Kosovo Recognition.docx

<p>Kosovo’s declaration of independence received mixed responses from the international community; with key supporting states regarding the same as a sui generis case arising out of a unique set of circumstances. The justifications offered for the unique status are predominantly based on human rights abuses against Kosovars as well as a decade of UN administration of the territory. To date, however, Kosovo is yet to receive full recognition. Those opposed regard the Kosovar declaration of independence as an act of secession against the territorial integrity of Serbia. The reasons for the same are rooted in one of the cardinal principles of international law, that of territorial integrity or uti possidetis. Serbia still regards Kosovo as secessionist, and the opinion is supported by Russia and China among others. Both countries supported Serbia’s action in seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice with regard to the situation. The ICJ chose the restrictive response to the question, ruling that the ‘declaration of independence did not violate any applicable rule of international law’<a>[1]</a>. Subsequent events in Crimea have shown that while Russia refuses to recognise Kosovo as an independent entity, it is not averse to applying the same ground rules to explain its role in the Crimean secession. </p> <p>The successful bid for independence has inspired other ethnic minorities worldwide. Even though Kosovo is considered as occupying a unique position, the justifications on which the argument is based have serious repercussions for other separatist conflicts elsewhere. According special status to Kosovo has the effect of redefining the cardinal principle of territorial integrity to suit a few, rather than all in the same situation. The Uyghurs in China and the Kurds in the Middle East are only two of the groups that have a chance of benefitting from Kosovo being treated as a precedent. This article analyses the rationale behind the ‘unique’ status accorded to Kosovo, and its ramifications, especially superimposed against the doctrine of uti possidetis, and its impact on other secessionist entities elsewhere. </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <div><br> <hr> <div> <p><a>[1]</a> I.C.J., ‘Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo’, Advisory Opinion, 22 July 2010</p> </div>