A Defense of Japanese Sovereignty over the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW George Washington Law Review Pub Date : 2013-06-01 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2285190
Ryan M. Scoville
{"title":"A Defense of Japanese Sovereignty over the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands","authors":"Ryan M. Scoville","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2285190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legal analyses on the sovereignty dispute over the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands have been unfavorable to Japan. The literature is populated primarily with works by commentators who argue in favor of the Chinese claim, and by others who conclude that the applicable law is simply too indeterminate to support either party. Analyses favoring Japan are rare and underdeveloped. This is a surprising state of affairs, given that Japan has the better argument. The purpose of this paper is to explain why.","PeriodicalId":47068,"journal":{"name":"George Washington Law Review","volume":"114 1","pages":"571"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"George Washington Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2285190","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Legal analyses on the sovereignty dispute over the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands have been unfavorable to Japan. The literature is populated primarily with works by commentators who argue in favor of the Chinese claim, and by others who conclude that the applicable law is simply too indeterminate to support either party. Analyses favoring Japan are rare and underdeveloped. This is a surprising state of affairs, given that Japan has the better argument. The purpose of this paper is to explain why.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
捍卫日本对尖阁列岛/钓鱼岛的主权
有关尖阁列岛/钓鱼岛主权争议的法律分析对日本不利。文献中主要充斥着支持中国主张的评论者的作品,还有一些人认为,适用的法律太不确定,无法支持任何一方。对日本有利的分析很少,而且还不发达。考虑到日本有更好的理由,这是一个令人惊讶的事态。本文的目的是解释其中的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊最新文献
The Jurisprudence of Justice Samuel Alito Measuring Computer Use Norms The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties and the Right to Marry: Why Article 23(2) of the ICCPR Should Be Re-Interpreted to Encompass Same-Sex Marriage Religion, Conscience, and Belief in the European Court of Human Rights Four Challenges Confronting a Moral Conception of Universal Human Rights
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1