State Succession: Tostacia and the Republic of Stolichnaya
1. Tostacia’s UN Membership
Regarding Tostacia’s UN membership following the dissolution of the Republic of Stolichnaya, two primary scenarios exist. The first assumes Tostacia cannot inherit the previous state’s membership and must apply as a new member. However, the UN’s actual practice presents a different perspective. Tostacia’s claim of continuity, and its recognition by other states, plays a crucial role. The territorial transformation resulting from Stolichnaya’s fragmentation complicates the issue. The international community’s stance, whether tacit or explicit, on recognizing Tostacia’s continuity will be decisive, similar to the cases of the former USSR becoming the Russian Federation and the former Yugoslavia.
Recognition of continuity would allow Tostacia to retain membership in international organizations and uphold existing international agreements. Conversely, lack of recognition would necessitate new membership applications and renegotiation of treaties.
2. The Antonovska-Nachev Claim and Border Restructuring
Analyzing the consequences of state succession requires considering the type of inheritance. Several forms exist: unification, absorption, emergence of a new state post-decolonization, and the birth of new states within a former state’s territory. In this case, the relevant form is transfer of territory from one state to another, or territorial cession. While rare, a notable example is the sale of Alaska from Russia to the U.S. A bilateral agreement between Tostacia and another country could address the Polish military base issue, potentially based on the “clean slate” principle.
3. Nationality of Tostacia’s Inhabitants
The issue of nationality presents several potential solutions. Automatic acquisition of the successor state’s nationality or the nationalities of different successor states is possible. This could be achieved through international treaties or domestic laws. Alternatively, inhabitants could be offered a choice of nationality.
4. Division of Stolichnaya’s Assets
The 1983 Convention provides a framework for asset division in cases of state succession. The convention prioritizes agreements between the involved parties. Key considerations include each state acquiring property within its territory, equitable distribution of assets outside the territory, transfer of movable state property tied to the predecessor’s activity, and existing regulations for separation cases (which typically exclude immovable property abroad).
5. Potosistán’s Succession to Conventions
Two principles govern Potosistán’s succession to conventions: continuity (successor states inherit rights and obligations) and tabula rasa (successor states are not bound by the predecessor’s agreements). Neither principle is applied strictly today. Under the continuity principle, succession is not automatic for closed or limited-participation treaties. The tabula rasa principle does not represent a complete break; states can opt for continuity through notification of succession, and some general rules mandate continued adherence to certain obligations.