Economic sanctions in MP /english/

Economic sanctions in MP /english/

UNIVERSITY of WORLD(GLOBAL) ECONOMY
And
ÄÈÏËÎÌÀÒÈÈ

FACULTY of the international LAW And
COMPARATIVE LEGISLATION

 

 

RESEARCH

WORK

ON THE SUBJECT OF: ECONOMIC
SANCTIONS In МП

 

                     Work has
executed: the student of group 1-3а-94. Хасанов Д

                                                  The
scientific chief: Ñàèäîâ

                                       
Ð.Ò êàí. Þðèä. Sciences.

                                  
The adviser for foreign language: Cафарова Ê.À.

 

Ташкент-98

The plan:

 

Introduction 3-5         

Глава-I. The международно-legal responsibility

1.1. General(common) concept of the международно-legal
responsibility 6-14

1.2. Basis of the международно-legal responsibility 15-21

1.3. Classification of international

Offences 22-39 

Глава-II. Economic sanctions as a measure of the
responsibility for offences

2.1. Export embargo 40-49

2.2.
Embargo on import 50-63

2.3. Additional kind of economic

The sanctions 64-69

The conclusion 70-72

The bibliography 73-75

Introduction

 A question on the sanctions, which
should be applied to агрессору, until recently did not involve(attract) to
itself of attention of wide sections and served a subject of study only of
small group of the lawyers, experts on application of the sanctions a UN, and
separate political figures. The question this seem especially academic, that is
torn off from life. But since the end of a 1935 in connection with
итало-абиссинским by the conflict, and then by beginning of the second
world(global) war and present regional conflicts this question has become most
urgent. This problem appears and in внешнеполитической of activity of a
Republic of Uzbekistan. The president of a Republic of Uzbekistan И.А. Каримов
in the performance(statement) as one of methods of the sanction of the regional
conflicts offered messages of embargo on importation of arms and raw material
for management of military actions in territory struggling государств1.

 The question on the sanctions
acquires a urgency in connection with all international conditions involved in
new wars for ïåðåäåë of the world.

 In these conditions the
consolidation of forces of countries interested in preservation of the world,
is the important problem. It can be made by strenghtening system of collective
safety, which part are the sanctions.

 As the sanctions hinder a
rule(situation) àãðåññîðà, a Republic of Uzbekistan, being
guided by the policy(politics) of the world, has supported system of the
sanctions used by the United Nations Organization.

   Some lawyers by a name of the
sanctions designate usually measures directed to maintenance of observance of
the law. The sanctions, as a rule, take the form of punishment for defiance of
the law. A problem of the sanctions, partly ïðåâåíòèâíàÿ, as the threat of application of
the sanctions in the certain cases should keep the infringer of the law, or àãðåññîðà, from his(its) agressive actions,
and partly positive, as the sanctions already after defiance of the law, or the
aggressions, are false to help to restore the infringed balance. In the field
of the международно-legal attitudes(relations) the question on the sanctions
acquires a urgency there, where the speech goes about struggle for preservation
of the world. From different promptings come to a problem of the sanctions of
the states which have organized a UN, and Republic of Uzbekistan have in sphere
of the international attitudes(relations) by the main problem and the purpose
struggle for preservation of the world.

 In the present research work I put
to myself by a problem to analyse system of the sanctions stipulated by the
Charter a UN, and to understand its(her) economic efficiency as on the basis of
the general(common) analysis of conditions of world(global) facilities(economy),
and on the basis of study of experience of application of the sanctions to some
àãðåññîðàì.

      With this purpose the work
will be conducted in two directions which have received the reflection in two
chapters of work. Each chapter will consist of three sections. In the first
chapter will be ïðîèññëåäîâàíû questions of the международно-legal
responsibility, general(common) concept, basis of the responsibility and
classification of international offences. In the second chapter all kinds of
economic sanctions (export embargo, embargo on import, reparation, restitution,
ðåïðåññàëèè, ñóáñòèòóöèè etc.) used to the states to the
offenders will be directly considered.

Глава-I. The международно-legal
responsibility

1.1. General(common) concept of the
международно-legal responsibility

 The международно-legal
responsibility is a set of the legal attitudes(relations), which arise in the
modern international law in connection with an offence, ñîâåðø ё ííûì by any state or other subject of
the international law, or in connection with damage, reasons ё ííûì by the state to other states as a
result of lawful activity. In one cases these ïðàâîîòíîøåíèÿ can concern directly only states —
offender and suffering state, in other — can mention the rights and interests
of all international community. Point of view;!from the point of view of
consequences these ïðàâîîòíîøåíèÿ can be expressed for want of
offences in restoration of the infringed right, in reimbursement of a material
loss, in acceptance of the various sanctions and other measures of collective
or individual character to the state which has infringed the international
responsibility, and in case of harmful consequences for want of of lawful
activity — in the responsibility to make appropriate indemnification.

 Ïðàâîîòíîøåíèÿ of the responsibility in the
international law result from wrongful actions or inactivity of the state
infringing his(its) international responsibility. With ó÷ ё volume that, that the norms of
the rights regulating questions of the responsibility, come in actions only for
want of infringement of primary (material) norms, some authors name ïðàâîîòíîøåíèÿ of the responsibility as
derivative, or вторичными1.

 The norms regulating the
responsibility of the subjects of the international law, differ from «main», or
«primary», norms. The representative(representative) of the Netherlands to a
Commission of the international law a UN À.Òàììåñ fairly has noticed, that « the main
norms are those, which directly influence actions of the states. Derivative
norms are those, which concern to the responsibility of the states, intend for
assistance to practical realization in life of an essence of the international
law contained in main norms » .2 is very important to not miss from a kind,
that an establishment of «primary» norm and contents of the obligation based on
it(her), — one party of business, and establishment that, whether that the
obligation was infringed, and if yes, what should be consequences of this
infringement, — other party. Only last also is sphere of the responsibility as
such. The establishment of norms of the international law named «primary»
frequently requires(demands) development(manufacture) of the vast and numerous
articles, whereas the question on the responsibility is connected to
development(manufacture) rather of few norms sometimes carrying general(common)
character. However it is necessary to agree with remark contained in one of the
reports of a commission of the international law a UN that possible(probable)
in this case « ëàêîíè÷íîñòü of the formulation the speech èä ё ò about a simple problem does not mean at all, that.
Opposite(on the contrary), in connection with each moment âñòà ё ò set of complex(difficult) questions, each of which should
be considered, for all of them influence choice of the proper formulation » 1.
The application of norms ìåæäóíàðîäíî — legal responsibility results in
occurrence of the new international legal attitude(relation), which derivates,
on the one hand, responsibility of the state — offender to stop wrongful
actions to restore the infringed right of the suffering state to reimburse of
the reasons ё ííûé damage or to undergo to the
sanctions, and on the other hand, right of the affected party to
require(demand) of the state — offender of fulfilment of these responsibilities
and to receive appropriate reimbursement and satisfaction.

 The commission of the
international law a UN, attending preparation of the project of the articles
about the responsibility of the state for offences, has come to a conclusion
about necessity to concentrate the efforts to researches of norms, which adjust
the responsibility, and to conduct for want of it ÷ ё òêîå differentiation between this
problem and problem which consists in an establishment of «primary» norms
assigning on the state the obligation, which infringement can cause
ответственность.1

 The contents of the obligations, çàêðåïë ё ííûõ in «primary» norms, can be
considered for want of definition(determination) of the contents and
consequences of an offence. «Primary», or main norms of the international law,
and «secondary» norms of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility, it is
necessary to consider in their interdependence and âçàèìîîáóñëîâëåííîñòè. Or else, without óÿñíåíèÿ the contents of main norms and
rights, following from them, and responsibilities of the subjects of the
international law cannot be defined(determined) point consequences of their
infringement and to differentiate categories of offences.

 The consequences of infringement
of the international obligation should be in dependence as from the contents of
«primary» norms, to which the given international obligation is based, and from
their value for all international community. It concerns first of all
infringement of the obligations connected to maintenance of the international
world and safety, with the right on self-determination, protection of the
rights of the person, protection of an environment, which should be considered
as international crimes, that is as the special category of an offence.

 In the report of a Commission of
the international law about work å ё to the twenty fifth session is spoken, that, when the problems
concerning definition(determination) of separate categories of offences will be
considered, « then there will be first of all main question on, whether it is
necessary now to admit(allow) existence of the distinction based on
significance of the infringed obligation for international community, whether
and it is necessary, thus, to reveal within the framework of the modern
international law a separate category more ñåðü ё çíûõ ìåæäóíàðîäíî-illegal äåÿíèé, which, maybe, can be qualified by
international crimes » 1.

