Well, it all boils down to how you answer the question: “What makes something a state?” We have all grown up looking down at maps and globes with nice, neat borders drawn on with colored pencil and country names. But down here on Earth, it’s messy! Politics versus history; culture versus law; all intersecting on one plane.
The Foundation of Statehood
International law does try to bring some order to chaos and provides a framework for the emergence of new states. But there is a catch: although legal criteria may be relevant, recognition almost always comes down to politics. You could hit every technical mark in the law, yet find yourself locked out of the international stone-age.
So What Makes a State… a State?
Back in 1933, the Montevideo Convention gave us a simple list of four things an entity needs to be considered a state. On paper, it looks easy. In practice? Not so much.
Let’s walk through them:
- Permanent population – You don’t need millions of people. Even a tiny group can qualify (Vatican City, anyone?). What matters is that they live there consistently. No one’s asking for skyscrapers and suburbs, just some level of stability.
- Defined territory – You need a piece of land, but it doesn’t have to be perfectly mapped out. Plenty of countries have border disputes (just look at India and China, or Israel and Palestine). The important part is having a space you control.
- Government – Not just someone calling themselves “President-for-life.” You need an actual functioning system people enforcing laws, providing services, keeping things running.
- Capacity to enter into relations with other states – This means you can sign treaties, run embassies, and make deals without someone else pulling the strings.
If you tick all four boxes, that’s a solid start. But here’s where it gets tricky…
Recognition – Two Theories, Zero Guarantees
There are two big theories in international law about recognition, and neither offers a perfect answer.
- The declarative theory says if you meet the Montevideo criteria, congrats you’re a state, even if no one likes you. Recognition is just a courtesy.
- The constitutive theory says: nope, it’s not enough. You’re not a real state unless other states say you are. Think of it as needing validation from the cool kids’ table.
We think both theories have blind spots. You can’t deny that meeting the basic requirements is crucial, but let’s face it if no one recognises you, how far can you really get on the world stage?
Modern Statehood Is… Complicated
Meanwhile, it all just gets messy by the day, with complications piling up in the 21st century. Still unresolved is the tension between self-determination and territorial integrity: regions such as Catalonia or Kurdistan may claim a right to self-rule, while the parent states insist upon national unity, and the two alternatives are often contingent more on international politics than on legal clarity. In the same vein, digital governance raises newer questions: could a government be remotely able to operate under international law, using cryptocurrency, and exercising control through the Internet, or would it lack so-called “effective control” in the eyes of international law? Then come the failures: those entities that barely operate and yet manage to maintain the UN recognition status, lacking any organized government and any control over territory. Such cases challenge the traditional criteria of statehood and demonstrate that sometimes international acknowledgment has precedence over actual governance.
The United Nations
To a certain extent, the UN might be called the ultimate stamp of approval. But there is also another side to this story; the Security Council can and, in some cases, does block a member from being admitted into the organization if one of the Big Five-viz., the US, Russia, or China-says “no” to the application, for practical purposes, there the road ends. You really expect to be left out even if you tick all the legal boxes-a few regional clubs such as the African Union or the European Union lay serious claims to these matters. The regional bodies’ stance sometimes overtakes that of the global community, especially if the neighbours stand to benefit. This only serves to further emphasize the fact that recognition is not a pure legal act. It is an elaborate game of chess between politics.
Let’s Talk Real-World Examples
Take a look at some real-world examples:
-
Kosovo – Declared independence in 2008. Recognised by most Western powers… but not by Russia, China, or several EU countries. It’s stuck in limbo. -
South Sudan – Gained independence in 2011 and got swift recognition across the board. Why? Because the separation was part of a peace deal. Timing and context mattered. -
Taiwan – Functions like a state. Has a booming economy, democratic government, global trade ties but China’s shadow keeps it out of most official clubs.
And then you’ve got de facto states like Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, or Somaliland places that govern themselves, but few others recognise them. It’s like being in a long-distance relationship where one side won’t post about you online.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Statehood is always in flux and often evolves faster than international law can keep up. For example, climate change might displace entire populations from island nations, posing difficult questions of whether a state can exist if its territory has submerged beneath the sea. On the other hand, digital nations and online communities are beginning to chip away the erstwhile notion of physical territory being essential for sovereignty-the day might come when we could be discussing the recognition of nations hosted entirely on servers under international law. Meanwhile, real political power is being wielded by non-state actors-the likes of multinational corporations, NGOs, and high-profile influencers-broadening the reconsideration about what constitutes a state and who is actually the governing entity.
Final Thought
International law tries to draw clear lines, but when it comes to forming and recognising states, there’s always a bit of grey. If you’re navigating this space whether as a student, lawyer, diplomat, or curious reader just know this: what’s on the map doesn’t always tell the full story.
Statehood isn’t just about borders and governments. It’s about people, power, recognition, and timing. And sometimes… a little luck.