| 70 | 0 | 77 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
在评价和规制争议海域武力行为时，应优先判断选择适用平时法抑或战时法的法律框架。尽管习惯国际法与相关司法判例已确立和平时期海上武力使用规则，但“使用武力威胁”“实际使用武力”与“武装攻击”在争议海域内的区分界限始终模糊。当前司法实践侧重于区分“执法活动”与“军事活动”以确认案件管辖权，缺乏对武装冲突的审查判断，导致法律定性滞后于冲突现实。在判断实际使用武力是否构成武装攻击时，不能仅依赖规模、效果等客观标准，还需引入当事国的主观意图，构建主客观相一致的综合认定框架。据此，可通过构建“战前法”体系和完善海上意外相遇规则，为有效管控危机和规制武力使用提供更明晰的法律指引。
Abstract：In evaluating and regulating the use of force in disputed maritime areas, priority should be given to determining whether the legal framework of peacetime law or wartime law applies. Although customary international law and relevant judicial precedents have established rules governing the use of force at sea in peacetime, distinctions among “threat of force,” “actual use of force,” and “armed attack” remain ambiguous in such contested areas. Current judicial practice tends to focus on distinguishing between “law enforcement activities” and “military activities” to establish jurisdiction, while often lacking a substantive assessment of whether an armed conflict exists. This results in legal characterizations that lag behind the reality of confrontations. When determining whether the actual use of force constitutes an armed attack, reliance solely on objective criteria such as scale and effects is insufficient; the subjective intent of the state parties must also be taken into account to establish a comprehensive evaluation framework that integrates both objective and subjective elements.Accordingly, clearer legal guidance for effective crisis management and force regulation may be provided by developing a “jus ante bellum” framework and refining rules for unexpected encounters at sea.
[1]孔令杰，韩茜.《联合国海洋法公约》第298条关于军事活动和执法活动争端的区分[J].中国海商法研究，2022(3):42-53.
[2]ISHII Y.Introductory Note to Case Concerning the Detention of Three Ukrainian Naval Vessels (Ukraine v.Russian Federation):Provisional Measures Order (ITLOS) [J].International Legal Materials,2019,58(6):1147-1166.
[3]ZOU K Y,YE Q.Interpretation and Application of Article 298 of the Law of the Sea Convention in Recent Annex VII Arbitrations:An Appraisal [J].Ocean Development and International Law,2017,48(3/4):331-344.
[4]SHI X X,CHANG Y-C.Order of Provisional Measures in Ukraine versus Russia and Mixed Disputes concerning Military Activities [J].Journal of International Dispute Settlement,2020,11(2):278-294.
[5]刘美.争议海域维权执法的强制管辖风险及中国因应——基于“乌克兰舰艇扣押案”中海洋法法庭指示临时措施的反思[J].国际法研究，2020(2):73-87.
[6]钱江涛.俄乌刻赤海峡争端的管辖权问题研究[J].浙江海洋大学学报(人文科学版),2023(1):8-15.
[7]The Office of the Prosecutor.Situation in the Republic of Korea:Article 5 Report [R].Hague:International Criminal Court,2014.
[8]International Law Association.Final Report on the Meaning of Armed Conflict in International Law [R].Hague:The Hague Conference,2010.
[9]MELZER N.Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities Under International Humanitarian Law [R].Geneva:ICRC,2009.
[10]KWAST P J.Maritime Law Enforcement and the Use of Force:Reflections on the Categorisation of Forcible Action at Sea in the Light of the Guyana/Suriname Award [J].Journal of Conflict & Security Law,2008,13(1):49-91.
[11]高健军.《联合国海洋法公约》第298条中的“军事活动例外”——评国际海洋法法庭在“扣留三艘乌克兰海军船只案”中的临时措施命令[J].国际法研究，2019(6):3-12.
[12]KLEIN N.Maritime Security and the Law of the Sea [M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2011:261.
[13]MELZER N,GASTEYGER G G.Conceptual Distinction and Overlaps between Law Enforcement and the Conduct of Hostilities [C]// GILL T D,FLECK D.The Handbook of the International Law of Military Operations.2nd ed.Oxford:Oxford University Press,2015.
[14]TALMON S.The South China Sea Arbitrations:Is There a Case to Answer?[C]// TALMON S,JIA B B.The South China Sea Arbitration:A Chinese Perspective.Portland:Hart Publishing,2014:57-58.