 Ó÷ ё ò of all changes, thus, acquires
major significance for achievement of positive result in êîäèôèêàöèè of norms and principles of the
responsibility in the international law. Correct their reflection is one of
laws of development of the modern international law. Êîäèôèöèðîâàííûå of norm and the principles of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility should fill in
formed in this area of the international law a blank. In it one of problems êîäèôèêàöèè consists, in my opinion in the
field of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility. In this work
regarding necessary to touch questions of a terminology and to
define(determine) a place of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility — in
general(common) system of the international law. On the XXV sessions of a
Commission of the international law has found expedient for a designation of an
offence to use expressions « ìåæäóíàðîäíî-illegal äåÿíèå », instead of expression «äåëèêò» or other similar expressions,
which sometimes can accept the special shade point of view;!from the point of
view of some systems of the internal right. For example, the expression « ìåæäóíàðîäíî-illegal äåÿíèå » point of view;!from the point of
view of French language is, probably, more correct, than the expression « the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-illegal sertificate(act) », by
virtue of that reason, that ïðîòèâîïðàâíîñòü frequently is displayed in
inactivity, and the latter precisely designate by the term «sertificate»(«act»),
which on ñóòè induces on an idea on actions under
it and some other reasons the commission has decided and for spanish language
to use the accordingly term «hecho internacionalemente illicito», and for
English language to keep the term «internationally wrongfull act», as the
English term «act» does not cause such associations what this term causes in
French and spanish languages.

 Former soviet ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal literature strongly included
the term « an international offence ». The replacement by his(its) new term « ìåæäóíàðîäíî-illegal äåÿíèå », on my sight, is not caused by
any necessity. All those reasonable reasons, which were resulted for change of
the given term on French and spanish languages, for Russian the significances
have not, as the term « an international offence » in Russian is supposed both
action, and inactivity and we shall use in any case of illegal behaviour. Term
« international offence » in Russian will be used for designation of action or
inactivity, which can, according to the international law to be
appropriated(given) to the subject of the international law and which the
infringement of the international obligation have basic significance for all
international community represents, the term « an international crime » will be
used.

 Ä.Б Ëåâèí writes, that development of the
international law in present period âåä ё ò to allocation in separate branch of
the right of the international responsibility. This branch, in his(its)
opinion, should be entered by(with) three main categories of norms and
institutes: first, norms and institutes concerning the responsibility of the
state for an international offence and determining the basis and the form of
this responsibility; secondly, norms concerning the criminal liability of the natural
persons for international преступления.1 In the same branch, in my opinion, the
responsibility of the state for damage, reasons ё ííûé should enter in connection with
lawful activity, which follows from other basis, than international law.

 The development of the
international law requires(demands) in conditions of deep changes, occurring in
the world, of overcoming of considerable difficulties in searches îáùåïðèåìëåìîãî of the agreement on that, as in
what area of the international attitudes(relations) it is necessary to
consider(count) as the right.

 With the purposes of maintenance
of the general world and safety a UN is called to promote observance of such
attitudes(relations) between the states and peoples, which for want of can be
observed respect for the obligations following from the agreements and other
sources of the international law.  

  

1.2. Basis of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility

 The basis of occurrence of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility of the subject
of the international law is the fulfilment by him(it) of an international
offence.

 The international offence is an
action or inactivity of the subject of the international law infringing norms
of the international law and the international obligations, íàíîñÿùèå to other subject either group of
the subjects of the international law or all international community as a whole
damage of material or non-material character (for example, sertificates(acts)
of aggression, illegal restriction of the sovereignty, encroachment on
territorial integrity and political independence, infringement of the
obligations under the agreements and other.) 1. For want of it the
responsibility arises, as a rule, only for want of availability ïðè÷èííîé of communication(connection)
between illegal behaviour of the subject and caused damage.

 Thus, components of an
international offence attracting behind self the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility, are: action
or inactivity of the subjects infringing norms of the international law; âìåíÿåìîñòü of an offence of the subject of the
international law; causing of damage or âðåäà to other subject or group of the
subjects of the international law.

 Any references of the state to the
national laws and rules in the justification of the behaviour which has
resulted(brought) in infringement of norms the international laws and drawing
of damage or âðåäà, are inadmissible. The references
to ignorance of norms of the international law or on wrong their interpretation
and application also are inadmissible. Practically all international offences
are made consciously, purposely, is guilty. It is impossible to justify
aggression of USA against Ãðåíàäû (October, 1983) and Libya (March,
1986), íàëåòû of aircraft ÞÀÐ on cities Çàìáèè and Çèìáàáâå (May, 1986), destruction by Israeli
aircraft of iraq centre of nuclear researches (June, 1981), exhibiting by
American mercenaries of mines in waters and ports of Nicaragua and other
similar actions by the references to necessity « protection of life » or
«interests». Especially, they cannot be issued for the sertificates(acts) of
«self-defense» 1.

 The illegal actions or inactivity
presenting(causing) to occurrence of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility the subjects
of the international law can be made by state bodies (without dependence from
their rule(situation) in system of public authorities and management),
officials of the state acting on his(its) assignment(order) or from his(its)
name, and also special bodies of the states allocated imperous authorities and acting
from his(its) name. For example, responsibility for grab by the Israeli
military ships of a greek vessel (the summer 1984) should bear government of
Israel. The responsibility of the state can come(step) behind acceptance of the
law or other normative sertificate(act) contradicting to norms of the
international agreement, which participant it is by, or, on the contrary, for íåïðèÿòèå of the law, which it was obliged to
accept according to the international obligations and which would prevent ïðîèñøåäøåå illegal event or action.

 The responsibility of the state
arises because of inactivity of government bodies in cases, when the duly
interference of authorities could prevent wrongful actions. USSR in USA for
want of connivance of the American official persons is known, for example,
numerous cases of violence and even the armed attacks on diplomatic
representations. In such cases the state was born by(with) ё ò the responsibility for criminal
actions of the persons from among the citizens both foreigners and their
organizations both for the foreigners and for actions (and inactivity) bodies,
which have not prevented illegal actions, though could and should it make.

 The responsibility of the state
«Х» can arise and as a result undertaken on it(him) (or from it(him)) territory
of illegal actions of the foreign state or his(its) bodies against the third
state or group of the states. For want of it if these actions of the foreign
state are made with is driven also of consent of the state «Х», it is the accomplice
of illegal actions of the foreign state. However, if such actions are made
without the knowledge of the state «Х», it bore ё ò the responsibility only in case
his(its) bodies have not displayed « necessary vigilance » and these illegal
actions of the foreign state did not stop. Is differently solved the problem
concerning the states granting the territory for creation of foreign military
bases or accommodation of the weapon: their ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility for all
possible(probable) dangerous consequences comes(steps) by virtue of the most
legal fact — sanction to creation of military base or accommodations of the
weapon.

 The ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility of the state
can arise and for want of increase of authorities by state bodies or officials
of the state, therefore can be has put ё í damage to the foreign state or his(its) natural or legal persons. In
particular(personally), the state should compensate damage for want of
interference in the high sea in case of failure of an oil tanker under
condition of, if the measures undertaken by him(it), will exceed those, which
were reasonably necessary for prevention, reduction or removal(elimination) ñåðü ё heat and real danger of pollution
of coast нефтью1.

 For actions of state bodies,
military parts and divisions during war, when as a result of these actions the
norms of the Geneva conventions about protection of victims of war of a 1949
and other international conventions, ðåãëàìåíòèðóþùèõ of a means and methods of
management of struggle are infringed, the responsibility was born by(with) ё ò the state, which posesses these
bodies, military parts and divisions. The state should accept legislative,
administrative and other measures by, that the laws and customs of war, çàêðåïë ё ííûå in the acting conventions and
agreements, were punctually executed by all state bodies, military connections
and military men.

 The ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility of the
subjects of the international law can come(step) not only by virtue of
infringement of norms of the international law or obligations by agreement, but
also for harmful consequences of lawful activity. She(it) can come(step) for
want of drawing of a material loss by a source of increased danger, use or
which application is forbidden by the international law (so-called
responsibility for risk).

 Sources of increased danger are,
for example, court with nuclear power installations(aims) (ßÝÓ) and space objects started in space
space. Court with ßÝÓ carry out the activity within the
framework of freedom of navigation being a main part of freedom of the high
sea, and the space objects can be started according to the Agreement for
principles of activity of the states on research and use of space space,
including the Moon and other heavenly bodies, 1967.

 As in first and in the second
cases speech èä ё ò about use of sources of increased danger, the states in the
contractual order have agreed to recognize compulsion of reimbursement of the
material loss which has arisen not in connection with any international
offence, and it is exclusively(extreme) by virtue of the  fact of causing of
such damage (responsibility without fault).

 In the Convention about the
international responsibility for damage, reasons ё ííûé by space objects of a 1972 is
spoken, that the starting state « was born by(with) ё ò the absolute responsibility for
payment of indemnification for damage, reasons ё ííûé by his(its) space object on a
surface of the Earth or air vessel in a floor ё those » 1.

1.3. Classification of international
offences

 In the international Law all
international offences it is possible will divide into three large groups
depending on a degree of their danger, scales and consequences:

а) International crimes;

в) Other international offences
(international äåëèêòû).

 International crime — especially
dangerous international offence encroaching on the vital interests the states
and nations, undermining bases of the international law representing threat to
the international world and safety.

