Category: News

  • The Montreux Convention and energy — outdated or essential?

    The Montreux Convention and energy — outdated or essential?

    WASHINGTON, Aug. 27 (UPI) — The five-day military conflict between Russia and Georgia over the disputed enclave of South Ossetia has thrown into the spotlight a nearly forgotten 72-year-old treaty governing the passage of both merchantmen and warships between the Mediterranean and Black seas through the Bosporus and Dardanelles, collectively known as the Turkish Straits.

    The 1936 Montreux Convention roiled relations between Washington, which wanted to send humanitarian aid on massive vessels through the Turkish Straits, and Ankara, which has steadfastly insisted on the terms of the treaty being respected. The incident is a reminder, if any is needed, that despite Turkey and the United States being close allies and NATO compatriots, the two nations’ strategic interests do not always run in tandem. While America and its NATO allies attempt to cram as many warships as legally allowed up the Turkish Straits, thoughtful analysts should remember that the passage is also a conduit for massive tankers of up to 200,000 tons or more. In 2006, tankers carrying more than 140 million tons of Azeri, Kazakh and Russian oil used the Turkish Straits. Washington’s increasingly aggressive stance with the Kremlin over South Ossetia could have a direct impact on these oil shipments, something that hawks both inside the Beltway and the Kremlin should consider.

    The Turkish Straits consist of two waterways connected by the landlocked Sea of Marmara. The 17-mile-long Bosporus, which debouches into the Black Sea, bisects Istanbul with its 11 million inhabitants, and its sinuous passage is only a half-mile wide at its narrowest point at Kandilli and has a convoluted morphological structure that requires ships to change course at least 12 times, including four separate bends that require turns greater than 45 degrees. At its southern end the Bosporus empties into the Sea of Marmara, which in turn connects to the 38-mile-long Dardanelles. Under good conditions merchant vessels currently canpass the 200 miles of the Turkish Straits in about 16 hours.

    Under Montreux, Turkish sovereignty is recognized over the entire channel, but while the agreement guarantees merchantmen unhindered passage, the passage of warships of non-Black Sea nations is tightly regulated, which has led to the current friction between Washington and Ankara. Disputes over the waterway date back to the dawn of European history. Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey recount the struggles of the Trojan War, which is assumed to have occurred in the 13th or 12th century B.C.; modern archaeology has placed Troy at the entrance to the Dardanelles.

    The Turkish Straits now carry 50,000 vessels annually, making the passage the world’s second-busiest maritime strait, whose volume of traffic is exceeded only by the Straits of Malacca, and the only channel transiting a major city. The development of the former Soviet Caspian states’ energy riches has led to an explosion of tanker traffic through the Turkish Straits; in 1996, 4,248 tankers passed the Bosporus; a decade later 10,154 tankers made the voyage, a development that Ankara, worried about a possible environmental catastrophe, views with growing concern as the Turkish Straits have become a tanker superhighway. The tankers transport Russian, Kazakh and, until the 2006 opening of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, Azeri crude to increasingly ravenous foreign markets.

    Under the terms of Montreux, Turkey cannot even charge tankers transit fees or require them to take on pilots to traverse the treacherous waterway.

    Montreux is quite explicit on the passage of foreign warships through the Turkish Straits, however, limiting non-riverain Black Sea forces to a maximum of 45,000 tons of naval vessels, with no single warship exceeding 30,000 tons.

    Washington originally proposed to send to Georgia two U.S. Navy hospital ships, the USNS Comfort and the USNS Mercy, but both are converted oil tankers displacing 69,360 tons apiece, and the Turks demurred.

