Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T08:47:56.180Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does democracy need sovereignty?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

OISÍN TANSEY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Non-state entities that aspire to statehood are increasingly developing democratic norms and practices, in part to enhance their claims for independence. However, the prospects for democracy in cases of ‘problematic sovereignty’ are little understood. This article seeks to explore the important but under-explored relationship between sovereignty and democracy, and in particular to assess the extent to which sovereignty is, or is not, a prerequisite for democracy. The article advances two arguments. First, it argues that there is no clear-cut relationship between sovereignty and democracy, as sovereignty is a complex concept that is comprised of several important, and distinct, constituent elements. Second, the article argues that the legal recognition of statehood (international legal sovereignty) is of marginal importance in this area, and should not be seen as a necessary condition for democratic rule. The article examines the process of democratic transition in the non-state entity of Somaliland to provide empirical support.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , October 2011 , pp. 1515 - 1536
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Traditionally, recognition of new states has been conditional on a number of factual conditions. These are that the aspiring state must demonstrate a defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. See, Murphy, Sean D.‘Democratic Legitimacy and the Recognition of States and Governments’, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 48:3. (July 1999), pp. 545–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

2 Kosovo's declaration of independence makes several references to democracy and begins with the words, ‘We, the democratically-elected leaders of our people […].’ See Assembly of Kosovo, ‘Kosovo Declaration of Independence’, Pristina (17 February 2008).

3 Gardner, Anne-Marie, ‘Beyond standards before status: democratic governance and non-state actors’, Review of International Studies, 34 (2008), pp. 531–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

4 Caspersen, Nina, ‘Separatism and Democracy in the Caucasus’, Survival, 50:4 (2008), pp. 113–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

5 Krasner, Stephen (ed.), Problematic Sovereignty: Contested Rules and Political Possibilities (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

6 A. A. Stein, ‘The Great Trilemma: Are Globalization, Democracy, and Sovereignty Compatible?’, unpublished manuscript (2002).

7 Ibid., and see Archibugi, Daniele, Held, David and Köhler, Martin (eds), Re-Imagining Political Community: Studies In Cosmopolitan Democracy (Polity Press and Blackwell Publishers, 1998)Google Scholar .

8 Linz, Juan J. and Stepan, Alfred, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America and Post-Communist Europe (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), p. 18Google Scholar .

9 Hinsley, Francis H., Sovereignty, second edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 26Google Scholar .

10 Lake, David A., ‘Reflection, Evaluation, Integration: The New Sovereignty in International Relations’, International Studies Review, 5:3 (September 2003), pp. 303–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

11 Zaum, Dominik, The Sovereignty Paradox: The Norms and Politics of International Statebuilding (Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

12 Sartori, Giovanni, The Theory of Democracy Revisited (Chatham, NJ: Chatham House, 1987)Google Scholar .

13 Collier, David and Adcock, Robert, ‘Democracy and Dichotomies: A Pragmatic Approach to Choices about Concepts’, Annual Review Political Science, 2 (1999), pp. 537–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

14 For more on the notion of indivisibility in the classical perspective on sovereignty, see Lake, David A., Hierarchy in International Relations (Cornell University Press, 2009), chap. 4Google Scholar .

15 See for example, Reus-Smit, Christian, ‘Human Rights and the Social Construction of Sovereignty’, Review of International Studies, 27:4 (2001), pp. 519–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

16 Lake, ‘Reflection, Evaluation, Integration: The New Sovereignty in International Relations’; Caporaso, James A., ‘Changes in the Westphalian Order: Territory, Public Authority and Sovereignty’, International Studies Review, 2:2 (2000), pp. 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Keohane, Robert O., ‘Political Authority After Intervention: Gradations in Sovereignty’, in Holxgrefe, J. L and Keohane, Robert O., Humanitarian Intervention: Ethical, Legal, and Political Dilemmas (Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar .

17 For a fuller discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of conceptual disaggregation, see Collier and Adcock, ‘Democracy and Dichotomies: A Pragmatic Approach to Choices about Concepts’.

18 Geddes, Barabara, Paradigms and Sandcastles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics (University of Michigan Press, 2003), p. 43Google Scholar .

19 Gallie, W. B., ‘Essentially Contested Concepts’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, N. S., 56, 1956, pp. 167–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

20 Levitsky, Steven and Way, Lucan A., ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, 13:2 (2002), pp. 51–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

21 Linz, Juan J. and Stepan, Alfred, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America and Post-Communist Europe (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), p. 18Google Scholar , emphasis added.

22 O'Donnell, Guillermo, ‘On the State, Democratization, and Some Conceptual Problems: A Latin American view with Glances at Some Postcommunist Countries’, in O'Donnell, Guillermo (ed.), Counterpoints: Selected Essays on Authoritarianism and Democratization (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1999), pp. 135–137Google Scholar .

23 Gonzalez, Francisco E. and King, Desmond, ‘The State and Democratization: The US in Comparative Perspective’, British Journal of Political Science, 34 (2004), p. 193CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

24 Held, David, Models of Democracy (Polity Press, 2006), p. 294Google Scholar .

25 It should be noted, however, that the full range of sovereignty attributes will not be sufficient to bring democracy about, but only to support it if it is established by domestic actors. Democratisation requires political agency as well as structures of sovereignty.

