Recognition and statehood in international law: the case of Taiwan

Abstract

This dissertation examines the complex interplay between international law principles and geopolitical realities in determining Taiwan's contested status as a state. Through an interdisciplinary analysis, the research investigates the historical evolution of statehood principles, assesses Taiwan's claims to statehood under international law, and examines its current legal situation. The study employs a doctrinal legal research methodology, complemented by historical analysis and case study approaches, to evaluate Taiwan's position against established legal frameworks, particularly the Montevideo Convention criteria for statehood. The research findings demonstrate that Taiwan substantially fulfills the objective criteria for statehood under international law, maintaining effective control over a defined territory, a permanent population, a functional democratic government, and the capacity for international relations. However, the study reveals a significant disconnect between Taiwan's de facto sovereignty and its de jure recognition, primarily due to the international community's adherence to the "One China" policy. This creates a unique legal paradox where Taiwan exercises effective statehood while lacking widespread formal recognition. The dissertation concludes that traditional binary approaches to statehood may be insufficient for addressing Taiwan's unique situation. It suggests that international law may need to evolve to accommodate entities that exercise effective sovereignty while lacking formal recognition. The research proposes several recommendations for various stakeholders, including strengthening Taiwan's domestic institutions, pursuing constructive cross-strait dialogue, and exploring innovative hybrid models for international participation. These findings contribute to both academic discourse and policy discussions surrounding contested statehood in the contemporary international legal order.