Sovereign state

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A sovereign state is, in international law, a nonphysical

juridical entity that is represented by one centralized
government that has sovereignty over a geographic area.
International law defines sovereign states as having a
permanent population, defined territory, one government, and
the capacity to enter into relations with other sovereign
states.[1] It is also normally understood that a sovereign state is
neither dependent on nor subjected to any other power or
state.[2]
Member states of the United Nations, all of which
The existence or disappearance of a state is a question of are sovereign states, though not all sovereign states
are necessarily members.
fact.[3] While according to the declarative theory of statehood,
a sovereign state can exist without being recognised by other
sovereign states, unrecognised states will often find it hard to exercise full treaty-making powers and engage in
diplomatic relations with other sovereign states.

Contents
1 Emergence of states
2 Westphalian sovereignty
3 Recognition
3.1 Constitutive theory
3.2 Declarative theory
3.3 State recognition
3.4 De facto and de jure states
4 Relationship between state and government
5 State extinction
6 Ontological status of the state
6.1 The state as "quasi-abstract"
6.2 The state as "spiritual entity"
7 Trends in the number of states
8 See also
9 References
9.1 Bibliography
10 Further reading
11 External links

Emergence of states
States came into existence as people "gradually transferred their allegiance from an individual sovereign (king,
duke, prince) to an intangible but territorial political entity, of the state".[4] States are but one of several political
orders that emerged from feudal Europe, others being city states, leagues, and empires with universalist claims to
authority.[5]
Westphalian sovereignty
Westphalian sovereignty is the concept of nation-state sovereignty based on territoriality and the absence of a role
for external agents in domestic structures. It is an international system of states, multinational corporations, and
organizations that began with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648.

Sovereignty is a term that is frequently misused.[6][7] Up until the 19th century, the radicalised concept of a
"standard of civilization" was routinely deployed to determine that certain peoples in the world were "uncivilised",
and lacking organised societies. That position was reflected and constituted in the notion that their "sovereignty"
was either completely lacking, or at least of an inferior character when compared to that of "civilised" people."[8]
Lassa Oppenheim said, "There exists perhaps no conception the meaning of which is more controversial than that
of sovereignty. It is an indisputable fact that this conception, from the moment when it was introduced into
political science until the present day, has never had a meaning which was universally agreed upon."[9] In the
opinion of H. V. Evatt of the High Court of Australia, "sovereignty is neither a question of fact, nor a question of
law, but a question that does not arise at all."[10]

Sovereignty has taken on a different meaning with the development of the principle of self-determination and the
prohibition against the threat or use of force as jus cogens norms of modern international law. The United Nations
Charter, the Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States, and the charters of regional international
organizations express the view that all states are juridically equal and enjoy the same rights and duties based upon
the mere fact of their existence as persons under international law.[11][12] The right of nations to determine their
own political status and exercise permanent sovereignty within the limits of their territorial jurisdictions is widely
recognized.[13][14][15]

In political science, sovereignty is usually defined as the most essential attribute of the state in the form of its
complete self-sufficiency in the frames of a certain territory, that is its supremacy in the domestic policy and
independence in the foreign one.[16]

Named after the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, the Westphalian System of state sovereignty, which according to
Bryan Turner is "made a more or less clear separation between religion and state, and recognised the right of
princes 'to confessionalise' the state, that is, to determine the religious affiliation of their kingdoms on the
pragmatic principle of cuius regio eius religio."[17]

The Westphalian model of state sovereignty has increasingly come under fire from the "non-west" as a system
imposed solely by Western Colonialism. What this model did was make religion a subordinate to politics,[17] a
problem that has caused some issues in the Islamic world. This system does not fit in the Islamic world because
concepts such as "separation of church and state" and "individual conscience" are not recognised in the Islamic
religion as social systems.

In casual usage, the terms "country", "nation", and "state" are often used as if they were synonymous; but in
stricter usage they can be distinguished:

Country denotes a region of land defined by geographical features or political boundaries.

Nation denotes a people who are believed to or deemed to share common customs, religion, language,
origins, ancestry or history. However, the adjectives national and international are frequently used to refer to
matters pertaining to what are strictly sovereign states, as in national capital, international law.
State refers to the set of governing and supportive institutions that have sovereignty over a definite territory
and population. Sovereign states are legal persons.