    Four ships belonging to the Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 — Spain’s SPS Almirante Don Juan de Borbon, Germany’s FGS Luebeck, Poland’s ORP General Kazimierz Pulaski and the USS Taylor — last week passed into the Black Sea to Romania’s Constanza and Bulgaria’s Varna ports to participate in a NATO maritime exercise scheduled in October 2007 to conduct joint operations with the Bulgarian and Romanian navies. The Bulgarian navy currently has one Koni-class, one Wielingen-class and three Riga-class frigates, one Tarantul and two Pauk-class corvettes, three Osa-class missile boats and a Romeo-class submarine, while Romania has three frigates, four light frigates, three Molniya-class corvettes, three torpedo boats, one minelayer, four minesweepers and 16 auxiliary ships. In contrast, the Russian Black Sea Fleet has 40 warships; its flagship is the guided missile cruiser Moskva. According to the Russian General Staff, these soon will be joined by an additional eight NATO warships, even as the Moskva dropped anchor in Abkhazian waters.

    The Pentagon finally got its chance to fly the flag when on Aug. 22 the USS McFaul (DDG-74, 8,915 tons) guided-missile destroyer loaded with humanitarian aid passed the Bosporus headed for Georgia with supplies such as blankets, hygiene kits and baby food, to be followed two days later by the USCGC Dallas (WHEC-716, 3,250 tons) cutter passing the Dardanelles, which eventually will be joined by the USS Mount Whitney (LCC/JCC 20, 18,400 tons), now loading supplies in Italy.

    The Kremlin is not pleased by the foreign show of naval force; Russian General Staff Deputy Chief Anatoly Nogovitsyn observed of the NATO exercise, “From the Russian point of view … the usefulness of this operation is extremely dubious,” later labeling the deployment “devilish.”

    The Turkish press is now full of speculation that Washington will pressure Turkey to revise Montreux, but is it really in America’s and its allies’ interests to be provocatively flying the flag in waters through which pass a number of tankers fueling European and Asian needs? As Turkey is allowed under Montreux to shut the Turkish Straits completely in the event of conflict, it is a question to which hawks in Europe and Washington ought to give more consideration.

  • Geopolitical Diary: How Far Will the Caucasus Conflict Go?

    Geopolitical Diary: How Far Will the Caucasus Conflict Go?

    Stratfor.com
    August 28, 2008

    Russian President Dmitri Medvedev flew to
    Tajikistan on Wednesday for a summit with China
    and four Central Asian countries. The countries
    are members of the Shanghai Cooperation
    Organization, which meets regularly. This meeting
    had been on the schedule for while and has no
    significance, save that it brings the Russians
    into contact with four former members of the
    Soviet Union and ­ as important ­ China.

    Each of the Central Asian countries is obviously
    trying to measure Russia’s long-term intentions.
    The issue will not be Georgia, but what Georgia
    means to them. In other words, how far does
    Russia intend to go in reasserting its sphere of
    influence? Medvedev will give suitable
    reassurances, but the Russian empire and Soviet
    Union both conquered this area in the past.
    Retaking it is possible. That means that the four
    Central Asian countries will be trying very hard
    to retain their independence without irritating
    the Russians. For them, this will be a careful meeting.

    Of greater interest to the world is China’s view
    of the situation. Again, China has no interest in
    Georgia. It does have to have quiet delight over
    a confrontation between the United States and the
    Russians. The more these two countries are
    worried about each other, the less either ­ and
    particularly the United States ­ can worry about
    the Chinese. For China, a U.S.-Islamic
    confrontation coupled with a U.S.-Russian
    confrontation is just what the doctor ordered.
    Certainly the least problem Washington will have
    is whether the yuan floats ­ and, hoping for
    cooperation with China, the United States will
    pull its punches on other issues. That means that
    the Chinese will express sympathy to all parties
    and take part in nothing. There is no current
    threat to Central Asia, so they have no problems
    with the Russians. If one emerges, they can talk.

