D. Dimitrijević


The issue of territorial delineation in the East China Sea has a geo-economics significance due to the presence of rich energy sources as well as to the intertwined interests of the coastal states and the interests of the United States, that, for strategic reasons, tends to maintain its political and military presence and control. In the last decade, China, Taiwan and Japan have intensified their territorial demands in the East China Sea over the islands that the Chinese call Diaoyu, Taiwanese Diaoyutai, and the Japanese Senkaku (hereinafter: Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands). Due to the increasingly visible escalation in mutual relations arising from different points of view regarding the sovereignty of these islands and different approaches in terms of determining the boundaries of exclusive economic zones and continental shelves, where no party wants to make concessions to the other party, the application of international law seems an inevitable mechanism for overcoming territorial disputes. In this regard, the study deals with the possibilities to resolve territorial disputes in the East China Sea in order to achieve sustainable legal solutions that would be in accordance with the international law of the sea, and whose application would ensure peace and stability in this part of the world.

Ключ. слова

territorial disputes, maritime delimitation, East China Sea, Senkaku / Diaoyu Islands, China, Taiwan, Japan.

Полный текст:


Список литературы

1. Joyman Lee. Senkaku/Diaoyu: Islands of Conflict. History Today, 2011, Vol. 61, no. 5. Availiable at: http:// www. historytoday.com / joyman-lee / senkakudiaoyuislands-conflict (accessed 30.09.2017) [in English].
2. Diaoyu Dao, an Inherent Territory of China. Availiable at: http://english.people.com.cn/90785/7960320. html (accessed 30.09.2017) [in English].
3. Seokwoo Lee. The 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan and Territorial Disputes in East Asia. Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal, 2002, Vol. 11, no. 1 [in English].
4. Information Office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China. Availiable at: http:// ba.chineseembassy.org / eng / zt / dydwteng / t986956. htm (accessed 30.09.2017) [in English].
5. Treaty of Peace with Japan. 8 September 1951. 3 U.S.T. 3169 [in English].
6. Mark J. Valencia. The East China Sea Dispute: Context, Claims, Issues and Possible Solutions. Asian perspective, 2007, Vol. 31, no. 1 [in English].
7. The Basic View of Sovereignty over the Islands of Senkaku. Availiable at: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/ asia-paci/senkaku/basic_view.html (accessed 17.08.2017) [in English].
8. PRC Foreign Ministry. Set Aside Dispute and Pursue Joint Development. November 17, 2000 [in English].
9. Selig Harrison Selig, ed. Seabed petroleum in Northeast Asia: Conflict or cooperation? Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Washington D.C., 2005. Availiable at: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index. cfm?topic_id=1462&fuseaction=topics.documents&group_ id=132299 (accessed 25.08.2017) [in English].
10. Ralph A. Stamm. China, Japan: Getting sensible, finally. ISN Security Watch, 30 June, 2008 [in English].
11. Ji Guoxing. Maritime Jurisdiction in the Three China Seas: Options for Equitable Settlement. In: Policy Papers. Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation. UC Berkeley, 1995 [in English].
12. Submissions to the Commission: Submission by the People's Republic of China. Availiable at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_ chn_63_2012.htm (accessed 30.09.2017) [in English].
13. Reisman W. M., Westerman G. S. Straight Baselines in International Maritime Boundary Delimitation. New York, 1992 [in English].
14. Liyu Wang and Peter H. Pearse. The New Legal Regime for China’s Territorial Sea. Ocean Development and International Law, 1994, Vol. 25, no. 4 [in English].
15. Handbook on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries. Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea Office of Legal Affairs. United Nations. New York, 2000 [in English].
16. Zhiguo Gao. China and the LOS Convention. Marine Policy, 1991 [in English].
17. Fisheries Case. Judgment of December 18th, 1951. International Court of Justice Reports, 1951 [in Russian].
18. Convention on the Law of the Sea with Annexes and Index. Final act of the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea. UN Treaty Series, Vol. 1833 [in English].
19. Shigeru Oda. International Law of the Resources of the Sea. Recueil des Cours Acadйmie de Droit International, 1969, Vol. 127, Vol. I [in English].
20. Delimitation in the Maritime Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen (Denmark v. Norway). International Court of Justice Reports, 1993 [in English].
21. Continental Shelf Case (Libya v. Malta). International Court of Justice Reports, 1985 [in English].
22. Continental Shelf Case (Tunisia v. Libya). International Court of Justice Reports, 1982 [in English].
23. Case Concerning the Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Malta). International Court of Justice Reports, 1985 [in English].
24. Zhu Fenglan. The Delimitation of East China Sea Continental Shelf: Sino-Japanese Disputes from the Perspective of International Law. China International Studies, 2006 [in English].
25. Gerald H. Blake. Mediterranean Micro-Territorial Disputes and Maritime Boundary Delimitation. Il regime giuridico internazionale del Mare Mediterraneo. Leanza, Milano, 1987 [in English].
26. Ralph A. Stamm. China, Japan: Getting sensible, finally. ISN Security Watch, 30 June, 2008 [in Russian].
27. Dusko Dimitrijević. International Law Regulation of Territorial Dispute in the East China Sea between Japan and China. Review of International Affairs, 2011, Vol. LXII, No. 1133 [in English].
28. Reinhard Drifte. Japanese-Chinese territorial disputes in the East China Sea – between military confrontation and economic cooperation. In: Working paper, Asia Research Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science. London, 2008. Availiable at:
http:// eprints.lse.ac.uk / 20881 / http: // www.un.org / Depts/ los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_chn_63_2012. htm (accessed 30.09.2017) [in English].

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/2542-047X-2018-4-1-38-46


  • Ссылки не определены.