Abstract
Among the criteria that were reviewed in international law after the end of the Cold War, was the way to identify a newly established state. Emphasis on concepts such as peace, democracy, self-determination and human rights caused democratic legitimacy to be proposed as a new element for the recognition of a government. This article aims to examine the place of democratic legitimacy in the field of government recognition. The hypothesis of the research is based on the fact that the criterion of democratic legitimacy has to a large extent been able to challenge the "exercise of effective power" which was the basic criterion for the recognition of a state in classical international law. The findings of the research indicate that with the passage of time, international actors, including countries and international organizations, have implicitly always included democratic legitimacy in identifying new governments more than in the past. The results of this study also confirm the fact that currently the position of democratic legitimacy in the identification institution is surpassing the criterion of effective control and the international instruments and mechanisms in this field, although implicitly, are trying to support it as much as possible.
Keywords: Democratic legitimacy, Cold War, identification of governments, effective control.
 
Introduction
In the international arena, the newly established governments need to be recognized among their peers. Non-recognition of a government by other countries can have important consequences in terms of diplomatic relations, access to international organizations and participation in international processes for the new government. This is where the criterion or criteria according to which this identification can take place has been discussed and exchanged opinions for a long time in the field of international law. In the framework of international law, at the time of recognition, the three factors of population (nationality), territory (geographical borders) and political power (sovereignty) must have existed in a state. Nevertheless, recognition is a political act and requires a response from other actors in the international arena. In classical international law, no foreign intervention in internal state affairs was acceptable. As a result, at the time of recognition, if a government had the ability to exercise effective control over its territory, it would be sufficient for this issue. Effective control in practice means the ability of a government to exercise authority, maintain order, and rule over a specific territory. With the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the communist camp, some western jurists considered the necessity of democratic legitimacy as one of the important features that every government should have in the process of recognition. In fact, the developments that took place in the international arena, especially in the 90s, led to the establishment of the fact that in the framework of international law, governments and international organizations can no longer be indifferent to the political forms of the regimes. This article aims to examine the place of democratic legitimacy in the field of government identification and to answer the questions that how this criterion could affect the classical criteria including effective control? Also, to what extent and under what conditions has democratic legitimacy been implemented in practice? And, as a result, what position has he gained for himself both legally and politically in the field of international law? The hypothesis of the research is based on the fact that the criterion of democratic legitimacy has to a large extent been able to challenge the "exercise of effective power" which was the basic criterion for the recognition of a state in classical international law. In this article, in addition to a brief look at the history of democratic legitimacy in relation to the institution of government recognition, theoretical aspects will also be discussed. Then, on the one hand, an attempt is made to study the international rules related to the subject under discussion and on the other hand, the international procedures that have been formed in the field of practice, especially with regard to political considerations, should be examined.
 
Materials and methods
This article has been compiled by collecting and reviewing the documents and literature produced around the topic under discussion in a descriptive-analytical method.
 
Discussion and results
The findings of the research indicate that in connection with the recognition institution in the field of international law, there are five criteria that include effective control, recognition by other governments, adherence to the constitution, democratic legitimacy and an agreement that representation becomes effective. This is despite the fact that until the Cold War, only effective control was a necessary and sufficient condition for identification. With the passage of time, international actors, including countries and international organizations, have implicitly included democratic legitimacy in identifying new governments more than in the past. The main point is that it will be possible to guarantee the legitimacy of a political system in the context of democracy. Therefore, the legitimacy of the government has a direct relationship with democracy, because it is a democratic system that is based on public votes and opinions. This relationship is such that in the new theories of democracy, it is the source of democratic legitimacy for governments.
The findings also show that democratic legitimacy has not been explicitly mentioned in any of the international conventions. But it is the interpretation of their provisions that well reveals the necessity of observing this principle. In this case, the Montevideo Convention approved in 1933 and the resolutions of the United Nations, including the resolutions issued in specific cases related to internal or international conflicts, imply this. Paying attention to democratic legitimacy has also caused other governments to act more cautiously in the process of identifying new governments, and to identify the origin of the formation of a government and its legitimacy in its internal political system. Currently, international documents and rules are regulated in such a way that the support and recognition of newly established governments arising from rebellion and repression, in which fundamental human rights are involved, is itself an example of violation of international laws. considered international. In the field of practice, democratic legitimacy reflects itself in the behavior of international actors in two positive and negative ways: the positive way, according to which, recognition depends on the establishment of democratic legitimacy; The negative method according to which governments, based on their international obligations, should refrain from identifying governments and groups that have committed fundamental violations of international laws.
 
Conclusion
Based on the results of this study, it should be said that currently the position of democratic legitimacy in the identification institution is surpassing the criterion of effective control, and international instruments and mechanisms in this field, although implicitly, are trying as much as possible, to support it.