Qualitative Alleviation Of War Reparations In Jus Post Bellum: Analysis Of Travaux Préparatoires Of Article 16 Of The Treaty Of Peace With Japan

Open access

Abstract

As a case study contributing to empirical and inductive specifications of the jus post bellum principle for reparations, the author conducts an analysis of a provision of the Treaty of Peace with Japan that mandates that Japan make reparations from attached Japanese assets in neutral and ex-Axis countries to compensate the Allied prisoners of war. This study’s findings elucidate the legal significance of the provision that war reparations can be qualitatively alleviated by virtue of substituting assets for pecuniary reparations, hence presenting inductive substantiation for implementing the jus post bellum principle for reparations.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Blum Gabriella and Natalie J. Lockwood. “Earthquakes and Wars: The Logic of International Reparations”: 178-216. In: Larry May and Elizabeth Edenberg eds. Jus Post Bellum and Transitional Justice. New York: CUP 2013.

  • 2. Boon Kristen. “Jus Post Bellum in the Age of Terrorism: Introductory Remarks.” American Society of International Law Proceedings 106 (2012): 331-332.

  • 3. Carlyle Margaret ed. Documents on International Affairs 1947-1948. London: Oxford University Press 1952.

  • 4. Chetail Vincent. “Introduction: Post-conflict Peacebuilding – Ambiguity and Identity”: 1-33. In: Vincent Chetail ed. Post-conflict Peacebuilding: A Lexicon. New York: OUP 2009.

  • 5. Commonwealth Working Party on Japanese Peace Treaty 1st May to 17th May 1950 Report FO371/83830. The United Kingdom National Archives.

  • 6. De Brabandere Eric. “The Concept of Jus Post Bellum in International Law: A Normative Critique”: 123-141. In: Carsten Stahn Jennifer S Easterday and Jens Iverson eds. Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations. New York: OUP 2014.

  • 7. Dennett Raymond and Robert K. Turner eds. Documents on American Foreign Relations. Vol. 10. Boston: World Peace Foundation 1950.

  • 8. Documents of the Far Eastern Department FO371/92532. The United Kingdom National Archives.

  • 9. Dunn Frederick S. Peace-Making and the Settlement with Japan. Princeton: Princeton University Press 1963.

  • 10. Easterday Jennifer. “Jus Post Bellum in the Age of Terrorism: Remarks by Jennifer Easterday.” American Society of International Law Proceedings 106 (2012): 335-337.

  • 11. Easterday Jennifer S. “Peace Agreements as a Framework for Jus Post Bellum”: 379-415. In: Carsten Stahn Jennifer S. Easterday and Jens Iverson eds. Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations. New York: OUP 2014.

  • 12. Iverson Jens. “Contrasting the Normative and Historical Foundations of Transitional Justice and Jus Post Bellum: Outlining the Matrix of Definitions in Comparative Perspective”: 80-101. In: Carsten Stahn Jennifer S. Easterday and Jens Iverson eds. Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations. New York: OUP 2014.

  • 13. Iverson Jens Jennifer S. Easterday and Carsten Stahn. “Epilogue: Jus Post Bellum – Strategic Analysis and Future Directions”: 542-553. In: Carsten Stahn Jennifer S. Easterday and Jens Iverson eds. Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations. New York: OUP 2014.

  • 14. Japanese Peace Treaty: General (C.P.(50)323). The United Kingdom National Archives.

  • 15. Japanese Peace Treaty: Memorandum by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (C.P.(51)137). The United Kingdom National Archives.

  • 16. Japanese Peace Treaty. Summary Records of Meetings FO371/92557. The United Kingdom National Archives.

  • 17. Kesaris Paul ed. Documents of the National Security Council [microfilm]. Vol. 1 A:I:0301 A:I:0326. Washington D.C.: University Publications of America 1980.

  • 18. May Larry. “Jus Post Bellum Grotius and Meionexia”: 15-25. In: Carsten Stahn Jennifer S. Easterday and Jens Iverson eds. Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations. New York: OUP 2014.

  • 19. May Larry. “Jus Post Bellum in the Age of Terrorism: Remarks by Larry May.” American Society of International Law Proceedings 106 (2012): 332-334.

  • 20. May Larry. “Jus Post Bellum Proportionality and the Fog of War.” European Journal of International Law 24(1) (2013): 315-333.

  • 21. May Larry. “Reparations Restitution and Transitional Justice”: 32-48. In: Larry May and Andrew T. Forcehimes eds. Morality Jus Post Bellum and International Law. New York: CUP 2012.

  • 22. May Larry and Elizabeth Edenberg. “Introduction”: 1-25. In: Larry May and Elizabeth Edenberg eds. Jus Post Bellum and Transitional Justice. New York: CUP 2013.

  • 23. May Larry and Andrew T. Forcehimes. “Introduction”: 1-10. In: Larry May and Andrew T. Forcehimes eds. Morality Jus Post Bellum and International Law. New York: CUP 2012.

