The secession of States is subject to legal regulation. The arguments presented by States in the advisory proceedings on Kosovo confirm that there are rules of international law that determine whether the secession of a State in the post-colonial world is permissible. These rules derive from the competing principles of self-determination and territorial integrity. In deciding whether to recognize a secessionist entity as a State, or to admit it to the United Nations, States must balance these competing principles, with due regard to precedent and State practice. These lectures examine cases in which secession has succeeded (such as Israel and Bangladesh), in which it has failed (such as Biafra and Chechnya) and in which a determination is still to be made (Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia).

On 17 February 2008 the Kosovo Assembly voted unanimously in favor of declaring the independence of the Republic of Kosovo. Although Kosovo s Government coordinated every step with the International Community, the unilateral declaration of Independence made the process of the creation of the State of Kosovo into a secessionist case. As of 30 June 2010, sixty nine States have recognized Kosovo s independence. A considerable number of states maintain that the Declaration of Independence of Kosovo is contrary to the norms of international law. The absence of a unified collective policy of the UN towards Kosovo s independence led the General Assembly to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice. The author examines the legal positions regarding the Declaration of Independence of Kosovo and analyzes the International Community s role in the creation and recognition of Kosovo. The author argues that the unique circumstances of the creation of the State of Kosovo should find a reinterpretation of self-determination, statehood and recognition corresponding to the needs of the current developments of international law.

What makes a state? This question has attracted more and more attention in recent years with Catalan's illegal vote for independence from Spain and Palestine's ongoing search for international recognition. And while Scotland chose to remain with the United Kingdom, discussions of independence have only continued as the ramifications of the Brexit vote begin to set in. Kosovo, South Sudan, and the situation in Ukraine--each in its way reveals the perils of creating a nation separate from neighbors who have dominated it. As James Ker-Lindsay and Mikulas Fabry show in this new addition to the What Everyone Needs to Know® series, the road to statehood never did run smooth. Declaring independence is only the first step; gaining both local and global acceptance is necessary before a state can become truly independent. The prospect of losing territory is usually not welcomed by the parent state, and any such threat to an existing culture and its economy is often met with resistance--armed or otherwise. Beyond this immediate conflict, the international community often refuses to accept new states without proof of defined territory, a settled population, and effective government, which frequently translates to a democratic one with demonstrated respect for human rights. Covering the legal, political, and practical issues of secession and state creation, Ker-Lindsay and Fabry provide a sure-footed guide to a complex topic.

How do states prevent the recognition of territories that have unilaterally declared independence? At a time when the issue of secession is becoming increasingly significant on the world stage, this is the first book to consider this crucial question. Analysing the efforts of the governments of Serbia, Georgia, and Cyprus to prevent the international recognition of Kosovo, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and northern Cyprus the work draws on in depth interviews with a number of leadingpolicy makers to explain how each of the countries has designed, developed, and implemented its counter secession strategies. After explaining how the principle of the territorial integrity of states has tended to take precedence over the right of self-determination, it examines the range of wayscountries facing a separatist threat can prevent recognition by other states and considers the increasingly important role played by international and regional organisations, especially the United Nations, in the recognition process. Additionally, it shows how forms of legitimisation or acknowledgement are also central elements of any counter-recognition process, and why steps to prevent secessionist entities from participating in major sporting and cultural bodies are given so much attention. Finally, it questions the effects of these counter recognition efforts on attempts to solve these territorial conflicts. Drawing on history, politics, and international law this book is the first and only comprehensive account of this increasingly important field of foreign policy.

From Kurdistan to Somaliland, Xinjiang to South Yemen, all secessionist movements hope to secure newly independent states of their own. Most will not prevail. The existing scholarly wisdom provides one explanation for success, based on authority and control within the nascent states. With the aid of an expansive new dataset and detailed case studies, this book provides an alternative account. It argues that the strongest members of the international community have a decisive influence over whether today's secessionists become countries tomorrow and that, most often, their support is conditioned on parochial political considerations.

The Oxford ILDC online database, an online collection of domestic court decisions which apply international law, has been providing scholars with insights for many years. This ILDC Casebook is the perfect companion, introducing key court decisions with brief introductory and connecting texts. An ideal text for practitioners, judged, government officials, as well as for students on international law courses, the ILDC Casebook explains the theories and doctrines underlying the use by domestic courts of international law, and illustrates the key importance of domestic courts in the development of international law.

International law is usually conservative, with lawyers and judges emphasizing consistency, stability and predictability as the major advantages of the law. Legal scholars often prefer not to challenge the status quo, to suggest amendments, or to reform institutions, advocating simply to focus on the implementation of the laws that already exist. This collection stands different. It shares the authors’ discomfort with the present legal order and some of its institutions and courts, and dives into either a corrective or a profound reimagination of these, so that they can better address rising global challenges. Leading experts in their areas present their new and cutting-edge perspectives. Divided into six parts, the volume paints a vast yet solid thematic landscape of unique and critical approaches. The book invites and allows for a deep engagement with a wide range of opinions from across the world. It enables a free and courageous reimagining of the international legal order, detached from the endless feasibility skepticism. The work will be fascinating reading for students, academics and researchers working in the areas of International Law and International Relations.

Sovereignty in the Exercise of the Right to Self-Determination detangles the relationship between a number of principles of international law and the exercise of sovereign power. Jane Hofbauer’s assessment is conducted through an analysis of the different tiers of self-determination, ranging from the right to exercise external self-determination, the right to exercise forms of autonomy as a form of de facto independence, and the right to a type of ‘spatial’ independence, exemplified through the principles of permanent sovereignty over natural resources (PSNR), and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). The book not only highlights the (intentional) uncertainties within each of these principles, but identifies the (non-discretionary) limits to their normative evolution. It thereby explores to what extent (indigenous) peoples can be designated as sovereign entities.