    In the meantime, in the main crisis, Russian
    Prime Minister Vladimir Putin called attention to
    the Black Sea as a potential flash point in the
    confrontation between Russia and the West. He
    warned that there could be direct confrontations
    between Russian and NATO ships should NATO or its
    member nations increase their presence there.
    According to NATO there are currently four NATO
    ships in the Black Sea for a previously scheduled
    exercise called Active Endeavor. Putin explicitly
    warned, however, that there could be additional
    vessels belonging to NATO countries in the Black
    Sea that are not under NATO command.

    It is hard to get ships into the Black Sea
    unnoticed. The ships have to pass through the
    Bosporus, a fairly narrow strait in Turkey, and
    it is possible to sit in cafes watching the ships
    sail by. Putting a task force into the Black Sea,
    even at night, would be noticed, and the Russians
    would certainly know the ships are there.

    As a complicating factor, there is the Montreaux
    Convention, a treaty that limits access to the
    Black Sea by warships. The deputy chief of the
    Russian general staff very carefully invoked the
    Montreaux Convention, pointing out that Turkey,
    the controlling country, must be notified 15 days
    in advance of any transit of the Bosporus, that
    warships can’t remain in the Black Sea for more
    than 21 days and that only a limited number of
    warships were permitted there at any one time.
    The Russians have been reaching out in multiple
    diplomatic channels to the Turks to make sure
    that they are prepared to play their role in
    upholding the convention. The Turkish position on
    the current crisis is not clear, but becoming
    crucial; both the United States and Russia are
    working on Turkey, which is not a position Turkey
    cares to be in at the moment. Turkey wants this crisis to go away.

    It is not going away. With the Russians holding
    position in Georgia, it is now clear that the
    West will not easily back down. The Russians
    certainly aren’t going to back down. The next
    move is NATO’s, but the alliance is incapable of
    moving, since there is no consensus. Therefore,
    the next move is for Washington to lead another
    coalition of the willing. It is coming down to a
    simple question. Does the United States have the
    appetite for another military confrontation
    (short of war, we would think) in which case it
    will use its remaining asset, the U.S. Navy, to
    sail into the Black Sea? If it does this, will it
    stay awhile and then leave or establish a
    permanent presence (ignoring the Montreaux
    Convention) in support of Ukraine and Georgia,
    with its only real military option being
    blockade? If this happens, will the Russians live
    with it, will they increase their own naval, air
    and land based anti-ship missile capabilities in
    the region, or will they increase pr essure
    elsewhere, in Ukraine or the Baltics?

    In short, how far does this go?

  • Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Turkish Straits

    Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Turkish Straits

    The International Straits Commission was abolished, authorising the full
    resumption of Turkish military control over the Straits and the
    refortification of the Dardanelles. Turkey was authorised to close the
    Straits to all foreign warships in wartime or when it was threatened by
    aggression; additionally, it was authorised to refuse transit from
    merchant ships belonging to countries at war with Turkey. A number of
    highly specific restrictions were imposed on what type of warships are
    allowed passage. Non-Turkish warships in the Straits must be under 15,000
    tons. No more than nine non-Turkish warships, with a total aggregate
    tonnage of no more than 30,000 tons, may pass at any one time, and they
    are permitted to stay in the Straits for no longer than three weeks. The
    number of foreign warships permitted in the Straits at any one time is
    restricted to one. Black Sea states are given more leeway, being
    authorised to send capital ships of any tonnage through the Straits (but
    only one at a time and specifically excluding aircraft carriers). They are
    also allowed to send submarines through the Straits, with prior notice, as
    long as the vessels have been constructed, purchased or sent for repair
    outside the Black Sea. The less restrictive rules applicable to Black Sea
    states were agreed as, effectively, a concession to the Soviet Union, the
    only Black Sea state other than Turkey with any significant number of
    capital ships or submarines.[7][8] The passage of civil aircraft between
    the Mediterranean and Black Seas is permitted, but only along routes
    authorised by the Turkish government.[9]

  • Istanbul — through the lens

    Istanbul — through the lens

    Rick Steves finds the camera not only a good way to capture the sites but to meet the people of Istanbul as he shoots another episode for his travel show.

