Thesis (Ph. D.)--Yale University, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves [374]-395).

Did Kosovo have right to secede? What was the cause of conflict in Kosovo? How important is Kosovo for international community? This thesis addresses these issues as it seeks, above all, to answer the question - Is Kosovo a sovereign, unrecognized, or failed state? To do so, the chapter I explores critically the definitions of sovereign, unrecognized, and failed states. The chapter I argues that Kosovo does not have full control over the territory it claims, but with help of the international offices this problem has been overcome. On the other hand, the main obstacle to international recognition and full sovereignty is Serbia (parent state), claiming that Kosovo is part of its territory. Therefore, the theories of secession are analyzed in-depth in order to answer whether Kosovo can obtain the missing part of sovereignty without a parent state. The main argument for Kosovo's secession is extensive violence in 1990's, therefore chapter II scrutinizes the history of political violence in Kosovo, showing that Kosovo's secession has its roots in creation of Greater Albania and alleged violation of human rights can be only the trigger but not the cause of the secession. Chapter III assesses the debate of Serbia's sovereignty/integrity versus Kosovo's right to self-determination. This chapter at first...

No description available.

Si l’État moderne s’est constitué par un processus d’unification de sa souveraineté territoriale, celle-ci doit aujourd’hui être repensée. En effet, bien que demeure une inclination de tout État à préserver son unité, il apparaît que le territoire sur lequel l’État entend étendre sa souveraineté fasse désormais l’objet de revendications diverses. Cette situation est particulièrement prégnante dans les États issus de la colonisation et au sein desquels l’indépendance n’a pas nécessairement remis en cause le lien de subordination des peuples colonisés aux peuples colonisateurs. Faisant perdurer une situation de domination largement condamnée sur le plan international compte tenu de la proclamation du droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-mêmes, ce phénomène de décolonisation partielle pose inévitablement question du point de vue de la théorie de l’État. En effet, cela conduit à opposer d’un côté, un modèle étatique d’inspiration européenne aspirant à la souveraineté territoriale et de l’autre, des peuples autochtones entretenant une revendication vis-à-vis de ce même territoire, fondée su l ’illégitimité originelle de la conquête dont sont finalement issus ces États. Ainsi, la réhabilitation de la vérité historique et la condamnation plus ou moins unanime de la colonisation a pu conduire à ce que de manière générale, les peuples autochtones soient rétablis dans leurs droits territoriaux. Ce faisant, le droit qu’ont les États sur le territoire ne peut désormais s’exercer sans tenir compte des privilèges originels dont ils sont susceptibles de jouir. En conséquence, une telle démarche peut conduire à la remise en cause de la souveraineté territoriale de ces États puisqu’ils ne disposent plus d’une puissance absolue et inconditionnelle sur leur territoire, mais bien d’une autorité conditionnée par le respect des droits des peuples autochtones, dimension alors largement confirmée par le développement d’un droit international des peuples autochtones. Ce phénomène, qui caractérise les États d’Amérique latine issus de la colonisation hispanique ainsi que certains États issus de la colonisation britannique – États-Unis, Canada, Australie, Nouvelle-Zélande – peut conduire à voir émerger une catégorie particulière d’État que représente l’État postcolonial. / Modern State has been formed by unification process of its territorial sovereignty but this must be redefined today. Indeed, although all States have a tendency to preserve their unity, it appears that the territory on which the State intends to extend its sovereignty is the subject of various claims. This situation is particularly characterized for States deriving from colonization and for which, independence did not challenged the subordination of colonized peoples to colonizing peoples. By perpetuating a situation of domination largely condemned by International law, considering the right of peoples to self-determination, this partial decolonization raises question in State theory. This leads to oppose on the one hand, an European State model aspiring to territorial sovereignty and on the other hand, some indigenous peoples having a claim to the same territory, based on the original illegitimacy of the conquest from which these States have emerged. Thus, there habilitation of historical truth and the unanimous condemnation of colonization have restored indigenous peoples in their territorial rights. Thereby, the States’ right on territory cannot be exercised without considering the original privileges of first inhabitants. Consequently, such approach may dispute territorial sovereignty of these States because they no longer have an absolute and unconditional power over their territory, but only aconditioned authority by the respect of indigenous peoples’ rights, which is largely confirmed by the development of an international law of indigenous peoples. This situation, which appear in the Latin-America States derived of Hispanic colonization, and in some States derived British colonization – United States, Canada,Australia, New-Zealand –, may contribute to define a particular category of States, which represents the postcolonial State.

