The Cold War unarguably played an active role in halting the development of public international law by causing many of the rules of law to be broken. In addition, international interests and the conflicts of intellectual politics reined in the galloping development of public international law.274 In the waning of the colonial era, the major powers encouraged the development of political parties loyal to the government, and the major superpowers engaged in a close race to attract the new states emerging on the international map. The Soviet Union attempted to support the ideas of communism by building states through communist parties and warlords. At the same time, the United States adopted a hostile stance towards the Soviet Union’s efforts and undertook similar steps to support regimes opposed to the ideas of Communism.275
However, the end of the Cold War saw the disintegration of the republics of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, creating the opportunity to put sophisticated international practises to effect in the rebuilding of states. At the same time, the international community devoted itself to the concept of democracy and consequently gave the right of political self-determination a more active role. This trend became evident as from the disintegration and dissolution of these countries came a consensual framework driven by peoples who desired to participate in the formation of new political entities.276For example, the Belarusian people did not oppose the Belarusian Parliament’s decision to declare the Republic of Belarus independent from the
273Besfort Rrecaj, The Right to Self-Determination and Statehood: The Case of Kosovo, Bepress Legal Series,
2006.
274Boleslaw Adam Boczek, International Law: A Dictionary , Oxford Press, 2005, pp. 5-96.Also see Rowena
Maguire, Bridget Lewis, Charles Sampford, Shifting Global Powers and International Law: Challenges and
Opportunities, Routledge, 2013, PP. 99-100.
275Gideon Boas, Public International Law: Contemporary Principles and Perspectives, Edward Elgar Publishing,
2012, pp. 21-22. Also see Wang Tieya, Sienho Yee, International Law in the Post-Cold War World: Essays in
Memory of Li Haopei, Routledge, 2001, p 23.
276Christian Hillgruber, The admission of new states to the international community, European Journal of International Law (1998) Vol. 9, No. 3 , pp. 491 – 509.
Soviet Union.277 In some countries, the people voted on resolutions for independence, as in Latvia where 73% of the Latvian people supported independence.278 Moreover, the mother state of Russia did not oppose the wishes of the people, and the international community, too, supported those wishes. The new states had to meet conventional state-building criteria, but that does not undermine the pivotal role played by unanimity between the people and their new governments.279 If the people did not accept these governments, it would lead to the disintegration of the state.280
The maturation of the right of political self-determination entered an important historic stage as international practises increasingly complied with global trends that emphasised fulfilling the wishes of the people through political self-determination.281 As well, international law tended to prohibit the building of a repressive state and accepting such a state as an active player in the international arena.282 This development was evident in the state rebuilding of communist countries in Eastern Europe, such as Bulgaria and Romania which gained international support to end repressive rule and rebuild through popular participation in decision-making and choosing a governance model.283Those practises have evolved and been
enshrined in international conventions and customary international law, such as the Commission on Human Rights Resolution No. 2000/47 (2000)284 and No. 2002/47.285 In
277The History of Diplomatic Relations between Finland and Latvia
<http://www.finland.lv/public/default.aspx?nodeid=38439&contentlan=2&culture=en-US> accessed 28 October 2013.
278Ibid .
279Joseph Weiler, Differentiated Statehood? Pre-States? Palestine@the UN; EJIL and EJIL: Talk!; The Strange
Case of Dr. Ivana Radacic; Looking Back at EJIL 2012 The Stats; Changes in the Masthead Our Scientific Advisory Board; In this Issue, The European Journal of International Law (2013) Vol. 24, No. 1 , pp.1 – 11.
280Beate Rudolf, Non‐State Actors in Areas of Limited Statehood as Addressees of Public International Law
Norms on Governance, ILA Workshop Leuven (26‐28 March, 2009).
281David J. Galbreatha, Dealing with diversity in international law: Self-determination and statehood, The International Journal of Human Rights (2005) Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 539 – 550.
282Obiora Chinedu Okafor, After Martyrdom: International Law, Sub-State Groups, and the Construction of
Legitimate Statehood in Africa, Harvard International Law Journal (2000) Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 503 – 528.
283The Romanian people led a massive uprising against the dictatorship of Nicolae Ceausescu and on 20 May
1990 held their first parliamentary elections under international monitoring, which were won by Ion Iliescu. See Danijela Dolenec, Democratic Institutions and Authoritarian Rule in Southeast Europe (ECPR Press 2013) p.164.
284United Nations Commission on Human Rights Res No. 2000/47 (April 2000)
<http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http %3A%2F%2Fap.ohchr.org%2Fdocuments%2FE%2FCHR%2Fresolutions%2FE-CN_4-RES-2000-
47.doc&ei=akXLUqnCKMe70QWKk4HwDw&usg=AFQjCNEtSAPN4aFN27CxdyKXXC395AJatg&bvm=bv.5818717 8, d.d2k> accessed 16 October/2013.
