Statehood under Siege: How Geopolitics Overrides Legal Criteria in the Recognition of Palestine and Kosovo

Abstract

The present article focuses on a contradiction between legal definitions of statehood and their political enforcement through recognition. Palestine’s and Kosovo’s paths to statehood after unilateral declarations of independence were analysed comparatively to assess how both entities fulfil the four conditions of the 1933 Montevideo Convention for statehood: permanent population, defined territory, government and capacity to enter into relations with other states. The research adopted a qualitative, doctrinal-comparative approach, drawing on primary materials like UNSC resolutions, ICJ Advisory Opinions, state declarations and secondary legal scholarship. The study indicates that Palestine and Kosovo meet the legal requirements for statehood, though recognition of both has been shaped by the political agendas of major powers. For Kosovo, a political alliance among Western countries emerged, framing it as sui generis, whereas the United States’ repeated vetoes on the UNSC stalled Palestine’s path to recognition. Findings demonstrate politicization of the statehood recognition process delegitimizes international law and creates inequality between applications of the self-determination principle. Recommendations include reinforcing collective international recognition regime through UN General Assembly voting procedures.