Roraima é um caso emblemático, assim como a Amazônia, como ilustrações das profundas mudanças das ações implementadas pelo Estado nacional brasileiro nos últimos 50 anos, com destaque para as últimas duas décadas e meia, em razão, principalmente, do aprofundamento da globalização, das ideologias e mecanismos dos regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e de direitos humanos dos povos indígenas. Derradeira fronteira econômica do Norte brasileiro, o território roraimense está institucionalmente protegido contra a sua utilização para a produção agropecuária em bases capitalistas (propriedade privada, liberdade de utilização do fator terra, orientação para o mercado). A superfície sob proteção atinge mais de 93% do território roraimense, restando em torno de 7% utilizáveis como capital natural para o desenvolvimento de atividades econômicas. Na Amazônia Legal, as áreas protegidas representam quase três quartos (3/4) da sua superfície. A construção desse território é resultado direto da decisão do Estado nacional brasileiro de assumir o papel de protagonista nas relações internacionais, explicado pela ótica da ideologia, fruto das relações Centro-Periferia. O objetivo dos países do Centro do sistema de relações internacionais é a manutenção da Estabilidade Hegemônica, tendo como instituições os regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e de direitos humanos; e como estruturas organizacionais as organizações internacionais e as organizações não governamentais. Esse objetivo se projeta sobre países detentores de capital natural ainda inexplorado, especialmente de florestas tropicais, e seu rebatimento sobre o território desses países se configura na criação de espaços protegidos. E a Amazônia é o coração – organismo vital – o lócus principal dessa Nova Ordem Internacional. Tais espaços transformam os territórios construídos em verdadeiros depósitos de capital natural, expressos em matérias-primas já conhecidas e a biodiversidade ainda em processo de descobrimento para sua possível utilização futura, sob a ótica e o interesse dos países do Centro, num cenário mundial de preocupação com os efeitos das mudanças climáticas e a escassez face o crescimento populacional planetário. Embora os territórios protegidos pareçam contrariar a lógica da expansão do capital na esfera produtiva, sua reprodução segue garantida pela ação do capital financeiro internacional, por meio da financeirização dos chamados serviços ambientais. Esses objetivos são perseguidos tendo como pano de fundo, para encobri-los, a permanente ameaça de um futuro sombrio para a humanidade devido ao aquecimento do planeta motivado pela forma com que os humanos lançam gases tóxicos na atmosfera. Embora o tema seja controverso, pois, afinal, outros cientistas atribuem o aquecimento global a fenômenos geológicos e/ou ao funcionamento do próprio sistema solar, e não às ações antrópicas, o certo é que restou dominante no conserto das relações internacionais entre os países a ideia de que é preciso fazer algo para mitigar os efeitos da intervenção humana no meio natural. Essas ideias processam interesses que geram políticas ambientais e indigenistas, cuja práxis é a criação de áreas protegidas na Amazônia Legal, que transformaram Roraima numa espécie de laboratório a céu aberto de experiências dos regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e direitos humanos dos povos indígenas, que têm por referência conceitual a ideia de desenvolvimento sustentável. / Roraima is an emblematic case, as the Amazon, as illustrations of the profound changes the actions implemented by the Brazilian national state in the last 50 years, especially the last two and a half decades, mainly due to the deepening of globalization ideologies and mechanisms international regimes environmental and human rights of indigenous peoples. Last economic frontier of northern Brazil, Roraima territory is institutionally protected its use for agricultural production on a capitalist basis (private property, free use of the land factor, market orientation). The surface under protection reaches over 93% of Roraima territory, leaving around 7% usable as natural capital for the development of economic activities. In the Amazon, protected areas account for almost half of its surface. The construction of this territory is a direct result of the decision of the Brazilian national state to assume the role of protagonist in international relations, explained from the perspective of ideology, the result of center-periphery relations. The purpose of the system of international relations of the Centre's countries is the maintenance of Hegemonic Stability, with the institutions the international regimes of the environment and human rights; and as organizational structures the international organizations and NGOs. This goal is projected on countries with untapped natural capital, especially tropical forests, and its bounce on the territory of these countries are set by the creation protected areas. And Amazon is the heart - vital body - the main locus of this New World Order. Such spaces transform the built