Wednesday, February 15, 2012


Features

Smuggling Dispute Between Sukhumi, Tbilisi Enters Uncharted Waters, Legally

Georgia says it will impound any ships delivering cargo to breakway Abkhazia using its Black Sea coast.
TEXT SIZE - +
By Charles Recknagel
As the war of words escalates between Georgia and breakaway Abkhazia, Tbilisi this week sent a strong warning to any sea captains tempted to deliver cargo to the secessionist region.

A Georgian court sentenced a Turkish captain convicted of taking fuel to Abkhazia to 24 years in jail. The charge: smuggling.

That is a charge that Abkhazia, which has declared independence from Georgia, would hotly dispute. Authorities in Sukhumi say that Tbilisi has no right to police the waters offshore of Abkhazia and this week they threatened to sink any Georgian ships trying to do so.

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko on September 3 claimed Tbilisi’s blockade of Abkhazia was illegal under international conventions. He said it was fueling tensions that could end in new armed clashes.

"The numerous seizures by the Georgian Navy and the ensuing arrests by the Georgian authorities of third-country merchant ships off the Abkhaz coast are nothing but a blatant violation of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea," he said.

Tough Questions

All this raises some tough questions for third parties tempted to engage in commercial trade with Abkhazia, which declared independence a year ago following the Russia-Georgia war.

Should ships from other nations respect Georgia’s sea blockade? Or is Tbilisi acting out of bounds by treating any shipments to Sukhumi as smuggling?

Usually, such questions are resolved by turning to international laws and conventions.

But experts say that in this case -- despite some governments' claim to the contrary -- there is little such guidance available.

Marko Pavliha is head of the Maritime and Transport Law Department of the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia. He says international sea law only governs relations between recognized and sovereign states. But in this crisis there is only one sovereign state.

“The issue is really an internal matter or even similar to civil war," Pavliha says. "Now, we cannot apply the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea; we cannot apply, for example, the Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law of 1856, which inter alia governs also [the legality of sea] blockades; and we cannot apply the 1909 London Declaration on Naval War.”

Case-By-Case Basis

Abkhazia is recognized as a sovereign state only by Russia and Nicaragua. And it is recognized by one other self-declared state, South Ossetia, which also declared independence from Georgia following the five-day Russia-Georgia war of August last year.

Pavliha says that because secessionist states are not covered by current international maritime conventions, each such crisis has to be worked out by the international community on a case-by-case basis.

The way it happens can vary.

As a Slovene, Pavliha cites the example of his own country, which declared independence from Yugoslavia in 1991 and fought a 10-day war with Belgrade. Seceding from Yugoslavia sent Slovenia into a legal limbo much like Abkhazia’s today, with one crucial difference.

“The crucial difference was that Slovenia was recognized virtually immediately by many, many other countries, including the majority of the UN members, the Vatican, and the [European Union]," Pavliha says. "So the situation was different and Slovenia was immediately an independent country entitled to proclaim maritime territories, whereas in this case [Abkhazia] is officially and legally still part of one country.”

That means that – unless Abkhazia can get a critical mass of international recognition – it has no legal basis in current maritime law for claiming “territorial waters” of its own.

Domestic Matter

Similarly, Tbilisi’s blockade of its own coastline is something not covered by current maritime law. Instead, it is a domestic matter, much like any government’s decision to launch a police operation to interdict, for example, drug-smuggling on its shore.

All this leaves third parties -- such as Ankara, in the case of convicted Turkish sea captain Mehmet Coskun Ozturk -- to work out their own responses without much help from international sea conventions.

And that is – again -- despite everybody’s apparent desire to interpret events in terms of international maritime law.

Speaking about Tbilisi’s imprisonment of Ozturk and the impounding of his ship, Turkish Foreign Ministry spokesman Burak Ozugergin said on September 3 that “we think the Georgians violated international maritime law regarding both the letter and the spirit of the law.”

But, in fact, Ankara is taking steps to work things out with through diplomats, not lawyers.

Turkish media report that Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu is expected to personally visit Tbilisi to ask Georgia to overturn Ozturk’s conviction. No date for the visit has been set.

Law Still Catching Up


Pavliha says one reason international maritime law does not cover secessionist regions is that until fairly recently there were not enough such cases to warrant it.

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, for example, was adopted in 1982 and came into force in 1994.

But in the meantime, the world saw a whole series of secessionist crises explode in Yugoslavia and in the former Soviet Union.

Those cases have redefined international political relations. But the body of international law has yet to catch up.

“During the past 20 years, we have had a completely different situation as compared to half a century ago," Pavliha says. "Half a century ago, the trend was toward unified countries, the establishment of larger entities like federal states and so on, whereas, beginning probably with the fall of the Berlin Wall, [parts of] countries started seeking independence.

