【摘要】：隨著全球氣候變暖，北極冰川融化，北極航道的價(jià)值逐漸“浮出水面”，而迄今為止，尚未有任何國(guó)際法直接規(guī)定北極航道的歸屬問題。也正是因?yàn)榉傻娜蔽粚?dǎo)致世界各國(guó)對(duì)北極航道權(quán)屬的爭(zhēng)奪愈演愈烈。因此通過綜合運(yùn)用歷史分析法、文獻(xiàn)分析法、規(guī)范分析法和比較分析法進(jìn)行分析，對(duì)北極航道權(quán)屬之爭(zhēng)的問題進(jìn)行全面分析和研究，不僅可以填補(bǔ)北極航道的法律空白，緩解矛盾，而且可以豐富北極航道權(quán)屬之爭(zhēng)解決方法的多樣性。此外，，北極航道權(quán)屬問題的解決對(duì)于我國(guó)的海運(yùn)發(fā)展和國(guó)家安全意義也尤為重大。 早在中世紀(jì)人類就已經(jīng)開始了對(duì)北極航道的探索活動(dòng)，并最終開通了最有價(jià)值的西北航道和東北航道，這就是狹義上的北極航道。近些年來(lái)，北極航道的巨大價(jià)值逐漸突顯，但北極航道仍然處于法律真空地帶，因此導(dǎo)致了世界各國(guó)對(duì)北極航道的權(quán)屬進(jìn)行激烈的爭(zhēng)奪。 加拿大和俄羅斯分別提出對(duì)西北航道和東北航道享有主權(quán)權(quán)利的要求，并主要以“扇形原則”、“歷史性水域”和“直線基線”以及相關(guān)國(guó)內(nèi)立法作為法律依據(jù)，但這些法律依據(jù)都存在著令人難以信服的瑕疵。相反，以美國(guó)為首的國(guó)家則主張北極航道為“國(guó)際航行海峽”，但目前北極航道尚不滿足國(guó)際航行海峽所應(yīng)具有的功能性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，也很難被劃定為國(guó)際航行海峽，但不排除未來(lái)其符合功能性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的可能性。 現(xiàn)階段，學(xué)術(shù)界中主要存在四種解決北極航道權(quán)屬問題的方法，但都存在著很多難以解決的問題，因此《斯瓦爾巴條約》模式應(yīng)運(yùn)而生，即形式上承認(rèn)加、俄兩國(guó)的權(quán)利主張，但實(shí)質(zhì)上這兩個(gè)航道為國(guó)際航行海峽，締約國(guó)要在加、俄的主權(quán)管轄下行使自由航行權(quán)。此外，針對(duì)北極航道的特殊情況，提出了該模式創(chuàng)建時(shí)所應(yīng)注意的生態(tài)環(huán)境和自然歷史因素，并進(jìn)一步對(duì)爭(zhēng)端雙方立場(chǎng)、北極航道的現(xiàn)狀以及馬六甲海峽的實(shí)際解決情況進(jìn)行分析，得出該模式運(yùn)行之可行性。
[Abstract]:With global warming and melting Arctic glaciers, the value of Arctic waterways has gradually "surfaced", and so far there is no international law that directly governs the attribution of Arctic waterways. It is precisely because of the absence of laws that countries in the world compete for the ownership of the Arctic waterway. Therefore, through the comprehensive use of historical analysis, literature analysis, normative analysis and comparative analysis, this paper makes a comprehensive analysis and research on the dispute over the ownership of the Arctic waterway, which can not only fill in the legal blank of the Arctic Waterway, The conflict can be alleviated and the diversity of the Arctic waterway ownership dispute can be enriched. In addition, the solution of Arctic waterway ownership is of great significance to the development of maritime transport and national security in China. As early as the Middle Ages, people began to explore the Arctic Channel, and finally opened the most valuable Northwest Passage and the Northeast Passage, which is the Arctic Channel in a narrow sense. In recent years, the great value of the Arctic waterway has been gradually highlighted, but the Arctic Waterway is still in the legal vacuum zone, which leads to fierce competition for the ownership of the Arctic Waterway in the world. Canada and Russia, respectively, claim sovereign rights to the Northwest Passage and the North-East Passage, mainly based on the "sector principle", "historic waters" and "straight baselines", as well as relevant domestic legislation, But there are unconvincing flaws in these legal grounds. On the contrary, the countries led by the United States advocate the Arctic Channel as the "Straits of International Navigation." however, at present, the Arctic Channel does not meet the functional standards required for international navigation straits, and it is difficult to be classified as an internationally navigational strait. But it does not rule out the possibility that it meets functional standards in the future. At the present stage, there are mainly four ways to solve the problem of ownership of Arctic waterway in academic circles, but there are many difficult problems. Therefore, the Svalbard model emerged as the times require, that is, the formal recognition of the claims of rights of Canada and Russia. But in essence, these two channels are international navigation straits, and the contracting states should exercise the right of free navigation under the sovereignty of Canada and Russia. In addition, in view of the special circumstances of the Arctic waterway, the ecological environment and natural historical factors which should be paid attention to in the establishment of the model are put forward, and the positions of the two parties to the dispute are further discussed. The present situation of the Arctic Channel and the practical solution of Malacca Strait are analyzed, and the feasibility of the model is obtained.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：哈爾濱工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D993.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李志文;高俊濤;;北極通航的航行法律問題探析[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年11期

2 劉江萍;郭培清;;保護(hù)還是擱置主權(quán)?——淺析美加兩國(guó)西北航道核心問題[J];海洋世界;2010年03期

3 儲(chǔ)昭根;;北極爭(zhēng)奪凸現(xiàn)法律缺陷[J];檢察風(fēng)云;2007年19期

4 韓逸疇;;論西北航道爭(zhēng)端之困境與出路[J];武大國(guó)際法評(píng)論;2011年01期

5 胡德坤;鄧肖亭;;20世紀(jì)初期北極地區(qū)領(lǐng)土爭(zhēng)端及其解決[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文科學(xué)版);2011年01期

6 嚴(yán)雙伍;李默;;北極爭(zhēng)端的癥結(jié)及其解決路徑——公共物品的視角[J];武漢大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年06期

7 郭培清;管清蕾;;北方海航道政治與法律問題探析[J];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年04期

8 劉惠榮;林暉;;論俄羅斯對(duì)北部海航道的法律管制——兼論其與《聯(lián)合國(guó)海洋法公約》的沖突[J];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年04期

9 劉惠榮;張馨元;;斯瓦爾巴群島海域的法律適用問題研究——以《聯(lián)合國(guó)海洋法公約》為視角[J];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年06期

10 劉惠榮;劉秀;;北極群島水域法律地位的歷史性分析[J];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 吳瓊;北極海域的國(guó)際法律問題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

2 楊凡;北極生態(tài)保護(hù)法律研究[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2010年

本文編號(hào)：2428115