Paul
Goble
Staunton, August 20 – Analysts have
offered a variety of reasons for the breakthrough on the Caspian – increased
Russian concerns about security and a desire to keep US forces out of that
region, Iranian interests in having a backdoor if Middle East deteriorates, and
a fall in gas prices which has made Moscow less worried about the impact of a
Trans-Caspian pipeline.
But Versiya analyst Ruslan Gorevoy suggests there is another and
perhaps more compelling reason: “Clarity on the Caspian,” he argues today, “has
given Russia the chance to control the
Sea of Azov,” a critical new theater in Russia’s war against Ukraine (versia.ru/radi-chego-rossiya-soglasilas-na-nevygodnyj-razdel-neftenosnogo-ozera).
According
to the Moscow commentator, the littoral states were unable to agree to a convention
on the Caspian because they disagreed as to whether it was a sea or an inland
body of water. Now, they have decided that “the Caspian is ‘an
intra-continental body of water’ of five countries. This is a special legal
status, neither a sea nor a lake.”
Immediately,
Gorevoy says, that precludes the opening of any American or Turkish bases on
its shores, while allow Russia and the other littoral states freedom of action
there. But “however paradoxical this may
sound,” the Caspian accord also “closes the question about the status of the
Sea of Azov.”
That
is because there is “a most direct” connection between the Caspian and the Sea
of Azov, the commentator continues. “The Sea of Azov was considered an internal
body of water of the USSR and its status was thus beyond the reach of
international treaties.”
After
the USSR disintegrated, the sea was not subject to demarcation by the two
littoral states, Russia and Ukraine. Instead, “the sea remained internal for
the two.” Then, the Maidan occurred in Kyiv, Crimea was annexed by Russia, and
the Crimean Bridge was built across the Kerch Straits.
As
a result, the Ukrainian ports of Mariupol and Berdyansk lost a significant part
of their earnings.” Ukraine reacted by
seizing Crimean shipping vessels, and then “Russian naval vessels began to play
on the nerves of Ukrainian ship owners.”
All that has led Kyiv to look for a way out.
Its
view is that “now that the Volga-Don canal allows ships to go from the Caspian
to the Sea of Azov and back, that body of water cannot be considered internal.”
And that means, Ukrainian analysts say, that it is entirely reasonable that NATO
ships should enter the sea to ensure the free passage of ships to and from
Ukrainian ports.
“As
long as the status of the Caspian remained undefined, American and European
destroyers could completely legally go from the Black Sea into the Sea of Azov,”
Gorevoy continues.
But
now that the Caspian littoral states have signed the accord, they cannot do so because
the Caspian isn’t an international body of water subject to the rules of the Law
of the Sea. Instead, it too is an internal body of water. “For Moscow, this is
an unqualified plus,” one more way that the Caspian accord will transform
geopolitics in Russia’s south.
No comments:
Post a Comment