Recognition
State recognition signifies the decision of a sovereign state to treat another entity as also being a sovereign
state.[18] Recognition can be either expressed or implied and is usually retroactive in its effects. It does not
necessarily signify a desire to establish or maintain diplomatic relations.

There is no definition that is binding on all the members of the community of nations on the criteria for statehood.
In actual practice, the criteria are mainly political, not legal.[19] L.C. Green cited the recognition of the unborn
Polish and Czechoslovak states in World War I and explained that "since recognition of statehood is a matter of
discretion, it is open to any existing State to accept as a state any entity it wishes, regardless of the existence of
territory or of an established government."[20]

In international law, however, there are several theories of when a state should be recognised as sovereign.[21]

Constitutive theory

The constitutive theory of statehood defines a state as a person of international law if, and only if, it is recognised
as sovereign by other states. This theory of recognition was developed in the 14th century. Under it, a state was
sovereign if another sovereign state recognised it as such. Because of this, new states could not immediately
become part of the international community or be bound by international law, and recognised nations did not have
to respect international law in their dealings with them.[22] In 1815, at the Congress of Vienna the Final Act
recognised only 39 sovereign states in the European diplomatic system, and as a result it was firmly established
that in the future new states would have to be recognised by other states, and that meant in practice recognition by
one or more of the great powers.[23]

One of the major criticisms of this law is the confusion caused when some states recognise a new entity, but other
states do not. Hersch Lauterpacht, one of the theory's main proponents, suggested that it is a state's duty to grant
recognition as a possible solution. However, a state may use any criteria when judging if they should give
recognition and they have no obligation to use such criteria. Many states may only recognise another state if it is to
their advantage.[22]

In 1912, L. F. L. Oppenheim had the following to say on constitutive theory:

International Law does not say that a State is not in existence as long as it isn't recognised, but it takes
no notice of it before its recognition. Through recognition only and exclusively a State becomes an
International Person and a subject of International Law.[24]

Declarative theory

By contrast, the declarative theory of statehood defines a state as a person in international law if it meets the
following criteria: 1) a defined territory; 2) a permanent population; 3) a government and 4) a capacity to enter into
relations with other states. According to declarative theory, an entity's statehood is independent of its recognition
by other states. The declarative model was most famously expressed in the 1933 Montevideo Convention.[25]

Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention declares that political statehood is independent of recognition by other
states, and the state is not prohibited from defending itself.[26] In contrast, recognition is considered a requirement
for statehood by the constitutive theory of statehood.
A similar opinion about "the conditions on which an entity constitutes a state" is expressed by the European
Economic Community Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration Committee, which found that a state was defined by
having a territory, a population, and a political authority.

State recognition

State practice relating to the recognition of states typically falls somewhere between the declaratory and
constitutive approaches.[27] International law does not require a state to recognise other states.[28] Recognition is
often withheld when a new state is seen as illegitimate or has come about in breach of international law. Almost
universal non-recognition by the international community of Rhodesia and Northern Cyprus are good examples of
this, the former only having been recognized by South Africa, and the latter only recognized by Turkey. In the case
of Rhodesia, recognition was widely withheld when the white minority seized power and attempted to form a state
along the lines of Apartheid South Africa, a move that the United Nations Security Council described as the
creation of an "illegal racist minority rgime".[29] In the case of Northern Cyprus, recognition was withheld from a
state created in Northern Cyprus.[30] International law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence,[31]
and the recognition of a country is a political issue.[32] As a result, Turkish Cypriots gained "observer status" in the
PACE, and their representatives are elected in the Assembly of Northern Cyprus;[33] and Northern Cyprus became
an observer member of the OIC and the ECO.

Formosa or Taiwan is also the same situation. Only 21 countries on the world recognize Republic of China (the
official name of Formosa).[34] People's Republic of China proclaims that Formosa is a part of it.

De facto and de jure states

Most sovereign states are states de jure and de facto (i.e., they exist both in law and in reality). However, a state
may be recognised only as a de jure state, in that it is recognised as being the legitimate government of a territory
over which it has no actual control. For example, during the Second World War, governments-in-exile of a number
of continental European states continued to enjoy diplomatic relations with the Allies, notwithstanding that their
countries were under Nazi occupation. The PLO and Palestinian Authority claim that the State of Palestine is a
sovereign state, a claim which has been recognised by most states, though the territory it claims is under the de
facto control of Israel.[35][49] Other entities may have de facto control over a territory but lack international
recognition; these may be considered by the international community to be only de facto states. They are
considered de jure states only according to their own law and by states that recognise them. For example,
Somaliland is commonly considered to be such a state.[50][51][52][53] For a list of entities that wish to be universally
recognised as sovereign states, but do not have complete worldwide diplomatic recognition, see the list of states
with limited recognition.

