English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 91913/122132 (75%)
Visitors : 25724619      Online Users : 306
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/96774


    Title: 從國際法觀點評析布希政府反擴散戰略
    Other Titles: The Legality of the BushAdministration’s Counter-Proliferation Strategy
    Authors: 李玫憲;卓慧菀
    Lee, Mei-Hsien;Cho, Hui-Wan
    Keywords: 反擴散戰略;自衛權;安理會授權;先制自衛;預防性戰爭
    Counter-Proliferation Strategy;Self-defense;Security Council Authorization;Preemptive Self Defense;Preventive War
    Date: 2009-08
    Issue Date: 2016-05-20 15:35:25 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 鑑於布希政府二○○二年提出《對抗大規模毀滅性武器的國家戰略》作為反擴散戰略指導方針,並將先制攻擊作為美國反擴散戰略的重要工具之一,本文擬以該文件及美國相關政策論述與實踐作為基礎,檢視美國各項反擴散戰略之國際法適法性。文章首先回顧當前美國反擴散戰略相關政策與實踐,包括反擴散三支柱與相對應之具體策略。其次,從國際法上禁止使用武力的原則出發,討論反擴散戰略的國際法基礎,分析重點將置於自衛權概念的擴張和安理會之授權,以及「先制自衛」與「預防性戰爭」之區分。本文認為,為避免霍布斯世界之負面建構,並維繫當前國際法的秩序,區分先制自衛與預防性戰爭,謹慎使用前者習慣國際法權利,避免後者,並加強非武力手段的國際合作,仍是美國國家安全與國際和平的最大公約數。
    The Bush administration of the United States publicized its “Na-tional Security Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction” in 2002 as its guideline of counter-proliferation, with the option of a preemptive strike[ul]. This article aims to analyze the legality of the counter-proliferation strategy based on this document and related Amer-ican policy statements and practices. First, it will review related U.S. policy statements and practices, including all three pillars of the strategy and corresponding concrete measures. Second, it will scrutinize the legality of the strategy according to the principle of non- use of force; the focuses will be the expansionary interpretation of the right to self-defense,authorization by the UN Security Council and the distinction between preemption self-defense and preventive war. This study concludes that in order to prevent constructing an unex-pected Hobbesian world and to maintain international law and order, it is important to distinguish “preemptive self-defense” from “preventive war,” exercise the customary right of preemptive self-defense with caution, avoid preventive wars, and strengthen interna-tional cooperation.
    Relation: 法學評論, 110, 1-52
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    110(001-052).pdf2166KbAdobe PDF351View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback