Abercrombie france bset _ The Taiwan issue and int

syth16dsvdc

The Taiwan issue and international law

A period of time, pro-independence forces in Taiwan has been pushing for gradual independence of Taiwan and the referendum into the constitution. Unification and independence has become the island's biggest political issues. A major issue stand out: Taiwan residents have the right to decide Taiwan's future? Taiwan residents have the right to decide Taiwan's sovereignty by referendum? Either politically or legally, the answer is: Taiwan residents the right to decide Taiwan's future, but it must be jointly decided with the people of the mainland, Taiwan has no right unilaterally to determine Taiwan's future; Taiwan to adopt referendum to determine Taiwan's future, but must be in the mainland government agreed to give up and assume responsibility for Taiwan's territorial sovereignty, the international never appeared on the sovereign government without the consent part of the territory only through a referendum on the unilateral decision of the inhabitants of that part of the territorial sovereignty legal and examples. In international law and international politics, The nature of Taiwan independence, China is to split into two in the international arena into a new country, to change China's status of international law and international relations, it is entirely different from the Chinese government, who represents the legitimacy of the dispute. An independent Taiwan will have the right to seek freely in the international political and military cooperation , free to enter into political and military alliances, and facing the mainland with Taiwan by force the waters,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], islands and exclusive economic zones of the problem. Therefore, Taiwan can not help but to change the status quo of cross-strait relations, to change the status and great damage to China's sovereignty and national interests of China as a precondition. Taiwan's referendum on unification or independence is not to decide the real future of the Taiwan people, but to decide the future of cross-strait relations, decided the future of the entire Chinese people. Taiwan is also expected because the protection of the United States, so Taiwan's referendum decision will also be the future of Sino-US relations. Residents of the island of Taiwan referendum for a decision to cross-strait relations, China- US relations and major fundamental changes in the interests of people on both sides, such typical unilateral acts are like Even if successful, as long as the mainland government resolutely opposes and will never get international recognition. Practice under international law , Taiwan independence on the premise that requires the consent of the mainland. This is because, in the international arena, the PRC government as the successor to the former government of the Republic,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], inherited the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan, even if the jurisdiction of the territory of Taiwan is mainly exercised by the Taiwan authorities, but did not change Taiwan's territorial sovereignty part of China's nature. Territory as a sovereign state sovereignty on the part of the change obviously with the consent of sovereign states as a precondition, which is the proper meaning of national sovereignty, the legal but based on a simple common sense: the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan belongs to Taiwan residents, including including all the Chinese people. One, without the consent mainland, Taiwan has no right to unilaterally decide the residents independence referendum approach. Almost all countries have strict protection of the domestic law of the unity and territorial integrity, national sovereignty, separatism behavior in domestic law is often treated as criminal behavior, especially when the award of the various separatist or terrorist force means time. A small number of states from the federal state provides access to an independent federal program. Such as the Canadian Parliament in view of Quebec, hopes residents referendum for independence requirements, in May 2000 adopted the) , but the law is clearly rejected the attempt by a unilateral residents of Quebec independence referendum possible. Treat secession law has been adopted is not to encourage the negative attitude. This negative attitude is reflected in the. State law allows the use of force to safeguard national sovereignty, territorial integrity and sovereignty, allowing the armed separatist forces of sovereign states to take military action. International law does not encourage secession, not only because international law is based on a sovereign state legal system, but also because the international community to make concessions if the separatist forces, equivalent to opening Pandora's Box, only lead to more war and disaster, jeopardize world peace. , Of course, international law does not preclude a country divided into a number of countries. However, the division of sovereign states, international law is not to promote active, but passive afterwards admitted that when the new generation of national and international recognition has been a fait accompli before acceptance. How should the emergence of new countries, it? Obviously can not be understood as long as the integrity of an area have formed their own government structure can be called a new country, if for such an understanding, the federal states and even countries in the non- federal countries The provincial government, may in a short time on the basis of the existing administrative framework to complete this structure. Apart from determining the composition of the national territory, residents, the Government, an important condition is that with internal and external sovereignty, that is to carry out independent diplomacy with the international rights and capabilities, or in the domestic and foreign policy is completely independent of any existing sovereign state. From the international community to recognize the newly created country-specific practice, have the sense of international law in practice: the new nation have first access to the original sovereign or