摘要
在遇到领土争端问题时,东盟成员国没有诉诸于《东南亚友好合作条约》规定的高级委员会,而是诉诸于国际法院。虽然这一举措并没有违背《东南亚友好合作条约》的规定,但却引起了学者们关于东盟机制作用的争论。国际法院的判决就东盟国家间领土的主权归属做出了明确的判决,但也激起了失利一方强烈的民族情绪。东盟国家间解决领土争端的做法及其结果启示我们:解决复杂国际问题的最好办法还是在于政治解决。而这正是东盟所一直倡导的原则和做法。
As territorial disputes rise, the relative states of ASEAN refer their disputes to the International Justice Court （IJC） rather than to the High Council under the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia （TAC）. Though these acts are not inconsistent with TAC, they result in debates over the functions of ASEAN regime. IJC can rule to whom the disputing territory belongs, but it can not diffuse the radical revolts of the lost state. The acts and results of ASEAN states resolving their territorial disputes tell us that political method is the best way to resolve complicated issues, and that has always been the principle insisted by ASEAN.
出处
《东南亚研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2007年第4期25-28,92,共5页
Southeast Asian Studies
关键词
《东南亚友好合作条约》
领土争端
国际法院
The Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia
Territorial Dispute
The InternationalJustice Court
