The Politics of a principle: US non-recognition policy before, during and after the recovery of Baltic independence
LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Baltijos valstybės; Principinė politika; Nepripažinimo politika; Baltic States; Policy in principle; Non-recognition policy.
ENFifteen years after Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania emerged from Soviet occupation to reclaim their de facto independence, many people in both the Baltic countries and the West remain divided into two opposing camps about the meaning, importance and limits of US non-recognition policy in this process. Some writers, especially in the Baltic states, argue that US nonrecognition policy played a relatively unimportant role in this process, that it was frequently and even hypocritically modified over time to suit the needs of Washington’s relationship with Moscow, and in any case it ceased to play any actual role in 1991 when the Baltic states regained their legitimate status as full members of the international system. Other writers, especially in the USA itself, suggest that US nonrecognition policy played a major role in the survival and reemergence of Baltic statehood, that it represented one of the most principled positions ever taken by a major power with respect to the actions of another over such a lengthy period, and that it continues to be significant in promoting the integration of the Baltic countries into the West and challenging those in Moscow who refuse to accept the 1991 settlement. While these two views might appear to be mutually exclusive, they are in fact simply different perspectives on the nature of the relationship between politics and principle and between the way things are done and the principles that are invoked to explain them. Consequently, the much disputed history of US non-recognition policy is important not only for its own sake but as an indication of the nature of this linkage and the ways in which principles inevitably constrain politics and are modified by them. [Extract, p. 45]
