Search results

"Hybrid Threats and the Law of the Sea debates the practice of states that have resorted to discriminatory navigational restrictions or aggression against foreign ships and aircraft in densely navigated straits. The book explores both widely acknowledged and lesser-known maritime incidents that potentially meet the characteristics of hybrid warfare or hybrid conflict. This research approaches hybrid threats from the perspective of the interrelationship between navigational restrictions, law enforcement, armed attack, and the legal regime of straits. It provides guidance for determining whether the rules of armed conflict or law enforcement are applicable to various naval incidents"--

Intro -- The Estonian Straits: Exceptions to the Strait Regime of Innocent or Transit Passage -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- Series Editor Preface -- Preface -- Introduction -- Part 1: The Legal Categories of Straits -- 1 Interpretation of the Legal Categories of Straits under the LOSC -- 2 The Legal Regimes of Historic Straits, Ice-covered Straits and Sui Generis Straits -- 3 The Determinants of the Legal Categories of Straits -- Part 2: The Significance of Maritime Boundary Delimitation for the Legal Regime of the Estonian Straits -- 1 The Estonian-Russian Territorial Sea Boundary Delimitation in the Gulf of Finland -- 1 The Maritime Area in the Gulf of Finland Subject to Delimitation between Estonia and the Russian Federation -- 2 Pre-existing Agreements Pertaining to the Delimitation of the Maritime Area -- 3 Estonian-Russian Negotiations on the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Finland -- 4 Delimitation of the Territorial Sea by the Equidistance-special Circumstances Rule -- 5 The Significance of Islands for the Maritime Boundary Delimitation and for the Viro Strait's Legal Regime -- 2 The Boundary Delimitation between Finland and the Soviet Union in the Gulf of Finland -- 1 The Existence of the Russian EEZ in the Gulf of Finland -- 2 The Acknowledgment of the Existence of the Russian EEZ in the Gulf of Finland -- 3 The Estonian-Latvian Boundary Delimitation in the Gulf of Riga -- 1 The Estonian-Latvian Negotiations on the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Riga -- 2 Pre-existing Agreements Pertaining to the Delimitation of the Maritime Area -- 3 Pre-existing Agreements on the Status of Ruhnu Island -- 4 The Status of Ruhnu Island under Article 7(1) of the LOSC -- 5 Delimitation in the Gulf of Riga -- 6 The EEZ in the Gulf of Riga

Source at https://site.uit.no/nclos/ . ; This short blog post aims to provide guidance for parties to hybrid naval warfare for determining whether the rules of armed conflict or law enforcement are applicable to various situations where force has been used against ships. The guidelines are based on the relevant case law and systemized into three scenarios: first, a commercial ship vs. government ship/warship (State vessel) scenario; second, a State vessel vs. commercial ship scenario; third, a State vs. State scenario. The analysis focuses on the use of force against ships, but the rules apply mutatis mutandis also in relation to aircraft and installations and structures at sea.

Abstract
It is widely believed that international law does not enable to protect effectively the wreck of the ms Estonia against looting. The protection regime established under the 1995 ms Estonia Treaty is binding and violations against it can be effectively sanctioned in respect of only the nationals of its few States Parties, resulting in numerous jurisdictional gaps.
This study argues that the law of the sea and administrative law provide the means for safeguarding the ms Estonia wreck against pilferers. Estonia has repeatedly designated tiny buffer zones around relatively modern shipwrecks outside its territorial sea. Finland can follow this practice in relation to the ms Estonia wreck that lies less than 19 nm from its baselines. In effect, Finland would be entitled to regulate and authorize activities directed at the shipwreck with the right to exercise its enforcement jurisdiction against persons that disturb the peace of the mass grave.

