国际法视角下的美国“航行自由计划”
The USA “Freedom of Navigation Program” from the Perspective of International Law
摘要: 美国的“航行自由计划”以维护航行自由之名,通过外交交涉、双边或多边磋商和“航行自由行动”的方式,来挑战美国所认为的他国“过度海洋主张”。美国拒绝加入《联合国海洋法公约》,长期以来一直游离于以《联合国海洋法公约》为核心的现代海洋法律体系之外,但是又试图通过“航行自由行动”等实践对《联合国海洋法公约》做出单边解释。基于过度海洋主张理论本身存在的缺陷,以及“航行自由行动”对《联合国宪章》基本原则的违背和对权利的滥用,美国的航行自由行动对国际海洋法律秩序构成了严重挑战。
Abstract: In the name of safeguarding freedom of navigation, the USA “Freedom of Navigation Program” challenges what the USA considers other countries’ “exces-sive maritime claims” through diplomatic representations, bilateral or multilateral consultations, and “freedom of navigation operations”. The USA refuses to join the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and has long been outside the modern legal system of the sea with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as the core, but it has tried to use the “freedom of naviga-tion operations” and other practices to make a unilateral explanation to the United Nations Conven-tion on the Law of the Sea. Based on the flaws in the theory of excessive maritime claims, as well as the violation of the basic principles of the UN Charter and the abuse of rights by “freedom of naviga-tion operations”, the US freedom of navigation operations poses a serious challenge to the interna-tional maritime legal order.
文章引用:王秋义. 国际法视角下的美国“航行自由计划”[J]. 争议解决, 2022, 8(3): 493-499. https://doi.org/10.12677/DS.2022.83066

参考文献

[1] 美国国防部. 美国国防部航行自由计划概况介绍[EB/OL].
https://policy.defense.gov/Portals/11/Documents/gsa/cwmd/DoD%20FON%20Program%20--%20Fact%20Sheet%20(March%202015).pdf, 2022-02-23.
[2] 包毅楠. 美国“过度海洋主张”理论及实践的批判性分析[J]. 国际问题研究, 2017(5): 106-128+131.
[3] 余敏友, 冯洁菡. 美国“航行自由计划”的国际法批判[J]. 边界与海洋研究, 2020, 5(4): 6-31.
[4] 张新军. 变迁中的“航行自由”和非缔约国之“行动”[J]. 南大法学, 2020(4): 110-129.
[5] 邢广梅, 汪晋楠. 美国南海“航行自由计划”与军舰无害通过问题研究[J]. 亚太安全与海洋研究, 2020(1): 74-86+3.
[6] 刘琳. 美国在南海的“航行自由行动”探析[J]. 当代美国评论, 2018, 2(1): 84-97+125.
[7] Hong, N. (2017) Freedom of Navigation and China-US Relations in the South China Sea. China International Studies, 65, 129-144.