Relationship between state and government

Although the terms "state" and "government" are often used interchangeably,[54] international law distinguishes
between a non-physical state and its government; and in fact, the concept of "government-in-exile" is predicated
upon that distinction.[55] States are non-physical juridical entities, and not organisations of any kind.[56] However,
ordinarily, only the government of a state can obligate or bind the state, for example by treaty.[55]

State extinction
Generally speaking, states are durable entities, though it is possible for them to become extinguished, either
through voluntary means or outside forces, such as military conquest. According to a 2004 study, violent state
abolition has virtually ceased since the end of World War II.[57] Because states are non-physical juridical entities, it
has been argued their extinction cannot be due to physical force alone.[58] Instead, the physical actions of the
military must be associated with the correct social or judiciary actions in order to abolish a state.

Ontological status of the state

The ontological status of the state has been the subject of debate,[59] specially, whether or not the state, being an
object that no one can see, taste, touch, or otherwise detect,[60] actually exists.

The state as "quasi-abstract"

It has been argued that one potential reason as to why the existence of states has been controversial is because
states do not have a place in the traditional Platonist duality of the concrete and the abstract.[61] Characteristically,
concrete objects are those that have position in time and space, which states do not have (though their territories
have spatial position, but states are distinct from their territories), and abstract objects have position in neither time
nor space, which does not fit the supposed characteristics of states either, since states do have temporal position
(they can be created at certain times and then become extinct at a future time). Also, abstract objects are
characteristically completely non-causal, which is also not a characteristic of states, since states can act in the
world and can cause certain events (though only by actions taken on their behalf through a representative).[62]
Therefore, it has been argued that states belong to a third category, the quasi-abstract, that has recently begun to
garner philosophical attention, especially in the area of documentality, an ontological theory that seeks to
understand the role of documents in understanding all of social reality. Quasi-abstract objects, such as states, can
be brought into being through document acts, and can also be used to manipulate them, such as by binding them by
treaty or surrendering them as the result of a war.[61]

Scholars in international relations can be broken up into two different practices, realists and pluralists, of what they
believe the ontological state of the state is. Realists believe that the world is one of only states and interstate
relations and the identity of the state is defined before any international relations with other states. On the other
hand, pluralists believe that the state is not the only actor in international relations and interactions between states
and the state is competing against many other actors.[63]

The state as "spiritual entity"

Another theory of the ontology of the state is that the state is a spiritual[64] or "mystical entity"[64] with its own
being, distinct from the members of the state.[64] The German Idealist philosopher Georg Hegel (17701831) was
perhaps the greatest proponent of this theory.[64] The Hegelian definition of the state is "the Divine Idea as it exists
on Earth".[65]

Trends in the number of states

Since the end of World War II, the number of sovereign states in the international system has surged.[66] Some
research suggests that the existence of international and regional organisations, the greater availability of economic
aid, and greater acceptance of the norm of self-determination have increased the desire of political units to secede
and can be credited for the increase in the number of states in the international system.[67][68] Harvard economist
Alberto Alesina and Tufts economist Enrico Spolaore argue in their book, Size of Nations, that the increase in the
number of states can partly be credited to a more peaceful world, greater free trade and international economic
integration, democratisation, and the presence of international organisations that co-ordinate economic and
political policies.[69]

See also
Country
Sovereignty
Exclusive mandate
Failed state
Federated state
List of sovereign states (by formation date)
List of sovereign states and dependent territories by continent
Montevideo Convention
Nation
Nation-building
Nation state
Rule according to higher law
Stateless society
Unitary state
Proto-state

