Cooperation Levels in Caspian States’ Practice in the 1990s
The incompleteness of the Soviet–Iranian agreements and their conflicting interpretation raised doubt about the legality of the activities of Caspian littoral states in the 1990s. Actions taken by coastal states, often taken under the influence of mutually exclusive political and economic national interests of individual states, have an effect on all strategic areas of cooperation in the Caspian Sea, including the question of the setting of state borders, operating of ships and fisheries and degradation of natural resources and their transportation. This precarious situation alters already existing legal problems and creates new ones. Establishment of a uniform legally-binding document regulating the collaboration of states in the Caspian Sea basin is of tremendous importance for the political security of the entire region and its future economic development. Clarity and thus stability of the legal situation in the Caspian region is no less important for securing international investments in the extraction of Caspian resources, obtaining foreign loans as well as for the purchase of shares or exploitation rights to Caspian oil and gas fields. The introduction of legal standards and rules oriented towards peace and international legal standards would make an important contribution to the prevention of military solutions.
International legal status of the Caspian Sea: issues of theory and practice
Since the collapse of the USSR, long established stability of compromise around the Caspian has left its place to competition and confrontation. While the USSR and Iran were the only coastal states in theCaspian basin during the Cold War, five states came to share the controlover the Caspian Sea in the Post-Soviet period, and they were quick to decIare their rights to the particular parts of the Sea in a unilateral manner, which led to controversies. Consequently, since 1992, there is a search for allegations, stimuli and causes for the formation of the multilateral relations regarding the status and usage of the Caspian Sea. However, altered geopolitical situation has made the issue of multinational ownership of the Caspian Sea and its delimitation, a matter of urgency. All the post-Soviet Caspian states, except Russia, declared at once their non-recognition of the legal force of the Soviet- Iranian contractual base (1921-1940) pertaining to the Caspian Sea. What followed was a contentious discussion on the legal status of the Caspian and its utilization. International negotiations on the Caspian problems, especially on determination of its international legal status, can be divided into three stages; First stage, which may be defined as the period of investigation, acquaintance and search after reasonable solutions, covers 1991-1994. Second stage covers 1995-1999, during which new ideas and postures were genemted, range of serious multilateral meetings and conferences, discussing the national postures toward the Caspian Sea and other issues, were held. The third, and the last stage goes back to January 2000, Le. to the moment when the new leader of Russia, Vladimir Putin, rise to the power. His arrival precipitated development of a new approach by the Russian Federation regarding the Caspian region and its problems.
Papacy and Law in the Gregorian Revolution: The Canonistic Work of Anselm of Lucca
PART I: PAPACY AND LAW ON THE EVE OF THE GREGORIAN REVOLUTION PART II: A CANONIST IN THE AGE OF REFORM