sovereign state consent, and to a new country after independence, boundaries, common property and common debt division, reached agreement on future relations or principles of agreement; Second, the international community to recognize the new country or the world, most countries recognize that the majority of countries to establish diplomatic relations with the new country. Former metropolitan country or the consent of the sovereign state is part of the territory of the country and residents of the new independent state out of a separate precondition, but also the core conditions, although such consent may be inside and outside the combined result of various factors. The pressure of foreign forces, internal ethnic, racial and religious conflicts, independent forces, acts of terrorism in the disputed region of special historical background, are likely to lead to the sovereign state, or sovereignty of States agreed to independent factors. But never in the absence of the sovereign state or a sovereign state without the consent of a sovereign country can be part of the territory to independence unilaterally, there is no such law or international conventions. As the twentieth century struggle of colonial peoples seeking independence broad victory, international recognition has started is not considered the basic components of the national birth. Since colonial countries,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], impeding the international recognition of colonial countries seeking independence, therefore, reduce the value of internationally recognized practices have the support of the developing countries. The colonial state's right to exist as a sovereign state does not depend on recognition, this is a reasonable proposition . However, this claim may not reduce the value of international recognition, because in here, but should not become another international recognition of the important principles of international law a more obstacles, that international recognition should not be an obstacle to the exercise of national self -determination. In the post-colonial era, the international recognition of national sovereignty will remain an important form and change political and legal factors, whether as basic components. Even if the Palestinians have not been the founding of nation-building by the international community to recognize its right to have international law on the part of sovereign status. EU independent post-Cold War wave of international law established more stringent than the traditional standard of international recognition has been established as one of the criteria to recognize the new state, indicating that post-colonial wave of Western political caution independent, that the international recognition of the actual formation of new national importance. International recognition from the negative side, the significance of international recognition is equally clear. Violation of international law for the country, in the absence of existing measures of the international community, would constitute a fundamental non-recognition of each country, the most peaceful sanctions, stop, and means of prevention. Drafted by the United Nations International Law Commission, Non-recognition of the separatist forces in both countries to respect for the principles of sovereign independence and territorial integrity of the basic and the most peaceful means, but also a basic international obligations. On the Taiwan issue, the international community generally recognize the sovereignty (as opposed to territorial jurisdiction.) Internationally, there is neither doubt the legitimacy of the Chinese government, nor the existence of International recognition of the state where there is no question of Taiwan. Here, the recognition of the international community to respect China's sovereignty constitutes independence and territorial integrity of the basic obligations, but also constitute the international community to curb the independence of Taiwan's most peaceful and most basic means. This is not Despite the continent's current government has no direct jurisdiction over Taiwan, but the division of jurisdiction does not constitute a sovereign on the split. International law does not deny the existence of territorial disputes with neighboring countries in the international presence as a fully sovereign states, for various reasons, do not deny the existence of the territorial jurisdiction of the sovereign government flaws as legitimate and sovereign governments . Extreme example is when the foreign invasion in international law on behalf of the government in exile still invaded the country; more common example is the central government in many countries because of internal armed conflict or religious forces, separatist forces in some areas because of loss of control and jurisdiction These are not posed in the disputed region will not be governed by, constitute an independent state, nor constitute the existing jurisdiction of sovereign governments for failing to lose the issue of territorial sovereignty in areas of conflict. In recent years, involving national sovereignty and territorial disputes and other major matters, more and more people appeared in the referendum approach. But never go beyond the sovereign state or the prior consent of the sovereign government prerequisite. That is, only when the sovereign state, the residents agreed to a referendum in the disputed region determined as the future of the region, this referendum is effective, will only be accepted by the international community, but also will have the force of international law. The three Baltic countries through a referendum for independence from the Soviet Union, but is independent in the history of the three countries, three countries from the Soviet Union was able to because of the disintegration of the Soviet Federation, with the political conditions to achieve independence , not simply achieved by a referendum to independence. Timor-Leste in August 1999 to achieve independence through a referendum, but the Government of Indonesia after the Portuguese government and the United Nations has signed an agreement with the residents of East Timor referendum to decide the future of East Timor, in fact, equal