Modernising the Montevideo Convention: A Redefined Concept for the 21st Century

The thesis critically examines the Montevideo Convention of 1933, an international treaty which defines the requirements for statehood: a permanent population, defined territory, effective government, and capacity to enter into relations with other states. Although foundational, the thesis argues that the Convention’s requirements are increasingly challenged by modern geopolitical realities. The study explores how the Convention has been applied across various case studies, including Palestine, Western Sahara, Somaliland, Taiwan, and the Kurdish regions, which present complexities that strain traditional definitions of statehood. Using a combination of doctrinal legal analysis and constructivist international relations theory, the thesis contends that the rigid requirements of the Montevideo Convention often fail to account for self-determination movements, indigenous rights, and non-traditional entities seeking recognition. Drawing on insights from prominent scholars, the research highlights the limitations of the Convention in a globalised world where statehood is as much a political and social construct as a legal one. Through case studies and comparative analysis, the thesis suggests a need for revisiting or modernising the Montevideo requirements, incorporating factors such as human rights, governance, and regional dynamics. Ultimately, the thesis provides a contemporary understanding of statehood in the 21st century, advocating for a more flexible, context-driven approach to recognising new states in international law.