territories into true deposits of natural capital, expressed in already known raw materials and biodiversity still in discovery process for possible future use, from the perspective and interests of the Centre's countries in a global scenario of concern with the effects of climate change and the scarcity face the planetary population growth. Although protected areas appear to contradict the logic of capital expansion in the productive sphere, reproduction follows guaranteed by the action of international financial capital through the financialization of so-called environmental services. These goals are pursued with a background that covers them the permanent threat of a bleak future for humanity due to the heating of the planet motivated by the way that human release toxic gases into the atmosphere. Although the issue is controversial because, after all, other scientists attribute global warming to geological phenomena and / or the operation of the solar system itself, and not to human actions, the correct fact is that remain dominant in the concert of international relations between countries the idea that something must be done to mitigate the effects of human intervention in the natural surroundings. These ideas process interests that generate environmental and indigenous policies, whose practice is the creation of protected areas in the Legal Amazon that have transformed Roraima in a species of laboratory under open sky to international regimes of the environment and human rights of indigenous peoples experiences, whose conceptual reference the idea of sustainable development.

Il existe, entre la Serbie et la France, une véritable communauté scientifique en ce qui concerne le droit public. En effet, depuis le XIXe siècle, si l’on se penche sur l’histoire, les publicistes serbes et français s’interrogent sur les mêmes problèmes relatifs à l’État et sa pérennité. Ceci n’a rien d’étonnant car la Serbie, comme la France, a sa place dans le cadre de l’espace européen contemporain et répond à ses modèles. Les concepts de droit public que nous connaissons, par rapport au cas étudié, sont de deux types : nous pouvons distinguer les concepts de processus, qui témoignent d’une dynamique particulière, et les concepts de cas, qui nous amènent à une analyse statique. Concernant les premiers, il est question de transition démocratique, transition constitutionnelle, succession d’États, dislocation, sécession, séparation d’États et internationalisation du droit public. Pour les seconds, il s’agit des concepts d’État, personnalité morale, d’État constitutionnel, souveraineté, État composé (état fédéré, régional, autonomies), État de droit, démocratie et administration internationale. Il ne nous a pas semblé nécessaire de créer d’autres concepts. En effet, la plupart des points problématiques rappellent les grandes théories, plus ou moins directement. Dans le cadre de notre recherche il a bien été question de faire un bilan de ces théories, au regard d’un cas concret : la République de Serbie depuis, 1990, au moment de l’introduction du pluripartisme, dans la Yougoslavie titiste mourante. Le but de cette analyse est de proposer notre contribution car nous n’avons pas la prétention de fonder une nouvelle théorie de l’État. Mais au vu des mécanismes du droit, comme outil nous permettant de penser l’État, le cas de la Serbie, depuis 1990, et ses données spécifiques, nous amènent à engager une piste de réflexion sur l’État tel qu’il peut être pensé et critiqué, en ce début de XXIe siècle. / The nineteenth century, if one looks at History, French and Serbian publicists have questioned the same problems with regard to the issue State and its future. This is not surprising as Serbia, like France, has its place in the framework of the European contemporary public Law. The concepts of public Law that we know from the cases studied are of two types: we can distinguish between concepts of process, which has proven to be particularly dynamic, and concepts of case law that leads us to a static analysis. The former relates to a democratic transition, constitutional transition, succession, dislocation, secession, separation of state and internationalization of public law. The latter, pertains to concepts of state, legal status, sovereignty, state compound (federal state, regional autonomies), Rule of law, Democracy and international administration. It did not seem necessary to create other concepts. Indeed, the most problematic issues involve the major theories, more or less directly. Part of our research has included a review of these theories, in terms of a concrete case: the Republic of Serbia since 1990, when the introduction of multipartism in Tito's Yugoslavia came to end. The purpose of this analysis is to offer our contribution ; we do not pretend to find a new theory of the state. Indeed in view of the mechanisms of Law as a tool to consider the question of state, in the case of Serbia, since 1990, with its specific circumstances, leads us to initiate a line of reflexions on the issue of state that may be thought as criticism, in the early twenty-first century.

