【摘要】 共同开发作为解决中日东海油气资源争议的临时性安排无疑是可行、有益的选择。尽管中日双方经过4次局长级磋商已进入了共同开发的协商解决阶段,但是在界定共同开发海域的问题上,双方的主张出现了极大的分歧。从法理上分析,确定某一区域为共同开发海域实际上是当事国对该区域内资源主权权利的一种处分。为了追求共同开发中自己利益的最大化,中日双方在该问题上存在矛盾是不可避免的,但是日本提出要将其单方面主张的所谓“中间线”两侧的油气田列为共同开发区域的主张缺乏国际海洋法上的依据。根据明确国际法上“跨界矿藏”的概念可以得出结论:日方单方面主张的所谓“中间线”西侧的油气田应属中国所有,不能列为共同开发的范围。根据共同开发制度和海洋法的相关规定,中国可以倡导在包括日方单方面主张的所谓“中间线”东侧已探明的油气田在内的广大争议海域中界定共同开发区。另外,建立共同开发分区和采用有层次的、递进的方式将使这一问题得到更顺利的解决。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a temporary arrangement to resolve the Sino-Japanese oil and gas dispute in the East China Sea, joint development undoubtedly is the most applicable and helpful alternative. Although Sino-Japanese bilateral negotiations have entered the stage of joint development, there are still great differences between the two sides in terms of defining the joint deve￣lopment area. The author argues that based on the theory of law, Japan’s unilateral demand that the joint area should include oil and gas fields on both sides of the Medium Line lacks evidence in the Law of the Sea. According to the definition of “trans-boundary minerals” in international law, oil and gas fields to the west of the Medium Line should be owned by China, and should not be covered in the joint development area. Therefore, the author suggests that according to the joint development system and other related rules in the Law of the Sea, China should propose to delimit the joint development area to within the disputed sea area, including the oil and gas fields to the east of the Medium Line. In addition, setting up sub-areas within the joint development area and adopting a progressive method will also help to resolve this issue.更多还原