The article considers the political concept «statehood» in comparison with the term «statehood» as employed in the international law. The article shows that the statehood criteria of international law are insufficient; this leads to conflicted conceptualisation of this term in political discourse. The analysis of conceptual gaps between theorems and the semantic zones of the cog-nominal concept is conducted on the basis of the written contribution provided by Kosovo to the International Court of Justice for the consideration during the proceedings about the accordance of the unilateral declaration of Kosovo’s independence with the international law. The analysis is founded upon the Michael Freeden’s approach to the consideration of political concepts.