Roraima é um caso emblemático, assim como a Amazônia, como ilustrações das profundas mudanças das ações implementadas pelo Estado nacional brasileiro nos últimos 50 anos, com destaque para as últimas duas décadas e meia, em razão, principalmente, do aprofundamento da globalização, das ideologias e mecanismos dos regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e de direitos humanos dos povos indígenas. Derradeira fronteira econômica do Norte brasileiro, o território roraimense está institucionalmente protegido contra a sua utilização para a produção agropecuária em bases capitalistas (propriedade privada, liberdade de utilização do fator terra, orientação para o mercado). A superfície sob proteção atinge mais de 93% do território roraimense, restando em torno de 7% utilizáveis como capital natural para o desenvolvimento de atividades econômicas. Na Amazônia Legal, as áreas protegidas representam quase três quartos (3/4) da sua superfície. A construção desse território é resultado direto da decisão do Estado nacional brasileiro de assumir o papel de protagonista nas relações internacionais, explicado pela ótica da ideologia, fruto das relações Centro-Periferia. O objetivo dos países do Centro do sistema de relações internacionais é a manutenção da Estabilidade Hegemônica, tendo como instituições os regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e de direitos humanos; e como estruturas organizacionais as organizações internacionais e as organizações não governamentais. Esse objetivo se projeta sobre países detentores de capital natural ainda inexplorado, especialmente de florestas tropicais, e seu rebatimento sobre o território desses países se configura na criação de espaços protegidos. E a Amazônia é o coração – organismo vital – o lócus principal dessa Nova Ordem Internacional. Tais espaços transformam os territórios construídos em verdadeiros depósitos de capital natural, expressos em matérias-primas já conhecidas e a biodiversidade ainda em processo de descobrimento para sua possível utilização futura, sob a ótica e o interesse dos países do Centro, num cenário mundial de preocupação com os efeitos das mudanças climáticas e a escassez face o crescimento populacional planetário. Embora os territórios protegidos pareçam contrariar a lógica da expansão do capital na esfera produtiva, sua reprodução segue garantida pela ação do capital financeiro internacional, por meio da financeirização dos chamados serviços ambientais. Esses objetivos são perseguidos tendo como pano de fundo, para encobri-los, a permanente ameaça de um futuro sombrio para a humanidade devido ao aquecimento do planeta motivado pela forma com que os humanos lançam gases tóxicos na atmosfera. Embora o tema seja controverso, pois, afinal, outros cientistas atribuem o aquecimento global a fenômenos geológicos e/ou ao funcionamento do próprio sistema solar, e não às ações antrópicas, o certo é que restou dominante no conserto das relações internacionais entre os países a ideia de que é preciso fazer algo para mitigar os efeitos da intervenção humana no meio natural. Essas ideias processam interesses que geram políticas ambientais e indigenistas, cuja práxis é a criação de áreas protegidas na Amazônia Legal, que transformaram Roraima numa espécie de laboratório a céu aberto de experiências dos regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e direitos humanos dos povos indígenas, que têm por referência conceitual a ideia de desenvolvimento sustentável. / Roraima is an emblematic case, as the Amazon, as illustrations of the profound changes the actions implemented by the Brazilian national state in the last 50 years, especially the last two and a half decades, mainly due to the deepening of globalization ideologies and mechanisms international regimes environmental and human rights of indigenous peoples. Last economic frontier of northern Brazil, Roraima territory is institutionally protected its use for agricultural production on a capitalist basis (private property, free use of the land factor, market orientation). The surface under protection reaches over 93% of Roraima territory, leaving around 7% usable as natural capital for the development of economic activities. In the Amazon, protected areas account for almost half of its surface. The construction of this territory is a direct result of the decision of the Brazilian national state to assume the role of protagonist in international relations, explained from the