References
1. See the following:
Shaw, Malcolm Nathan (2003). International law. Cambridge University Press. p. 178. "Article 1 of the
Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, 1 lays down the most widely accepted formulation of the
criteria of statehood in international law. It note that the state as an international person should possess the
following qualifications: '(a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to
enter into relations with other states'"
Jasentuliyana, Nandasiri, ed. (1995). Perspectives on international law. Kluwer Law International. p. 20. "So far
as States are concerned, the traditional definitions provided for in the Montevideo Convention remain generally
accepted."
2. See the following:
Wheaton, Henry (1836). Elements of international law: with a sketch of the history of the science. Carey, Lea &
Blanchard. p. 51. "A sovereign state is generally defined to be any nation or people, whatever may be the form of
its internal constitution, which governs itself independently of foreign powers."
"sovereign" (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sovereign), The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language (4th ed.), Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004, retrieved 21 February 2010, "adj. 1. Self-governing;
independent: a sovereign state."
"sovereign", The New Oxford American Dictionary (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, ISBN 0-19-
517077-6, "adjective ... [ attrib. ] (of a nation or state) fully independent and determining its own affairs."
3. Lalonde, Suzanne (2002). "Notes to pages". Determining boundaries in a conflicted world: the role of uti possidetis (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=x7qEqVpq9poC). McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. p. 181. ISBN 978-0-7735-2424-8.
4. Glassner, Martin Ira; Fahrer, Chuck (2004). Political Geography (3rd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley. p. 14. ISBN 0-471-35266-7.
5. Spruyt, H. (1994). The Sovereign State and its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press. ISBN 0-691-03356-0.
6. Krasner, Stephen D. (1999). Sovereignty: Organised Hypocrisy. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-00711-X.
7. Nez, Jorge Emilio. "About the Impossibility of Absolute State Sovereignty" (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%
2Fs11196-013-9333-x). International Journal for the Semiotics of Law.
8. Wilde, Ralph (2009). "From Trusteeship to Self-Determination and Back Again: The Role of the Hague Regulations in
the Evolution of International Trusteeship, and the Framework of Rights and Duties of Occupying Powers". Loy. L.A.
Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 31: 85142 [p. 94].
 9. Lassa Oppenheim, International Law 66 (Sir Arnold D. McNair ed., 4th ed. 1928)
10. Akweenda, Sackey (1997). "Sovereignty in cases of Mandated Territories". International law and the protection of
Namibia's territorial integrity. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 40. ISBN 90-411-0412-7.
11. "Chapter IV Fundamental Rights and Duties of States" (http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_A-41_Charter_of_the_Organizati
on_of_American_States.htm#ch4). Charter of the Organization of American States. Secretariat of The Organization of
American States. Retrieved 21 November 2010.
12. "Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States" (http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft%20articles/2_1
_1949.pdf) (PDF). UN Treaty Organization. 1949. Retrieved 21 November 2010.
13. "General Assembly resolution 1803 (XVII) of 14 December 1962, "Permanent sovereignty over natural resources" " (htt
p://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/resources.htm). United Nations. Retrieved 21 November 2010.
14. Schwebel, Stephen M., The Story of the U.N.'s Declaration on Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources, 49
A.B.A. J. 463 (1963)
15. "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights"
(http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx).
16. Grinin L. E. Globalization and Sovereignty: Why do States Abandon their Sovereign Prerogatives? Age of
Globalization. Number 1 / 2008 [1] (http://www.socionauki.ru/journal/articles/127716/)
17. Turner, Bryan (July 2007). "Islam, Religious Revival and the Sovereign State". Muslim World. 97 (3): 405418.
18. "Recognition" (http://www.answers.com/topic/recognition), Encyclopedia of American Foreign Policy.
19. See B. Broms, "IV Recognition of States", pp 47-48 in International law: achievements and prospects, UNESCO Series,
Mohammed Bedjaoui(ed), Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1991, ISBN 92-3-102716-6 [2] (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=jrTsNTzcY7EC&lpg=PA47&client&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q&f=false)
20. See Israel Yearbook on Human Rights, 1989, Yoram Dinstein, Mala Tabory eds., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1990,
ISBN 0-7923-0450-0, page 135-136 [3] (https://books.google.com/books?id=5okNqth8I9wC&lpg=PA136&ots=ARGG
NDm7G-&dq=t&pg=PA136#v=onepage&q&f=false)
21. Thomas D. Grant, The recognition of states: law and practice in debate and evolution (Westport, Connecticut: Praeger,
1999), chapter 1.
22. Hillier, Tim (1998). Sourcebook on Public International Law (https://books.google.com/books?id=Kr0sOuIx8q8C).
Routledge. pp. 2012. ISBN 1-85941-050-2.
23. Kalevi Jaakko Holsti Taming the Sovereigns p. 128 (https://books.google.com/books?id=Jh6gjr-2ho8C&pg=PA128&dq=
Final+Act+of+the+Congress+of+Vienna&lr=&sig=ACfU3U1FTkJPODAK8KkyGV5Nz6O-ke9_Ig).
24. Lassa Oppenheim, Ronald Roxburgh (2005). International Law: A Treatise (https://books.google.com/books?id=vxJ1Jw
myw0EC&pg=PA135). The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. p. 135. ISBN 1-58477-609-9.