"And most, not all, but many, many international conventions, protocols and so on are somehow fitted to the previous international situation or climate which really doesn't exist anymore.”
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments page of 2
    Next 
by: Johann from: USA
September 04, 2009 14:03
What will happen if a NATO country like Turkey or Denmark sends a gunboat or have armed guards on their ships, to protect the ship that is flying their flag, and there are classes between that ships crew and the Georgian custom officers.
Russia does not need to send ships to Abkhazia, they can send everything by land.
Abkihazia is much more likely to become independent state than Transnistra, because Abkhazia has access to international waters, but Transnistra not.

by: Ivan from: Sofia
September 04, 2009 20:10
Why doesn't Georgia try to blockade and seize any US cargo ships violating its territorial waters? Because the Americans are delivering weaponry, technology and military men to Georgia. Ask the Georgian army where it got its camouflage uniforms from. The Georgians can play the big, scary cat to Abkhazia as long as America is backing them up. The cowboys are involved in the conflict, because of only that - it provides them with an opportunity to divide and conquer. But when the Georgians prove themselves unworthy of their "noble" cause, the yankees will lose interest and back off. After all, both Georgia and Abkhazia fall within the Russian sphere of influence. So Georgia - chill out, because you're just a pawn in the game of the superpowers. And America - remember Vietnam?

by: Rasto from: London
September 04, 2009 20:58
Ivan looks like your rethoric belongs to the times of 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. I am sure your hart is full of sorrow that old good times when Bulgaria was in Russian sphere of interest are gone..I am always wondering why people like you who are grieving after old Soviet times do not move to Russia

by: George from: USA
September 04, 2009 21:07
Ivan,
just leave Georgia in piece. No body says something about Bulgaria using Russian weapons and products for 40 some years.
Now you are in EU, being for 40 some years Russian dog.

by: Stefan
September 04, 2009 21:30
I am tired from RFE/RL's pro-Georgian news'. What is realationship between RFE/RL and Georgia? Saakashvili proud of with you.

by: sephia karta from: Leiden, Netherlands
September 04, 2009 22:17
Interesting article, but it doesn't address the point that the ships were seized in international waters, which is I believe why that Turkish source said it was in breach of that treaty.

by: Dave from: Stokholm
September 05, 2009 00:30
Everyone has right to live not only on their own land but also in any place where they have been living since immemorial times. Russians ethnically cleansed georgians from so called Abkhazia and Ossetia since 1990 (at this time nobody in Georgia would imagine any support from the US). Russia does not respect international law and occupying Georgian territories cannot be justified with Putin`s theories.
No to Russian imperialism and colonialism!
If Ossets who came in Georgia as refugees can be independent, why not Chechens and Ingushs, or Ossets living in Russia cannot be independent?

by: Johann from: USA
September 05, 2009 02:01
I disagree with Ivan from Sofia.
We lost Vietnam to the communists, because of weak minded American politicians.
I believe that in a few years Georgia will be a full member of NATO.
Georgia gets its weaponry from all over including USA, EU, China, Ukraine and from corrupt Russian arms dealers. Russian arms dealers have also sold weapons to Muslims in Northern Caucasus that were used to kill Russian women and kids.
Transnistra will join Moldova if communists cling on power there, but Moldova will stay a natural country, because it takes 60 members out of 101 in The Moldovian Parliament, to change their constitution and join NATO and commies there will in nearest future have at least 45 to 50.
In the other hand, Belarus, Venezuela, Somaliland, and a handful of cash poor African and European countries will recognize Abkhazia and Nort Ossetia and this countries including Belarus will be the 16th,17th and 18th republics of The Union State of Belarus and Russia.

by: James from: Burq
September 05, 2009 04:43
This is a little game being played. Georgia attacked break away South Ossetia and got beat up. Ex-VP Cheney was visiting cause its about gas and oil. The US can not challenge the Islamists and Russia at the same time. Georgia knows if they push too hard they are going to get taste of ship to ship missile. The Israelis ran/abandoned Georgia when Russia was getting serious. Most US voters picked Obama and not McCain's neoconservatives. I think Russia will eventually send in frogmen against the navy like the Israelis do against their opponents.

by: Nick
September 05, 2009 15:50
What a nice new judicial term "critical mass of international recognition". Maybe Iraq war, and mass murdering of Iraqi children was also legal after all, because so many "first-class democracies, leaders of the free world" like US, UK and so on, supported it.
Comments page of 2
    Next 

Most Popular

               
 
 
 
 
Being Discussed Now

Iranian Bomber Wounded In Bangkok

Latest Comment (1 total)

arash: As I've said before this terrorist regime must be thrown out of the ... More

Kosovo Serbs To Vote In Referendum

Latest Comment (4 total)

Eugenio: Ah, Alija, your open-hearted admission of desire to cleanse the ethnic Serbs from ... More

U.S. Hearing On Balochistan Raises Hackles, Awareness In Pakistan

Latest Comment (11 total)

Mah: Really? You wanna divide Balochistan? That's the outrageous idea I've heard so far. ... More