Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Who Gets to Exist? State Recognition as Strategic Legitimacy in Kosovo and Chechnya

Stankovic, Katarina LU (2026) SIMZ12 20261
Master of Science in Global Studies
Abstract
This thesis examines why the United States recognised Kosovo’s independence in 2008 while consistently refusing to support Chechen self-determination across two wars and more than a decade of conflict. Both cases involved secessionist movements, significant civilian suffering, and comparable normative claims, yet produced opposite recognition outcomes. This divergence constitutes a central puzzle for international relations theory.
The study develops a Strategic Recognition Framework integrating three explanatory variables: security framing, power asymmetry, and economic interdependence, to explain this variation. Drawing on securitization theory, organised hypocrisy and liberal institutionalism, the framework argues that recognition... (More)
This thesis examines why the United States recognised Kosovo’s independence in 2008 while consistently refusing to support Chechen self-determination across two wars and more than a decade of conflict. Both cases involved secessionist movements, significant civilian suffering, and comparable normative claims, yet produced opposite recognition outcomes. This divergence constitutes a central puzzle for international relations theory.
The study develops a Strategic Recognition Framework integrating three explanatory variables: security framing, power asymmetry, and economic interdependence, to explain this variation. Drawing on securitization theory, organised hypocrisy and liberal institutionalism, the framework argues that recognition functions as an instrument of strategic statecraft rather than a neutral legal determination.
Through a structured comparative case study and qualitative content analysis of US official discourse, the thesis finds that all three variables converged to enable recognition in Kosovo and to preclude it in Chechnya, and the findings suggest that humanitarian norms and legal vocabularies are selectively mobilised to legitimise strategically predetermined outcomes. The study contributes a replicable analytical framework for studying recognition decisions beyond these two cases. (Less)
Abstract (Uncoded languages)
Ova teza ispituje zbog čega su Sjedinjene Američke Države priznale nezavisnost Kosova 2008. godine, dok su istovremeno dosledno odbijale da podrže čečensko pravo na samoopredeljenje tokom dva rata i više od jedne decenije sukoba. Oba slučaja obuhvatala su secesionističke pokrete, značajna stradanja civila i uporedive normativne zahteve, ali su rezultirala suprotnim ishodima u pogledu međunarodnog priznanja. Ova razlika predstavlja centralnu zagonetku u teoriji međunarodnih odnosa.

Studija razvija Strateški okvir priznanja (Strategic Recognition Framework), integrišući tri objašnjavajuće varijable — bezbednosno uokviravanje, asimetriju moći i ekonomsku međuzavisnost — kako bi objasnila ovu varijaciju.

Oslanjajući se na teoriju... (More)
Ova teza ispituje zbog čega su Sjedinjene Američke Države priznale nezavisnost Kosova 2008. godine, dok su istovremeno dosledno odbijale da podrže čečensko pravo na samoopredeljenje tokom dva rata i više od jedne decenije sukoba. Oba slučaja obuhvatala su secesionističke pokrete, značajna stradanja civila i uporedive normativne zahteve, ali su rezultirala suprotnim ishodima u pogledu međunarodnog priznanja. Ova razlika predstavlja centralnu zagonetku u teoriji međunarodnih odnosa.

Studija razvija Strateški okvir priznanja (Strategic Recognition Framework), integrišući tri objašnjavajuće varijable — bezbednosno uokviravanje, asimetriju moći i ekonomsku međuzavisnost — kako bi objasnila ovu varijaciju.

Oslanjajući se na teoriju sekuritizacije, koncept organizovanog licemerja i liberalni institucionalizam, okvir tvrdi da priznanje funkcioniše kao instrument strateškog državnog delovanja, a ne kao neutralna pravna odluka.

Kroz strukturisanu komparativnu studiju slučaja i kvalitativnu analizu sadržaja zvaničnog američkog diskursa, teza zaključuje da je kombinacija sve tri varijable omogućila priznanje Kosova i istovremeno onemogućila priznanje Čečenije. Nalazi dalje ukazuju na to da se humanitarne norme i pravni diskurs selektivno koriste kako bi legitimisali ishode koji su unapred određeni strateškim interesima.

Teza doprinosi razvoju primenljivog analitičkog okvira za proučavanje odluka o međunarodnom priznanju i izvan ova dva slučaja. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Stankovic, Katarina LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Ko ima pravo na postojanje? Međunarodno priznanje država i strateški legitimitet u slučaju Kosova i Čečenije
course
SIMZ12 20261
year
type
H1 - Master's Degree (One Year)
subject
keywords
State Recognition, Securitization, Organised Hypocrisy, Kosovo, Chechnya, US Foreign Policy, Strategic Recognition Framework
language
English
id
9231625
date added to LUP
2026-06-25 10:10:28
date last changed
2026-06-25 10:10:28
@misc{9231625,
  abstract     = {{This thesis examines why the United States recognised Kosovo’s independence in 2008 while consistently refusing to support Chechen self-determination across two wars and more than a decade of conflict. Both cases involved secessionist movements, significant civilian suffering, and comparable normative claims, yet produced opposite recognition outcomes. This divergence constitutes a central puzzle for international relations theory.
The study develops a Strategic Recognition Framework integrating three explanatory variables: security framing, power asymmetry, and economic interdependence, to explain this variation. Drawing on securitization theory, organised hypocrisy and liberal institutionalism, the framework argues that recognition functions as an instrument of strategic statecraft rather than a neutral legal determination.
Through a structured comparative case study and qualitative content analysis of US official discourse, the thesis finds that all three variables converged to enable recognition in Kosovo and to preclude it in Chechnya, and the findings suggest that humanitarian norms and legal vocabularies are selectively mobilised to legitimise strategically predetermined outcomes. The study contributes a replicable analytical framework for studying recognition decisions beyond these two cases.}},
  author       = {{Stankovic, Katarina}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Who Gets to Exist? State Recognition as Strategic Legitimacy in Kosovo and Chechnya}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}