parties so long to come to an agreement, the picture becomes clearer.
Prior to the signing of the 2018 Caspian Sea Convention, the Caspian Sea divided along the coastline very
unevenly. Russia got 695 km. coastline, Kazakhstan - 2320 km, Turkmenistan - 1200, Iran - 724, Azerbaijan -
955 km. The complexity of the situation was also in the fact when look at the map it is difficult to understand
that, for example, the Russian coastline is inferior to all other parts of the Caspian coast. This circumstance,
combined with the complex geography of the sea, created additional difficulties.
In determining the legal status of the Caspian Sea, the parties could not come to a common opinion on how
to classify - as lakes or seas. There were different options for using the space behind this. If there were used the
definition of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, so territorial and neutral waters would appear in the
Caspian Sea. Everything within the territorial waters would then be under the sovereignty of the coastal state.
In this case, each country would have 12 miles of territorial waters and 200 miles of exclusive economic zones,
defined by the median line method.
International Journal of Information and Communication Technologies, Special issue, march 2022
28
НАУЧНО-ПРАКТИЧЕСКАЯ КОНФЕРЕНЦИЯ «30-ЛЕТИЕ НЕЗАВИСИМОСТИ КАЗАХСТАНА:
ДОСТИЖЕНИЯ И ПЕРСПЕКТИВЫ»
Although there is no natural communication with the World Ocean for the Caspian Sea to be recognized as
an ordinary sea. By the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea the rivers and canals are not considered as the
natural connection of a body of water with the ocean.
If the Caspian Sea is not recognized as a sea, but it is considered as closed sea or lake, then the regime for
using its water area would be determined by an agreement between the coastal states. In this case, the water
area should be divided by the median line - a median line is drawn from north to south, which divides the water
area strictly in the middle, and the boundaries from the points of exit to the coast of state borders are drawn to
it by straight lines.
The problem is that any definition of the Caspian reservoir does not lead to an automatic determination of
its legal status. In any case, whether the Caspian is a sea or lake, the legal regime for its use will be established
by agreement of the Caspian states.
Did the signing of the Caspian Convention rule out such problems? The answer to this question is especially
relevant because it is associated with the problem of the "energy security" we are considering.
Danish specialist B. Sovakul [2] found as many as 45 different definitions of energy security. The flow
of definitions tends to make sense that goes beyond the steady flow of energy that perhaps stems from the
multidimensional, evolving and easily politicized nature of energy security and energy itself.
The clearest differences in the concepts of energy security are found between importers and exporters of
energy, due to the emphasis on security of supply for the former and security of demand for the latter. However,
it is important to know that many producing/exporting countries also face the problem of energy insecurity
in their domestic supply. As the nature of energy-related problems evolves over time, so does the concept of
energy security.
The more governments recognize the problems of global warming (especially since the 1990s), the more
explicitly this phenomenon relates to energy security. Recently, issues of energy poverty have been increasingly
discussed within the framework of the concept of energy security. Today, a typical definition of security of
supply is “the constant availability of energy in various forms, in sufficient quantities and at reasonable prices.
An example of demand assurance is stable business relationships with customers, whose purchases often
provide a significant portion of their national income.
Likewise, British expert R. Dannreuter analyzes the essence of energy demand security and argues that
it is a stable and safe income for development. These definitions coincide with stable energy flows, but,
unsurprisingly, there is no consensus on what “reasonable” prices for importers and exporters is. Observers
often criticize such ambiguity of the concept of energy security [3]. For example, B. Sovakul and Brown argue
that the concepts of energy security are either so narrow that they tell (us meaning the audience in broad sense)
little about complex energy challenges, or so broad that they lack precision and coherence. [4]. Energy security
was described as “inherently fuzzy”. Given the multidimensional and evolving nature of energy security or
energy problems in general, the legal aspects of this problem are of particular importance.
Demand security has been a concern for exporting countries since at least the 1980s. Exporters' organizations
such as OPEC and the GECF are seeking ways to negotiate with importers on the terms on which a demand
level can be set that would suit at least most of these countries. One option they may have is vertical integration
of energy importing countries, although this option largely failed in the case of the oil market and faced
reluctance from importing regions such as the EU.
The general concept of energy security, which would include the adoption of the concept of security of
demand by importing countries, has not yet been formed [5].
Energy consuming countries are reluctant to “meet demand” due to their policies to reduce consumption.
This does not mean that importers doubt that large investments in energy production and transportation require
a guaranteed absorption. The "fair price" debate will always remain at the commercial level. The presence
of a diverse set of tools for solving the problem of security of supply can be considered as one of the main
differences from security of demand.
While diversification of export markets and vertical integration may ensure demand security. Reliable energy
supplies are essential for the development of the economy, while demand security is essential for securing
export revenues. However, given the large share of energy exports in the GDP of many energy-producing
countries, security of demand may become a matter of concern for the entire national economy.
Many exporting countries strive not only to diversify the market for their products, but also to diversify the
entire economy, making it less dependent on revenues from energy exports. In many cases, this appears to be
even more difficult than curbing consumption by importers.
International Journal of Information and Communication Technologies, Special issue, march 2022
29
Достарыңызбен бөлісу: |