 In the project of the articles
about the responsibility of the states prepared by a Commission of the
international law a UN, ïîä÷ ё ðêèâàåòñÿ, that ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal äåÿíèå, arising as a result of
infringement by the state of the international obligation, so basic for
maintenance of the vital interests of community, that his(its) infringement is
considered as a crime before international community as a whole, makes
international преступление1. To number of such international crimes concern:
aggression, ãåíîöèä, àïàðòåèä, êîëîíèàëèçì, military crimes, crime against
humanity etc. As such crimes mention practically âñ ё international community, the states according to the
Charter a UN have the right to accept collective measures on their suppression.

 The kinds of the armed violence
used in international practice of many states are extremely diverse. Proceeding
from definition(determination) of aggression from the facts of a history of the
international attitudes(relations) after the second world(global) war, we can
allocate the following most important kinds:

— agressive war;

-вооруж ё ííóþ intervention;

-âîîðóæ ё ííûå the agressive shares, that is
separate âîîðóæ ё ííûå attacks which are not carrying of
character wars or intervention;

— the input âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces on territory of the
foreign state or îñòàâëåíèå them on the given territory
contrary to his(its) will and for interference in his(its) internal businesses
(here is possible to include preservation on territory of the foreign state
contrary to his(its) will of military bases);

— marine blockade in peace time of
coast or ports of the foreign state (so-called « peace blockade »);

— support of the armed groups or
groups of mercenaries for intrusion on territory of other state with the
purpose of interference in his(its) internal businesses.

Agressive war. The most dangerous
kind of the forbidden application of the armed force is the agressive war. In
the international sertificates(acts) ïîñëåâîåííîãî of period this term meets extremely
ðåäêî. In them such terms, as «
application of force », «aggression», « the armed attack » are more often used.
If the term «war» appears in the Status of League of Nations and in the Paris
pact of a 1928, in the Charter a UN this term is present only in item 1 of a
Preamble (short of a word in ст.107 concerning the second world(global) war),
and in his(its) articles is spoken about application of force (item 4 ст.2),
about âîîðóæ ё ííîì an attack (51).

 In the sentence of the
International military tribunal in Nuremberg agressive actions ãèòëåðîâñêîé of Germany concerning Austria and
Czechoslovakia is designated as «grab», concerning Denmark, Norway, Belgium,
Netherlands of Luxembourg — as «intrusion», concerning Poland, Yugoslavia and
Greece — as «aggression» and in the attitude(relation) ÑÑÐ and USA — « agressive war » 1.

 In the Geneva conventions on
protection of victims of war alongside with the terms of «war», « condition of
war » the term « âîîðóæ ё ííûé the conflict » is widely applied.

 In the agreements for the mutual
help, çàêëþ÷ ё ííûõ after the second world(global) war,
term « the agressive war » does not meet, and the term «aggression» and « âîîðóæ ё ííîå an attack » is applied.

Whether  Means âñ ё it, what concept « the agressive
war » can be replaced by concepts « application of force », «aggression», « âîîðóæ ё ííîå an attack » and should not be
allocated in the responsibility of a separate kind âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression? By no means is not
present. The agressive war is and continues to remain the kind, most dangerous
and attracting the widest international responsibility, âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression. In spite of the fact
that now from life of company, the danger of agressive wars, both in
world(global), and in local frameworks has not disappeared. As to the
responsibility for agressive war, that, as is known, before the second
world(global) war the agressive war was announced by an international crime,
and in the Charter and sentences of the International military tribunal in
Nuremberg, in which the principles becoming then principles of the
international law are formulated, they are qualified as « crimes against the
world ».

 The concept of agressive war
develops of two components: concept of war and concept àãðåññèâíîñòè or aggression. However neither
that, nor other concept has not the conventional definition(determination) in
the international law. The majority of the lawyers — международников for want
of definition(determination) of concept of war the recognitions by them of a
condition of war are guided by by formal criterion of the announcement of war,
availability at the struggling parties animus belligerenti. For example, Л. Îïïåíãåéì writes: « the Unilateral violent
actions, one state against other without the preliminary announcement of war,
can be the reason of occurrence of war, but in themselves are not war, as the
opposite party does not answer them by similar hostile actions, or, at least,
declaration, that they consider these actions as the sertificates(acts) of war
» 1. The australian lawyer — международник Äæ. Ñòðàðê states the same point of view;!from
the point of view of åù ё sharply. As he said, « a Nature
of war in itself becomes more exact îïðåäåë ё ííîé as the formal status âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of hostile actions, in which the
intention of the parties should be a determinative. Thus, the condition of war
can be established(installed) between two and more by states ïóò ё ì of the formal announcement of war, even between them active
military actions » 1 never took place.

 It is a point of view;!from the
point of view of of the majority of the lawyers — международников does not
correspond(meet) to the validity, as the state quite often begins military
actions without any announcement of war and, nevertheless, both âðàæäóþùèå of country appear in a condition of
war.

 In soviet « the Diplomatic
dictionary » yes ё òñÿ the following
definition(determination) of war: « War — struggle between the states and
classes by means âîîðóæ ё ííîãî of violence representing
continuation of that policy(politics), which these states or the classes
conducted before war ».

 The agressive war it is
indispensable çàõâàòíè÷åñêàÿ war, which âåä ё òñÿ àãðåññîðîì to seize a part of territory of the
state — victim of aggression or completely to deprive of his(its) independent
state existence. The agressive war is accompanied by claims of the state — àãðåññîðà on annexation of a part or whole
territory of the state being a victim of aggression. This attribute is inherent
just in agressive war, instead of all kinds of aggression. From a formal point
of view;!from the point of view of the war as against other âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of the conflicts, as a rule, is
connected to break of diplomatic, consular, trade and other normal
attitudes(relations) between the struggling states.

 Hence, the agressive war is âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ struggle begun by one state against
other with the purpose of grab of a part of his(its) territory or deprivation
of his(its) independent state existence and accompanying with break of
diplomatic, consular, trade and other normal attitudes(relations) between these
states.

 The agressive war is those
irrespective of, has a place the announcement of war whether or not. From it by
no means does not follow, that the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-rules of law concerning war have
lost force. « For the state beginning war first, the sertificate(act) of the
announcement of war does not mean clearing it(him) from the responsibility for ðàçâÿçûâàíèå of aggression » 1. However íà÷àòèå of war without the announcement
aggravates this responsibility, as means infringement not only norms about
prohibition of agressive war, but also norms concerning management of war.

 The largest and typical example of
agressive war is the war ãèòëåðîâñêîé of Germany against ÑÑÐ and his(its) allies in the second
world(global) war. After the second world(global) war some agressive wars took
place which infortunately, have not received such qualification and appropriate
condemnation from the party a UN.

 Âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ intervention. Other rather
dangerous kind of illegal application âîîðóæ ё ííîé of force is frequently meeting in
international practice of some states âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ the intervention, that is intrusion
âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces of one state on territory
of other state with the purpose of interference in his(its) internal
businesses. Such intrusion frequently is undertaken to interfere in occurring
in the foreign state with internal struggle for the benefit of one of the
struggling parties, or to force government of the foreign state to undertake îïðåäåë ё ííûå of action on a question which are
included in his(its) internal competence. Can be and other purposes âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention, but all of them
are usually connected by interference in internal businesses èíòåðâåíèðóåìîãî of the state, instead of with àííåêñèðîâàíèåì by all or part of his(its)
territory.

 Âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ the intervention can accept rather
wide scales, not less, than agressive war.

 In the soviet literature the
opinions expressed, that between agressive war and âîîðóæ ё ííîé by intervention « there is no
difference » 1. It is impossible to agree with this opinion. Undoubtedly, as
agressive war, and âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ intervention represent rather
dangerous âîîðóæ ё ííóþ aggression. But âñ ё they various kinds âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression. Distinctions between
them is, that while the agressive war is undertaken to seize a part of
territory of other state or at all to deprive of his(its) independent state
existence, âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ the intervention usually does not
put such purposes. She(it) is undertaken to spread in èíòåðâåíèðóåìîì the state óãîäíûé èíòåðâåíòó a political mode and government, or
to impose to government èíòåðâåíèðóåìîãî of the state will èíòåðâåíòà in sphere relating the sovereignty èíòåðâåíèðóåìîãî the states.

 The agressive war too can put the
purposes of change public and political building other struggling party in a
favour àãðåññîðà (such purposes, for example, put
Israel in war against the Arabian states in 1967г.), but indispensable
attribute of agressive war is the aspiration to grab of territory of other
struggling party or termination(discontinuance) of his(its) independent existence,
between that âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ the intervention puts before itself
the purposes connected extremely in internal businesses èíòåðâåíèðóåìîãî of the state. Besides âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ the intervention can occur and
without break of the diplomatic, consular and trade attitudes(relations)
between the state èíòåðâåíòîì and èíòåðâåíèðóåìûì by the state, while such break
comes(steps) always for want of availability of a condition of war, that is and
when has a place agressive war.

 After the second world(global) war
the interdiction âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention was ïîäòâåðæä ё í widely and in åù ё to the more categorical form. First of all, it(he)
directly follows from a number of the articles of the Charter a UN: as from
item 4 ст.2 forbidding threat by force or his(its) application against
territorial inviolability or political independence of any state, and ст.39, providing
application of the international sanctions in case of threat to the world,
infringement of the world and sertificates(acts) of aggression, and from ст.51,
admitting application âîîðóæ ё ííîé of force by the separate states
only in a case âîîðóæ ё ííîãî of an attack and, hence, not
admitting it(him) in other cases.