26 Krasner, Stephen D., ‘The Case for Shared Sovereignty’, Journal of Democracy, 16:1 (2005), pp. 69–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

27 Grant, Thomas D, The Recognition of States: Law and Practice in Debate and Evolution (London: Praeger, 2000)Google Scholar , Introduction. See also Crawford, James, The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar .

28 Hillgruber, Christian, ‘The Admission of New States to the International Community’, European Journal of International Law, 9:3 (1998), pp. 491–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

29 Murphy, Sean D., ‘Democratic Legitimacy and the Recognition of States and Governments’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 48 (1999), pp. 545–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

30 Weller, Marc, ‘The Self-Determination Trap’, Ethnopolitics, 4:1 (2005), pp. 3–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

31 This is a central thesis of Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy.

32 Pegg, Scott, International Society and the de facto State (Aldershot: Ashgate 1998)Google Scholar .

33 Wong, Joseph, ‘Deepening Democracy in Taiwan’, Pacific Affairs, 76 (2003)Google Scholar .

34 International Crisis Group, Africa Report N0 66, ‘Somaliland: Democratisation and Its Discontents’ (28 July 2003).

35 For a discussion of weaknesses and deficiencies in non-state entities, see Kolstø, Pål, ‘The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States’, Journal of Peace Research, 43:6 (2006), pp. 725–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

36 King, Charles‘The Benefits of Ethnic War: Understanding Eurasia's Unrecognized States’, World Politics, 53:4 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

37 Tansey, Oisín, ‘Kosovo: Independence and Tutelage’, Journal of Democracy, 20:2 (April 2009)Google Scholar .

38 For more on the implications of societal divisions on the potential for democracy, see the discussion of ‘stateness’ problems in Linz and Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, chap. 2.

39 Caspersen, Nina, ‘Separatism and Democracy in the Caucasus’, Survival, 50:4 (2008), pp. 113–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

40 See Roy Allison, , ‘Russia Resurgent? Moscow's Campaign to “coerce Georgia to peace”’, International Affairs, 84:6 (2008), pp. 1145–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

41 Bradbury, Mark, Abokor, Adan Yusuf and Yusuf, Haroon Ahmed, ‘Somaliland: Choosing Politics over Violence’, Review of African Political Economy, 30:97 (2003), pp. 455–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

42 Laitin, David D. and Samatar, Said S., Somalia: Nation in Search of a State (Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1987)Google Scholar .

43 Bradbury et al., ‘Somaliland: Choosing Politics over Violence’.

44 International Crisis Group, ‘Somaliland: Democratisation and Its Discontents’, p. i.

45 Kaplan, Seth, ‘The Remarkable Story of Somaliland’, Journal of Democracy, 19:3 (July 2008), pp. 143–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

46 Huntington, Samuel P., The Third Wave: Democratization in the Twentieth Century (University of Oklahoma Press, 1991)Google Scholar .

47 Academy for Peace and Development, ‘Consolidation and Decentralization of Institutions’ (July 2002), available at: {www.apd-somaliland.org}.

48 International Crisis Group, ‘Somaliland: Democratisation and Its Discontents’.

49 The Constitution of the Republic of Somaliland (2005), available at: {www.somalilandlaw.com}.

50 International Crisis Group, ‘Somaliland: Democratisation and Its Discontents’.

51 Initiative & Referendum Institute, ‘Final Report of the Initiative & Referendum Institute's Election Monitoring Team’ (July 2001).

52 Ibid.

53 NORDEM, ‘Somaliland: Presidential Election 2003’, NORDEM Report 08/2003.

54 NORDEM, ‘Somaliland: Elections for the Lower House of Parliament, September 2005’, NORDEM Report 03/2006.

55 Ibrahim Hashi Jama, ‘The Sheikh Concordat – Settling Constitutional Disputes in the Somaliland Way?’, Somaliland Focus (December 2006).

56 The Constitution of the Republic of Somaliland, Article 9.

57 Ibrahim Hashi Jama, ‘Somaliland Electoral Laws’, Somaliland Law Series 2009, available at:{www.somalilandlaw.com}.

58 See The Somaliland Times, ‘Imprisoned political leaders to be released as elections approach’, Issue 292 (2007), available at: {www.somalilandtimes.net}.

59 International Crisis Group, ‘Somaliland: Democratisation and Its Discontents’.

60 Academy for Peace and Development, ‘A Vote for Peace: How Somaliland Successfully Hosted its First Parliamentary Elections in 35 Years’ (September 2006).

61 NORDEM, ‘Somaliland: Elections for the Lower House of Parliament, September 2005’.

62 ‘Deadly car bombs hit Somaliland’, BBC News (29 October 2008)Google Scholar .

63 See the website of the Somaliland National Electoral Commission, available at: {http://www.necsomaliland.net/facts/elections.php}.

64 Jama, ‘Somaliland Electoral Laws’, fn. 50.