Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
The mode of operation of the Black Sea or Turkish straits is again becoming a matter of international discussion following the clash of two globalization projects: the American Greater Black Sea region and the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, as well as Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, which is primarily realized on the ground. Being the Black Sea straits a core object of international agreements between the World War I and the World War II, the Montreux Convention of 1936 secured the Black Sea from major naval clashes and accidents. The Convention, which is more than 85 years old, has the longest regime for regulating the passage of military and civilian ships through the Black Sea straits since 1783 and has reflected the geopolitical reality, in which the Black Sea littoral powers, which have been Türkiye and Russia for 240 years, have noticeable advantages over the navies of non-littoral powers. This provision contradicts the modern American aspirations to open the Black Sea region and the Black Sea - Caspian space for the military-political expansion of the United States and the coalition. The purpose of the article is to determine, on the basis of a discursive analysis, the goal-setting of the main geopolitical actors in relation to the Montreux Convention and to predict the possible transformations of the Black Sea region, which has become the center of a clash of interests of global and regional powers. The research methodology is based on the principles of systemic and interdisciplinary approaches to provide a combination of methods of political linguistics and geopolitical analysis and synthesis. The article examines the discourse of the leading actors of international relations around the Montreux Convention following the special military operation, which makes it possible to identify its transformations between the status quo or denunciation at the level of conceptual discussions. Türkiye traditionally balances between the interests of Russia and the West due to the role of a neutral “gatekeeper” of the straits, technologically applying Article 19 of the Convention, which so far fully meets the interests of Russia; while the USA shows a tendency to revise the Convention or circumvent it legally. Therefore, the Montreux Convention will remain at the center of public and real politics until the end of the formation of a new system of international relations that should ensure the stability of the development of the world for the next political era.
The mode of operation of the Black Sea or Turkish straits is again becoming a matter of international discussion following the clash of two globalization projects: the American Greater Black Sea region and the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative, as well as Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, which is primarily realized on the ground. Being the Black Sea straits a core object of international agreements between the World War I and the World War II, the Montreux Convention of 1936 secured the Black Sea from major naval clashes and accidents. The Convention, which is more than 85 years old, has the longest regime for regulating the passage of military and civilian ships through the Black Sea straits since 1783 and has reflected the geopolitical reality, in which the Black Sea littoral powers, which have been Türkiye and Russia for 240 years, have noticeable advantages over the navies of non-littoral powers. This provision contradicts the modern American aspirations to open the Black Sea region and the Black Sea - Caspian space for the military-political expansion of the United States and the coalition. The purpose of the article is to determine, on the basis of a discursive analysis, the goal-setting of the main geopolitical actors in relation to the Montreux Convention and to predict the possible transformations of the Black Sea region, which has become the center of a clash of interests of global and regional powers. The research methodology is based on the principles of systemic and interdisciplinary approaches to provide a combination of methods of political linguistics and geopolitical analysis and synthesis. The article examines the discourse of the leading actors of international relations around the Montreux Convention following the special military operation, which makes it possible to identify its transformations between the status quo or denunciation at the level of conceptual discussions. Türkiye traditionally balances between the interests of Russia and the West due to the role of a neutral “gatekeeper” of the straits, technologically applying Article 19 of the Convention, which so far fully meets the interests of Russia; while the USA shows a tendency to revise the Convention or circumvent it legally. Therefore, the Montreux Convention will remain at the center of public and real politics until the end of the formation of a new system of international relations that should ensure the stability of the development of the world for the next political era.
INTRODUCTION. In modern international and domestic maritime law, regional fragmentation of legal regulation is becoming more and more noticeable, which, in turn, objectifies and actualizes the formation of complex arrays of legal norms, united by the consistency of the political and legal positions of the contracting states that have national interests in the relevant water area, primarily-coastal states extending their state sovereignty to certain areas of maritime space. In this context, the Greater Mediterranean region should be considered as one of the most important in the world merchant shipping and naval support of international peace and security, as a basin that optimally connects the Atlantic and Indian Oceans from the point of view of logistics, which requires the formation of an appropriate scientific and methodological basis for full implementation of the fundamental principle of international cooperation in the maritime policy of the states of the region.MATERIALS AND METHODS. To substantiate the expediency of singling out the Greater Mediterranean as an independent object of legal regulation, general and special international legal treaties, the domestic legislation of the Mediterranean states, as well as political and legal documents indicating the existence of certain disputes and situations around certain zones of the Mediterranean water area, primarily – in the Eastern Mediterranean region. To obtain reliable and substantiated results of the study, methods of scientific knowledge were used: formal-legal, logical, historical-legal, system-structural analysis. Thus, the formal legal method made it possible to clarify the content and meaning of international legal treaties concluded at different times and aimed at regulating public relations in the maritime sphere. The logical method made it possible to substantiate the need for comprehensive international cooperation of the coastal states of the Greater Mediterranean. With the help of the historical and legal method, an overview was made of both the world, Soviet and Russian practice of applying the norms of domestic and international law on issues related to ensuring international law and order in the Greater Mediterranean region. The logical method made it possible to build the necessary connections and patterns of development of international legal regulation in the Greater Mediterranean region in the general context of ongoing universal and regional political and legal processes and transformations. Using the method of system-structural analysis, it was possible to display a holistic picture of law-making and law enforcement of the Mediterranean states, aimed at the formation of unified principles and norms for the exercise of the sovereign rights of coastal states.RESEARCH RESULTS. International maritime merchant shipping seems to be a very complex area of public relations with a large number of entities that have different legal status and, accordingly, are related to each other in a very different way.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. This work is devoted to the study of the main trends in the development of the Greater Mediterranean region in terms of formulating key international legal guidelines and rules of conduct for its constituent states. The object of the study is the legal relations carried out in the maritime spaces of the Greater Mediterranean as one of the key regions, which, along with its economic and political significance, is an integral zone for the implementation of the national interests of the Russian Federation, extending to the entire World Ocean.
Changes in international relations and perceptions of national security are forcing individual States to expand the contours of their own security borders. It is not uncommon for these contours to go far beyond their own borders. The purpose of the study is to determine the nature of the perception of the transformation of cross-border spaces in the system of threats to Russia's national security. The main materials of the study were socio-political discourse, in particular individual speeches of the President of Russia, the national security strategy and other normative and doctrinal documents in the field of ensuring the security of the Russian Federation. The studied narratives and comparison of statements and reactions to individual regional transformations, compared with doctrinal documents in the field of national security, allowed us to identify trigger points. In particular, in comparison of the political changes in Afghanistan, Finland and Ukraine, it was revealed that it is the value transformation at the current moment in the vision of the Russian elite that is of the greatest concern, both regionally and politically and socially. The basis of the research methodology is a systematic approach, content analysis, and a comparative approach, which made it possible to identify the dominants in the current political discourse and determine the reason for the perception of the transformation of cross-border spaces by the Russian elite in a certain way. As a result, it is determined that the change of the value paradigm is perceived as something significantly more dangerous than a military threat, as well as the expansion of NATO to the east, which is by no means perceived as an equivalent threat. In addition, the Russian elite perceives the current international system as something unfair, due to the capabilities of Western states to influence areas lying near the borders of Russia. While Russia itself does not have the opportunity to broadcast its ideas and values on territories far from its borders. Changes in the value orientation of cross-border areas lying in the border of Russia are perceived by the elite at the moment as the main national threat to the country's security.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.