 The principle of non-interference
in internal businesses of the state, including the interdiction âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention, was formulated in
the special article (ст.15) of the Charter of Organization of the American
states, in which is spoken: « Any state or group of the states under any by a
pretext the rights on direct or indirect interference in internal or external
businesses of any other state » have not. The speech èä ё ò both about âîîðóæ ё ííîì interference, and about any other
form of interference is further spoken, that. In a 1949 the interdiction by the
international law âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention was ïîäòâåðæä ё í INTERNATIONAL court a UN in the decision on business about
a strait Êîðôó.

 At last, the interdiction of the
armed intervention was categorically ïîäòâåðæä ё í GENERAL Assembly a UN on å ё XX sessions in the declaration on inadmissibility of
interference in internal businesses of the states, about a protection of their
independence and sovereignty, according to which « is condemned not only âîîðóæ ё ííîå interference, but also all other
forms of interference ». In the Resolution ХХI sessions № 2225 from December
19, 1996 by General Assembly about a course of fulfilment of this declaration
the Assembly again has found by the responsibility urgently to offer to all
states to abstain from âîîðóæ ё ííîãî of interference, no less than from
the various forms of indirect interference.

 Âîîðóæ ё ííûå the agressive shares. Alongside
with agressive war and âîîðóæ ё ííîé by intervention, these most
dangerous kinds âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression, it is necessary to
stay and on other å ё kinds, sometimes is rather close
them contiguous. It, first of all âîîðóæ ё ííûå the agressive shares, that is âîîðóæ ё ííûå of an attack which are not having
attributes inherent agressive war or âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention, inherent in
agressive war âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces of one state on territory
of other state, attack âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces of one state on separate
items of territory of other state or on marine and air court outside of
his(its) territory. They can carry both individual, and systematic character.  Distinctive
feature of this kind âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression in comparison with
agressive war and âîîðóæ ё ííîé by intervention is that such
attacks are usually undertaken not for grab of territory of the state or
interference in his(its) internal businesses, and for other purposes. More
often they are undertaken that ïóò ё ì âîîðóæ ё ííîãî of pressure to force the state to
execute that or other his(its) requests àãðåññîðà.

 The most significant examples of
agressive such sertificates(acts) are the systematic bombardments from air and
artillery bombardment from the military ships âîîðóæ ё ííûìè by forces of USA against cities and
íàñåë ё ííûõ of items of Democratic Republic
Vietnam.

 By other not less significant
example âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of the agressive shares of large
scale was the intrusion âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces of USA on territory of
neutral Cambodia in May, 1970.

 In a number of cases âîîðóæ ё ííûå the agressive shares are undertaken
by some states under a pretext âîçìåçäèÿ for the valid or seeming offences,
that is under a pretext репрессалий1. 

 Input âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces on territory of the
foreign state and preservation them on it(her) for interference in his(its)
internal businesses. One of kinds of illegal application âîîðóæ ё ííîé of force close contiguous to âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention, is the input âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces on territory of the
foreign state contrary to his(its) will and for interference in his(its)
internal businesses. As the practice of some states, in particular(personally)
facts of landing American âîéñê in Lebanon and British âîéñê in Jordan in July, 1958 serving
with a subject of consideration III extreme sessions of General Assembly a UN
shows, such input âîéñê sometimes masks by the request of
dependent government. However and in these cases it(he) is rough infringement
of the international law, what the intervention «by agreement» or « at the
request » èíòåðâåíèðóåìîãî of the state is, mentioned above, âîîðóæ ё ííàÿ.

 To âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention the contents âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces on territory of other
states, contrary to will of this state rather closely adjoins. Quite often
states keeping âîîðóæ ё ííûå the forces on territory of other
states, ignore requests of governments of these states, and sometimes and
resolution of bodies a UN concerning a conclusion âîéñê. So, for example, Great Britain and
France entering during the second world(global) war âîéñêà in Syria and Lebanon, continued to
keep them and on termination(ending) war (down to April, 1946) contrary to a
request of governments of Syria and Lebanon. Great Britain, France and Israel, ïðåäïðèíÿâøèå in a 1956 agressive war against
Egypt, continued to keep âîéñêà on territory of Egypt and upon
termination of military actions (Great Britain and France till December 22,
1956, Israel — till March 7, 1957.), despite of a number of the resolutions
about an immediate conclusion âîéñê, I of Extreme special session of General Assembly a
UN and XI General Assemblies a UN.

 The experience shows, that
presence âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of forces on territory of other
states contrary to will last, as we saw, in a number of cases was direct
continuation of agressive war (stay Israeli âîéñê in ÎÀÐ, Syria and Jordan) or âîîðóæ ё ííîé of intervention (stay belgium âîéñê in Êîíãî, American âîéñê in Äîìèíèêàíñêîé to Republic), is directed against
territorial integrity and political independence of these states. Therefore it,
undoubtedly, is illegal application of force infringing by item 4 ст.2 of the
Charter a UN.

 Marine blockade in peace time. A
kind of illegal application âîîðóæ ё ííîé of force is so-called « the peace
blockade », that is blockade by naval forces one or several states in peace
time. Å ё as difference from blockade made
during war, it is accepted to consider(count) that she(it) is accompanied not
by confiscation, and only by temporary detention on period of blockade of
courts of the third states trying å ё to tear. As the history of the international attitudes(relations)
testifies, « the peace blockade » is usually applied large äåðæàâàìè as the instrument âîîðóæ ё ííîãî of pressure on weaker государства1.
Some lawyers -международники try to prove « legitimacy of peace blockade » as
to a version âîîðóæ ё ííûõ ðåïðåññàëèé, ostensibly admitted international
правом2. Actually so-called « the peace blockade » is the sertificate(act) âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression — in such quality
she(it) and appears in the London conventions of a 1933 — and certainly is
forbidden under the Charter a UN both by virtue of item 4 ст.2, and by virtue
of ст.39.

 In period after the second
world(global) war the largest case of application « of peace blockade » was
so-called «quarantine» announced by government of USA concerning Cuba in
October, 1962.

 Support âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of groups and groups on ё ìíèêîâ for intrusion on territory of other
state. At last, among kinds of illegal application âîîðóæ ё ííîé of force the support âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of gangs and groups on ё ìíèêîâ for intrusion on territory of other
state should be mentioned with the purpose of interference in his(its) internal
businesses, in particular(personally) with the purpose of suppression occurring
in í ё ì íàöèîíàëüíî-îñâîáîäèòåëüíîãî of movement(traffic). Åù ё in the agreements about íåíàïàäåíèè, çàêëþ÷ ё ííûõ the Soviet Union with other states
in 20-th and 30-th years, provided the obligations of each party to not admit
and to interfere with organization and activity on the territory âîîðóæ ё ííûõ of groups putting by the purpose
struggle on territory of other party against å ё of government, for an overthrow state building, against
integrity å ё of territory or
appropriating(giving) to themselves a role of government by all or part å ё of territory. In the London
conventions on definition(determination) of aggression of a 1933 of the party
consider as one of kinds âîîðóæ ё ííîé of aggression support by the state,
« rendered âîîðóæ ё ííûì to gangs, which being are
formed(educated) on his(its) territory, have intruded on territory of other
state, or failure(refusal), despite of requests of the state which has
undergone to intrusion to accept on own territory all measures, dependent on
him,(it,) for deprivation of named gangs of the help or protection » (item 5 of
an item. II). In the project of the code of crimes against the world and safety
of mankind accepted the Commission of the international law a UN on å ё of 6-th session in a 1954, as one
of such crimes specified « organization by authorities of any state or
encouragement by them of organization âîîðóæ ё ííûõ øàåê within the limits of his(its)
territory for intrusion territory of other state, or assumption of use by such âîîðóæ ё ííûìè øàéêàìè of his(its) territory as operative
base or basic point for intrusion on territory of other state, no less than
direct sharing(participation) in such intrusion or support those » 1.

Глава-II. Economic sanctions as a measure
of the responsibility for offences

1.1. EXPORT EMBARGO.

 The legal problems of the
sanctions, as we saw above, have involved(attracted) from the very beginning of
formation(training) a UN most serious attention of its(her) bodies both various
international conferences and commissions. The commission of blockade
recommended to prepare, and from time to time to revise the list of the goods
of military significance, defining(determining) thus ýâåíòóàëüíóþ area of application of economic
sanctions.

 The economic sanctions can accept
the double form: the form of prohibition of export in country — àãðåññîðà of the raw goods have mainly
military significance, and form of prohibition of import from this country. The
most effective form of economic sanctions is the complete blockade of this
country both on import, and on экспорту1. Before that how to disassemble a
question on efficiency of application of the sanctions, it is necessary even in
brief features to stay on a general(common) problem of significance of economic
sanctions.