25. Hersch Lauterpacht (2012). Recognition in International Law (https://books.google.com/books?id=EWgEv1Qq2TwC&p
g=PA419). Cambridge University Press. p. 419.
26. http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-40.html
27. Shaw, Malcolm Nathan (2003). International law (5th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 369. ISBN 0-521-53183-7.
28. Opinion No. 10. of the Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia.
29. United Nations Security Council Resolution 216
30. United Nations Security Council Resolution 541
31. BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-10730573) The President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Hisashi Owada (2010): "International law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence."
32. Oshisanya, An Almanac of Contemporary and Comperative Judicial Restatement, 2016 (https://books.google.com.tr/boo
ks?id=xMvOBAAAQBAJ) p.64: The ICJ maintained that ... the issue of recognition was a political.
33. James Ker-Lindsay (UN SG's Former Special Representative for Cyprus) (https://books.google.com/books?id=4PwmeR
G9QsUC) The Foreign Policy of Counter Secession: Preventing the Recognition of Contested States, p.149
34. http://www.mofa.gov.tw/en/AlliesIndex.aspx?n=DF6F8F246049F8D6&sms=A76B7230ADF29736
35. Staff writers (20 February 2008). "Palestinians 'may declare state' " (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7254434.stm). BBC
News. British Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 2011-01-22.:"Saeb Erekat, disagreed arguing that the Palestine
Liberation Organisation had already declared independence in 1988. "Now we need real independence, not a declaration.
We need real independence by ending the occupation. We are not Kosovo. We are under Israeli occupation and for
independence we need to acquire independence".
36. B'Tselem - The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories: Israel's control of the airspace
and the territorial waters of the Gaza Strip (http://www.btselem.org/english/Gaza_Strip/Control_on_Air_space_and_terri
torial_waters.asp), Retrieved 2012-03-24.
37. Map of Gaza fishing limits, "security zones" (http://dissidentvoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Gaza-map-08s-fishin
g-limits-20090119.jpg)
38. Israel's Disengagement Plan: Renewing the Peace Process (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+P
eace+Process/Israels+Disengagement+Plan-+Renewing+the+Peace+Process+Apr+2005.htm) Archived (https://web.arch
ive.org/web/20070302014936/http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Process/Guide%20to%20the%20Peace%20Proces
s/Israels%20Disengagement%20Plan-%20Renewing%20the%20Peace%20Process%20Apr%202005.htm) 2007-03-02 at
the Wayback Machine.: "Israel will guard the perimeter of the Gaza Strip, continue to control Gaza air space, and
continue to patrol the sea off the Gaza coast. ... Israel will continue to maintain its essential military presence to prevent
arms smuggling along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt (Philadelphi Route), until the security situation and
cooperation with Egypt permit an alternative security arrangement."
39. Gold, Dore; Institute for Contemporary Affairs (26 August 2005). "Legal Acrobatics: The Palestinian Claim that Gaza is
Still "Occupied" Even After Israel Withdraws" (http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief005-3.htm). Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 5,
No. 3. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Retrieved 2010-07-16.
40. Bell, Abraham (28 January 2008). "International Law and Gaza: The Assault on Israel's Right to Self-Defense" (http://w
ww.jcpa.org/brief/brief005-3.htm). Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 7, No. 29. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Retrieved
2010-07-16.
41. "Address by Foreign Minister Livni to the 8th Herzliya Conference" (https://web.archive.org/web/20111026025009/htt
p://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Speeches%2Bby%2BIsraeli%2Bleaders/2008/Address%2Bby%2BFM%2BLivn
i%2Bto%2Bthe%2B8th%2BHerzliya%2BConference%2B22-Jan-2008.htm?DisplayMode=print) (Press release).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel. 22 January 2008. Archived from the original (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Govern
ment/Speeches+by+Israeli+leaders/2008/Address+by+FM+Livni+to+the+8th+Herzliya+Conference+22-Jan-2008.htm?
DisplayMode=print) on 26 October 2011. Retrieved 2010-07-16.
42. Salih, Zak M. (17 November 2005). "Panelists Disagree Over Gazas Occupation Status" (http://www.law.virginia.edu/ht
ml/news/2005_fall/gaza.htm). University of Virginia School of Law. Retrieved 2010-07-16.
43. "Israel: 'Disengagement' Will Not End Gaza Occupation"
(https://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/10/29/isrlpa9577.htm). Human Rights Watch. 29 October 2004. Retrieved
2010-07-16.
44. Gold, Dore; Institute for Contemporary Affairs (26 August 2005). "Legal Acrobatics: The Palestinian Claim that Gaza is
Still "Occupied" Even After Israel Withdraws" (http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief005-3.htm). Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 5,
No. 3. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Retrieved 2010-07-16.
45. Bell, Abraham (28 January 2008). "International Law and Gaza: The Assault on Israel's Right to Self-Defense" (http://w
ww.jcpa.org/brief/brief005-3.htm). Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 7, No. 29. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Retrieved
2010-07-16.
46. "Address by Foreign Minister Livni to the 8th Herzliya Conference" (https://web.archive.org/web/20111026025009/htt
p://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Speeches%2Bby%2BIsraeli%2Bleaders/2008/Address%2Bby%2BFM%2BLivn