to agree to independence of East Timor. Portugal is a colonial occupation of East Timor, East Timor in 1975 when it agreed to give up the future of East Timor to self-determination. Indonesia had agreed to the residents of East Timor referendum decided the future of the Government of Indonesia does not exclude the results of the referendum have some degree of fantasy, but politically, it is difficult to imagine without the consent of the Government of Indonesia in East Timor to achieve independence through a referendum. In particular, the history does not belong to Indonesia, East Timor, Indonesia occupied East Timor in 1975 has not been internationally recognized. Therefore, Indonesia's decision on the status of East Timor is not based on international law to determine the rights , but on the actual occupation of a result due to the sovereign interests of the correlation. Even in Indonesia, the existence of international law the sovereignty of East Timor, the major flaw of the case,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], Indonesia's East Timor's independence is still not agreed to bypass the political premise. Indonesia's sovereignty over East Timor is the lack of international basis in order to force Indonesia into an independent international pressure to agree. Indonesia, East Timor by force to maintain the rule of human rights caused by another form agreed to an independent international pressure. Canadian Parliament in May 2000 through the the terms of secession.) The law stipulates that a seek independent provinces should first from the federal body to separate the is not clear, you should not be a referendum, forced referendum results will not be accepted by the federal government. If the House of Representatives that the referendum question clearly, and the referendum results to majority vote, the House of Representatives shall be based on the proportion of votes, voter turnout and other Identified in the House, the rights of ethnic and other issues, in an agreement on all these issues before independence. This means that the independence of a province not only to go through with the federal government and other provinces of the consultation and consent, and even the province's referendum on independence referendum question the results of the design and identification of the majority, to go through the review and consent of the federal legislature. Therefore, whether the practice of international law and individual domestic law, the sovereign right of domestic residents in an area separate decision of the region's independence. Residents of the referendum is always in an independent sovereign state agreed to the disputed area and agreed to the referendum process in the form of a time to complete independent confirmation process, that has been an independent sovereign state agreed to stamp the seal of democratic legitimacy (might called.) As a result, residents of the significance of the referendum decision is not independent, but to confirm independently. Not all areas need the independent referendum, referendum and not all are able to achieve independence or sovereignty over the decision. Whether in law or in real life, the legitimacy and role of the referendum are limited. Seventies of last century referendum on sovereignty of Gibraltar to the United Nations was denied. Switzerland held a referendum on accepting refugees, the referendum result was the European Court of Justice rejected. But the referendum as a form of direct democracy can indeed help alleviate many of the independent process of political difficulties encountered: first, the unification of the region to persuade people admit their minority status to independent; second, help sovereign or sovereign power to persuade people to accept the national separation, slowing the government to give up some sovereignty for the pressure (may be called political Sometimes the referendum Most residents agree that the time of independence, such as East Timor). In any case, this Or, an area often to achieve independence through two The importance and significance of the former decision is often greater than the latter. This referendum to confirm or secondary Referendum on the EU membership is not just a policy, first and foremost the EU and Russia agreed (albeit in different rights and different mood) EU enlargement, followed by Eastern European countries, the Government has identified the goal line with national interests of the EU accession, and finally full referendum confirmed the policy. In fact, most involving the sovereignty referendum results in advance can be expected, and even if the referendum results and the Government's policy objectives contrary, the Government can also create opportunities to re-organize residents in a referendum, and through the available political resources and advocacy power of positive impact referendum result, until the goal. Referendum sometimes seem to play a one-time After the first world major stations between 1920-1921, Schleswig, Klagenfurt Foote, Upper Silesia, Xiao Pulang and other regions is defeated by a defeated country or occupied population under international supervision, the decision by way of poll its attribution (But the occupation of these areas have a history background, the validity of the referendum also related to sovereign states and the victors agreed to decide the referendum as a precondition of its ownership, not simply India and Pakistan gained independence in 1947, the two sides has been the ownership of Kashmir dispute and India-Pakistan war broke out three times. After the first war between India and Pakistan, India and Pakistan the Kashmir issue had to be submitted to the UN General Assembly and Security Council. August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949, the Council decided to Kashmir by the two Kashmiri people to decide. However, India believes that the Kashmir problem in 1947 by the king of Kashmir territory agreement with India to resolve, against the referendum to determine its ownership. Kashmir issue can not be ruled out India and Pakistan were resolved, of course, does not rule out a referendum by the residents of the region possible. To be sure, in violation of the will of the cases of