THE
BREZHNEV DOCTRINE
The Brezhnev Doctrine was a Soviet Union foreign policy, first and
most clearly outlined by S. Kovalev in a September 26, 1968 Pravda article,
entitled "Sovereignty and the International Obligations of Socialist
Countries." Leonid Brezhnev reiterated it in a speech at the Fifth
Congress of the Polish United Workers' Party on November 13, 1968, which
stated:
Eastern
Bloc
When
forces that are hostile to socialism try to turn the development of some
socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the
country concerned, but a common problem and concern of all socialist countries.
This doctrine was announced to retroactively justify the Soviet
invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 that ended the Prague Spring, along
with earlier Soviet military interventions, such as the invasion of Hungary in
1956. These interventions were meant to put an end to liberalization efforts
and uprisings that had the potential to compromise Soviet hegemony inside the
Eastern bloc, which was considered by the Soviets to be an essential defensive
and strategic buffer in case hostilities with NATO were to break out.
In practice, the policy meant that limited independence of the
satellite states' communist parties was allowed. However, no country would be
allowed to compromise the cohesiveness of the Eastern bloc in any way. That is,
no country could leave the Warsaw Pact or disturb a ruling communist party's
monopoly on power. Implicit in this doctrine was that the leadership of the Soviet
Union reserved, for itself, the right to define "socialism" and
"capitalism". Following the announcement of the Brezhnev Doctrine,
numerous treaties were signed between the Soviet Union and its satellite states
to reassert these points and to further ensure inter-state cooperation. The
principles of the doctrine were so broad that the Soviets even used it to
justify their military intervention in the non-Warsaw Pact nation of
Afghanistan in 1979. The Brezhnev Doctrine stayed in effect until it was finally
ended with the Soviet non-invasion of Poland during the 1980–1981 crisis, and
the later unwillingness of Mikhail Gorbachev to use military force when Poland
held free elections in 1989 and Solidarity defeated the Communist Party. It was
superseded by the facetiously named Sinatra Doctrine in 1989, alluding to the
Frank Sinatra song "My Way".
LOTUS
CASE
The
Lotus case concerns a criminal trial which was the result of the 2 August 1926
collision between the S.S. Lotus, a French steamship (or steamer), and the S.S.
Boz-Kourt, a Turkish steamer, in a region just north of Mytilene (Greece). As a
result of the accident, eight Turkish nationals aboard the Boz-Kourt drowned
when the vessel was torn apart by the Lotus.
On
7 September 1927 the case was presented before the Permanent Court of
International Justice, the judicial branch of the League of Nations, the
predecessor of the United Nations.
The
issue at stake was Turkey's jurisdiction to try Monsieur Demons, the French
officer on watch duty at the time of the collision. Since the collision
occurred on the high seas, France claimed that the state whose flag the vessel
flew had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter. France proffered case law,
through which it attempted to show at least state practice in support of its
position. However, those cases both involved ships that flew the flag of the
flag state and were thus easily distinguishable. The Court, therefore, rejected
France's position stating that there was no rule to that effect in international
law.
The
Lotus principle or Lotus approach, usually considered a foundation of
international law, says that sovereign states may act in any way they wish so
long as they do not contravene an explicit prohibition.
The application of this principle – an outgrowth of
the Lotus case – to future incidents raising the issue of jurisdiction over
people on the high seas was changed by article 11 of the 1958 High Seas
Convention. The convention, held in Geneva, laid emphasis on the fact that only
the flag state or the state of which the alleged offender was a national had
jurisdiction over sailors regarding incidents occurring in high seas.
The
principle has also been used in arguments against the reasons of the United
States of America, for opposing the existence of the International Criminal
Court (ICC).
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar