| Popis: |
The persistent Pinnacle Islands controversy has been often observed from several perspectives, such as historical entitlements, territorial sovereignty prerogatives, maritime rights to exploit natural recourses, and strategic affairs. The importance of this dispute lies in the contextual necessities and interests of the governments from China, Japan, and Taiwan. Likewise, the United States implications and interests beneath the dispute have also been manifested. In this case, the Japan-U.S. strategic alliance serves as a framework for the Washington policy maintenance in East Asia. In the meantime, International Public Law as an alternative to solve the Pinnacles controversy has failed. Under those circumstances, an armed conflict among the parties is possible, yet the United States military presence can prevent them. |