 We shall begin our analysis from a
question on embargo on the raw goods have military significance. First of all
it is necessary to tell, that concept " military significance " for
the raw goods rather rather. If to take only such raw material, which goes
directly on manufacturing of a means of war, and in this case, considering
extreme development of military industry, the list will be rather wide. It is
necessary to consider(count) as such raw material not only products serving directly
for manufacturing áîìá, ãðàíàò, bullets, guns and ò.ä:, such goods here concern also which are necessary for production of
military planes, military courts for carriage âîéñê, let alone raw material for
production of chemical means of war; at last it is necessary to consider(count)
as military raw material products necessary for production of regimentals for
army. All this shows, that the list of raw material have military significance,
is in modern conditions rather wide. The British royal institute on
international businesses in interesting work under heading of
"Sanction" schedules the following list of the most important goods
have military significance:

 — coal and the coke — for
production of steel, for power facilities(economy) and transport, and is equal
indirectly for production of explosive substances and õèêàëèé;

 — petroleum — for all types of
transport;

 — clap(cotton) — for production of
explosive substances;

 — wool — necessary material for
various productions have and military significance;

 — rubber — for various
productions, mainly for electrical mechanical engineering and transport;

 -глицерин — for production áåçäûìíûõ of gunpowders;

 — iron ore and pig-iron — for
production of arms, military equipment, railway equipment and any sort of
construction;

 — lead — for production of arms,
and also for production of acids necessary for explosive substances;

 -медь, coal, tin, êàäìèé — for production of the weapon,
military equipment and electroindustry;

 -никель — for a different sort of
arms;

 — aluminium (áîêñèòû) — for construction of planes;

 — the tin — is widely used for
production of explosive substances;

 — platinum — for chemical
preparations, in particular(personally) for want of production íèòðàòîâ;

 -антимоний, ôîñôàòû, ìàãíèçèò, ìàðãàíöîâûå of ore, ìîëèáäåí, âîëüôðàì, õðîì — for metallurgy;

 -асбест — for mechanical
engineering, for production of the weapon;

 — graphite — for production and ïëàâêè of metals;

 -силитра — important element for
production of explosive substances;

 — sulfur — for production of
explosive substances;

 -мышьяк, áðîìèí, õëîðèí, phosphorus — for chemical industry
and for production poisonous газов1.

 It is impossible to recognize the
list this comprehensive. From the indicated transfer ÿâñòâóåò, that ýâåíòóàëüíîå the embargo on exportation of raw
products imposed by way of economic sanctions, inevitably mentions not only
specially military production, but also production of countries working for
civilians. It is very difficult to conduct a side between military and civil
production. It is well-known, that during the second world(global) war a lot
especially of peace productions fast was adapted to production of means of
destruction. It is enough to result even simple example of canning factories
fast adapted to production of shells. It is well-known, that the tractor
factories can be used for production of tanks. The military significance of
factories of artificial silk (i.e. product widely used for the so peace
purposes, as for example ladies’ linen) also widely is known. Attempt to
conduct a side between military and civil production and to limit embargo only
to raw material necessary for needs(requirements) of war, it is necessary to
consider(count) completely hopeless. From here follows, that the economic
sanctions on a line of raw embargo can be effective only in the event that the
importation of raw material in country — àãðåññîðà completely or very considerably is
reduced.

 The important significance has and
borrowing(occupying) UN a question on change òîâàðîïîòîêîâ. Uneasy to itself to present, ÷òüå) also widely it is known. Attempt
to conduct a side between military and civil production and to limit embargo
only to raw material necessary for needs(requirements) of war, it is necessary
to consider(count) completely hopeless. From here follows, that the economic
sanctions on a line of raw embargo can be effective only in the event that the
importation of raw material in country — àãðåññîðà completely or very considerably is
reduced.

 The important significance has and
borrowing(occupying) UN a question on change òîâàðîïîòîêîâ. Uneasy to itself to present, ÷òèÿ, and first of all Scandinavian
countries considerably have expanded the import from "allied"
countries on all not õâàòàâøèì of Germany to the raw goods, and
then with large profit for themselves ïåðåïðîäàâàëè these goods of Germany. The rough
growth of import of Scandinavian countries per military years was directly
caused by importation for resale in Germany. Not casually Scandinavian
countries have published the foreign trade statistics only after
termination(ending) war. In practice now àãðåññîð, on which are applied sanctions,
for example Italy, receives the scarce goods via such countries, as Germany,
which is inclined to support àãðåññîðà. For struggle with this phenomenon
there is only one method. This method was discussed by committee of
coordination on the initiative of a French delegation maintained by a
delegation USSR, but it(he) was not accepted owing to resistance rendered to
it(him) by a English delegation, which did not want to limit English export and
Germany. The method, offered by the French, was reduced to restriction of
export of goods, on which is imposed by embargo, in countries which are not
accepting sharing(participations) in the sanctions, so-called normal
quantities(amounts) of average export during several last " of peace years
". While such decision not принято1.

 So, economic sanctions in the form
of embargo on exportation of the raw goods will quite effective in the event
that they will to be applied to country requiring for importation of the
foreign raw goods, all countries of the world or even by members a UN, for want
of assistance of USA and if they will be accompanied by restriction of export
of goods, on which is imposed by embargo, in countries which are not using of
the sanctions.

 For want of analysis of
significance of economic sanctions and their influence on a national economy of
country — àãðåññîðà, and consequently and on its(her)
ability to the further development of aggression it is impossible to lose from
a kind and general(common) significance of the external market for the states.

 It is well-known, that the
significance of modern protectionism is, that it(he) facilitates to national
monopolies preservation of a more increased price level on a home market and
extraction by them thus of superprofits. The advance prices on a home market
can be supported only under condition of restriction of sales inside country.
The exclusive excess profit is a source of cover of the losses from dumping on
the external market. The monopoly prices in turn become the factor of the
further narrowing of a home market, reducing demand and lowering a buying power
of the broad masses, and without that taking place in conditions growing îáíèùàíèÿ. Colliding with growing narrowing
of the market inside country, the monopolies are compelled to throw out the
increasing quantity(amount) of products on the external market, where these
monopolies collide with fierce resistance of the competitors asserting the
items. It is no wonder, that for want of growing process of narrowing of a home
market the external market for these countries acquires the increasing
significance.

 For understanding of dependence of
the advanced country from export it is absolutely not enough to
define(determine) the so-called export quota of this or that country. For
example, though USA have the lowest of all industrial countries of the world
the export quota, however this quota is extremely various in application to
separate branches of facilities(economy). Íèæåïðèâîäèìûå the data show, that the export
quota made in 1989 on such leading branch for ïëàíòàòîðñêèõ of staffs(states), as a
clap(cotton), 54,8 % and on such leading branch for the whole
facilities(economy) of USA, as automobiles, 14%. Hence, though in
general(common) production of USA only 8-10 % fall on export, the importance of
export for separate branches of facilities(economy) of USA is incommensurable
more than these conditional figures. The data for 1989г. (in %) хлопок-54,8;
табак-41,2; writing машины-40,1; медь-30,0; шмальц-33,3; lubricant масла-31,0; òèïîãðàôè÷åñêèå машины-29,2; sewing машины-28,0;
agricultural машины-23,3; локомативы-20,8; автомобили-14,0) 1.

1.2. EMBARGO ON IMPORT

 The economic sanctions in the form
of prohibition of import from country — àãðåññîðà have by the problem deprivation of
country, on which are applied sanctions, legal tenders necessary for import.
The efficiency of these sanctions depends on the following circumstances: 1) .îò that, in what measure the country —
àãðåññîð requires import; 2) .îò that, in what measure she(it)
possesses other sources for payment in the form of receipts under the so-called
invisible articles of a balance of payments.

 The experience of the last years
has shown, that the import of country can be subjected to significant
reductions.

 During the second world(global)
war from the nomenclature of import of struggling countries the fancies have
disappeared, the import of consumer goods was sharply reduced. All this occurs
as a result of downturn of a scale of living, compression of a home consumption
of the broad masses. Simultaneously there is some expansion of import of main
kinds of raw material necessary for military production and production,
connected to the militarian. Import under the articles of военно-raw
significance, which production äåôèöèòíî in country especially is increased.
This implies, that the countries to the greatest degree dependent on foreign
import of the raw goods, in the least degree are capable to reduce import. In
this connection we shall stay on the characteristic of import of such country,
as Iraq in 1994, when this import is already compressed by conditions ïðåäâîåííîé of a conjuncture (we are
founded(established) on the tables contained in statistics of international
trade after 1994, issued a UN). Iraq on the basis of the further downturn of a
scale of living of the workers has reduced and can even more reduce the import
of food products, furs, even of tobacco, but she(it) cannot even more reduce
import of ore, ìåäè, mineral oils, wool, silk,
clap(cotton) and ëüíà. A minimum the third of present
iraq import should be saved for want of sharpest reduction of importation in
Iraq. Uneasy to itself to present, that in these conditions the complete
termination(discontinuance) of export from Iraq even for want of preservation
of foreign trade at a level of one third can serious complicate a
rule(situation) of country.