    By Rick Steves
    Tribune Media Services

    ISTANBUL – Staring into a TV camera, I say, “Istanbul is one of the world’s great cities, period. For thousands of years, this point, where East meets West, has been the crossroads of civilizations. Few places on earth have seen more history than this sprawling metropolis on the Bosphorus.”

    It’s the last day of a week devoted to producing a TV show on Istanbul, and we need a grand spot for the show’s opening. We had a reasonable vista from the Galata Bridge, but it just showed charming old fishermen and tour boats. I want to somehow capture both the historic crossroads and contemporary might of this city.

    So far, the site selection has just led to frustrations. Mentally scanning all possible angles, it hits me – we need what filmmakers call a “high-wide,” a wide-angle, almost aerial shot. I want to show the freighter-filled Bosphorus and its Golden Horn inlet, the teeming Galata Bridge with lumbering commuter ferries churning up the port, and a huge mosque in the foreground.

    We go to the spot I envision (above the “New Mosque,” near the famous Spice Market) and survey the zone. A restaurant has a shaded roof terrace – we go there and it is perfect … except no necessary sun is shining on me.

    Next door, a toy company has offices with a small rooftop terrace in the sun. It’s perfect.

    They welcome our crew onto their roof, bring us tea, and – grabbing a calm moment between the gusts – I deliver my lines.

    Then we taxi to Ortakoy, a trendy cafe district at the edge of town. It’s too far away for tourists, but it sits in the shadow of a Baroque mosque and the mighty modern bridge that crosses the Bosphorus.

    I want to get more interaction between the Turks and me and this is perfect – four charming young Turkish men join me to pass around a “nargile” (big water pipe), sip chai, and play backgammon. Whether you’re filming or not, backgammon is the perfect way to create conviviality with new friends. At the neighboring table we film two sisters – one in Western dress and the other wearing a colorful but conservative Muslim head scarf – chatting as they pass the mouthpiece of their big water pipe. (I admit this was part of my agenda: to make both a big water pipe and a scarved Muslim woman less menacing to the more insular of my viewers.)

    When the sun is low and the chop of the Bosphorus carbonates the scene, I step out onto the ferry landing. Behind me, the frilly mosque softens the harsh lines created by the mighty bridge as it reaches for Asia. Just as a ship enters the frame, I look into the lens and close the show: “Like its bridge, Istanbul brings East and West together. With a complex weave of modern affluence, Western secularism, and traditional Muslim faith, it’s a dynamic and stimulating city, well worth a visit.”

    The next day, I’m sitting in a taxi heading for Istanbul’s Ataturk Airport. Driving along the coast, I scan the Bosphorus. A hundred freighters fill the sea – a commotion of ships reminding me of the size of the D-Day landings. Each is filled with cargo for thriving economies. One by one, they enter this maritime bottleneck.

    In the middle of the strait there’s a construction site – an industrial-strength pontoon island with heavy machinery digging down and then out. Istanbul is well on the way to constructing a tunnel under the Bosphorus. I trace the city’s horizon with its misty minarets spiking up from the old town to the distant skyline where there is a wannabe-Shanghai forest of modern skyscrapers that tourists never visit.

    Reaching the airport, I tip the taxi driver, selfishly holding back just enough local lira for a coffee. Enjoying a rare break with my iPod, I listen to Amy Winehouse while immersed in the sea of traveling people. I find I can appreciate the human drama of a crowded public scene better with music-pumping earphones obliterating the natural sound. An old woman weeps as the security line slowly swallows up her son, who’s holding a reaching grandson in his arms. Water and shoes are okay here – but my watch and belt need to come off. With a thump, my passport is stamped and shortly I’m out of Istanbul.

