Negotiating the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea: Some Nuances

2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (005) ◽  
pp. 60-73
Author(s):  
A. Kachalova
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The Caspian Sea

Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-413
Author(s):  
Rizal Abdul Kadir
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The United Nations

After twenty-two years of negotiations, in Aktau on August 12, 2018, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Russia, and Turkmenistan signed the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea. The preamble of the Convention stipulates, among other things, that the Convention, made up of twenty-four articles, was agreed on by the five states based on principles and norms of the Charter of the United Nations and International Law. The enclosed Caspian Sea is bordered by Iran, Russia, and three states that were established following dissolution of the Soviet Union, namely Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan.

The Soviet-Iranian Treaty of 1921: History and Modernity (to the Centenary of Conclusion)

2021 ◽  
pp. 191
Author(s):  
Zaven A. Arabadzhyan
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Property Transfer ◽  
Soviet Russia ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Almost All

After a century since the Soviet-Iranian Treaty was signed in 1921 authors of the article consider its significance from a new viewpoint – as the backing of the sovereignty of Iran and Russia that supported development of their relations. Authors examine the way it complied with the interests of Russia and Iran, and its impact on the bilateral relations in the 20th century. The signing of the Treaty secured the sovereignty of Iran, served as the base for the development of equal relations between the two neighboring states and opened up Iran for relations with foreign states. For the Russia, this document was a step towards breaking its diplomatic isolation. The authors emphasize that Russia had granted almost all its property to Iran which contributed to the improvement of the financial situation in Iran and served as a base for the development of mutually beneficial economic relations between the two countries. The authors mention that the property transfer clause was connected with the security of the Soviet Russia. This fact was reflected in the Article 6 of the Treaty. The Treaty set up the basement for the legal status of the Caspian Sea as a closed sea in the states' joint usage. The Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea, signed in 2018, to some extent retained the special regime of the sea and reflected the spirit of the Treaty of 1921. Although in IRI there are different views about the Treaty some experts consider that it generally complied with Iran's national interests.

scholarly journals Legal Status Of The Caspian Sea: History And Present

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ardak Kapyshev
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Oil Fields ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Interstate Relations ◽  
The Usa ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Near Future

At  the  present  stage  one  of  the  unsolved   problems in  interstate relations of  Caspian bordering countries is defining international­legal status of the Caspian Sea. It is noted in the article that this problem is not a new one at all. The history of “division” of the Caspian Sea begins in the ancient age, namely in VIII century. It is underlined that the basic stumbling block  is the position of Iran on the right to use the Caspian Sea, and also occurrence of extra regional players, such as  the USA, China, etc. First of  all, it is connected with rich oil fields and other minerals, and also with convenient geopolitical and geostrategic position. The only way to worry out the international­legal delimitation of the Caspian Sea problem is a negotiating process. By now, despite of  certain disagreements on  legal status of  the Caspian Sea, five Caspian bordering countries managed to achieve certain progress, admitting the possibility of applying the principle of sectorial sectioning on the Caspian Sea.  Clear proof  of  it is the agreements on  division of ground on the northern part of Caspian Sea signed between Kazakhstan, Russia and Azerbaijan. It is important that Kazakhstan, Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan clearly stated their positions and agreed to make a compromise in their official statements. More than likely, in the near future Iran will soften its position, considering its present  situation and   strained relations with the USA. It has been alleged that the constructive  dialog  already  started; everything depends on  the mobility,  concurrency and rationality of actions of all Caspian bordering countries.

New Stage in the Geopolitical Struggle around the Caspian Sea after 1991

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-36
Author(s):  
Stanislav Aleksandrovich Pritchin
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
Water Area ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Regional Powers ◽  
Complete Work ◽  
Strategic Goals ◽  
The Military

For almost three centuries, starting with the campaign of Peter the Great in 1721-1722, Russia has traditionally played a key role in the Caspian Sea. The situation changed dramatically with the collapse of the USSR in 1991 and the emergence of three new regional players-Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. For Russia, this meant a significant reduction in influence in the region and the loss of control over most of the water area and the sea and its resources. In the historiography devoted to the region, the emphasis is placed on assessing the new round of geopolitical struggle, the position and interests of Western and regional powers. The author of this article provides a critical analysis of changes in Russian policy towards the Caspian Sea over the past 30 years and assesses the effectiveness of these changes. The difficult transition from the role of a dominant player in a region closed to external competitors to an open geopolitical confrontation over resources, their transportation routes, and political influence at the first stage was not in favor of Russia. Russia could not defend the principle of a condominium for joint development of hydrocarbon resources of the sea. With the active assistance of Western competitors, Russia lost its status as a monopoly transit country for oil and gas from the region. At the same time, thanks to diplomatic efforts and increased political dialogue with its neighbors in the region, Russia managed to resolve all territorial issues at sea by 2003, maintain the closed status of the sea for the military forces of third countries, and by 2018 complete work on the Convention on the international legal status of the sea, which established the principles of cooperation in the region that are important for the Russian Federation. Thus, official Moscow managed to achieve the strategic goals adapted after the collapse of the USSR by using the traditional strengths of its foreign policy and consolidate its status as the most influential player in the region.

The Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea: The Final Answer or an Interim Solution to the Caspian Question?

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 232-263
Author(s):  
Elena Karataeva
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Complete Solution ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
New Developments ◽  
History Of ◽  
Final Answer

Abstract This article analyses new developments in the question of the Caspian Sea legal status, namely the signing of the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea on 12 August 2018 in Kazakhstan, after twenty-six years in the making. First, the article provides an overview of the history of the Caspian Sea ownership and examines the legal status question from the collapse of the USSR to the present day. Then, the text of the newly signed Convention is examined to determine whether it provides the final answers to the issues of the legal status and delimitation of the sea. It is contended that despite this seminal breakthrough, the convention does not provide a complete solution. Specifically, while it establishes Caspian Sea zones and their limits, it fails to clarify some key contentious aspects, including delimitation principles between the opposite and adjacent Caspian States, which remain to be determined bilaterally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document