 For valuation of the economic
importance ýâåíòóàëüíîãî the applications of the sanctions
to Iraq need to be taken into account specific organization âíåøíåõîçÿéñòâåííûõ of communications(connections) of
this country. Having insignificant gold reserves and requiring large raw and
food import, Iraq has constructed the communications(connections) with the
majority of countries of the world (except USA) on áåçâàëþòíûõ accounts, on the basis of the
clearing agreements. Thus import of Iraq is paid by extremely its(her) export,
moreover, the import of Iraq from the given country is paid as a rule, export
to the same country. This specific feature âíåøíåõîçÿéñòâåííûõ of communications(connections) of
Iraq hinders transferring its(her) import from one country on other. It means,
that the prohibition of export from Iraq in the certain group of countries is
for facilities(economy) heavy impact, as that prohibition automatically means
for Iraq the termination(discontinuance) of import from this group of countries
and respective import relief and all supply of iraq import and all supply iraq
хозяйства1.

 If we shall take Japan, the
picture will be approximately same, with that only difference, that necessary
import of Japan by virtue of some more greater its(her) dependence on the
external market will be $much more(greater) and will make not less than halves
of present import. The truth, import of a clap(cotton), which makes a third of
all import of Japan, in case of application to Japan of economic sanctions
would undergo to strong reduction, as the clap(cotton) this goes in the
significant part on production of cotton fabrics for export. The reduction of
export would result in import relief under this article. Nevertheless for want
of of existing dependence of Japan on the external world we consider(count),
that, evaluating necessary import of Japan in 50 % of its(her) normal import,
we do not miss true.

 In the same rule(situation) there
is a majority of countries of the world, except for Great Britain, USA and
partly of France, and also several small countries (Holland, Belgium,
Switzerland), which, being the creditors of the world, have the active articles
of a balance of payments in the form of receipts under the credits, given by
them. These active articles can in turn limited to application of the sanctions
in the form of temporary suspension of payments on debts of old standing.

 Some appreciable investments
abroad possess only Great Britain, USA and France. The investments of other
states are rather insignificant. It is necessary also to take into account
difficulty of mobilization of these capitals in case of necessity, and also
aspiration separate êàïèòàëèñòîâ, engaging these investments to
evade from transfer to their government.

 The efficiency of prohibition of
import from country — àãðåññîðà, prohibition depriving this country
legal tenders, can have an effect not at once, if countries — àãðåññîðà have significant investments abroad
or significant stocks of gold, which she(it) can realize(sell) and to use for
payment of the import. Significant gold reserves possess first of all USA and
France, and then Great Britain and small countries — Belgium, Holland both
Switzerland. Germany and Italy some appreciable stocks of gold have not. The
stocks these cannot be filled up with internal production of gold, as this
production is distributed on other countries.

 It goes without saying, that the
efficiency of prohibition of import from country — àãðåññîðà depends on generality(universality)
of this measure. If this measure will not be applied by the majority of
countries of the world, she(it) will appear much less effective. It is known,
that on the members the UN on the average is necessary approximately 88 % of
world(global) trade.

 The sanctions on the idea should
induce àãðåññîðà to stop aggression; they should
deprive of his(its) means for continuation of aggression. It is possible only
in the event that the raw embargo will deprive country — àãðåññîðà of the most essential means
necessary for continuation of war. The country, by which the embargo is
applied, should require import raw material have paramount significance. Only
in that case of economic sanctions can be effective. It means, that the efficiency
of the sanctions is increased in a proportion of growing dependence of this or
that country from foreign sources of raw material.

 Perfectly understanding it, ýâåíòóàëüíûå àãðåññîðû, first of all Germany, and then
Japan and Italy accepted intensive measures for creation of independence of the
country from world(global) facilities(economy), for reception inside country of
the foodstuffs and raw material necessary for management of war. Despite of
these successes, it is possible definitely to tell, that there is no country,
which would not depend on foreign raw import.

 Determining significance in the
world(global) coal market have USA, Great Britain and Germany. Despite of it is
have a rather insignificant mineral industry, Poland in view of narrow capacity
of a home market is also big exporter óãëÿ. The important place in the coal market is taken
by(with) Russia, which export, truth, is insignificant owing to a huge home
consumption.

 On iron ore the world(global)
manufacturers — France, Russia and USA. However production of USA hardly(with
an effort) covers a home consumption, and on export nothing acts(arrives).

 A determining role on
world(global) õëîïêîâîì the market belongs to USA, India,
Egypt and Brasil. The large manufacturer is as well China, which consumption is
great.

 On a wool the large manufacturers
— Australia, Argentina, ÞÀÐ, New Zealand and USA. The
production of USA completely is consumed by a home market, and this country is
import ё rum of a wool.

 In the market of aluminium the
leading role belongs to USA, Germany, France, Norway, and also Canada.

 On antimony the determining role
belongs to China.

 On àñáåñòó the world(global) manufacturers —
Canada, Russia, ÞÀÐ.

 On áîêñèòàì the managing role in the market is
taken by(with) France, partly USA. The largest manufacturers are also Italy and
Yugoslavia.

 On õðîìîâîé the ore behind Russia as the large
manufacturer is followed by(with) Turkey. An essential role plays also New Êàëåäîíèÿ.

 On ìåäè the large manufacturer are by USA,
the significant production is present also in Canada and Chile.

 On ôîñôàòàì the managing role belongs Ñîåäèí ё ííûì to Staffs(states), France and
Germany.

 On lead the managing role belongs
to Canada, Australia and Mexico. The production in Ñîåäèí ё ííûõ Staffs(states), France and Germany
is significant.

 On lead the managing role belongs
to Canada, Australia and Mexico. The production in Ñîåäèí ё ííûõ Staffs(states) and then in Spain
and Germany is significant. However, this product is present in the majority of
countries.

 The manganese in a fair quantity
is present only in Russia and India.

 Íèêåëü mainly is present in Canada. The
rather significant production is present at France — In New Êàëåäîíèè.

 The sulfur is present mainly in Ñîåäèí ё ííûõ Staffs(states) and Italy.

 Ïèðèòû are distributed between sets of
countries of the world.

 Âîëüôðàì is present mainly in China and
India.

 Zinc — at a fair quantity of
countries, including at Germany.

 Êàäìèé — in USA, Mexico, Canada, Australia
and in France.

 Mercury — in USA, Italy and Spain.

 Platinum — in Russia, and also in
Colombia, Canada, ЮАР1.

 From íèæåñëåäóþùåãî of transfer it is visible, as the
dependence on the foreign market of separate countries on îïðåäåë ё ííûì to the goods is great.

 Great Britain on a clap(cotton),
antimony, àñáåñòó, áîêñèòàì, õðîìîâîé to ore, ìàãíåçèòó, manganese, mercury, ìîëèáäåíó, íèêåëþ, platinum, rubber, sulfur —
complete dependence on the foreign market; on graphite, lead, petroleum, tin, âîëüôðàìó, wool, zinc — almost complete
dependence.

 France on õðîìó, clap(cotton), ìàãíåçèòó, íèêåëþ, rubber, tin, âîëüôðàìó — complete dependence; on ìåäè, graphite, lead, manganese,
petroleum, sulfur, wool, zinc — almost complete dependence; on antimony and óãëþ — significant dependence.

 Germany on áîêñèòàì, õðîìó, clap(cotton), mercury, platinum,
rubber, tin, âîëüôðàìó, wool — significant dependence.

 Italy on õðîìó, íèêåëþ, platinum, rubber, tin and âîëüôðàìó — complete dependence; on óãëþ, ìåäè, clap(cotton), iron, lead,
manganese, petroleum, wool, zinc — almost complete dependence.

 Japan on áîêñèòàì, clap(cotton), íèêåëþ, rubber, wool — complete
dependence; on antimony, iron, lead, ìàãíåçèòó, mercury, petroleum, platinum, tin,
âîëüôðàìó, zinc — almost complete dependence.

 Poland on àíòèìîíèþ, áîêñèòàì, õðîìó, ìåäè, clap(cotton), graphite, ìàãíåçèòó, manganese, mercury, íèêåëþ, platinum, rubber, tin, âîëüôðàìó — complete dependence; on iron and
wool — significant dependence.

 Ñîåäèí ё ííûå Staffs(states) on antimony, íèêåëþ, rubber, tin — complete dependence;
on õðîìó and manganese — significant
dependence.

 Of their analysis âûøåïðèâåä ё ííûõ of the data follows, that main
countries have in the hands the control of major raw branches, is Great
Britain, USA, Франция1.

 The analysis supports all ïðèâåä ё ííûõ of the data the assumption, put
forward by us,, that any country is not completely independent from
world(global) facilities(economy). USA possess main sources of raw material,
however and this country depends on foreign importation under such decisive articles
of military import, as íèêåëü, rubber and tin. Is characteristic,
what exactly these raw branches almost completely are supervised by the main
contender of USA — England. On the other hand, England having in the world
rather greater independence, âñ
ё represents compact íàðîäíî — economic whole. Âñ ё it can result that in large war
with the powerful contender, engaging strong fleet, British empire as the unity
can turn to fiction. Between that Great Britain depends on world(global)
facilities(economy) almost on all major raw branches, since a clap(cotton) and
finishing rubber and petroleum.