    Edmonds-based Rick Steves (www.ricksteves.com) writes European travel guidebooks and hosts travel shows on public television and public radio. His syndicated column runs weekly at seattletimes.com/travel

    Source : Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company

  • Oskanian Urges ‘More Public’ Foreign Policy

    Oskanian Urges ‘More Public’ Foreign Policy

     

     

     

     

     

    By Emil Danielyan

    Former Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian signaled his disapproval of Armenia’s low-key stance in the Russian-Georgian conflict on Wednesday, saying that Yerevan should have been more vocal in articulating its neutrality.

    In an interview with RFE/RL, Oskanian also said rising tensions between Russia and the West will make it harder for Armenia to carry on with its long-standing “complementary” foreign policy.

    “Armenia certainly can not choose [between the two warring sides,]” he said. “Nor can it be indifferent. We should be able to find the right balance and I think that can be achieved through an upgraded complementarity.” “That means our foreign policy should be much more public,” he added.

    The Armenian government barely reacted to the August 8 outbreak of fighting in South Ossetia that developed into a full-scale Russian-Georgian war, with President Serzh Sarkisian refusing to cut short his vacation in China despite strong criticism from his political opponents. Sarkisian held a meeting of Armenia’s National Security Council only on his return to Yerevan on August 14. He also discussed the festering crisis in separate phone conversations with the presidents of Russia and Georgia.

    “Saying nothing when the situation is difficult might be a solution,” said Oskanian. “What the authorities have done in connection with the latest developments is understandable. I don’t want to voice any criticism.”

    “But my preference would have been somewhat different,” he said, adding that Yerevan should have displayed a “more public neutrality.”

    “I think that as soon as this problem arose we could have … publicly told Russia and the U.S. that what is happening does not stem from anybody’s interests, is bad for the region and in the global political sense,” continued Oskanian. “Armenia would have had a clearer stance by telling everyone that Armenia is not going to choose between its two allies. Indeed, if Russia is our strategic ally, Georgia is our natural ally.”

    According to Oskanian, the Sarkisian administration’s “silence” could also reflect negatively on Armenia’s negotiating position in the unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. He said Russia’s decision to unilaterally recognize Abkhazia’s and South Ossetia’s de facto independence from Georgia will erode Western support for the principle of peoples’ self-determination championed by the Armenian side.

    “As I said, our silence or low-key stance on the other issue is understandable. But I think that we could lag behind on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue,” warned the man who served as Armenia’s foreign minister and chief Karabakh negotiator from 1998-2008.

    “If we fail to enter these processes and clearly express our position on Karabakh’s self-determination, I’m afraid we will find it harder to achieve results desirable to us,” he said.

    Oskanian went to on to imply that Armenia should draw parallels between the conflicts over Karabakh and Kosovo and exploit Georgia’s botched attempt to win back South Ossetia for stressing the importance of non-use of force in the resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani disputed. He said Yerevan should also go as far as to threaten to formally recognize Karabakh as an independent state if Baku rejects international mediators’ existing peace plan.

    The plan calls for a gradual settlement of the conflict that would enable Karabakh’s predominantly Armenian population to determine the disputed territory’s status in a referendum. It was drawn up by U.S., Russian and French diplomats co-chairing the OSCE Minsk Group. The crisis in Georgia and its geopolitical implications have left observers wondering whether Russia and Western powers will continue to work together in trying to have the conflicting parties accept the framework peace deal.

    “This is also a problem,” admitted Oskanian. “Those countries have frequently said that the Karabakh issue unites them and that they have no differences on that issue. I am really concerned that those disagreements [on Georgia] could also manifest themselves in their positions on the Karabakh conflict.”

    Oskanian reiterated in that regard his calls for Russia, the U.S. and the European Union to help create a “regional security pact” comprising Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. In an article published by “The International Herald Tribune” on Monday, he made a case for a “nonaligned Caucasus, free of security memberships and adversarial alliances.”

