Communist China’s Attitude Toward International Law

1966 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hungdah Chiu

Despite the growing interest in Chinese studies in this country, little, if any, attention has been paid to the study of Communist China’s view of international law. Some persons may feel that Communist China, as a Socialist country, cannot do other than to adhere to the Soviet concept of international law or that of Socialist countries in general. There may be some truth in this view, but it does not disclose the whole picture. Communist China does accept many principles of international law proclaimed or applied by the Soviet Union or by Soviet jurists, but in view of the growing differences of views between the two countries in handling many international problems and in conducting the international Communist movement, it is reasonable to infer that Communist China may have developed different views toward international law in some aspects. In this connection, it may be noted tha Wu Tê-feng, a prominent jurist in Communist China and President of the China Political Science and Law Association, not long ago severely criticized the Soviet concept of international law in a report delivered on October 8, 1964, to the general meeting of the Association.

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-413
Author(s):  
Rizal Abdul Kadir

After twenty-two years of negotiations, in Aktau on August 12, 2018, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Russia, and Turkmenistan signed the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea. The preamble of the Convention stipulates, among other things, that the Convention, made up of twenty-four articles, was agreed on by the five states based on principles and norms of the Charter of the United Nations and International Law. The enclosed Caspian Sea is bordered by Iran, Russia, and three states that were established following dissolution of the Soviet Union, namely Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan.


1963 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 226-230

The Security Council discussed this question at its 1022nd–1025th meetings, on October 23–25, 1962. It had before it a letter dated October 22, 1962, from the permanent representative of the United States, in which it was stated that the establishment of missile bases in Cuba constituted a grave threat to the peace and security of the world; a letter of the same date from the permanent representative of Cuba, claiming that the United States naval blockade of Cuba constituted an act of war; and a letter also dated October 22 from the deputy permanent representative of the Soviet Union, emphasizing that Soviet assistance to Cuba was exclusively designed to improve Cuba's defensive capacity and that the United States government had committed a provocative act and an unprecedented violation of international law in its blockade.


1985 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
pp. 253-276
Author(s):  
Peter Kuhfus

After the 1927/28 upheaval in the communist movement, a complex relationship evolved between Chen Duxiu (1879–1942) and Leon Trotsky (1879–1940). To date little has been written about this relationship in the west. The relationship between Chen and Trotsky, however, deserves treatment in its own right for various reasons. First, an elucidation of the contacts between them should close a significant gap in the respective biographies of the two Opposition leaders. The intention is not only to define Trotsky's role as seen from Chen's perspective, but also to emphasize the Far Eastern component hitherto underestimated in biographies of Trotsky. Secondly, the reconstruction of the relationship between Chen and Trotsky constitutes an important, correcting supplement to our knowledge of the developments ( = Wirkungsgeschichte) of “Trotskyism” in China, as it has been described as a concrete phenomenon as well as an ideological-political undercurrent. Thirdly, a study of the relationship between Chen and Trotsky should provide a better understanding of relations between the Communists of China and of the Soviet Union.


1959 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 667-669 ◽  

The eighteenth plenary meeting of the International Cotton Advisory Committee was held in Washington, May 14–22, 1959. Governments from 34 countries were represented as members and 24 attended as observers; representatives from ten international organizations were also in attendance. Eight resolutions were adopted by the plenary meeting, the first four of which were concerned with budgetary matters. The fifth dealt with the future work program and instructed the secretariat to prepare a statement on government regulations on cotton and a report on harsh short staple cotton; the secretariat was also instructed to keep under review the extra-long staple cotton situation, to investigate the possibility of a similar survey on long staple cottons, and to provide as much information as possible on the effect of competition from the Soviet Union, communist China, and eastern Europe on world markets for cotton and cotton textiles. The sixth resolution drew attention to the present surplus situation of extra-long staples and indicated the desirability of convening a special meeting to examine the problems of this commodity with attention to production plans and policies, price and export policies, and steps needed to encourage consumption.


Author(s):  
Ngoc Son Bui

This book seeks to fill the academic gap in the existing literature on comparative constitutional law by examining how and why five current socialist countries (China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam) have changed their constitutions after the fall of the Soviet Union. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach which integrates comparative constitutional law with social sciences (particularly political science and sociology), this book explores and explains: the progressive function; institutional and socio-economic causes; legal forms, processes, and powers; and five variations (universal, integration, reservation, exceptional, and personal) of socialist constitutional change. It uses qualitative methodology, including the support of fieldwork. It contributes to a better understanding of dynamic socioeconomic, legal, and constitutional change in socialist countries and comparative constitutional law and theory, generally.


2021 ◽  
pp. 141-142
Author(s):  
Martin Wight

In this note Wight describes pendulum swings in opinion about the requirements of justice in war in Western civilization since the Middle Ages. Medieval Catholicism emphasized the righteousness of the ruler’s cause and asserted orthodoxy against infidels or heretics. Prominent writers on international law in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Gentili, Grotius, and Vattel) marked a shift toward secularization and rationalism (with both sides usually able to claim justice) and restraint in the laws of war governing the methods of combat. Moser’s study of international law, published in 1777–1780, was representative of an ‘age of positivism’ (1763–1918) in which all sovereign states had a right to resort to war or to remain neutral, while codifying obligations concerning the conduct of war. The Covenant of the League of Nations, signed in 1919, initiated a return to restrictions on the right to resort to war, reinforced by the 1928 Kellogg–Briand Pact, also known as the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy, which was upheld by the Nuremberg Tribunals. The Covenant ruled out aggression as unjust, while action in defence of the Covenant would be just by enforcing collective security. The Soviet Union reintroduced Holy War with its view of the Great Patriotic War (World War II) and the Cold War as just causes that advanced Communist revolutionary objectives. Counter-force strategies of nuclear deterrence may be regarded as strengthening restraint in the methods of war, compared to counter-value or ‘anti-city’ approaches.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document