 Thus, despite of all àâòàðêè÷åñêèå óñòðåìëåíèÿ of countries preparing to new
world(global) áîéíå, it was not possible by him(it)
till now it will be not possible hereinafter îñòè÷ü of stable independence of
world(global) facilities(economy). The limits àâòàðêè÷åñêèì óñòðåìëåíèÿì are fixed largely ðèðîäíûì by distribution of natural riches.
The successes of a science have managed to a certain extent ìÿã÷èòü this natural division of labour.
So, already there is a synthetic petroleum, rubber and apparently synthetic
clap(cotton). However seller’s price of these productions a synthetic
clap(cotton). However seller’s price of these productions in the world åù ё does not allow completely to
replace natural kinds of raw material synthetic. Furthermore(in addition to)
and the modern science åù ё has not reached complete
replacement of all kinds of raw material artificial or substitutes. As far as
it is known, åù ё the replacements for example such
colour metals, as tin and íèêåëü have not found to themselves.

 Taking into account these
circumstances, ýâåíòóàëüíûå àãðåññîðû go not only on a line of expansion
of internal production of scarce kinds of raw material and experimental ïîñòàíîâêè÷åñêèé a clap(cotton). However seller’s
price of these productions in the world åù ё does not allow completely to replace natural kinds ñû

Ðüÿ synthetic. Furthermore(in addition
to) and the modern science åù
ё has not reached complete replacement all

Х kinds of raw material artificial
or substitutes. As far as it is known, åù ё the replacements for example such colour metals, as tin
and íèêåëü have not found to themselves.

 Taking into account these
circumstances, ýâåíòóàëüíûå àãðåññîðû go not only on a line of expansion
of internal production of scarce kinds of raw material and experimental ïîñòàíîâêáùåíèé. Opposite(on the contrary), such
countries, as Italy, Japan and Germany, in view of availability in these
countries of the powerful productive device for want of of poverty by natural
raw resources would be essentially constrained in the actions by application of
embargo on main kinds of raw material.

 For want of application of embargo
on raw products it is necessary to take into account, first,
generality(universality) of a used measure and, secondly, availability in
country of stocks of raw material. The members a UN, as ÿâñòâóåò from the analysis of the mentioned
above data, supervise from major kinds of raw material only tin, íèêåëü and rubber. But already without USA
and Egypt it is impossible with complete efficiency to apply economic sanctions
on a clap(cotton); without USA it is impossible to use sanctions on petroleum, ìåäü and sulfur; without Germany and
partly USA (though here production óãëÿ in main is consumed inside country) it is impossible
to apply embargo on a corner; without USA and Germany it is impossible to apply
embargo on iron, steel, zinc and lead; without USA and Italy it is impossible
to apply embargo on mercury.

 Thus, the main role of USA and
significant role of Germany in the market of the major raw goods is ñåðü ё çíûì an obstacle for effective
application of economic sanctions a UN.

 The question on stocks of raw
material has essential significance: if for example on petroleum it is
difficult because of necessity to have extremely îáú ё ìíûå of storehouse to create stocks
more, than on some months, already on ores iron and manganous, on colour metals
etc. it is possible to prepare stocks on some years. It weakens significance of
economic sanctions, which in this case can only complicate long and "
large war " for country — àãðåññîðà, but cannot prevent military
actions àãðåññîðà in the first time.

 Summarizing all told, the rather
effective means in a case is possible to come to a conclusion, that economic
sanctions in the form of prohibition of import from country — àãðåññîðà -:

1). If the structure of import of
the given country is those, that the significant share(!long) it(him) is taken
by(with) raw products, which importation almost can not be ñîêðàù ё í;

2). If the structure of the payment
ё æíîãî of balance of this country is
those, that she(it) does not possess instead of dropping out export of the
significant payment ё æíûìè means under the invisible articles;

3). If this country does not possess
significant stocks of gold and precious metals and does not extract at itself;

4). If she(it) does not possess
abroad easily sold investments;

5). If in import of this country the
significant sharing(participation) is accepted by(with) countries which are
applying sanctions.

 Ïðèâåä ё ííûé the analysis is higher proceeds
from that rule(situation), that all members a UN participate in the sanctions.

2.3. Additional kinds of economic
sanctions

 The sanctions are compulsory
measures used to the state — infringer. They can be applied by international
organizations (universal and regional), group of the states or separate of
государствами1.

 The sanctions for an encroachment
on the international world and safety are stipulated in an item 39, 41 and 42
Charters a UN.

 The sanctions as the form of
compulsion are applied only in case of fulfilment of a heavy international
crime. It is impossible to consider(count) application of the sanctions in
other cases lawful, for, in essence, the sanctions are reaction to deliberate
fulfilment of illegal actions or deliberate causing âðåäà. For the second world(global) war
to the states — àãðåññîðàì were applied the political and
economic form of the sanctions. So, after unconditional êàïèòóëÿöèè ãèòëåðîâñêîé of Germany according to the
Declaration from June 5, 1945 allied äåðæàâû have undertaken functions of a
supreme authority, have carried out its(her) disarmament and äåìèëèòàðèçàöèþ, liquidated and have forbidden íàöèñòñêèå of organization. In Germany was
established(installed) îêêóïàöèîííûé a mode.

 The economic sanctions are applied
in case of infringement by the state of the international obligations connected
to causing of a material loss or for the sertificates(acts) of aggression.
She(it) can be expressed in the form of an export embargo, embargo on import,
complete embargo, and also reparations, restitutions, ðåïðåññàëèé and ñóáñòèòóöèé.

 The reparations — represent
reimbursement of a material loss in money terms, goods, services. Volume and
kind of reparations, as a rule, are applied on the basis of the international
agreements. The sum of reparations. Usually, is significant less than volume of
damage caused by war. For example. Under the decision of a Crimean conference
of a 1945 of a reparation from Germany have made only 20 ìëðä. Dollars. The agreement on the
termination(discontinuance) of war and restoration of the world in Vietnam from
January 27, 1973 obliged USA only to introduce " the contribution in çàâëå÷åíèå of wounds of war and ïîñëåâîåííîå construction of Democratic Republic
Vietnam and all Indochina " 1.

 Restitution — this return in a
nature of property wrongfully withdrawed and exported by the struggling state
from territory of the opponent. For example, according to the Peace agreement
between allied äåðæàâàìè and Italy from February 10, 1947
Italy has undertaken to return " in possible the shortest term the
property exported from territory any Incorporated Nations " 2.

 Object of a restitution can be
also returning of the wrongfully seized or wrongfully delayed property in peace
time, that is outside of communication(connection) with military actions.

 A version of a restitution is ñóáñòèòóöèÿ. She(it) represents replacement of
the wrongfully destroyed or damaged property, buildings, art values, personal
property etc.

 Ðåïðåññàëèè (unaided) are lawful compulsory
actions of one state against other state. Ðåïðåññàëèè are applied by one state in reply
to wrongful actions of other state with the purpose of restoration of the
infringed right. They should be proportionate to the caused damage and that
compulsion. Which is necessary for reception of satisfaction.

 Ðåïðåññàëèè should be terminated on receipt of
satisfaction. The modern international law forbids armed ðåïðåññàëèè as a means of the resolution of
disputes and разногласий1.

 In the international law to
reimbursement is subject the valid material loss (direct and indirect). The
missed profit is not usually reimbursed.

 It is exclusively(extreme) on the
basis of the agreements there is such version of the economic responsibility,
as absolute. Or objective, responsibility. The speech in this case goes about
the responsibility arising without dependence from fault ïðè÷èíèòåëÿ of damage, that is for damage
caused during lawful activity.

 It is necessary to the affected
party to provick only direct ïðè÷èííóþ communication(connection) between
action (inactivity) and ущербом1.

 There is a concept of contractual
restriction of the absolute liability on the sum which is being a subject to
reimbursement. In the agreement the limiting maximum sum of indemnification
which is being a subject to payment to the affected party almost always is
underlined. For example, the maximum sum of reimbursement is stipulated under
the Convention on reimbursement âðåäà, caused by a foreign air vessel to
the third persons on a surface, 1952 " as a result of fall of an air
vessel " 2.

 In these cases the affected party
cannot apply for reception of the sum exceeding an established(installed)
limit, even if the actual damage exceeds this sum. At the same time the maximum
limit is paid not automatically: if the sum of the proved damage is lower than
this maximum, the affected party can apply for reception only her(it).

 The contractual restriction of the
responsibility on the sum represents some kind of protectionism in relation to
use of engineering being a source of increased danger, but necessary in
interests of the people (aircraft, atomic engineering etc.). In this case there
is a distribution of burden of the losses arising as a result of damage,
between the dissatisfied party and ýêñïëóàòàíòîì of a source of damage.

 The contractual establishment of
the absolute responsibility guarantees reimbursement of damage suffering even
in the event that ïðè÷èíèòåëü of damage refers that all his(its)
actions were not infringement of the right.

The conclusion.

 The problems of application of the
international sanctions are specific, are rather complex(difficult) and ìíîãîãðàííû. The progressive development and êîäèôèêàöèÿ of norms and principles of the
responsibility in the international law requires(demands) the analysis and
coordination of many questions, each of which should be considered and ó÷ò ё í so that correctly and full to reflect changes in this area
of the international law, which have taken place in the last time.