India and Pakistan, Kashmir, the public would have happened. Historical reasons that both claim of sovereignty of Kashmir, the lack of any agreed solution between the two countries will not bring peace to Kashmir, is not feasible politically. What circumstances under which sovereign states have permissive part of the territory under their jurisdiction unilaterally to achieve independence? There are two cases, one of colonial rule, and second, the illegal occupation. International law requires that the original colonial countries, through colonial rule and colonial war and seized the territory under the jurisdiction of the nation shall be allowed its independence. That is, by the colonial rule of the peoples and nations have the right to get independence from the former sovereign state, such an independent sovereign state should not agree with the premise. However, the former colonial peoples from the international law, sovereign and independent right of colonial peoples in the struggle for national independence and gradually established principles of international law. As barriers to international political reality, most of the colonial peoples in independent sovereign state is generally agreed that only after international recognition. Colonial rule but human rights violations, violations of international law make the reality of international law, sovereign state , faces the greatest pressure and moral pressure, but also makes independence requirements of the colonial peoples righteously, the general support of the international community. Acquired territories occupied by force is not recognized by international law and should be returned. After two world wars, have returned defeated the original occupation of large tracts of territory. But if the territories occupied by force the sovereign state was a large number of immigrants moving into and through a period of several centuries, the situation becomes complicated, like the United Kingdom under the jurisdiction of Northern Ireland and Gibraltar. Cause a large number of immigrants since the British, the two several times in favor of the referendum results are attributable to the United Kingdom. But in Northern Ireland, the independence movement has not been extinguished ; while Gibraltar, Britain and Spain are discussing the arrangements for sharing of sovereignty, the UN Security Council has vetoed the results of the referendum in Gibraltar unilaterally. This not only shows the results of the limited significance of the referendum, also shows that the attitude of the relevant sovereign state has always been an important deciding factor. Taiwan referendum is the crux: the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan belong to one China, which in the history and reality of international politics was never in dispute. Taiwan referendum is to fundamentally change the status quo of China's sovereignty, the establishment of a new sovereign state. The Chinese Government firmly opposes Taiwan independence, and not hesitate to use force to maintain sovereignty. Thus, neither Taiwan's referendum on unification or independence is based on a UN Security Council resolution will not be the basis of an agreement between the two sides. Taiwan may be the only unilateral legislation and referendum, to impose the mainland and the international community, this practice is totally lack of legal basis and political foundation. There really were such a referendum into a reality, and to support independence for the referendum results, this result required by the Chinese Government firmly opposes the United Nations Security Council and the national government will be obliged to refuse to accept Taiwan's referendum result. The Chinese government will also have the right under international law to take all necessary means to safeguard sovereignty and territorial integrity. Is worth mentioning that, due to Taiwan independence ideology of those in power has, on the island in favor of the normal exchanges between both sides often act as a. So, the mainland for Taiwan's Thus,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], the current political environment in Taiwan, the unification or independence, not only in law is invalid, there is no guarantee technically correct. Second , the only Just because Only have a referendum, Canadian scholars G? A? Bodin Quebec referendum will be called Was once the leader of Taiwan that But international law is only The National self- determination in international law developed in the twentieth century, a principle of international law, but the national self-determination is the former colonial peoples have the right people and managed to determine their political status and to seek the nation's economy development. There has never been reason to national self-determination to support the multi-ethnic divisive issue of sovereign states. 1960, the partial or total disruption of national unity and territorial integrity for the purpose of the attempt, both with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter is incompatible . 1970, sovereign and independent country's territorial integrity or political unity. This means that the principle of national self-determination may be made to undermine the sovereignty of any country's political unity and territorial integrity of the understanding. After World War I, Finland and Sweden because of a dispute over the ownership of Aland islands. Council of the League appointed an international committee of legal experts to provide advice on this issue, the Committee comments that: right to dispose of the territory is, in essence , the nature of the context of national sovereignty. The current international law (positive international law) does not recognize such a state constitute ethnic groups have the right to express their wishes by way of splitting out of other countries do not recognize this claim. This autonomy is a nation within the framework of the existing state to pursue their political, economic, social and cultural development. Western academic scholars has been Particularly in the last few decades, as international law, human rights law and the study of constitutional development, to expand, breaking the Western scholars gradually This new