2019 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 1(1) accepted to enter this category. 106 After all, they have once possessed statehood. However, it will be interesting to see how the ILA Sea Level Rise Committee will approach this question in the future. Some authors suggest that even if the whole territory of a state disappears, it is still possible that the international community would recognise the existence of its statehood. 107 In general, international law has accepted the presumption of continuing statehood under certain circumstances. 108 Thus, state practice so far suggests that the international community is willing to uphold recognition of states that no longer fulfil the criteria of statehood (eg failed states such as Somalia). 109 Accordingly, in order to protect ‘failed’ states from unlawful invasion and annexation from other states, their continuing statehood will generally be presumed for a considerable amount of time. 110 In contrast to situations of ‘failed’ states, the presumption of continuing statehood may also not be justified by preventing claims of neighbouring states to otherwise uncontrolled and stateless territory. That distinction being made, scholars have specifically argued that the presumption of continuing statehood is not appropriate in the case of disappearing island states. 111 They have also noted that the prevailing doctrine favours the declaratory theory, and recognition does not play a constitutive role in the determination of statehood. 112 In that case, it would be absurd to recognise nonterritorial entities as states. 113 Above all, there should be at least a minimum amount of territory left to recognise the continuance of statehood. 114 It is important to keep in mind that the recognition of states remains a political act, and states will not base their decision to recognise a state strictly on the fulfilment of the statehood criteria. 115 Consequently, it will be seen how far the 106 For instance, Taiwan is considered to have international legal identity, approximating to that 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 of a state. However, such acknowledgment of a modified personality applies to ‘case[s] of territory title to which is undetermined, which is inhabited and has an independent administration’. This does not apply to submerged island states: Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law (n 86) 125. See also McAdam, Climate Change, Forced Migration (n 29) 159: suggesting that disappearing islands could at some point be regarded ‘as having acquired a different kind of international personality, other than as a state’. See, eg, Stoutenburg (n 11) 297; McAdam, Climate Change, Forced Migration (n 29) 140. The requirements on fulfilling the statehood criteria are much more stringent in the context of the creation of new states. See also Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (n 81) 34; See also Sydney Conference Final Report (n 104) 25. Regarding Somalia, see Rayfuse and Crawford (n 97) 9 Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (n 81) 63; McAdam, Climate Change, Forced Migration (n 29) 134. It is also noteworthy to mention International Law Commission, Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of Its Fifty-Third Session, UN GAOR, 56th sess, Supp No 10, UN Doc A/56/10 (10 August 2001) 286 art 41(2) (‘ILC Articles on State Responsibility’): ‘No State shall recognize as lawful a situation created by a serious breach within the meaning of article 40, nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation.’ This article confers on states the obligation to refrain from recognising situations as lawful, which are created by jus cogens violations. Alexander and Simon, ‘Sinking into Statelessness’ (n 83) 21. ibid 24–25. ibid. Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (n 81) 46. Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law (n 86) 147. See also Alexander and Simon, ‘Sinking into Statelessness’ (n 83) 25: 56