俄罗斯对克里米亚的吞并及其在国际法背景下的正当化

Q4 Social Sciences Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review Pub Date : 2016-12-01 DOI:10.1515/lasr-2016-0001
Erika Leonaitė, Dainius Žalimas
{"title":"俄罗斯对克里米亚的吞并及其在国际法背景下的正当化","authors":"Erika Leonaitė, Dainius Žalimas","doi":"10.1515/lasr-2016-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article carries out an assessment of the “reunification of Crimea with Russia” from the point of view of contemporary international law and examines the arguments of Russian legal scholars who try to deny the annexation, i.e. the acquisition of territory by force. The assessment reveals recent changes in the interpretation of the principle of the self-determination of peoples in the Russian official position and legal doctrine, compared to the interpretation of this principle prevalent before the International Court of Justice adopted the Advisory Opinion on Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo. The analysis carried out in the article identifies the arguments and strategies that are employed in seeking to offer an interpretation of international legal norms that corresponds to the political interests of the Russian Federation. The examination reveals how new content is attached to international legal concepts in the works of Russian legal scholars who construct a position favourable to the Russian Federation, and in what way legal arguments are combined with statements and theoretical constructs that are irrelevant from the point of view of contemporary international law, thus deleting the boundaries between legal and non-legal reasoning and producing a pseudo-legal narrative that serves the political interests of Russia.","PeriodicalId":37780,"journal":{"name":"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review","volume":"14 1","pages":"11 - 63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Annexation of Crimea and Attempts to Justify It in the Context of International Law\",\"authors\":\"Erika Leonaitė, Dainius Žalimas\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/lasr-2016-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The article carries out an assessment of the “reunification of Crimea with Russia” from the point of view of contemporary international law and examines the arguments of Russian legal scholars who try to deny the annexation, i.e. the acquisition of territory by force. The assessment reveals recent changes in the interpretation of the principle of the self-determination of peoples in the Russian official position and legal doctrine, compared to the interpretation of this principle prevalent before the International Court of Justice adopted the Advisory Opinion on Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo. The analysis carried out in the article identifies the arguments and strategies that are employed in seeking to offer an interpretation of international legal norms that corresponds to the political interests of the Russian Federation. The examination reveals how new content is attached to international legal concepts in the works of Russian legal scholars who construct a position favourable to the Russian Federation, and in what way legal arguments are combined with statements and theoretical constructs that are irrelevant from the point of view of contemporary international law, thus deleting the boundaries between legal and non-legal reasoning and producing a pseudo-legal narrative that serves the political interests of Russia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37780,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"11 - 63\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/lasr-2016-0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lasr-2016-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

摘要本文从当代国际法的角度对“克里米亚并入俄罗斯”进行了评估,并对俄罗斯法律学者试图否认吞并即武力获取领土的观点进行了考察。这项评估表明,与国际法院通过《关于按照国际法单方面宣布科索沃独立的咨询意见》之前普遍对这一原则的解释相比,俄罗斯官方立场和法律学说最近对人民自决原则的解释发生了变化。文章中进行的分析确定了在寻求对国际法律规范作出符合俄罗斯联邦政治利益的解释时所采用的论点和战略。这项审查揭示了在俄罗斯法律学者的著作中,如何将新的内容附加到国际法律概念上,这些法律学者构建了有利于俄罗斯联邦的立场,以及法律论点如何与从当代国际法的观点来看无关的陈述和理论结构相结合。从而消除了法律和非法律推理之间的界限,并产生了一种服务于俄罗斯政治利益的伪法律叙事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Annexation of Crimea and Attempts to Justify It in the Context of International Law
Abstract The article carries out an assessment of the “reunification of Crimea with Russia” from the point of view of contemporary international law and examines the arguments of Russian legal scholars who try to deny the annexation, i.e. the acquisition of territory by force. The assessment reveals recent changes in the interpretation of the principle of the self-determination of peoples in the Russian official position and legal doctrine, compared to the interpretation of this principle prevalent before the International Court of Justice adopted the Advisory Opinion on Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo. The analysis carried out in the article identifies the arguments and strategies that are employed in seeking to offer an interpretation of international legal norms that corresponds to the political interests of the Russian Federation. The examination reveals how new content is attached to international legal concepts in the works of Russian legal scholars who construct a position favourable to the Russian Federation, and in what way legal arguments are combined with statements and theoretical constructs that are irrelevant from the point of view of contemporary international law, thus deleting the boundaries between legal and non-legal reasoning and producing a pseudo-legal narrative that serves the political interests of Russia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review
Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review is a bilingual (Lithuanian and English), peer reviewed scholarly magazine that is published once per year by the Strategic Research Center of the Military Academy of Lithuania in cooperation with Vilnius University (Institute of International Relations and Political Science) and Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas (Political Science and Diplomacy Department). The journal focuses on the global, regional and national security problematique which directly or indirectly influence security and defense issues of Lithuania, the Baltic states and region around. The Review aims to sustain high profile scientific publications delivering rigorous analytical insights into security and defence problematique ofn the region and to be ranked as a regular and high-quality academic periodical. The Review reaches out for academic community and political practitioners and offer ample opportunities for scholarly visibility and potential impact.
期刊最新文献
Military expenditure and income inequality in European NATO Member States China’s Rising Military Threat in the Indo-Pacific Region: Change in Japan’s Defence Policy in 2013–2022 Allies That Matter: Elite versus Public Opinion in Latvia The War in Ukraine: Estonia and European Strategic Autonomy Responding to Russia The Protracted Survival of Boko Haram From a Revolutionary Warfare Perspective
×
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