Mikulas Fabry

In the course of my M.A. studies, I became interested in the subject of sovereign statehood in international relations.  As I worked on my M.A. thesis, my attention gradually focused on the issues of acquisition and criteria of statehood.  I had recalled witnessing the domestic debates on these issues before the dissolution of the country of my birth, Czechoslovakia, as well as following the international debates on recognition of former Yugoslav republics in the early 1990s.  Both episodes had left me with many unanswered questions, and I thought it would be worthwhile to probe them in a doctoral study.  The ultimate outcome of these efforts was a book charting the practice of recognition of new states since the late 18th century.

There are currently three areas to my research. First, I am working on various themes linked to my book.  I published chapters on the relationship between secession and state recognition in international relations and law, and on the evolution of external involvement in secessionist conflict since the 16th century. A journal article analyzing the impact of Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia on the contemporary practice of state recognition is forthcoming.  

While these projects deal with the subject of state legitimacy, the second area of research tackles the related theme of governmental legitimacy.  It asks what criteria should determine the international legitimacy of a government rather than what it means to be an internationally legitimate state.  In its recent document, the Inter-American Democratic Charter, the Organization of American States both proclaimed democracy to be the only legitimate form of government in the Western Hemisphere and designed measures to preserve it where it may internally falter.  Similar institutional developments have occurred regionally in Europe and Africa, and even globally in the United Nations.  I have published an article which examines the content of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and its application in Latin America and the Caribbean, and an article which reflects on the theory and practice of an enforceable international right to democracy in the broader global context.  

Most recently, I began a book project probing the historical evolution and current dilemmas of the norm of territorial integrity.  This research grows out of, and will build upon, my work on state recognition.  Sovereign statehood and territory are interrelated concepts which share one crucial characteristic: they are both regulated not just domestically but also internationally.  International society has institutionalized standards of not only legitimate sovereign statehood but also of legitimate territorial possession.  The norm of territorial integrity in international relations, specifically, embodies the twin notions that (1) the territorial unity of a sovereign state cannot be disrupted against the will of its government, and 2) the protection of that territorial unity is not just a national, but an international responsibility.  Recent invocations of the norm helped generate conflicts in various parts of the world, leading in the Balkans and the Caucasus to great power disputes over its actual meaning.  This practical need to make sense of territorial integrity, coupled with the relatively underdeveloped scholarly understandings of the norm, call for a systematic and comprehensive investigation. 

Education

Honors Bachelor of Arts, International Relations, University of Toronto (1997); Master of Arts, Political Science, University of British Columbia (1998); Doctor of Philosophy, Political Science, University of British Columbia (2005)