[15]TANAKA Y.Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities?:Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen [J].Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law,2023,11(1):1-26.
[16]刘美.海上军事活动的界定与美国南海“灰色地带行动”[J].国际安全研究，2021(3):102-131.
[17]LOTT A.Hybrid Threats and the Law of the Sea:Use of Force and Discriminatory Navigational Restrictions in Straits [M].Leiden:Brill Nijhoff,2022.
[18]BLANK L R.Irreconcilable Differences:The Thresholds for Armed Attack and International Armed Conflict [J].Notre Dame Law Review,2020,96(1):249-290.
[19]罗肖.东南亚声索国在南海问题上的“灰色地带”策略——对越南与菲律宾的比较分析[J].东南亚研究，2023(5):49-70.
[20]胡波.“灰色地带”竞争：概念泛化与实践复杂化[J].太平洋学报，2024(9):56-67.
[21]江河.论军事活动规制国际法的碎片化与开放性——从“乌克兰舰船扣押案”切入[J].法学，2020(9):179-191.
[22]FLECK D.The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law [M].4th ed.Oxford:Oxford University Press,2021:61.
[23]联合国人权理事会.使用武装无人机进行定点清除：法外处决、即决处决或任意处决问题特别报告员的报告[R].日内瓦：联合国大会，2020.
[24]BROWNLIE I.International Law and the Use of Force by States [M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1963:364.
[25]SADURSKA R.Threats of Force [J].American Journal of International Law,1988,82(2):239-268.
[26]POBJIE E.Prohibited Force:The Meaning of “Use of Force” in International Law [M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2024.
[27]KRESS C.The International Court of Justice and the “Principle of Non-Use of Force” [C]// WELLER M.The Oxford Handbook of the Use of Force in International Law.Oxford:Oxford University Press,2016:582.
[28]GRAY C.International Law and the Use of Force [M].4th ed.Oxford:Oxford University Press,2018:151.
[29]叶泉.当事国在海洋划界前的国际法义务之研析——兼论南海当事国在划界前之国际法义务[J].法学评论，2016(6):99-109.
[30]段嘉政，宋尚聪.争议海域执法中武力使用之定性研究[J].海南开放大学学报，2022(3):97-109.
[31]叶泉.谁之权利?何种义务?——当事国在争议海域单边行动之边界探究[J].当代法学，2021(5):127-139.
[32]张亮，刘松涛.论沿海国在争议专属经济区内对外国船舶污染的管辖权[J].国际法研究，2024(3):31-49.
[33]张立，辛逸伦.战略文化与道德风险：理解中印边界摩擦新视角[J].南亚研究，2024(3):1-25.
[34]马得懿.和平时期军舰介入海上执法的国际法规制[J].贵州省党校学报，2021(5):111-120.
[35]HILL-CAWTHORNE L.International Litigation and the Disaggregation of Disputes:Ukraine/Russia as a Case Study [J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly,2019,68(4):779-815.
[36]FOGT M M.Legal Challenges or “Gaps” by Countering Hybrid Warfare-Building Resilience in Jus Ante Bellum [J].Southwestern Journal of International Law,2020,27(1):28-100.
[37]CHANG Y-C.The Use of Force During Law Enforcement in Disputed Maritime Areas [J].Marine Policy,2021,124(2):1-8.
[38]林兆然.海上军事控制区的国际法依据与限制：海洋法和军事法的视角[J].太平洋学报，2025(1):81-95.
[39]WYLER E,WHELAN A.Lawyers as Creators of Law's Temporal Reality:A Pragmatic Approach to International Law [C]// PLOEG K P V,PASQUET L,CASTELLANOS-JANKIEWICZ L,et al.International Law and Time:Narratives and Techniques.Cham:Springer,2022:33.
[40]LUBIN A.Technology and the Law of Jus Ante Bellum [J].Chicago Journal of International Law,2025,26(1):1-22.
[41]MEIER M W.Soft Law:What Is It Good For?[C]// SIVAKUMARAN S,BURNE C R.Making and Shaping the Law of Armed Conflict.Oxford:Oxford University Press,2024:79.
[42]王毅.谈南海问题：对达成“南海行为准则”充满信心[EB/OL].(2025-03-07)[2025-06-09].https://www.mfa.gov.cn/nanhai/chn/wjbxw/202503/t20250307_11570219.htm.
