Admission to the United Nations

Thomas D. Grant, Ph.D. (2000) in Law, University of Cambridge, JD (1994), Yale Law School, is a Senior Research Fellow of Wolfson College, University of Cambridge. He has published extensively on public international law.

“Grant's craftsmanship is undeniable. This is a well-nigh brilliant study, based on extensive and careful research, of an under-analyzed phenomenon… [T]his is classic international legal scholarship at its best.” Jan Klabbers, University of Helsinki / New York University, vol. 7 International Organizations Law Review (2010), 227–230.“… a valuable account of the practice... livening up old controversies in order better to understand new ones.” Anne-Laurence Brugère, University of Geneva, vol. 21 European Journal of International Law (2010) 791–792.

• PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS; TABLE OF CASES; TABLE OF TREATIES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS TABLE AND FIGURES; LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSINTRODUCTION 1 Admission under the UN Charter1.1 The Constitutive Function of Admission 1.2 Admission Mechanisms: Article 4(2) 1.3 Admission Criteria: Article 4(1) 2 The Early Years: Implementing Article 4?2.1 Introductory 2.2 The Argentine Controversy2.3 Advisory Opinion on Conditions of Admission (1948)The Court’s AnalysisNegative Votes and Non-application of the Substantive CriteriaElaborating the Criteria for Admission2.4 Substantive Criteria and the Procedures for Admission Rules of ProcedureImplementation- Committee on Admission of New Members: Questionnaires and Applicant Responses- Disuse of the Committee on Admission 3 The Road to Universality: The Admissions of 1955–63.1 The ‘Logjam’3.2 The General Assembly and the Non-admissibility of Spain3.3 Universality as Legal Requirement?Universality Defined - A UN Principle - A Measure of Tasks and Potential Universality in the Charter as a WholeUniversality and Sovereign Equality3.4 Universality as Policy Decision3.5 The Package DealJapan; Mongolia; Albania; Jordan; Hungary; Romania; Bulgaria; Libya; Spain;Conclusions4 Universality Affirmed: The Eclipse of Substantive Admission Criteria4.1 Universality under Charter Law: The Views of States after the Package Deal4.2 The Charter after Eclipse of the Substantive CriteriaPractice as Effecting Change in the Constitutive InstrumentInterpretation or Amendment?- General Considerations- Article 4(1): Interpreted or Amended?Entrenchment of Article 4(1) Practice5 Admission after the Package Deal5.1 Statehood as the Residual CriterionClaims to the Territory of a StateThe ‘Divided States’- Germany; Korea- ConclusionTaiwan- Introductory- Resolution 2758 (XXVI): A Question of Credentials- One China, One Membership- Limiting the Territorial Scope of Credentials- Status of Taiwan: Early Signs of Consolidation- Original Membership: a Basis for Special Rights?- Taiwan’s Applications for Admission- Status Redux: Erosion and ConsolidationKosovo5.2 Contested Admission as the Exceptional Case6 Universality Achieved: Micro-States, Neutral States, and the Residue of Empires6.1 Independence of States in the 1990sMacedoniaOther States in the Former Yugoslavia- Yugoslavia: Extinction, Continuity, or Improvisation?- Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia and HerzegovinaStates in the Former USSR- Introductory- The Agreed End of Soviet Power- The Baltic States- Ukraine and Belarus: Union Republics as Original Members- Georgia- Other Territories of the USSRCzech and Slovak Republics6.2 Very Small Island States6.3 The European Micro-States6.4 Switzerland6.5 Conclusion7 Consequences of Admission7.1 Legal Consequences of Admission as a Member StateStatehood and UN MembershipInternational ResponsibilityAccess to the International Court of JusticeParticipation in other UN ProcessesThe Presumption of Continuity of Membership7.2 Universality and the Future of International OrganizationMinimum Access to Processes of International RelationsConsolidation of the International Community as a WholeUniversal Vocation versus Sectoral TasksCONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY INDEX