Succession of states is a concept ininternational relations regarding asuccessor state that has become asovereign state over a territory (and populace) that was previously under the sovereignty of another state. The theory has its roots in 19th-centurydiplomacy.[1] A successor state often acquires a newinternational legal personality, which is distinct from a continuing state, also known as a continuator or historical heir, which despite changes to its borders retains the same legal personality and possess all its existing rights and obligations (such as arump state).[2]
A state succession can be characterized as either beinguniversal orpartial. A universal state succession occurs when one state is completely extinguished and its sovereignty is replaced by that of one or more successor states. A partial state succession occurs when successor state(s) succeed only part of a state's land and sovereignty, which continues to exist where succession has not taken place.[3]
An example of a partial state succession is the case of thesecession of Bangladesh from Pakistan. There was no challenge to Pakistan's claim to continue to exist and to retain its membership of the United Nations: it was a continuator and not a successor. Bangladesh eventually was recognized as a new state: it was a successor and had to apply for UN membership.
An example of a universal state succession is thedissolution of Czechoslovakia. Neither part claimed any continuity: both theCzech Republic andSlovakia were new successor states.
There are cases where a state is completely extinguished or abolished without having any successor states. Cases like this occur when, for example, one state is annexed or conquered by another and ceases to exist even in nominal form (i.e., not even a "government in exile" is established). The most recent case is theGerman Democratic Republic (East Germany), which was completely abolished after thereunification of Germany. Modern Germany is a continuation of theFederal Republic of Germany and not a successor state of East Germany.
Consequent upon the acquisition ofinternational legal personality, the difficult matter of succession to treaty rights and obligations arises.[4] Succession may refer to the transfer of rights, obligations, or property from a previously well-established predecessor state to its successor state, and can include overseas assets such asdiplomatic missions,foreign-exchange reserves, and museum artifacts; and participation in treaties in force at the date of succession orinternational organizations. In an attempt to codify the rules of succession of states, the1978 Vienna Convention entered into force on November 6, 1996.[5]
In their application to the acquisition of independence, distinctions should be drawn between different cases though the line of demarcation is not always clear:[6]
There are several recent examples where a succession of states, as described above, has not been entirely adhered to. This is mostly a list of the exceptions that have occurred since the creation of theUnited Nations in 1945. In previous historical periods, the exceptions would be too many to list.
TheTaliban state inAfghanistan (theIslamic Emirate of Afghanistan) became thede facto government of nearly all the country in the mid-1990s, but theAfghan Northern Alliance was still recognised by many nations and retained theUN seat. In 2021, the Taliban againtook power, but as of 25 August 2022,[update] it does not have the Afghanistan UN seat, which is still held by representatives appointed by the former government.[7]
ThePeople's Republic of China (PRC) was established in 1949 inmainland China and claimed succession from theRepublic of China (ROC). The ROC'sterritory was reduced to mainly theisland of Taiwan, who took control fromJapan in 1945, although it continues to claim control of the mainland. At the start of theCold War the PRC wasrecognized by few states; the ROC continued to represent "China" in theUnited Nations and hold thepermanent seat on the UN Security Council. In 1971, the PRC replaced the ROC in the UN throughGeneral Assembly Resolution 2758; this followed a trend of greater recognition for the PRC at the expense of the ROC. Although the resolution makes no mention ofTaiwan, the ROC continues to be unrepresented within the United Nations but exercises sovereignty over theTaiwan Area. In addition to the Chinese mainland, the ROC also claims borderlands unclaimed by the PRC, most notablyOuter Mongolia.
InChinese history, periods of prolonged political division and dynastic transition saw the existence of more than one claimant to "China" at the same time.[8] China was politically divided during several sustained periods historically, with two or more states simultaneously existing on territories associated with "China" and claiming to represent "China". Examples include theThree Kingdoms,Sixteen Kingdoms,Northern and Southern dynasties,Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms periods,Warlord Era and theChinese Soviet Republic among others. Just as the PRC and the ROC formally claimexclusive mandate over the entirety of China,[9][10][11] historical Chinese dynasties that existed during periods of sustained political disunity often claimed exclusive Chinese politico-cultural orthodoxy at the expense of others.
