Asia

India's five underground nuclear explosions detonated on May 11-13, 1998, raise such international law questions as these: Is India prohibited by any applicable treaty or customary rule of international law from testing or possessing nuclear weapons? Is there any other source of international law that might prohibit India's testing or possessing nuclear weapons? If India may test and possess them, under what circumstances would it be lawful to use them? Do India's tests provide any other states, such as Pakistan, with legal justification to conduct their own nuclear tests? 

Before the end of President Clinton's term in office, Congress will debate in earnest China's application to join the World  Trade Organization (WTO). Rhetoric in Congress during President Jiang Zemin's recent state visit tells us this debate may be highly contentious. The recent congressional defeat of the President's request for fast-track authority raised awareness in the international trade community that close attention must be paid to laying groundwork for critical national decisions on trade policy. It is not too early to address the new "China question." 

 

On June 21, 2000, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled (14-2) that it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute brought by Pakistan against India in September 1999. The Court, which is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations entrusted with settling legal disputes between sovereign States, consists of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms by the UN General Assembly and Security Council, together with two judges ad hoc appointed especially for the case by Pakistan and India. The ICJ has its seat at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the Netherlands.