Makalede süreklilik veya uluslararası hukuk kişiliğinin kimliği konusu incelenecektir. Devletin kimliği ve sürekliliği konusunda süre hususu yalnız siyasi önem taşıyabilir. Onun hukuki önemi yoktur. Bir devletin kimliği ve sürekliliğinin kabulüne ilişkin olarak uluslararası hukukta kesin kural yoktur. Eğer süreklilikte süreye ilişkin kıstasları belirlemeye çalışırsak o zaman: “sürgün hükumetinin” varlığı ve onun savaşı, uluslararası birliğin ayrı ayrı devletlerin kanuna aykırı ilhaka negatif yaklaşımı ve ilhak edilen toprakların halkının devamlı siyasi askeri yaklaşımı dikkate alınmalıdır. Halkın yaklaşımı, onun gizli ve açık siyasi teşkilatlanması, bağımsızlık savaşı uluslararası hukuk kimliği anlamında öncekinin bütün parametreleri ile “aynı” olmasa da “onun gibi” devletin sürekliliği için en önemli kıstas olur. Önceki devletle onarılan devlet arasında kimliği aynılaştırma şartı ve halkın önceki devletin sürekliliğe ilişkin anayasal beyanı da önemli şartlardan sayılmalıdır.

Exposure of state to aggression directly affects the identity and values of its population. As noted, the stronger the identity, the more stable the statehood. The essence of the identity of a subject of international law without continuity is that the identity of the restored state depends on the institution of recognition and the political interests of other states. Although the identity and continuity of the subject of international law depend on the political interests of third countries, there are generally accepted norms in this area. The basis of the identity of the subject of international law is the universally recognized norms of the people's right to self-determination. State subjectivity in international law is concerned with its identity. If annexation occurs as a result of threats of aggression or the use of force and violation of other principles in international law, the subjectivity of international law of the state is de facto terminated. If an annexation occurs, the state's subjectivity in international law may not be formally terminated. Thus, if the government of the annexed state continues to be active in exile, the state subjectivity in international law formally retains its existence. As a result, all measures of the new government established by force, including referendums, have no legal significance. The "adaptation" of the people to the annexation regime after a certain period of time does not eliminate the illegality of the process in terms of international law. Therefore, the population of the illegally annexed territory ensures its continent by restoring its state. Here the process of internal self-identification between the previous and the restored one is crucial. Even in the event of a long-term loss of state, its restoration should not exclude continuity and identity. It is enough that the relevant people have formed the ability to establish a state. Therefore, in the context of the identity and continuity of the state, the issue of time can only have political significance. It has no legal value. There is no specific rule in international law regarding the duration of a claim in respect of the identity and continuity of a state. It is not excluded that during the illegal annexation there will be a change in the state apparatus with the break of the continuity for a long time. However, since the source of power is the people, the creation of state similar to the previous one (identical) depends on the declaration of will. It is obvious in the Constitutional Acts we have mentioned in the article, the sustainability of the constitutional will of the people is also the basis for the identity of the state subjectivity in international law, which was later restored with the previous state. At the level of international law, it must also ensure that the state's claim for equal status is secured. As a result, if we try to determine the criteria for sustainability, then the existence of a "government of exile" and its political struggle is considered. Here, in addition to showing the negative attitude of the international community to the illegal annexations of individual states, the position (identity) of the population of the continuing politically and militarily occupied territories is once again of particular importance for the sustainability of the state.