Published version available at: https://site.uit.no/nclos/2021/06/21/maritime-security-threats-and-the-passage-regime-in-the-bab-el-mandeb/ ; The strait of Bab el-Mandeb separates Africa from the Arabian Peninsula and is an important element in the connection of the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea with the Indian Ocean. The Suez Canal interlinks the Mediterranean with the Red Sea, while the Bab el-Mandeb connects the Red Sea with the Indian Ocean. In Arabic, Bāb al-Mandab stands for "the gate of tears" (Encyclopaedia Britannica), which in the present-day context is a fitting name for a sea passage in a region that has borne tragic sufferings: a protracted humanitarian crisis and armed conflicts in Yemen, Somalia, and the Ethiopian province of Tigray, a brutal dictatorship in Eritrea, and genocide in Sudan. At the same time, the Bab el-Mandeb is the world's third-largest maritime oil chokepoint after the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca. The oil flow through the Bab el-Mandeb increased from 5.1 million barrels per day (b/d) in 2014 to 6.2 million b/d in 2018 which accounts for roughly a tenth of total seaborne-traded oil (EIA, 2019). The Bab el-Mandeb bears particular strategic importance for Europe as most of the European Union's (EU) maritime commerce with Asia crosses this narrow sea passage.

Source at https://www.juridicainternational.eu/. ; The Crimean conflict in 2014 followed in many respects the pattern of Russia's previous interventions in a neighbouring state – e.g., the 2008 Georgian conflict. Yet its similarities with the forgotten Abkhazian conflict in 1992–1993 are not widely acknowledged. The principal aim of the study presented was to determine whether Abkhazia had the right to claim statehood and to examine Russia's actions in support of the Abkhaz separatist forces during the conflict in 1992–1993. The author finds that the Abkhazians, similarly to the Crimean Russians, were not entitled to the right of external self-determination. The paper arrives at the conclusion that the fighting in Abkhazia in 1992–1993 may be categorised as an international armed conflict due to Russia's direct military intervention.

Introduction -- The legal categories of straits -- The significance of maritime boundary delimitation for the legal regime of the Estonian straits -- The significance of the outer limits of maritime zones for the legal regime of the Estonian straits -- The significance of long-standing treaties and the legal regime of sui generis straits for the Viro strait -- The significance of domestic law on the internal waters and state continuity for the legal regime of the sea of straits -- Conclusion

The purpose of this manuscript is to critically examine the legal findings of the Tagliavini Report in hope of contributing to the debate on its principal conclusions. The establishment of an independent fact-finding commission to explore the origins and course of the conflict marked the first time in its history that the EU, key mediator in concluding the Georgia-Russia conflict's ceasefire, intervened actively in an armed conflict. The author, disparate from the Fact-Finding Mission, does not find Georgia to have the right of self-defence in regard of attacks by Ossetian secessionist forces preceding the Russian invasion. The author argues, analogously to the Tagliavini Report, that Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali in South Ossetia represented an excessive use of force which violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. In regards to the central issue, the author contends that the Russian military intervention in Georgia on 8 August 2008 following Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali was not justified under the scope of reinforcing its peacekeeping force, or on the grounds of humanitarian intervention, intervention by invitation, or protection of citizens. Distinct from the Tagliavini Report, this manuscript reaches the conclusion that Russia was neither entitled to invade Georgia for protecting its peacekeeping contingent that comprised part of an international peacekeeping force.

The Nord Stream transboundary submarine pipeline, significant for its impact on the EU energy policy, has been a heav- ily debated issue in the Baltic Sea region during the past decade. This is partly due to the concerns over the effects that the pipeline might have on the Baltic Sea as a particularly sensitive large marine ecosystem. This manuscript focuses on the issue from the viewpoint of the UNCLOS legal framework and its related treaties. It thus illustrates some of the more polemical topics arising in modern law of the sea and environmental law, eg limitations on the freedom to lay submarine pipelines, the scope and boundaries of marine scientific research, the obligation to consider alter- natives in the course of an EIA. In broader terms, this manuscript presents an explanatory study of matters mostly related to sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the ecosystem approach.

The Nord Stream transboundary submarine pipeline, significant for its impact on the EU energy policy, has been a heav- ily debated issue in the Baltic Sea region during the past decade. This is partly due to the concerns over the effects that the pipeline might have on the Baltic Sea as a particularly sensitive large marine ecosystem. This manuscript focuses on the issue from the viewpoint of the UNCLOS legal framework and its related treaties. It thus illustrates some of the more polemical topics arising in modern law of the sea and environmental law, eg limitations on the freedom to lay submarine pipelines, the scope and boundaries of marine scientific research, the obligation to consider alter- natives in the course of an EIA. In broader terms, this manuscript presents an explanatory study of matters mostly related to sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the ecosystem approach.