i%2Bto%2Bthe%2B8th%2BHerzliya%2BConference%2B22-Jan-2008.htm?DisplayMode=print) (Press release).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel. 22 January 2008. Archived from the original (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Govern
ment/Speeches+by+Israeli+leaders/2008/Address+by+FM+Livni+to+the+8th+Herzliya+Conference+22-Jan-2008.htm?
DisplayMode=print) on 26 October 2011. Retrieved 2010-07-16.
47. Salih, Zak M. (17 November 2005). "Panelists Disagree Over Gazas Occupation Status" (http://www.law.virginia.edu/ht
ml/news/2005_fall/gaza.htm). University of Virginia School of Law. Retrieved 2010-07-16.
48. "Israel: 'Disengagement' Will Not End Gaza Occupation"
(https://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/10/29/isrlpa9577.htm). Human Rights Watch. 29 October 2004. Retrieved
2010-07-16.
49. Israel allows the PNA to execute some functions in the Palestinian territories, depending on special area classification.
Israel maintains minimal interference (retaining control of borders: air,[36] sea beyond internal waters,[36][37] land[38]) in
the Gaza strip and maximum in "Area C".[39][40][41][42][43] See also Israeli-occupied territories.
[35][44][45][46][47][48]
50. Arieff, Alexis (2008). "De facto Statehood? The Strange Case of Somaliland" (http://yalejournal.org/wp-content/upload
s/2011/01/083206arieff.pdf) (PDF). Yale Journal of International Affairs. 3: 6079. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
51. "The List: Six Reasons You May Need A New Atlas Soon" (https://foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3903).
Foreign Policy Magazine. July 2007. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
52. "Overview of De-facto States" (http://www.unpo.org/content/view/8418/244/). Unrepresented Nations and Peoples
Organization. July 2008. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
53. Wiren, Robert (April 2008). "France recognises de facto Somaliland" (http://www.lesnouvelles.org/P10_magazine/15_gr
andentretien/15055_mahamudsalahnur_eng.html). Les Nouvelles d'Addis Magazine. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
54. Robinson, E. H. (2013). "The Distinction Between State and Government" (http://www.edwardheath.net/wp-content/upl
oads/2013/08/State_and_Government.pdf) (PDF). The Geography Compass. 7 (8): 556566.
 55. Crawford, J. (2006). The Creation of States in International Law (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-
826002-4.
56. Robinson, Edward Heath (2010). "An Ontological Analysis of States: Organizations vs. Legal Persons" (http://www.edw
ardheath.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/States_v_Legal_Persons.pdf) (PDF). Applied Ontology. 5: 109125.
57. Fazal, Tanisha M. (2004-04-01). "State Death in the International System" (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/inte
rnational-organization/article/state-death-in-the-international-system/293E2E30C054DEE72899DAAA643B61AD).
International Organization. 58 (2): 311344. ISSN 1531-5088 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1531-5088).
doi:10.1017/S0020818304582048 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818304582048).
58. Robinson, Edward Heath (2011). "The Involuntary Extinction of States: An Examination of the Destruction of States
though the Application of Military Force by Foreign Powers since the Second World War" (http://www.edwardheath.net/
wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Destruction-of-States.pdf) (PDF). The Journal of Military Geography. 1: 1729.
59. Ringmar, Erik (1996). "On the ontological status of the state". European Journal of International Relations. 2 (4).
doi:10.1177/1354066196002004002 (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1354066196002004002).
60. A. James (1986). Sovereign Statehood: The Basis of International Society (London: Allen & Unwin)
61. Robinson, Edward H. (2014). "A documentary theory of states and their existence as quasi-abstract entities" (https://dl.dr
opboxusercontent.com/u/46395762/My%20Articles/Documentary%20Theory%20of%20States.pdf) (PDF). Geopolitics.
19 (3): 129. doi:10.1080/14650045.2014.913027 (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F14650045.2014.913027). Retrieved
16 September 2014.
62. Robinson, Edward H. (2011). "A theory of social agentivity and its integration into the descriptive ontology for linguistic
and cognitive engineering" (http://www.edwardheath.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Social_Agentivity.pdf) (PDF).
International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems. 7 (4): 6286. doi:10.4018/jswis.2011100103 (https://d
oi.org/10.4018%2Fjswis.2011100103). Retrieved 16 September 2014.
63. Ringmar, Erik (1996). "On the Ontological Status of the State". European Journal of International Relations. 10 (2).
64. Fundamentals of Government, pg. 71,
65. Fundamentals of Government, pg. 71 (citing Hegel's Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree [New York: Wiley Book Co.,
1944]).
66. "The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy" (https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-sage-handbook-of-diplomacy/book242760
#contents). SAGE Publications. pp. 294295. Retrieved 2016-11-17.
67. Fazal, Tanisha M.; Griffiths, Ryan D. (2014-03-01). "Membership Has Its Privileges: The Changing Benefits of
Statehood" (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/misr.12099/abstract). International Studies Review. 16 (1): 79
106. ISSN 1468-2486 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1468-2486). doi:10.1111/misr.12099 (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fm
isr.12099).
68. "The State of Secession in International Politics" (http://www.e-ir.info/2016/09/23/the-state-of-secession-in-international
-politics/). E-International Relations. Retrieved 2016-11-16.
69. "The Size of Nations" (https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/size-nations). MIT Press. Retrieved 2016-11-16.

