Recognition of States and Governments
Diplomatic recognition must be distinguished from formal recognition of states or their governments. The fact that states do not maintain bilateral diplomatic relations does not mean that they do not recognize or treat one another as states. A state is not required to accord formal bilateral recognition to any other state, and some have a general policy of not doing so (considering that a vote for its membership of an international organisation restricted to states, such as the United Nations, is proof of recognition. Some consider that a state has a responsibility to not recognize as a state any entity that has attained the qualifications for statehood by a violation of basic principles of the UN Charter: the UN Security Council has in several instances (for example, Rhodesia, and the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus has issued Chapter VII resolutions (binding in in international law) which deny their statehood and should preclude recognition. States can exercise their recognition powers either explicitly or implicitly. The recognition of a government implies recognition of the state it governs, but even countries which have a policy of formally recognise states may not have a policy of formally recognising governments.
De facto recognition of states, rather than de jure, is rare. De jure recognition is stronger, while de facto recognition is more tentative and recognizes only that a government exercises control over a territory. An example of the difference is when the United Kingdom recognized the Soviet Union de facto in 1921, but de jure only in 1924. Another example is the state of Israel in 1948, whose government was immediately recognized de facto by the United States and three days later by Soviet de jure recognition. Also, the Republic of China, commonly known as "Taiwan", is generally recognized as de facto independent and sovereign, but is not universally recognized as de jure independent due to the complex political status of Taiwan related to the United Nation's de-recognization of it in favor of the People's Republic of China in 1971.
Renewing recognition of a government is not necessary when it changes in a normal, constitutional way (such as an election or referendum), but is necessary in the case of a coup d'etat or revolution. Recognition of a new government by other states can be important for its long term survival. For instance, the Taliban government of the Islamic State of Afghanistan, which lasted from 1996 to 2001, was recognized by only Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia, while far more had recognized the government of ousted President Burhanuddin Rabbani. The disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir of the Republic of India is not recognized by either Pakistan or the People's Republic of China.
Recognition can be implied by other acts, like the visit of the head of state, or the signing of a bilateral treaty. If implicit recognition is possible, a state may feel the need to explicitly proclaim that its acts do not constitute diplomatic recognition, like when the United States commenced its dialogue with the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1988.
The doctrine of non-recognition of illegal or immoral situations, like territorial gains achieved by force, is called the Stimson Doctrine, and has become more important since the Second World War, especially in the United Nations where it is a method of ensuring compliance with international law - for instance, in the case of Rhodesia in 1965. Withdrawal of recognition of a government is a more severe act of disapproval than the breaking of diplomatic relations.
Read more about this topic: Diplomatic Recognition
Famous quotes containing the words recognition of, recognition, states and/or governments:
“Tragedy, as you know, is always a fait accompli, whereas terror always has to do with anticipation, with mans recognition of his own negative potentialwith his sense of what he is capable of.”
—Joseph Brodsky (b. 1940)
“No democracy can long survive which does not accept as fundamental to its very existence the recognition of the rights of minorities.”
—Franklin D. Roosevelt (18821945)
“In it he proves that all things are true and states how the truths of all contradictions may be reconciled physically, such as for example that white is black and black is white; that one can be and not be at the same time; that there can be hills without valleys; that nothingness is something and that everything, which is, is not. But take note that he proves all these unheard-of paradoxes without any fallacious or sophistical reasoning.”
—Savinien Cyrano De Bergerac (16191655)
“And so the reliance on Property, including the reliance on governments which protect it, is the want of self-reliance.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (18031882)