Duringdynastic transitions, it was rare for one dynasty to end abruptly and transition smoothly to a new one, resulting in the existence of more than one entity claiming to be "China".[12] For instance, during theMing–Qing transition, theMing dynasty existed alongside theQing dynasty (or Predynastic Qing) for a period before 1644. The predecessor of the Qing dynasty, theLater Jin dynasty, was established in 1616 and ruled overNortheast China whilst the Ming dynasty ruled overChina proper.[13] Following thefall of the Ming dynasty in 1644, remnants of theMing imperial family, whose regime is known in historiography as theSouthern Ming dynasty, continued to rule parts of southern China until 1662.[14] Multiple ephemeral regimes also existed during this period, including theShun andXi dynasties onmainland China, and the Ming loyalistKingdom of Tungning on Taiwan.
Ireland, then called theIrish Free State, seceded from theUnited Kingdom under theAnglo-Irish Treaty of 1922. The new state took the view that when a new state comes into being after formerly being part of an older state, its acceptance of treaty relationships established by the older state is a matter for the new state to determine by express declaration, or by conduct in the case of each individual treaty.[6] In practice, however, the Irish regarded the commercial and administrative treaties of theUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland previously applying to the territory of the Irish Free State as remaining in force.[6]
Israel took the view that, by virtue of itsdeclaration of independence in 1948, a new international personality fromMandatory Palestine was created, and that it started with a clean slate, and was bound only by such of the former international obligations affecting the territory as Israel might accept.[6]
WhenDemocratic Kampuchea led byPol Pot was militarily displaced by theVietnamese-backedPeople's Republic of Kampuchea, the country'sUnited Nations seat was held by Democratic Kampuchea for many years. It is now held by theKingdom of Cambodia.
When theProvisional Government of the Republic of Korea was formed in 1919, it claimed continuity directly from Korea's pre-1910 status. When the modernRepublic of Korea was formed in 1948, it claimed that it was identical toProvisional Government of the Republic of Korea and that the Provisional Government succeeded theKorean Empire.[15] An important tenet of the modern state of Republic of Korea is that theKorean Empire's incorporation into the Empire of Japan from 1910 to 1945 is internationally recognized as an illegal occupation.
South Korea resumed membership to international organizations such as theUniversal Postal Union and re-affirmed that pre-1910 treaties were still in force.[16]
There is some debate over whether the modernRepublic of Turkey is a continuing state to theOttoman Empire or a successor.[17] The two entities fought on opposing sides in theTurkish War of Independence (1919–23), and even briefly co-existed as separate administrative units (whilst at war with one another): Turkey with its capital in Angora (nowAnkara) and the Ottoman Empire fromConstantinople (nowIstanbul), but this type of scenario is also common incivil wars. TheTurkish National Movement, led byMustafa Kemal who defected from theOttoman Army, established the modern republic as a nation-state (ornew government regime) by defeating the opposing elements in theTurkish War of Independence. There remains debate about whether the conflict was a war of independence, or a civil war that led to a regime change.
The question of state succession is relevant to the issue ofArmenian genocide reparations.[18]
AfterPakistan wascreated in 1947, it claimed that it was automatically a member of theUnited Nations. TheUnited Nations Secretariat, however, expressed the following opinion:[6]
From the viewpoint of International Law, the situation is one in which part of an existing State breaks off and becomes a new State. On this analysis there is no change in the international status of India; it continues as a State with all treaty rights and obligations, and consequently with all rights and obligations of membership in the United Nations. The territory which breaks off—Pakistan—will be a new State. It will not have the treaty rights and obligations of the old State and will not, of course, have membership in the United Nations. In International Law, the situation is analogous to the separation of the Irish Free State from Britain, and Belgium from the Netherlands. In these cases the portion which separated was considered a new State, and the remaining portion continued as an existing State with all the rights and duties which it had before.
TheSoviet Union (USSR)dissolved in 1991, which together with itsUkrainian SSR andByelorussian SSR as separateUnited Nations members, co-founded theUnited Nations in 1945.
TheRussian Federation succeeded tothe Soviet Union's United Nations membership, including itspermanent membership on theSecurity Council of the United Nations. Russia accounted for more than 75% of the Soviet Union's economy, the majority of its population and 75% of its land mass; in addition, thehistory of the Soviet Union began in Russia with theOctober Revolution in 1917 inPetrograd. If there was to be a successor to the Soviet seat on the Security Council among the former Soviet republics, these factors made Russia seem a logical choice.[19][20] In a letter dated 24 December 1991, the Russian PresidentBoris Yeltsin informed the Secretary-General that the membership of the USSR in the Security Council and all other United Nations organs was being continued by the Russian Federation with the support of the ninemember countries of theCommonwealth of Independent States.[21] All Soviet embassies became Russian embassies.