285United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Resolution No. 2002/47(April 2002)
<http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.RES.2002.47.En?Opendocument> accessed 15 October 2013.
addition, the UN has supported many states in rebuilding themselves according to the concept of the right of political self-determination, from Haiti in 1994,286 for example, down to the revolutions of the Arab Spring.287
Notably, since 1989, the conceptualisation of human conflict has transitioned from an era of national disputes to one of ethnic strife and religious struggles. An emerging concept holds that individuals should be prepared to die for freedom and to uphold human dignity.288 Accordingly, individuals should not be subjected to repressive governments or dictatorships, whatever the diverse ethnic groups, religions and ideas within the boundaries of a state. Belligerents might still advance legal arguments, such as that a state has the right to defend its territory against another state, and certain groups defend themselves in response to a racially motivated attack.289However, in a conflict, contemporary legal arguments recognise the right to political self-determination and do not accept contrary claims made by governments or repressive dictatorships. Therefore, the right of political self-determination and its merits enjoy a high position in contemporary international law and practise, which endows it with strong influence on state-building and rebuilding.
One must not lose sight of the historical period in which emerged the right to political self- determination and its impact on state-building, whether through legal rules, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights290 and the Declaration of Helsinki,291or through international practices, such as the international community’s rejection of the racist government in South Africa, or South Rhodesia.292This period also saw the violent collision
of the Cold War, which affected the development of this right and made it an effective
286David Schweigman, The Authority of the Security Council Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter: Legal Limits and the Role of the International Court of Justice, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001, p. 138
287Efraim Inbar, The Arab Spring, Democracy and Security: Domestic and International Ramifications,
Routledge, 2013 , pp. 51-125.
288Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira, Democracy and Public Management Reform: Building the Republican State, OUP
Oxford, 2004, pp. 40- 110.
289Matthew Craven,'Statehood, Self-Determination and Recognition.' In: Evans, Malcolm D. and International Law. , Oxford University Press, pp.34-98.
290Opinions, Martinus, Nijhoff Publishers, 2000, p 2.
291Christian Hillgruber, The admission of new states to the international community, European Journal of International Law (1998) Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 491 – 509.
292Jure Vidmar, Territorial integrity and the law of statehood, The George Washington International Law Review (2012) Vol. 44, No. 4.
standard for building or rebuilding the state. Thus, the period following the end of the Cold War was more stable, and the right of political self-determination became more visible.293
This development was reflected by the emergence of a new standard in the international arena, that of unanimity between the people and the government. International law no longer accepts dictatorial governments which are not consistent with the aspirations of their people.294Governments also must also popular desire to participate in the management of the country in order to collectively achieve social justice and to realise the human rights agreed upon in international law.295Along these lines, Robert Delahunty claimed that, at the present time, we accept states’ territorial boundaries only because of history. However, if a state no longer maintains an effective unity between its people and its government, this means that the state is not acceptable from the perspective of the international community.296
Almost all human rights settled in international law presuppose the existence of domestic laws, rules and institutions to ensure these rights. As well, the government cannot neglect respect for the rule of law for all the people within the boundaries of the state, whether they belong to the masses or to the ruling authorities. The government must also establish an independent judicial system and take other measures to preserve human rights, uphold human dignity and achieve social justice.
Undoubtedly, many fundamental factors beyond the end of the Cold War contributed to the emergence and growing importance of this new standard. Among these are the evolution of human thought to be more respectful of human rights and to reject racial and religious extremism,297 the material factors influenced by globalisation and the role of the non- governmental actors in international law. The latter factors might have acquired the most prominence in state-building and rebuilding by taking on an active role in the formation of modern international law, extending to the domestic laws of countries themselves.
293Christopher Clapham, Degrees of statehood, Review of International Studies (1998) Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 143 –
157.
294David J. Galbreatha, Dealing with diversity in international law: Self-determination and statehood, The International Journal of Human Rights (2005) Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 539 – 550.
295Thomas Grantd , Defining Statehood: The Montevideo Convention and its Discontents, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law (1999) Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 403 – 457.
296Robert Delahunty, Statehood and the Third Geneva Convention. (The Laws of War: Past, Present, and
Future) Virginia Journal of International Law (2005) Vol. 46, No. 1.
297Cord Schmelzle, Effectiveness and Legitimacy in Areas of Limited Statehood, Governance in Areas of Limited
2.4.2 The role of non-state actors in the construction of criteria for the modern