 The correct reflection of these
changes is law of development of the modern international law. The necessity of
special research of problems êîäèôèêàöèè both progressive development of
norms and principles of ìåæäóíàðîäíî-deterrents of law is dictated by
the increased role of the international law as a legal basis of the
international attitudes(relations), increase of his(its) efficiency in business
of consolidation of the world and safety, in the decision of major problems of
a civilization.

 At the present stage existence of
the independent sovereign states the international attitudes(relations) are
displayed as ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal, basing on the legally fixed
principles and norms of behaviour of the states. The functions of the
international law consist in normative fastening of the rights about the
responsibilities of the states arising during their dialogue. The international
law should be considered in quality íàäñòðîå÷íîé of a category not above one
international economic attitudes(relations), and above the international
attitudes(relations) in a broad sense, covering all set of the
attitudes(relations) between the states and peoples. Scientifically reasonable
use of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-rules of law and principles enables
not only actively to influence the international attitudes(relations), but also
largely to direct their course.

 Into a problem of the
international law enters not only establishment of the rules of behaviour of
the states in this or that area of their international activity, but also
development(manufacture) of norms and principles guaranteeing observance of
these rules. One of major and tested ìåæäóíàðîäíî of legal tools in this business is
the principle of the international responsibility of the states and other
subjects of the international law for infringement of their international
obligations, and also for harmful consequences for want of of lawful activity
in separate spheres of interstate cooperation.

 The development of the
international law represents integrally interconnected process of an
establishment and modernization both rules of behaviour of the states, and
norms and principles ensuring their observance, including application of
international economic sanctions. However now of this unity is not observed. In
development of norms and principles of the international sanctions in the
international law the blank was formed. Norms and principles of the ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility of the states
not êîäèôèöèðîâàíû, though such necessity has ripened
already for a long time. To fill in this blank an essential problem of the
modern international law. It is possible without exaggeration to tell, that êîäèôèêàöèÿ and the progressive development of
norms and principles of application of the sanctions can serve as the important
condition hereinafter progressive development of the international law as a
whole.

 To the states is not indifferent,
in what direction, by what criteria and in what volume will êîäèôèöèðîâàíû and was progressively be advanced
norm and principles of application of the international sanctions. On the
correct decision of these questions depends, what influence these norms and the
principles will render on ñóäüáû of the world, on the decision of
problems of interstate cooperation, on the further progress of mankind.

The bibliography:

 I. the Managing literature:

1. Êàðèìîâ È.À. Our purpose: a free and prospering native land. "Ò" -1996. Ò-2.

2. Êàðèìîâ È.À. On a way of creation. "Ò" -1996. Ò-4.

3. Performance(statement) of the
President of a Republic of Uzbekistan on special solemn meeting of General
Assembly a UN in a case of the fiftieth anniversary of the Incorporated
Nations, October 24, 1995.

4. Performance(statement) of the
President of a Republic of Uzbekistan Èñëàìà Êàðèìîâà on Tashkent meeting — seminar on
safety and cooperation in Central Asia. Tashkent, September 15, 1995.

5. Performance(statement) of the
President of a Republic of Uzbekistan on

48-th sessions of General Assembly a
UN. New York,

28-September, 1993.

6. Performance(statement) of the
President of a Republic of Uzbekistan È.À. Êàðèìîâà at a Budapest meeting ÑÁÑÅ in âåðõàõ. December, 1994.

 II. Normative bases:

1. Charter a UN from a 1945.

2. Convention on the international
responsibility for damage caused by space objects from a 1972.

3. Agreement for principles of activity of the states on
research and use of space space, including the Moon and other heavenly bodies
from a 1967.

4. Geneva convention on protection
of victims of war against a 1949.

5. International convention
concerning interference in the high sea in case of failures presenting(causing)
to pollution by petroleum from a 1969.

6. Convention a UN under the
maritime law from a 1988.

 III. Manuals:

1. Ëåâèí Ä.Б. The responsibility of the states in the modern international law.
"Ì" -1966.

2. Êóðèñ Ï.Ì. International offences and responsibility of the states.
"В" -1973.

3. Êîëîñîâ Þ.Ì. The responsibility in the international law. "Ì" -1975.

4. Âàñèëåíêî Â.À. The responsibility of the states for international
offences. "К" -1976.

5. Øóðøàëîâ. Â.Ì. International ïðàâîîòíîøåíèÿ.

"Ì" -1971.

6. Ôàðóêøèí Ì.Õ. The ìåæäóíàðîäíî-legal responsibility. "Ì" -1971.

7. Áîðèñîâ Ä. of the Sanction. "Л" -1936.

8. International law. "Ì" -1987.

9. Dictionary of the international
law. "Ì" -1982.

10. International law. "Ì" -1995.

 IY. The literature in foreign
language:

1. Oppenheim L. International Law.
"B" -1973.

2. Starke J. An Intrduction to
International Law. "L" -1978.

3. Verdross A. Voelkerrecht.
"B" -1986.

4. Colbert E.S. Retaliation in
International Law. " N.Y. "-1948.

5. Brierly J. The law of Nations.
"L" -1987.

6. Annuaire de la Commission du
droit international. "P" -1970.

 Y. The journal and newspaper
articles:

1. Хал = сызи. October 27, 1995.

2. Ызбекистон овози. September 16,
1995.

3. Soviet year-book of the
international law 1960.

"Ì" -1961., Стр-101.

4. Soviet state and right. 1969., №
12., Стр-122.

5. New time. 1967., № 24., Стр-6.

1 Look more in detail.
Performance(statement) of the President of a Republic of Uzbekistan on special
solemn meeting of General Assembly a UN in a case of the fiftieth anniversary
of the Incorporated Nations, October 24, 1995. Performance(statement) of the
President of a Republic of Uzbekistan Ислама Каримова on Tashkent meeting —
seminar on safety and cooperation in Central Asia, September 15 1995г.
Performance(statement) of the President of a Republic of Uzbekistan on 48-th
session of General Assembly a UN. New York, 28-September 1993г.
Performance(statement) of the President of a Republic of Uzbekistan И.А.
Каримова at a Budapest meeting СБСЕ in верхах. December, 1994.

1 See. In the book Â.À. Âàñèëåíêî « the Responsibility of the state
for international offences » these offences are named ðåãóëÿòèâíî îõðàíèòåëüíûìè.

2 See. Annuaire de la Commission du
druit international 1969. «N.Y.» 1970, Vol. 1., P.117.

1 See. The report of a Commission of
the international law on work å ё of
the twenty fifth session (May 7 on July -13, 1973). — dock. A UN А9010, 23
июня1973г., page 30.

1 See. The report of a Commission of
the international law on work å ё of
the twenty fifth session, page 20.

1 See. The report of a Commission of
the international law on work of the twenty fifth session, page 26.

1 See. Левин Д.Б. Urgent problems of
the theory of the international law. «М» — 1974, page 102.

1 See. The international law. «Ì» -1987. Page 169.

1 See « International life ». 1993.,
№ 2., Page 37.

1 See. The international Convention
concerning interference in the high sea in case of failures presenting(causing)
to pollution by the petroleum Ст.1.

1 See. The dictionary of the
international law. «М» -1986. Page 308.

1 See. Ïîëòîðàê À.È. Nuremberg process. «Ì» -1977. Page 144.

1 See. Oppenheim L., International
Law, vol. II, pp.202-203.

1 See. Starke L. An Intrduction Law,
vol. II, pp.202-203.

1 See « a Rate of the international
law », ò. II, page 123.

1 See. Øàðìàçàíàøâèëè Ã.Â. From the right of war to the right of the world, page 66.

1 See « Institut de droit
international. Tableau qenerale des resolutions (1873-1956)», Bale » -1978,
p.168.

1 See « the Soviet state and right
», 1964, № 4., page 94 and trace.

2 See. Starke L. An Intrduction Law,
vol. II, pp.344-345.

1 See « General Assembly. The
official reports. The ninth session », Addition № 9, page 11.

1 See. Áîðèñîâ Ä. of the Sanction. Page 45.

1 See. Cанкции. "L" -1994
Cтр.34-35.

1 See. Борисов Д. of the Sanction.
Page 55.

1 See "American Journal of
International Law", vol.50, 1996, № 3, p.530.

1 See " International life
", 1995., № 2., page 14.

1 See " a statistical Year-book
of the Incorporated Nations " for 1990-1995гг.

1 See " a statistical Year-book
of the Incorporated Nations " for 1990-1995гг.

1 See. The international law. "Ì" -1987. Page 175.

1 See. The agreement on the
termination(discontinuance) of war and restoration of the world in Vietnam from
January 27, 1973. Ст.21.

2 See. The peace agreement between
allied äåðæàâàìè and Italy from February 10, 1947.
Ст.75.

1 See. The charter a UN from Ст.2.
Item 3.

1 See. The international law. "Ì" -1995. Page 261.

2 See. The convention on
reimbursement âðåäà, caused by a foreign air vessel to
the third persons on a surface from Ст.49.

Добавить комментарий

Ваш адрес email не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *