Description
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the benefits of full international recognition for policymaking, ranging from border management to vaccine procurement. For aspiring states lacking such recognition, practical drawbacks can be even more painful than the lack of United Nations membership. This paper develops the growing body of literature arguing that goals other than legal recognition (unlikely in most cases) are the immediate target for these liminal entities. While some have argued that such states seek material benefits (such as investment) and physical security, I draw on Janis Grzybowski’s work to argue that they are also driven by the need for fundamental ontological security. Their precarious status breeds anxiety related not only to their unclear role in the international system but their very identity as states. The ability to claim territory and, in some cases, receive some international validation reaffirm their identities as “normal”, territorially delimited states, even if they do not result in tangible gains. I undertake an exploratory probe of the argument through an empirical study of Western Sahara, developed out of extensive journalistic fieldwork undertaken in Saharawi refugee camps. I process trace Western Sahara’s lawsuits in the European Court of Justice that sought to confirm its claims to the territory currently occupied by Morocco, and contextualise the document analysis through fieldwork observation from 2014 and 2016.
