Applied to the case of Kosovo, their essence can be summarized as follows: “We will determine whether state A is worthy of sovereignty over territory B, guided by our own notions of what is right.” Awareness of the dangers of this approach was reflected in the split over Kosovo’s recognition not only in the international community as a whole, but also within the Western bloc itself.
However, the generally accepted taboo was lifted—and in the same year, 2008, Russia removed Abkhazia and South Ossetia from the “grey zone.” Although the international scale of their recognition—as well as the recognition of subsequent territorial changes in the post-Soviet space—was much smaller than in the case of Kosovo, Moscow also made a bid to change the rules of the game. Essentially, its message to the world was: “In areas of our vital interests, we define our own borders, and beyond them, we adhere to generally accepted norms.” The absence of universalist claims, coupled with a clear understanding of the threat posed by the advance of “the most successful military alliance in history” toward its borders, rendered Moscow’s position acceptable to a significant portion of the world majority, even without formal approval. In fact, this very majority crystallized in 2022 thanks to its refusal to heed the West’s call to confront Russia at all levels for violating the rules of international community. By then, it was already clear that these rules were not absolute.
The United States under Donald Trump contributed significantly to their further erosion. In 2017, he decided to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move the American embassy there. While this decision provoked widespread international condemnation for undermining the peace process, it did not definitively resolve the city’s status (that is, it did not formally deny Palestinian claims to its eastern part). Much more unequivocal was the 2019 decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, literally pitting the United States and Israel against the rest of the world, which considers this territory occupied.
In 2020, Trump made another important decision on territorial sovereignty, recognizing Western Sahara as part of Morocco. Rabat has long been Washington’s ally in North Africa, and the de facto annexation of the former Spanish Sahara had never impeded Moroccan-American relations, despite not being officially recognized. Under Trump, recognition of Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara became a “prize” for Rabat for normalizing relations with Israel. Israel itself recognized Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara in 2023.
One could say that on this issue, the US and Israel (now along with Morocco) have once again pitted themselves against the rest of the world, but there is an important nuance. While the list of countries recognizing Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara is limited to these three, the idea of a plan for regional autonomy within the kingdom has far more support. This was confirmed by the UN Security Council vote on October 31, 2025, on Resolution 2797, which states that “genuine autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty could constitute a most feasible solution.” The resolution garnered support from eleven of the fifteen Security Council members, including three permanent members (with Russia and China abstaining), marking a significant diplomatic success for Morocco.
A further significant development in the realm of unrecognized states and territorial disputes occurred in December 2025, when Israel became the first UN member state to recognize the independence of Somaliland. Informal relations between Tel Aviv and Hargeisa have existed for much of the history of this self-proclaimed state, which considers itself the successor to the short-lived State of Somaliland—an entity that gained independence from Britain but existed for only five days in June 1960 before uniting with the former Italian Somalia. The formalization of Israeli-Somaliland relations unfolded against the backdrop of the formation of two informal coalitions in the Middle East that also encompass the Horn of Africa. The UAE and Ethiopia closely cooperate with Israel, while Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Somalia oppose them. The latter plays a key role in Turkey’s plans to gain a foothold in East Africa, so Tel Aviv’s decision has become yet another factor in exacerbating tensions with Ankara.
As for Washington, the likelihood of its recognition of Somaliland is quite high. This isn’t just because Hargeisa enjoys Tel Aviv’s support and is willing to join the Abraham Accords, while Trump harbours a personal dislike for Somalia as a country, likely driven by his antipathy of Representative Ilhan Omar. In February, Somaliland’s leadership offered
Washington access to its natural resources and military bases on its territory—in the clear hope that this transactional language, understood by Trump, would pave the way for diplomatic recognition.
These recent developments collectively illustrate how sovereignty and territorial integrity—the sacred cows of a bygone era in international relations—are progressively losing their inviolable status. States now wield these principles with growing instrumentalism, and what was previously in a “grey zone” is being legitimized. The world’s political map has never been uniform—for example, India and Pakistan have drawn their borders in mutually exclusive ways for nearly eighty years, without regard for the situation on the ground. But today, such discrepancies are growing, and countries with distinct opinions on various territorial issues are increasingly unconcerned about universal recognition of those opinions.
The Valdai Discussion Club was established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai, which is located close to Veliky Novgorod, where the Club’s first meeting took place.
Please visit the firm link to site
