浅析南海主权之争——从国际法视角探讨

菲律宾、越南、马来西亚、印度尼西亚、文莱纷纷占据我国在南海拥有主权的岛屿,在南沙群岛189个已命名的岛、礁、滩、沙中,我国有效控制的岛礁只有11个。事实上,南沙群岛自古以来就是中国的领土,中国对南沙拥有主权是有历史依据和法理依据。     

浅析南海主权之争——从国际法视角探讨

菲律宾、越南、马来西亚、印度尼西亚、文莱纷纷占据我国在南海拥有主权的岛屿,在南沙群岛189个已命名的岛、礁、滩、沙中,我国有效控制的岛礁只有11个。事实上,南沙群岛自古以来就是中国的领土,中国对南沙拥有主权是有历史依据和法理依据。     

法国南沙群岛政策与“九小岛事件”再研究

20世纪30年代初,法国占领南沙群岛若干岛礁,向国际社会宣称拥有南沙群岛主权,这在当时引起南沙海域利益相关国家的积极反应,此即为"九小岛事件"。文章以法国外交部相关档案为考察对象,尝试依据法国方面的记录梳理"九小岛事件"的背景、经过以及法国各部门的态度和推进方式,最终分析法国制造该事件的动机。     

菲律宾国家领土界限评述

菲律宾宪法把所谓“条约界限”的全部海域规定为国家领土,这不仅扩大了本国的领土范围,而且对我国南海海域的划界造成了不良影响。此外,菲律宾又以总统法令把我国南沙群岛的33个岛礁宣布为菲律宾领土,并命名为“卡拉延群岛”。从国际法有关规定和客观历史事实看,菲律宾声称的国家领土界限及“卡拉延群岛”是不合法的。     

"承认"与中国对南沙群岛享有无可争辩的主权

承认与禁止反言已经成为一项公认的国际法准则。本文通过对著名的国际法学家关于“承认”、“禁止反言”的论述以及一些著名案例的分析,认为越南、菲律宾、马来西亚等国已经承认了中国对南沙群岛享有的领土主权,因此这些国家就应承担不能反悔的法律责任。     

2007马来西亚旅游年

对于马来西亚这个充满魅力的国家来说,2007的确是不同寻常的一年。首先,马来西亚将迎来国庆50周年。此外,“2007马来西亚旅游年”活动将在明年全面拉开帷幕。     

戴志强等出访马来西亚

应马来西亚国际文化交流基金会主席、马来西亚海洋考古博物馆馆长DatukChanTeckChan (拿督陈德泉 )先生的邀请 ,中国钱币博物馆馆长、中国钱币学会秘书长戴志强及周卫荣、刘志嘉一行三人出席了 2 0 0 3年 10月 3- 5日在马来西亚吉隆坡举办的“国际货币博览会” (封三上 )。马来西亚海洋考古博物馆是国际ICOMON组织的正式成员 ,早在去年 10月由中国人民银行举办的ICOMON组织“北京年会”上 ,两馆就商定合作开展“15 - 19世纪中国货币对马来西亚货币的影响”课题研究 ,经过近一年的工作 ,现已取得了初步的成果。出席此次博览会 ,是马来…     

20世纪30年代日本对我国南沙群岛政策的演变

20世纪30年代,日本对我国南沙群岛政策呈现出阶段性变化。1933年“九小岛事件”发生之际,日本在对外政策中坚持“协调外交”路线,与法国达成妥协,实现共存。1936年当“南进”政策成为日本的国策时,向我国南沙群岛的扩张成为日本实施向外南洋扩张计划中的一部分。随着日本军部逐渐主导国家对外决策及国际局势的新变化,日本外务省从极力反对海军省的行动演变为积极献策,一致主张驱逐法国势力,武力侵占我国南沙群岛。1939年3月末,日本将我国南沙群岛非法“编入”领土。20世纪30年代日本对我国南沙群岛政策演变是日本外务省、海军省基于国内政治与国际时局综合考量,也是他们分歧、折冲、平衡的结果。     

法日英在南沙群岛的角力与法国南沙政策的两次调整(1933—1938)

1933年7月26日,法国宣称占领南沙“九小岛”,国民政府的抗议被法国忽视,而日本的非法声索却受到法国的重视。出于对远东政策的贯彻以及对日本“恫吓外交”的屈服,法国被迫于1934年对南沙政策作出调整。全面抗日战争爆发后,法国派舰前往南沙群岛巡视,试图重新进行“有效占领”,针对日本非法占领经营太平岛,法日在东京和太平岛进行多轮交涉。英国亦几次试图伺机攫取南沙部分岛礁,盘算落空后则竭力怂恿法国登岛以抗衡日本。1938年,法国再次调整其南沙政策,并派兵登上太平岛。法国南沙政策的两次调整主要基于远东局势的变化,亦是对其“印度支那”安全、利益等因素权衡的结果。     

李单与东、西沙群岛

近些年来,东南亚有些国家不顾历史事实,不断宣称对西沙、南沙群岛拥有“主权”。早在1988年5月12日,中国外交部针对越南当局接连声称西沙、南沙群岛是越南“领土”,攻击中国不愿和平解决争端等就发表过备忘录,申明中国原则立场,通过大量事实证明西沙、南沙群岛自古以来就是中国领土,中国自古至今一直拥有对这些群岛的主权,并进行实际管辖。我的外祖父李辈,曾任清末广东水师提督,     

南中国海争端与中菲关系

中国在南中国海的主权受到一些国家的挑战,菲律宾是其中之一。菲律宾最早对南中国海的岛礁提出领土要求可追溯到20世纪30年代。菲律宾在南中国海的活动分为三个阶段。20世纪70年代以前,菲律宾政府不断地对南沙岛礁提出领土要求,也支持其国民到南沙海域勘探,但未占领中国南沙岛礁;20世纪70年代,菲律宾占领了部分南沙岛礁;冷战结束后,由渔业纠纷而引发了美济礁和黄岩岛问题,影响较大。总的来看,南中国海争端一定程度上影响了两国关系,但不影响双边关系的大局。在可预见的将来,南中国海的局势将维持现状,双方会通过协商途径解决可能出现的纠纷和争执。     

南海"断续线"的法律地位

文章对南海“断续线”的法律地位进行了探讨。认为存在于南海的九条以国界线方法标绘的“断续线”,确认了中国对线内岛礁滩沙的主权和对周边海域的海洋权益。“断续线”与领海外部界限、专属经济区和大陆架范围主张线、菲律宾“条约线”等有着本质的区别。南海“断续线”的法律地位使其在维护中国在南海的海洋权益方面有着特殊的作用和意义。     

晚清政府的海洋主张与对南海权益的维护

晚清时期,南海诸岛丰富的自然资源、重要的交通地理位置以及军事上的战略枢纽地位,引起了西方列强的觊觎,此时南海诸岛的主权问题已经较为明显地凸现出来。在与列强斗争过程中,晚清政府采取一系列措施来加强南海诸岛的开发建设,并自觉运用国际法来捍卫我国的海洋国土主权。     

The United States government’s deliberations and actions on the status of the South China Sea Islands, 1943–1951: the formation of American policy towards South China Sea disputes

In 1943, the United States began to consider the issue of the world order after the end of World War II; at that time, the status of the islands in the South China Sea remained undetermined. Towards the end of the war, a US policy-planning document on this issue favored either returning the islands to one of the parties claiming sovereignty or placing the islands under international trusteeship once the war ended. Immediately after the end of World War II, the United States withdrew its support for an international trusteeship, and it did not back up any single party’s claim of sovereignty over the islands. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, the United States did not clarify its stance on the issue of sovereignty over the South China Sea islands, hoping the eventual outcome would not favor the newly founded People’s Republic of China. Finally, the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951, signed under the guidance of the United States, stipulated only that Japan relinquish the islands, but failed to identify who would take them over. The San Francisco Peace Treaty signaled the formation of the official US policy towards disputes over the islands in the South China Sea.     

The origins of the South China Sea issue

China discovered and was the first to name and explore the South China Sea islands and the adjacent waters, and China has exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over them since the Tang and Song dynasties. In modern times, imperialists shattered the peace of the South China Sea using advanced weapons, but Chinese sovereignty over this area has never been challenged. In the more than 60 years since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the Chinese government has pursued the principle of “claiming sovereignty, shelving disputes, and seeking joint development” and has exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over and explored the South China Sea islands and territorial waters peacefully and effectively. The lure of resources and profits and strategic competition among countries beyond the region, however, have complicated the prospects for resolving the South China Sea issue.     

Eastern Asia's revitalization of the state ideal through maritime territorial disputes

In the midst of globalization and other processes that redefine state-territory-sovereignty relationships, reassertion of traditional state ideals is common. This article highlights one venue through which this takes place. Building on Stuart Elden's distinction between territorial sovereignty and territorial preservation as two aspects of “territorial integrity,” among other conceptual guides, the article posits that strong emphasis on territorial preservation through territorial disputes in effect works to counteract territorial sovereignty's slippage. Analysis of states' semi-official prosecution of five maritime territorial disputes in eastern Asia shows various rhetorical strategies that prop up traditional notions of unbreakable bonds between state, territory, and sovereignty. These include obscuring state historicity and naturalizing the nation-state relationship, using territory to represent historical victimhood and sanctifying state territory, and using the disputes to find a place for the state within the international state system. The analyzed territorial disputes include the southern Kurils/Northern Territories (Russia vs. Japan), Dokdo/Takeshima (Korea/Japan), Senkaku/Diaoyutai (Japan/China), Paracels (China/Vietnam), Spratlys (Vietnam/Philippines/China, especially).     

国际海洋法会议与中国对海洋权益的维护

新中国恢复联合国的合法席位后,随即加入了联合国海底委员会,积极参与《联合国海洋法公约》的起草和审议工作。中国政府关于领海、毗连区、大陆架、专属经济区的观点和主张,既是对国际海洋法发展趋势的把握和推动,在某种程度上也是对中国海洋法实践的总结说明。中国政府的举措代表着发展中国家扩大海洋权益的诉求,对《联合国海洋法公约》的最终形成产生了积极影响。     

从地图在解决边界争端中的作用看我国对南沙群岛的主权

本在对国际边界争端的典型案例进行研究后,指出地图在解决争端中发挥着重要的作用,并从国际法的角度研究了众多标明南沙群岛属于中国的中外地图,进一步指出南海断续国界线是中国拥有南沙主权的重要依据和标准。     

Shipwreck archaeology of the Lakshadweep Islands, west coast of India

Archaeological investigations in the Lakshadweep Islands have brought to light the presence of a large number of shipwrecks and the archival records have the details of some of these wrecks. Northern islands and reefs of Minicoy were the locations of shipwrecks prior to 1865, but the trend changed with the opening of the Suez Canal. Various organisations including the National Institute of Oceanography, Goa, have focused on Minicoy, Byramgore, Suheli Par, and Bangaram Island for detailed exploration of shipwrecks, and the findings suggest that due to submerged coral reefs, atolls, and other shallow hazards a large number of ships were wrecked in Lakshadweep waters.     

The glass beads of Kampai Island,Sumatra

Pulau Kampai is the name of a small island on the east coast of Sumatra and also the name of a village on this island. Excavations conducted at Pulau Kampai in the mid-1970s yielded glass beads likely manufactured in India. More glass beads dating from the 11th to the 14th c. AD were found during excavations undertaken more recently. Those beads were analyzed using laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS). Results show that the vast majority of the beads were likely imported from South Asia. Trace element signatures point toward two production areas: western India for most of the beads and northeastern India for a few high copper orange and red beads. A small number of beads have a very different composition resulting from the use of soda plant ash and a low alumina silica source indicating a possible Middle-Eastern provenance. A comparison with data published elsewhere indicates a similarity with material found in Egypt, dating from the 13th to the 15th c. AD suggesting that those beads might have reached the island during the later phases of the occupation period and might have transited through Egypt. It is uncertain where those beads were manufactured within the Middle-East. A comparison is provided with the glass beads from the site of Kampung Sungai Mas (9th to the 11th c. AD) located in Malaysia, one of the only “late” sites in the area that was studied recently using LA-ICP-MS.