perspective of ideology, the result of center-periphery relations. The purpose of the system of international relations of the Centre's countries is the maintenance of Hegemonic Stability, with the institutions the international regimes of the environment and human rights; and as organizational structures the international organizations and NGOs. This goal is projected on countries with untapped natural capital, especially tropical forests, and its bounce on the territory of these countries are set by the creation protected areas. And Amazon is the heart - vital body - the main locus of this New World Order. Such spaces transform the built territories into true deposits of natural capital, expressed in already known raw materials and biodiversity still in discovery process for possible future use, from the perspective and interests of the Centre's countries in a global scenario of concern with the effects of climate change and the scarcity face the planetary population growth. Although protected areas appear to contradict the logic of capital expansion in the productive sphere, reproduction follows guaranteed by the action of international financial capital through the financialization of so-called environmental services. These goals are pursued with a background that covers them the permanent threat of a bleak future for humanity due to the heating of the planet motivated by the way that human release toxic gases into the atmosphere. Although the issue is controversial because, after all, other scientists attribute global warming to geological phenomena and / or the operation of the solar system itself, and not to human actions, the correct fact is that remain dominant in the concert of international relations between countries the idea that something must be done to mitigate the effects of human intervention in the natural surroundings. These ideas process interests that generate environmental and indigenous policies, whose practice is the creation of protected areas in the Legal Amazon that have transformed Roraima in a species of laboratory under open sky to international regimes of the environment and human rights of indigenous peoples experiences, whose conceptual reference the idea of sustainable development.

Roraima é um caso emblemático, assim como a Amazônia, como ilustrações das profundas mudanças das ações implementadas pelo Estado nacional brasileiro nos últimos 50 anos, com destaque para as últimas duas décadas e meia, em razão, principalmente, do aprofundamento da globalização, das ideologias e mecanismos dos regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e de direitos humanos dos povos indígenas. Derradeira fronteira econômica do Norte brasileiro, o território roraimense está institucionalmente protegido contra a sua utilização para a produção agropecuária em bases capitalistas (propriedade privada, liberdade de utilização do fator terra, orientação para o mercado). A superfície sob proteção atinge mais de 93% do território roraimense, restando em torno de 7% utilizáveis como capital natural para o desenvolvimento de atividades econômicas. Na Amazônia Legal, as áreas protegidas representam quase três quartos (3/4) da sua superfície. A construção desse território é resultado direto da decisão do Estado nacional brasileiro de assumir o papel de protagonista nas relações internacionais, explicado pela ótica da ideologia, fruto das relações Centro-Periferia. O objetivo dos países do Centro do sistema de relações internacionais é a manutenção da Estabilidade Hegemônica, tendo como instituições os regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e de direitos humanos; e como estruturas organizacionais as organizações internacionais e as organizações não governamentais. Esse objetivo se projeta sobre países detentores de capital natural ainda inexplorado, especialmente de florestas tropicais, e seu rebatimento sobre o território desses países se configura na criação de espaços protegidos. E a Amazônia é o coração – organismo vital – o lócus principal dessa Nova Ordem Internacional. Tais espaços transformam os territórios construídos em verdadeiros depósitos de capital natural, expressos em matérias-primas já conhecidas e a biodiversidade ainda em processo de descobrimento para sua possível utilização futura, sob a ótica e o interesse dos países do Centro, num cenário mundial de preocupação com os efeitos das mudanças climáticas e a escassez face o crescimento populacional planetário. Embora