[43]周士新.《南海行为准则》与地区秩序的重构[J].南洋问题研究，2022(3):40-50.
[44]刘天琦.全球海洋治理视域下的南海海洋治理[J].海南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2019(4):1-8.
[45]张康乐.增强国际话语权的国际法路径研究[J].中国社会科学院大学学报，2022(8):110-123.
[46]陈继红，李中涵.全球风险治理视域下中国道德话语重构的三大命题[J].河北学刊，2023(3):37-45.
[47]戴瑛.习近平海洋命运共同体理念的理论渊源、现实意义及实践路径[J].内蒙古社会科学，2023(2):1-6.
[48]KRASKA J,PARK Y K.Emerging Technology and the Law of the Sea [M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2022:244-245.
[49]习近平.坚持自立自强突出应用导向推动人工智能健康有序发展[EB/OL].(2025-04-26)[2025-06-08].https://www.gov.cn/yaowen/liebiao/202504/content_7021072.htm.
[50]史翰青，于浩.人工智能赋能法治的风险及其应对[J].理论探索，2024(2):121-128.
[51]胡玉鸿.试论法学上的基础公理[J].河北学刊，2023(4):176-189.
[52]高晓林，梁永涛.缘起·内涵·价值：论加强国际传播能力建设的守正创新[J].暨南学报(哲学社会科学版),2024(3):19-33.
[53]刘晓红.论中国涉外法治体系的构建[J].上海大学学报(社会科学版),2024(5):1-12.
[54]杨雪.以全人类共同价值引领人类文明新发展[J].理论探索，2023(3):32-38.
①争议海域的争端类型包括岛屿主权争端、海域划界争端，以及二者交织的争端。
(1)根据《联合国海洋法公约》第298条第1款第b项的规定,军事活动属于导致有拘束力裁判的强制程序的任择性例外。
(2)参见Case concerning the detention of three Ukrainian naval vessels (Ukraine v.Russian Federation),Provisional Measures,Memorandum of the Russian Federation,7 May 2019,ITLOS,pp.299-302,paras.63,74;Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen (Ukraine v.the Russian Federation),Award on Preliminary Objections,27 June 2022,PCA,p.44,para.125。
(3)参见Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,p.147,para.445。
(4)参见Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen (Ukraine v.the Russian Federation),Award on Preliminary Objections,27 June 2022,PCA,p.44,paras.122-125。
(5)Case concerning the detention of three Ukrainian naval vessels (Ukraine v.Russian Federation),Provisional Measures,Separate Opinion of Judge Gao,ITLOS,p.355,para.49.
(6)Case concerning the detention of three Ukrainian naval vessels (Ukraine v.Russian Federation),Provisional Measures,Separate Opinion of Judge Gao,ITLOS,p.355,paras.50-51.
(7)参见Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,p.147,para.445。
(8)参见Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,p.147,para.445。
(9)Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,p.142,paras.433-434.
(10)Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v.Turkey),Interim Protection,Order of 11 September 1976.I.C.J.Reports 1976,para.32.
(11)参见Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,pp.155-156,paras.466-470。
(12)参见Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Atlantic Ocean (Ghana/C??te d'Ivoire),Provisional Measures,Order of 25 April 2015,ITLOS Reports 2015,pp.164-165,paras.99-102。
(13)参见Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,p.147,para.445。
(14)参见Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v.Suriname),Award of the Arbitral Tribunal,2007,PCA,p.162,para.484。
(15)Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen (Ukraine v.the Russian Federation),Award on Preliminary Objections,27 June 2022,PCA,p.42,para.116.
(16)参见Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen (Ukraine v.the Russian Federation),Preliminary Objections of the Russian Federation,24 August 2020,PCA,p.18,para.46。
基本信息:
DOI：10.14134/j.cnki.cn33-1337/c.2025.06.006
中图分类号:D993.5;D995
引用信息:
[1]马得懿,段嘉政.争议海域武力使用的法律界定与规制路径[J].浙江工商大学学报,2025,No.195(06):57-67.DOI:10.14134/j.cnki.cn33-1337/c.2025.06.006.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金重大项目“军民融合战略下海上通道安全法治保障研究”(18ZDA155)
2026-01-30
2026
2026-02-10
2026
1
2025-11-15
2025-11-15