Actual problems of «recognition» as a main factor of state creation

Abstract

The article highlights the legal gaps of “recognition” of the state, the existing mechanism, which is based on customary international law and is not uniform and universal. In the context of a multi-year war on different fronts against the Russian Federation, the issues of formation of states and their “recognition” become all over the world, since the political will of the internal elites and support of the population does not play such a significant role in these processes as the position of the world leaders, who are still on our side, although it was not always and it will not always be. In the article it was given a definition of the concept of «state creation» – it is a phenomenon that domestic scientists have used to consider in narrow and broad meaning. It should be emphasized separately that the importance of the issue is also conditioned by the fact that certain so-called people’s republics have already received their legal “recognition”, however, only from a narrow circle of undeveloped countries with manual control from Russian side, in addition, the world’s trends toward globalization and the search for real or imaginary, uttered strata of society can hide the bowls of terrorists not in favor of a unitary Ukraine. International norms have been studied, such as the Statute of the Organization of American States, the views of prominent domestic scientists. In particular, it is pointed out at certain contradictions of the “recognition” of the party in a war, which also “non-recognition” of the states and governments that conduct aggressive policy. The evolution of international customs regarding recognition theory was also highlighted as a result of the liberalization of the world and of the sympathy of small peoples and nationalities without a state. The possible future problem of recognition of so-called puppet republics on the territory of Ukraine against the background of military aggression of the Russian Federation is analyzed. Special attention is paid to finding solutions to key problems that make it impossible to have a single recognition approach, and thus can put international actors in an unequal legal position before each other. Special attention was paid to current situation when only political will partly forms the rules of the game and the attitude of the international establishment to one or another state, and the law is inferior to the regulator of public relations to the interests of a certain number of people. Clear ways to overcome obstacles that hinder the effective functioning of the recognition institute have been identified. Steps have been proposed that may partially neutralize the shortcomings of the current situation. The historical parallels, which testify to the incongruence of the Institute of Recognition, its stagnation and its diligence, are given. Key words: a recognition, a state-building, a quasi-state, an international legal capacity, an international custom, a policy of aggression