    When asked by RFE/RL whether that means Armenia should be ready to end its military alliance with Russia, Oskanian said, “That should be discussed by those six players, in the 3 plus 3 format. Other neighbors — and Turkey in particular — should also be involved.”

  • From Skaneateles to Istanbul

    From Skaneateles to Istanbul

    Forty-nine years ago, it’s possible no one involved in this story thought a relationship spanning the Atlantic would still be thriving.

    But friendship can span time and, as is this case, continents.

    The year was 1959, and Ann German Higbee was an American Field Service student from Skaneateles living with the Turkoglu family in Istanbul, Turkey. She spent the summer living with the family – a mother, father, older brother and sister, Selma.

    “While I didn’t choose (to go to Turkey), I was thrilled to be in the first group of AFSer’s to Turkey, truly a little known country in 1959, a country that literally joins Asia and Europe,” Higbee said. “(It was) a place totally foreign to almost anything I knew (or) had heard of at that point in my life.”
    Little would foreshadow the story that unfolded after her time in Istanbul.

    In 1962, Selma Turkoglu Ertuna was awarded a Rotary Club international scholarship to come to the United States as an exchange student to Keuka College. Selma said while she was a student here, she would spend weekends and vacations with Higbee and her family.

    There was love in the air when Selma was on her way back to college, though, and she met a man by the name Ozer Ertuna.

    “I met Ozer on the boat on my way to Keuka College,” she said. “In 1964 we got married. I joined him in Ithaca when he was working for his PhD degree in Cornell University.”

    Now, 49 years later, Ozer and Selma have returned to the U.S. to rekindle long-time friendships and to visit with their exchange relatives. Over the years, the families have been able to visit each other’s homes.

    Like Higbee and Selman, Ozer, too, was an AFS exchange student. He had come to the states 51 years ago as a student in Wells, Minn., for a year-long trip.

    “Our current visit to USA is a nostalgic trip to visit our friends. We started our trip visiting Ann and Jim,” Selma said. “We had a wonderful time with them in Skaneateles meeting the family and their nice friends. We enjoyed every moment of our stay.”

    Following their stay in Skaneateles, Selma and Ozer headed to Ithaca to visit with Ozer’s professors at Cornell University, then they took a flight to Minnesota to visit Wayne Unke and his family. Unke was Ozer’s math teacher and coach during his exchange.

    The couple’s trip also includes a drive to Grinnell College in Iowa where their grandson is studying. Like his grandparents, the Ertuna’s grandson came to the U.S. as an exchange student to Kansas through AFS.

    “We are happy that our grandson is studying in the USA. He is having the similar experiences that we have had,” Selma said. “We are sure that this opportunity will broaden his vision of the world.”
    Higbee and the Ertunas each have a deep understanding of the importance of organizations like Rotary and AFS. They enable people to understand one another despite cultural differences.
    “AFS was and is an incredibly powerful organization that has been bringing people from around the world since post WWII. Founded by Stephen Galatti, an ambulance driver during the war, its vision has always been to join people from all points on the globe into a harmony based on living side-by-side … coming to understand each other in their respective cultures,” Higbee said. “It does not have a political agenda. Its only agenda is to build bonds of friendship and understanding that may contribute to world peace.”

    According to Selma, the organizations need increased support in order to expand their activities. The Ertunas would also like to see new organizations that promote friendship among people.
    “It is wonderful to have so close relations with friends in a distant part of the world,” Selma said. “If more people had the same experience we are sure that we would have a better world. And, we hope more people will have similar experience.”

    Ozer said the couple’s journey across the U.S. will come to a end on Sept. 5 when they fly to Turkey. Once they reach their destination, Istanbul, Ozer will resume teaching at Okan University.

    “It was pure joy to have Selma and Ozer back with us in Skaneateles and to share the pleasure of (re)igniting memories that will, hopefully, contribute to building even stronger bonds between our families/countries as we head into yet a new generation of friendship,” Higbee said.

    Source :