Comparison of the U.S.S.R. and United States on the Territorial Sea, Exclusive Economic Zone, and Strait Issues

This thesis compares the positions of the United States and the Soviet Union on the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone, and straits

Maritime Delimitation in the Caspian Sea: Legal Issues

Erik Francks,比利时布鲁塞尔自由大学法学院国际法和欧洲法部门及国际法中心主 任。这篇文章是作者在由俄罗斯外交部莫斯科国际关系学院国际燃料和能源复合研宄所、莫斯科国际石油俱乐部、俄罗斯科学院和俄罗斯国际法协会组织的于2002年2 月26日至27日在莫斯科总统饭店举行的“里海:法律问题”会议上的投稿。因此，这 篇文章反映了当时的情况。作者诚挚地感谢会议的组织者提供了其参与这个享有盛 名的会议的机会;此外，要特别感谢Anatoly Kolodkin教授的友好邀请

从国际法的角度看海洋地物的命名

The first section of this article acknowledges the usefulness of framing this issue from an international law perspective.An initial examination of the right ofs tates to attribute appellations will be followed by an inquiry into the possible legal implications that can be derived from the names of maritime features. The latter will mainly draw upon a discussion of international case law, chiefly the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice(ICJ). The second section narrows our scope of analysis to two bodies with specific competence vis-à-vis geographical names.First of all,the work of the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names(UNGEGN) will be singled out.Its procedure and the legal nature of its recommendations highight this organ’s ey role as a developer of procedures as well as major prooter of place names. Secondly, the involvement of the International Hydrographic Organization(IHO) in the naming of maritime features will be studied in some detail.This section examines the possibilities for co-operation between states in the area of hydrography. On the one hand the influence of international organizations on sovereign states in the maritime naming process cannot be underestimated.On the other hand limitations to achieving solutions in politically sensitive cases still loom large,as can be observed for areas beyond the outer limits of states’territorial seas. Finally, this contribution offers some sober thoughts on the lacunae in the current legal framework of naming maritime features. 本文将首先明确,国际法在海洋地物的命名过程中发挥了重要的作用。在这一部分中,首先我们将考察基于地物命名可能牵涉到的关于国家权力的这一层面的法律问题。而后我们将对与之相关的国际判例做一些必要的梳理,主要的着眼点是与我们的主题相关的国际法院的某些具体法律实践。在本文的第二部分中,我们将分析的范围限定在具有典型意义的普通水体和咸水体的地理名称所承载的特殊内涵上。 首先,我们将对联合国地理名称专家组(UnitedNationsGroupofExpertsonGeographicalNames)通过的文件作必要的梳理。相关的程序规则及其建议的法律性质都凸显了该专家组在程序设计和推动地物命名等方面的重要作用。 其次,我们将对国际水文组织曾经介入过的一些海洋地物命名的案例进行深入研究,这里我们也将考量国家之间在相关水域中进行合作的可能性。在研究的过程中,我们也意识到如下两个方面的问题:一方面,国家主权范围内海洋地物的命名过程中,国际组织的作用不能被忽视;另一方面,解决政治敏感海域内海洋地物命名的方法还极其有限,这一点在国家领海之外的区域表现的尤为明显。 最后,本文对海洋地物命名现存法律框架的缺失之处提出一些想法和建议

Governance of Arctic Marine Shipping

The governance of shipping activities in the Arctic might be described as a “complicated mosaic.” The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), often referred to as the constitution of the oceans, sets out the overall legal framework for the regulation of shipping. The Convention sets out coastal state legislative and enforcement powers over foreign ships according to the maritime zones of jurisdiction laid out in the Convention. A fragmented array of international agreements attempts to address specific challenges raised by shipping such as marine pollution prevention standards, ship safety, seafarer rights and qualifications, and liability and compensation for spills (Appendix A). In addition, the threats raised to/by ships operating in ice-covered waters have led northern countries that border these waters, such as Canada and Russia, to adopt national legislation specifically for Arctic shipping (Appendix B)

Governance of Arctic Marine Shipping

The governance of shipping activities in the Arctic might be described as a complicated mosaic The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea UNCLOS often referred to as the constitution of the oceans sets out the overall legal framework for the regulation of shipping The Convention sets out coastal state legislative and enforcement powers over foreign ships according to the maritime zones of jurisdiction laid out in the Convention A fragmented array of international agreements attempts to address specific challenges raised by shipping such as marine pollution prevention standards ship safety seafarer rights and qualifications and liability and compensation for spills Appendix A In addition the threats raised toby ships operating in icecovered waters have led northern countries that border these waters such as Canada and Russia to adopt national legislation specifically for Arctic shipping Appendix