Quest of Micro states for formal recognition
Getting a UN membership is not convenient for emerging states, as the body is controlled by a few developed nations. Even when the guidelines are met, additional questions and restrictive interpretations continue to arise from established powers.
UNRECOGNISED STATES set to achieve higher, in their quest for international recognition and global co-operation with other UN member states. As individuals, we are taught and encouraged to be proud of our own persona and integrity and value our achievement without seeking the approval of others. We cannot find contentment and peace within ourselves, until we accept and embrace all the good and not so good qualities that make up our personality. It is disappointing, that a career diplomat from an UN member country questioned the legitimacy or existence of emerging states and then asked "what are you for?" The Montevideo Convention of 1933, clearly spells out guidelines for emerging states and micro states. It was convened and passed to deal with a situation where emerging states ask for formal inclusion in UN. As resolved in Montevideo convention, getting a UN membership is not convenient for emerging states, as the body is controlled by a few developed nations. Even when the guidelines are clearly met, additional questions and restrictive interpretations continue to arise from established powers, that not only prevent admission but, more appallingly, prevent consideration. This leads us to the larger, more compelling question; why should we seek membership and international acceptance to be considered a "legitimate" or a full-fledged state? Should they be content to be denied their entitled status without seeking inclusion? It was evident that this UN member state had become part of the winners of World war two nations and acknowledging the existence of a legitimate micro state, would have to be trial by fire. The United Nations is perhaps the most recognised and largest international organisation in the world although, the relevance of which is now questionable. Nations were built and conquered for several millennia prior to their organisation. There are several examples of long standing nations that have never sought participation. The principality of Seborga in Northern Italy, is about 1000 years old and not a UN member. Tibet has not been accepted as a member of the United Nations. Due to the historical relationship between China and the UN, Taiwan has been prevented from membership and has only been granted observer status. Observer status has also been granted to Palestine but, not membership. History also has several examples of long established aspiring nations that have not sought membership in international groups. Switzerland did not seek membership until a few years ago. The historical importance of Knights of Ice, who discovered the ice continent of Antarctica, was neglected till the sovereign order of Antarcticland brought this to the notice of UN. Are these countries less entitled to respect or a voice in world affairs? Are they so small or powerless that there entity can be dismissed as a non-entity? Are violent measures like strong military presence, terrorist activity, or show of force required before a microstate is taken seriously? Prior to the establishment of the United Nations, which is only about 50 years old, small countries had alliances and did the best they could defending their sovereignty with natural barriers and standing armies. Why is the posture of peace not an acceptable policy? Micro states often mean micro economies. It seems that paternal neighbours do not take those countries, which desire autonomy and have the ability to be self-sufficient, seriously. Some countries have become wealthy because, they have Internet economy or casinos to sustain them and are taken more seriously. Many US corporations now have assets and business volume larger than GNP of many countries. In our ever-shrinking world, due to technology advances, success can be realized by small states, if they are allowed to peacefully pursue their goals and objectives. Established states are often the roadblock for progress and growth for micro nations despite, decades of established international law, designed to obviate this kind of behavior. Why should nations be denied the entitlement of sovereignty set up by international law without violent confrontation?
 | Previous Post |
Login
 Login through Social ID
|
