com/200812191504/Business-and-Economy/Blocked-air-routesthrough-Serbia-cost-Kosovo-environment.html last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo statehood implications: Kosovo Advisory Seeks Voice for Non-members at the UN at http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/kosovo_advisory_seeks_voice_for_non_members_at_the_u_n.html last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo Independence: Russia Warns Kosovo on Independence at http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/17/news/UN-GEN-UN-Kosovo.php last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo U.N. membership: Kosovo Albanians Worry About Russia’s Veto at http://kosovo.birn.eu.com/en/1/70/2934/ last visited 13 January 2009 Google search: Kosovo recognition: Kosovo Recognition a Tricky Question. http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb22/0,4670,KosovoTheRecognitionGame,00.html last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo recognition implications: The Serbia Kosovo Dispute as a Factor of Instability in the Balkans at http://www.humsec.eu/cms/fileadmin/user_upload/humsec/Workin_Paper_Series/WP_Hoare.pdf last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kosovo recognition implications: Independence for Kosovo Will Open the Floodgate for all Unrecognized Provinces and Regions at http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/europa/kosovo/vuk.html last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Kurdistan State: Kurds-A People without a State at http://www.cyberessays.com/History/65.htm last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Palestinian Authority Area: Palestinian National Authority at http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Palestinian_National_Authority.htm last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Palestine Authority area issue: The United Nations and Non-Governmental Organizations on the Question of Palestine http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/3822b5e39951876a85256b6e0058a478/fad095b10eec14f285256c37006cbd06!OpenDocument last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Palestine International Court of Justice decision: Vote on Right of Palestinian People to Self-Determination at http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/6416e13891a2f0628525739a004fddf0!OpenDocument last visited 02 February 2009 Google Search: Implications of Statehood: Abu Sayyaf: Target of Philippine-US Anti Terrorism Cooperation at http://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/crsreports/crsdocuments/RL31265_01242007.pdf last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: UN assistance for recognized states: Sudan Agrees to U.N. Peacekeepers to Complement African Union last http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/02/world/africa/02darfur.html?_r=1 last 13 January 2009 Google Search: Benefits of Statehood at http://prssa51.wordpress.com/why-statehood/ last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: Recognition of states: Recognition of States and Governments at http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/intla/cintla/recco.html last visited 13 January 2009 Google Search: International Rights: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) at http://un.org/Overview/rights.html last visited 13 January 2009 Word Count: 592 words Read More