  • 24. Memorandum by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (C.P.(51)104). The United Kingdom National Archives.

  • 25. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan ed. Documents on Japanese Foreign Policy: Records Related to the Conclusion of Treaty of Peace with Japan. Vol. 2 3 4 5. Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan 2002.

  • 26. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan ed. Documents on Japanese Foreign Policy: Treaty of Peace with Japan Preparatory Work. Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan 2006.

  • 27. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan ed. Documents on Japanese Foreign Policy: Treaty of Peace with Japan Negotiation with the United States. Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan 2007.

  • 28. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Provisional Verbatim Minutes of the Conference for the Conclusion and Signature of the Treaty of Peace with Japan. Tokyo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1951.

  • 29. Neff Stephen C. “Conflict Termination and Peace-making in the Law of Nations: A Historical Perspective”: 77-91. In: Carsten Stahn and Jann K. Kleffner eds. Jus Post Bellum – Towards a Law of Transition from Conflict to Peace. Hague: T·M·C·Asser Press 2008.

  • 30. Österdahl Inger. “Just War Just Peace and the Jus post Bellum.Nordic Journal of International Law 81 (2012): 271-294.

  • 31. Österdahl Inger and Esther van Zadel. “What Will Jus Post Bellum Mean? Of New Wine and Old Bottles.” Journal of Conflict & Security Law 14(2) (2009): 175-207.

  • 32. Overseas Consultants Inc. Report on Industrial Reparations Survey of Japan to the United States of America February 1948. New York: Overseas Consultants 1948.

  • 33. Pauley Edwin E. Report on Japanese Reparations to the President of the United States: November 1945 to April 1946. Washington D.C.: Division of Publications Office of Public Affairs 1946.

  • 34. Records of Proceedings: Conference for the Conclusion and Signature of the Treaty of Peace with Japan. Washington D.C.: Department of State 1951.

  • 35. Records of the Office of the Historian. Japanese Peace and Security Treaties 1946-1952 [microfilm] (Lot File 78 D 173). Modern Japanese Political History Materials Room Japanese National Diet Library.

  • 36. Records of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs Relating to the Treaty of Peace with Japan [microfilm] – Subject File 1945-51 (Lot File 56 D 527). Modern Japanese Political History Materials Room Japanese National Diet Library.

  • 37. Ronzitti Natalino. “Reparation and Compensation”: 638-659. In: Nigel D. White and Christian Henderson eds. Research Handbook on International Conflict and Security Law: Jus ad Bellum Jus in Bello and Jus post Bellum. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar 2013.

  • 38. Sari Aurel. “The Status of Foreign Armed Forces Deployed in Post-Conflict Environments: A Search for Basic Principles”: 467-501. In: Carsten Stahn Jennifer S. Easterday and Jens Iverson eds. Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations. New York: OUP 2014.

  • 39. Sassòli Marco. “Reparation”: 279-290. In: Vincent Chetail ed. Post-conflict Peacebuilding: A Lexicon. New York: OUP 2009.

  • 40. Stahn Carsten. “‘Jus ad bellum’ ‘jus in bello’ … ‘jus post bellum’? – Rethinking the Conception of the Law of Armed Force.” European Journal of International Law 17(5) (2007): 921-943.

  • 41. Stahn Carsten. “Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Discipline(s)”: 93-112. In: Carsten Stahn and Jann K. Kleffner eds. Jus Post Bellum – Towards a Law of Transition from Conflict to Peace. Hague: T·M·C·Asser Press 2008.

  • 42. Stahn Carsten. “The Future of Jus Post Bellum”: 231-237. In: Carsten Stahn and Jann K. Kleffner eds. Jus Post Bellum – Towards a Law of Transition from Conflict to Peace. Hague: T·M·C·Asser Press 2008.

  • 43. United States Department of State. [1945] Foreign Relations of the United States. Vol 6.

  • 44. United States Department of State. [1947] Foreign Relations of the United States. Vol 6.

  • 45. United States Department of State. [1950] Foreign Relations of the United States. Vol 6.

  • 46. United States Department of State. [1951] Foreign Relations of the United States. Vol 6.

  • 47. Yasamee Heather J. and Hamilton K. A. eds. Documents on British Policy Overseas. Series 2 Vol. 4. London: HMSO 1991.

  • 48. Yoshida Shigeru. Kaisō Jūnen [Ten Years Memoirs]. Vol. 3. Tokyo: Chuokoron-sha INC 1998.

  • 49. Yoshida Shigeru. The Yoshida Memoirs: The Story of Japan in Crisis. Translated by Kenichi Yoshida. Westport: Greenwood Press 1973.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.42

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.138
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.281

Target audience: researchers and scholars in the fields of law and politics, with an acute interest in the cross-pollinations of disciplines, comparative approaches to regional issues, and active dialogue on pressing contemporary issues of theoretical and practical import.
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 416 132 2
PDF Downloads 183 73 6