The article examines the recognition of states as a legal mechanism for integrating new political entities into the system of international relations. It notes the predominantly customary character of the applicable rules and the limited treaty-based elaboration, which has hindered codification and maintained the leading role of legal scholarship. Recognition is presented as a sovereign act that opens the way to stable inter-state relations, while the academic debate continues over its unilateral or bilateral nature. The constitutive and declaratory theories are contrasted, with contemporary practice largely treating recognition as confirmation of a state’s pre-existing international legal personality. The analysis emphasizes widely accepted criteria of statehood—permanent population, defined territory, effective government, and capacity to enter into relations with other states—together with sovereignty as an inherent attribute from the moment of state emergence. It argues that the absence of these criteria, or creation in breach of fundamental norms of international law, may justify refusal of recognition. The conclusion calls for renewed codification efforts grounded in the practice of states and international organizations.
Sergey Nikolaevich Khrameshin (Fri,) studied this question.