检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:林晓萍 Lin Xiaoping
机构地区:[1]北京大学历史学系
出 处:《世界历史评论》2023年第1期118-134,293,294,共19页The World History Review
摘 要:“在华势力范围”概念出现伊始,便存有争议性。“在华势力范围”概念在国际法上暧昧不明的“合法性”地位以及具体概念含义的多变性,为中国政府主张撤废“在华势力范围”相关的不平等条约带来了困境。同时,当国际上倾向于讨论撤废“在华势力范围”概念时,“在华势力范围”的多变性与可伸缩性,则被日本政府利用于“缩小”“在华势力范围”内涵,以试图达到维持其在华最大特权的目的。The concept of“Sphere of Influence”in China has been the subject of controversy since its inception.The concept’s ambiguous legal status in international law,coupled with its variable definition,has presented a significant obstacle for the Chinese government in its efforts to abolish the unequal treaties associated with“Sphere of Influence”in China.Meanwhile,as the international community trended towards discussions of abolishing the concept of“Sphere of Influence”in China,the Japanese government capitalized on the concept’s flexibility and adaptability to narrow the scope of Japan’s own“Sphere of Influence”within China,with the aim of maintaining its maximum privileges in the country.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.44