论文部分内容阅读
“禁止使用武力或者以武力相威胁”与“和平解决国际争端”是现代国际法的两项基本原则,然而,不应由此推导出“国际法绝对禁止使用武力”的一般性结论。实践中,该两项原则与主权国家的基本权利之一——自保权之间并不存在冲突,在具备了一系列限定性要件(例如自卫)的前提下,国家有权诉诸武力解决争端。在国际海洋争端最终无法通过政治外交途径或者国际司法办法解决的极端情况下,无法排除采取军事措施解决争端的可能性。当然,在采取军事措施时应遵守武装冲突法的原则与规则,将使用武力引起的消极影响降到最低限度,以期在政治伦理层面掌握主动权,并最终在政治上和军事上均取得优势地位,达成采取军事措施保障国家利益的目的。
However, “the prohibition of the use of force or the threat of force” and “the peaceful settlement of international disputes” are the two basic principles of modern international law. However, we should not deduce therefrom the generality of “the absolute prohibition of the use of force by international law” in conclusion. In practice, the two principles do not conflict with the right of self-preservation, one of the fundamental rights of a sovereign state. Under the premise of having a series of restrictive elements (for example, self-defense), the state has the right to resort to force to solve dispute. In the extreme circumstances in which the international maritime dispute can not be resolved through political diplomacy or international judicial solutions, the possibility of taking military measures to resolve the dispute can not be ruled out. Of course, in taking military measures, the principles and rules of the law of armed conflicts should be observed and the negative impact caused by the use of force should be minimized with a view to taking the initiative at the political and ethical level and ultimately gaining a political and military superiority , Reached the purpose of taking military measures to safeguard national interests.