os territórios protegidos pareçam contrariar a lógica da expansão do capital na esfera produtiva, sua reprodução segue garantida pela ação do capital financeiro internacional, por meio da financeirização dos chamados serviços ambientais. Esses objetivos são perseguidos tendo como pano de fundo, para encobri-los, a permanente ameaça de um futuro sombrio para a humanidade devido ao aquecimento do planeta motivado pela forma com que os humanos lançam gases tóxicos na atmosfera. Embora o tema seja controverso, pois, afinal, outros cientistas atribuem o aquecimento global a fenômenos geológicos e/ou ao funcionamento do próprio sistema solar, e não às ações antrópicas, o certo é que restou dominante no conserto das relações internacionais entre os países a ideia de que é preciso fazer algo para mitigar os efeitos da intervenção humana no meio natural. Essas ideias processam interesses que geram políticas ambientais e indigenistas, cuja práxis é a criação de áreas protegidas na Amazônia Legal, que transformaram Roraima numa espécie de laboratório a céu aberto de experiências dos regimes internacionais de meio ambiente e direitos humanos dos povos indígenas, que têm por referência conceitual a ideia de desenvolvimento sustentável. / Roraima is an emblematic case, as the Amazon, as illustrations of the profound changes the actions implemented by the Brazilian national state in the last 50 years, especially the last two and a half decades, mainly due to the deepening of globalization ideologies and mechanisms international regimes environmental and human rights of indigenous peoples. Last economic frontier of northern Brazil, Roraima territory is institutionally protected its use for agricultural production on a capitalist basis (private property, free use of the land factor, market orientation). The surface under protection reaches over 93% of Roraima territory, leaving around 7% usable as natural capital for the development of economic activities. In the Amazon, protected areas account for almost half of its surface. The construction of this territory is a direct result of the decision of the Brazilian national state to assume the role of protagonist in international relations, explained from the perspective of ideology, the result of center-periphery relations. The purpose of the system of international relations of the Centre's countries is the maintenance of Hegemonic Stability, with the institutions the international regimes of the environment and human rights; and as organizational structures the international organizations and NGOs. This goal is projected on countries with untapped natural capital, especially tropical forests, and its bounce on the territory of these countries are set by the creation protected areas. And Amazon is the heart - vital body - the main locus of this New World Order. Such spaces transform the built territories into true deposits of natural capital, expressed in already known raw materials and biodiversity still in discovery process for possible future use, from the perspective and interests of the Centre's countries in a global scenario of concern with the effects of climate change and the scarcity face the planetary population growth. Although protected areas appear to contradict the logic of capital expansion in the productive sphere, reproduction follows guaranteed by the action of international financial capital through the financialization of so-called environmental services. These goals are pursued with a background that covers them the permanent threat of a bleak future for humanity due to the heating of the planet motivated by the way that human release toxic gases into the atmosphere. Although the issue is controversial because, after all, other scientists attribute global warming to geological phenomena and / or the operation of the solar system itself, and not to human actions, the correct fact is that remain dominant in the concert of international relations between countries the idea that something must be done to mitigate the effects of human intervention in the natural surroundings. These ideas process interests that generate environmental and indigenous policies, whose practice is the creation of protected areas in the Legal Amazon that have transformed Roraima in a species of laboratory under open sky to international regimes of the environment and human rights of indigenous peoples experiences, whose conceptual reference the idea of sustainable development.

