摘要
1898年美西巴黎和约形成的"巴黎和约线"不仅规定了菲律宾群岛的范围,而且明确将黄岩岛排除在菲律宾群岛之外。20世纪30年代以前,尽管巴黎和约线经数次变动,最终演变为菲律宾条约界限,但其未涉及黄岩岛。1937~1938年美菲内部对条约界限能否外扩包括黄岩岛(斯卡伯勒礁)进行了讨论。研究表明,19世纪西班牙对黄岩岛(斯卡伯勒礁)进行的调查测量、命名行动和救援活动,可能勾画、拼凑出一幅该世纪西班牙拥有黄岩岛主权或管辖权的图景,然而,这种"占领"在当时国际法上是不被承认的;上述零碎的事实亦不足以使美国于20世纪30年代依据1900年美西华盛顿条约将黄岩岛纳入菲律宾群岛;1938年美国务院提出声索黄岩岛主权的其他证据也是站不住脚的。相反,30年代末至菲律宾独立之初,部分美制菲律宾地图和美菲相关法律文件,从事实上证明了菲律宾条约界限已然固定,且不包括黄岩岛。菲律宾条约界限具有开放性的观点不能成立。
Paris Treaty Line which was formed in the Paris Peace Treaty signed between Spain and United States in 1898 not only provides the scope of the Philippine Islands,but explicitly excluded the Huangyan Island( Scarborough Shoal) from the Philippine Islands. Although the Paris Treaty Line ultimately evolved Philippine Treaty Limits after a number of changes before 1930 s,it did not involve the Huangyan Island. It was discussed whether Treaty Limits can extend Huangyan Island or not in 1937- 1938. Research shows that the facts that the survey,naming operations and rescue activities to Huangyan Island by Spain in the 19 th century may outline a picture of Spain's sovereignty or jurisdiction over Huangyan Island. However,those facts was not able to show that the United States took Huangyan Island into the Philippine Islands in the 1930 s according to the1900 Treaty of Washington. The other evidence which Department of State made a claim to the sovereignty of Huangyan Island in 1938 is also invalid. Instead,in the period of the late 1930 s up to the independence of the Philippines,part of the Philippine Islands maps made by US and relevant legal documents between America and Philippines proved that Philippines Treaty Limits has already fixed,and did not include Huangyan Island.Thus,the view that Philippines Treaty Limits has flexibility is not correct.
出处
《江海学刊》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第1期150-162,共13页
Jianghai Academic Journal
