Two States: a Case Study of Taiwan's Statehood
Taiwanese statehood
Taiwanese statehood is one of the case studies that challenge and expose the ineffectiveness of international law in enforcement and its jurisdictional limits. Its complexities have international relations scholars to oppose on the views of international law. The purpose of this essay is to render an argument to prove that international law does not support Taiwan’s statehood. There are two dominant theories on states recognition which are; the declarative theory and the constitutive theory. These theories shall be applied on the criteria for state; which is provided by the Montevideo Convention of 1993. Furthermore, we shall critically analyse the ineffectiveness of international law from the outcomes of this case study.
Sovereignty and statehood
Taiwan has existed independently since Japan’s legal withdrawal from the territory, the question is whether we should call it sovereign and recognise it. Under the treaty of Westphalia of 1648, a sovereign state is an entity that has the ability to demonstrate internal supremacy and external independence. A sovereign entity must be the only political authority in that existing territory and no other authority can exercise political control over its population within its boundaries. More importantly, a sovereign state ought to demonstrate independence and it needs to be recognised by the international community as a state.
Recognition
Recognition is a significant element of statehood it grants an entity membership to the international community. Recognition may be either unilateral or collective; unilateral recognition is when a state recognises an entity as a state, and collective recognition is when a group of states such as the United Nations and the European Union recognises an entity as a state. The role of recognition is a debatable issue; there are two dominant theories on recognition. The declarative theory argues that an entity only becomes a state once it meets the factual criteria
Taiwanese statehood is one of the case studies that challenge and expose the ineffectiveness of international law in enforcement and its jurisdictional limits. Its complexities have international relations scholars to oppose on the views of international law. The purpose of this essay is to render an argument to prove that international law does not support Taiwan’s statehood. There are two dominant theories on states recognition which are; the declarative theory and the constitutive theory. These theories shall be applied on the criteria for state; which is provided by the Montevideo Convention of 1993. Furthermore, we shall critically analyse the ineffectiveness of international law from the outcomes of this case study.
Sovereignty and statehood
Taiwan has existed independently since Japan’s legal withdrawal from the territory, the question is whether we should call it sovereign and recognise it. Under the treaty of Westphalia of 1648, a sovereign state is an entity that has the ability to demonstrate internal supremacy and external independence. A sovereign entity must be the only political authority in that existing territory and no other authority can exercise political control over its population within its boundaries. More importantly, a sovereign state ought to demonstrate independence and it needs to be recognised by the international community as a state.
Recognition
Recognition is a significant element of statehood it grants an entity membership to the international community. Recognition may be either unilateral or collective; unilateral recognition is when a state recognises an entity as a state, and collective recognition is when a group of states such as the United Nations and the European Union recognises an entity as a state. The role of recognition is a debatable issue; there are two dominant theories on recognition. The declarative theory argues that an entity only becomes a state once it meets the factual criteria
Bibliography: Dugard, J. : International Law- A South African Perspective, JUTA, Cape Town, 2005, Goldsmith, J, Stanford Law Review: Sovereignty, International Relations Theory and International law, Vol Sinclair, I: The Vienna Convention On The Law Of Treaties, Manchester University Press, Manchester, 1984, Weil, P, The American Journal of International Law: Towards Relative Normativity in International Law? , Vol [ 4 ]. Dugard, J. : International Law- A South African Perspective, JUTA, Cape Town, 2005, p 90 [ 5 ] [ 8 ]. Shen, J. “Sovereignty and Its Claims to Statehood, Self-determination, and the Issue of Taiwan” in American University international Law Review, Vol. 15, 1999-2000, p 1126 [ 9 ] [ 21 ]. Sinclair, I: The Vienna Convention on The Law Of Treaties, Manchester University press, Manchester, 1984, p 71 [ 22 ] [ 23 ]. Chang, T, Chinas Claim Of Sovereignty Over Spratly and Paracel islands: A Historical and Legal Perspective, Vol. 52, No. 4, 2000, p 958 [ 24 ] [ 25 ]. Weil, P, The American Journal of International Law: Towards Relative Normativity in International Law? , Vol. 77, No. 3, 1993, pp 423 [ 26 ]