Le droit international de l’environnement est fondé sur deux principes fondamentaux qui sont le principe de la souveraineté permanente sur les ressources naturelles et le principe de la conservation de la nature. La conjoncture économique contemporaine se caractérise par la systématique violation de ces normes juridiques à travers la surexploitation et la pollution des écosystèmes, ainsi que l’accès clandestin aux ressources biologiques, c’est-à-dire, la biopiraterie. Cette thèse a été développée spécialement à partir des discussions sur la gestion quantitative des ressources biologiques biotiques (la faune et la flore) et des ressources biologiques abiotiques (l’eau), ainsi qu’à partir d’analyses sur le problème de la pollution. Ces analyses sont cependant toujours en connexion avec la surexploitation et la biopiraterie, qui sont vraiment deux des grands enjeux contemporains du droit international de l’environnement. Afin de démontrer combien ces questions environnementales sont désormais de portée universelle, tous les régimes d’utilisation des ressources ont été étudiés, qu’ils soient relatifs à l’air, à la mer ou à la terre. L’on a ainsi pu vérifier l’existence d’un système juridique commun de l’utilisation des ressources biologiques fondé sur la coopération internationale, la bonne foi et le devoir de ne pas causer un préjudice aux autres États, outre les deux principes fondamentaux supra. Toutes ces normes juridiques de gestion de la nature sont matérialisées dans les accords internationaux d’utilisation d’une ressource biologique fondés sur les notions de quotas de durabilité et de quotas nationaux d’exploitation. Par conséquent, les États ont la capacité d’assurer le respect du droit international de l’environnement en assurant la conservation de la nature et la lutte contre la biopiraterie. / Environmental international law is based on two fundamental principles: the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources, and the principle of conservation of nature. The contemporary global economy is characterized by systematic violations of these legal norms through overexploitation and pollution of ecosystems, as well as the clandestine access to biological resources, or biopiracy. This thesis has been especially developed from discussions on the quantitative management of biotic biological resources (fauna and flora) and abiotic biological resources (water), in spite of the analysis on pollution, which can be found in the body of the thesis. The latter analysis is, however, always connected with the overexploitation and biopiracy, which are actually two major contemporary issues of environmental international law. For the demonstration of the generalization of these environmental issues, all regimes relating to the use of resources have been examined, independently of whether they concern the air, the sea, or land. That which could be verified is the existence of a common legal system for the use of biological resources based, in addition to the two fundamental principles mentioned supra, on international cooperation, good faith and the duty not to cause transboundary harm to other States. All these legal norms on nature management are established in international agreements on the use of a biological resource based on the notion of sustainability quotas and national quotas of exploitation. Therefore, States may control the compliance with environmental international law by ensuring the conservation of nature and the fight against biopiracy.

Cette étude repose sur l’hypothèse selon laquelle, de l’adoption de la constitution fédérale à la Première Guerre Mondiale, l’expansion territoriale des États-Unis d’Amérique, de même que le projet fédéral, ont appelé une « construction » des règles et principes du droit international au sein même des frontières américaines. Car, en 1789 déjà, tant les États-Unis,que les États membres de la Fédération ou les Nations indiennes, revendiquent sur tout ou partie de cet espace la souveraineté que reconnaît le droit international à tout « État ». C’est alors en définissant, en aménageant, en repensant, les notions d’ « État » ou de « souveraineté » sur un territoire, les conditions de détention et de formation d’un titre territorial, ou encore en fixant la valeur juridique interne du droit international, que ces revendications seront – ou non –satisfaites. Fondé sur l’analyse de la pratique, de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence américaines durant le « long XIXe siècle », ce travail a ainsi pour objet d’interroger la question du territoire telle qu’elle se pose au sein de cet « État fédéral » territorialement souverain que constitueraient les États-Unis. Il espère ce faisant mettre au jour des constructions du droit international dont l’actualité tient à leur objet : la question du territoire aux États-Unis entre 1789 et 1914interroge en effet les principales notions et problématiques de ce droit – au premier rang desquelles celle de l’articulation spatiale des compétences. / This study is based upon the hypothesis that, from the entry into force of the federal constitution to the First World War, the United States territorial expansion, as well as the federal project, called for a « construction » of international law’s rules and principles within the American boundaries. It is to be remembered that, in 1789, the United States, the member States and the Indian Nations claimed for themselves, on parts or the whole of that space, the sovereignty that every « State » is entitled to according to international law. It is therefore by defining, adapting, or rethinking the notions of « State » or « territorial sovereignty », the conditions required for a territorial title to be held or formed, and by setting the legal status of international law, that those claims have been enforced – or not. Grounded upon the analysis of the American doctrine, practice and case law, the purpose of this study is thus to inquire about territorial issues as raised within what is usually described as a « federal State », sovereign on its territory. Because those issues, and mainly jurisdictional ones, are fundamental to international law, this work hopes to bring to light constructions of international law which are still relevant today.