Ukraine, the successor state of theUkrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (legally[22]) being one of the founding members of the Soviet Union, has not recognized the exclusive Russian claims to succession of the Soviet Union and claimed such status forUkraine as well, which was stated in Articles 7 and 8 ofLaw on the Succession of Ukraine issued in 1991. After independence, Ukraine has continued to pursue claims against the Russian Federation in foreign courts, seeking to recover its share of the foreign property that was formerly owned by the Soviet Union.[23][24][25]
A special case for theBaltic states had existed. An important tenet of the modern states ofEstonia,Latvia andLithuania is that their incorporation into the Soviet Union from 1940 to 1991 constituted anillegal occupation. In 1991, when each Baltic state regained its independencethey claimed continuity directly from their pre-1940 status. Many other states share this view, and as such, these states were not considered either predecessor or successor states of the Soviet Union. As a consequence, the Baltic states were able to simply re-establish diplomatic relations with countries, re-affirm pre-1940 treaties still in force, and resume membership in international organizations.[26] A similar situation applies to theCaucasus countries ofArmenia,Azerbaijan andGeorgia, which claimed continuity of the pre-1921 republics before being conquered by theRed Army as well as Ukraine, which as mentioned above, is thede facto successor to theUkrainian People's Republic that was founded in 1917 before itsSovietization in 1919 (seeSoviet–Ukrainian War).
After four of the six constituent republics of theSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslaviaseceded in 1991 and 1992, therump state, renamed theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia, stated it was the continuation of theSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia—against the objections of the newly independent republics. Representatives fromBelgrade continued to hold the original Yugoslavian UN seat—however, the United States refused to recognize it. The remaining territory of the federation was less than half of the population and territory of the former federation. In 1992 theSecurity Council on 19 September (Resolution 777) and theGeneral Assembly on 22 September, decided to refuse to allow the new federation to sit in the General Assembly under the name of "Yugoslavia" on the theory that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had dissolved.
The first negotiations on succession issues of the former Socialist Yugoslavia began in 1992 within the framework of theWorking Group on Succession Issues of thePeace Conference on Yugoslavia.[27] The agreement was initially prevented by the insistence of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that it was the exclusive legal and political continuation of Socialist Yugoslavia as well as the owner of all state property owned by the earlier socialist federal government, and that it was willing to renounce a part of it only as an act of goodwill.[27] The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia interpreted the breakup of Yugoslavia as a process of serial secessions and not as a complete dismemberment of the earlier state, an interpretation rejected by the other former Yugoslav republics.[27] TheBadinter Arbitration Committee recommended a division of assets and liabilities based on principle ofequity, referring to the 1983Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Archives and Debt (a convention not in force which at the time was signed by only six states, including SRF Yugoslavia).[27] This proposal was unacceptable to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which therefore motivated theInternational Monetary Fund to develop an alternative key model which considered the economic power of republics and their contribution to the federal budget, which was accepted by all.[27] The key determined participation of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with 36.52%, Croatia with 28.49%, Slovenia 16.39%, Bosnia and Herzegovina with 13.20% and Macedonia with 5.20%.[27] An agreement was also reached on gold and other reserves at theBank for International Settlements, but the final conclusion was postponed by the beginning of theKosovo War.[27]
After the end of theNATO bombing of Yugoslavia followed next year by theoverthrow of Slobodan Milošević, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was admitted as a new member to the United Nations on 1 November 2000. The successor states then concluded their agreement. In 2001, with the support of the international community, five countries (Slovenia,Croatia,Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – todayNorth Macedonia — and theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia – todaySerbia andMontenegro) signed theAgreement on Succession Issues of the Former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which conclusively confirmed that five sovereign equal successor states were formed upon the dissolution of the former SFR Yugoslavia.[28] It entered into force on 2 June 2004, when the last successor state ratified it.[28] The agreement was signed as an umbrella agreement which included annexes on diplomatic and consular properties, financial assets and liabilities, archives, pensions, other rights, interests and liabilities as well as private properties and acquired rights.[27]
FR Yugoslavia was renamedSerbia and Montenegro in 2003, and in May 2006,Montenegro declared independence.Serbia continued to hold the federation's seat. At the subsequent dissolution of the state union ofSerbia and Montenegro (one of the five successor states), the two countries agreed on Serbian sole succession of rights and obligations of their federation.
Additionally,Kosovo, one of the constituent provinces of Yugoslavia and Serbia,declared independence in February 2008.