Bibliography
Schmandt, Henry J., and Paul G. Steinbicker. Fundamentals of Government (Milwaukee: The Bruce
Publishing Company, 1954 [2nd printing, 1956]).

Further reading
Chen, Ti-chiang. The International Law of Recognition, with Special Reference to Practice in Great Britain
and the United States. London, 1951.
Crawford, James. The Creation of States in International Law. Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-19-
825402-4, pp. 1524.
Lauterpacht, Hersch (2012). Recognition in International Law (https://books.google.com/books?id=EWgEv
1Qq2TwC&pg=PA419). Cambridge University Press.
Rai, D. Statehood and the Law of Self-determination. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2002. ISBN 978-90-411-
1890-5. p 29 (with reference to Oppenheim in International Law Vol. 1 1905 p110)
Schmandt, Henry J., and Paul G. Steinbicker. Fundamentals of Government, "Part Three. The Philosophy of
the State" (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1954 [2nd printing, 1956]). 507 pgs. 23 cm. LOC
classification: JA66 .S35 https://lccn.loc.gov/54010666
External links
Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration Committee (http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/3/1/178) at the
European Journal of International Law
A Brief Primer on International Law (http://www.burneylawfirm.com/international_law_primer.htm) With
cases and commentary. Nathaniel Burney, 2007.
What constitutes the sovereign state? (http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=630
5536&jid=RIS&volumeId=22&issueId=04&aid=6305528&bodyId=&membershipNumber=&societyETOC
Session=) by Michael Ross Fowler and Julie Marie Bunck
Links to the best political risk websites, ipoliticalrisk.com (http://www.ipoliticalrisk.com) information on
tracking, evaluating and managing sovereign risk for trade and permanent investment
Legal opinion by the Negotiations Support Unit in the Palestinian Authority on transitional sovereignty (htt
p://thepalestinepapers.com/files/1402.PDF)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sovereign_state&oldid=788950053"

Categories: International law Political geography Sovereignty

This page was last edited on 4 July 2017, at 13:01.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark
of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.