Крым – тематическое исследование по территориальной целостности и самоопределения и применения силы
Ключевые слова:
Европейский союз, Президент Украины, соглашение, сотрудничество, мировой рынок, ситуация в Крыме, международное право,Аннотация
В данной статье анализируются последние события в Крыму. В первой части статьи излагаются факты. Встатье автор ищет ответы на вопросы относительно критериев принципов территориальной целостности и право на самоопределение, а также запрета интервенции. Кроме того, встатье поднимается вопрос о легитимности действий Россий, которые обосновываются защитой русскогонаселения, проживающего в Крыму и как гуманитарная интервенция. В заключении статьи делается вывод о том, сецессияКрыма не может опираться на международное право и, что Российская интервенция является нарушением норм международногоправа.
Библиографические ссылки
1 Art. 111 of the Constitution of Ukraine
2 Conclusions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 19 March 2014
3 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice para. 81
4 By that time Ukraine had the third biggest nuclear arms potential in the world
5 Art. 2 of the Treaty reads: „High contracting parties according to provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and obligations
under the Final act of Meeting on safety and cooperation in Europe respect territorial integrity of each other and confirm inviolability
of borders existing between them.“
6 Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada of 20 August, 1998 https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1643/index.do
7 See f.e. UN Security Council Resolutions 853, 874, 884 which treated this territory as part of Azerbaijan; resolution of the UN
General Assembly of 14 March, 2008 reaffirmed Azerbaijan's territorial integrity with 39 votes in favour, 7 against and 100 abstentions
8 Art. 3 g of the Resolution 3314 of 14 December 1974 – Definition of Aggression – A/Res/29/3314
9 Decision of the ICJ in the Nicaragua Case, 1986, para. 246
10 Leaving apart the countermeasures, especially reprisals, but this is not in discussion in the given case.
11 UN Document A /68/L.39 of 24 March 2014
2 Conclusions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 19 March 2014
3 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice para. 81
4 By that time Ukraine had the third biggest nuclear arms potential in the world
5 Art. 2 of the Treaty reads: „High contracting parties according to provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and obligations
under the Final act of Meeting on safety and cooperation in Europe respect territorial integrity of each other and confirm inviolability
of borders existing between them.“
6 Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada of 20 August, 1998 https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1643/index.do
7 See f.e. UN Security Council Resolutions 853, 874, 884 which treated this territory as part of Azerbaijan; resolution of the UN
General Assembly of 14 March, 2008 reaffirmed Azerbaijan's territorial integrity with 39 votes in favour, 7 against and 100 abstentions
8 Art. 3 g of the Resolution 3314 of 14 December 1974 – Definition of Aggression – A/Res/29/3314
9 Decision of the ICJ in the Nicaragua Case, 1986, para. 246
10 Leaving apart the countermeasures, especially reprisals, but this is not in discussion in the given case.
11 UN Document A /68/L.39 of 24 March 2014
Загрузки
Опубликован
2016-06-04
Выпуск
Раздел
Современные проблемы внешней политики и международных отношений
