지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this paper is to examine the Russian position of th legal dispute over the Caspian Sea. It looks at the meaning of geopolitical problems that the World's major powers are intertwined in Caspian Sea. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Caspian Sea was governed by the two states that hand concluded 'a treaty of friendship and cooperation' in 1921. But the geopolitical situation changed. The three states achieved independence soon after the demise of the Soviet Union. Now there are five states bordering the Caspian?Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. Therefore a new regime for the sea was need. Yet Russia and Iran insisted that the 1921 and 1940 treaties remained in force. However Azerbaijan argued that the treaties were adjusted. Thus the legal dispute over the Caspian sea began.
In early stage of the legal dispute, Russian had a position which maintain its sphere of influence in the region. Therefor Russia has asserted after 1991 that outside companies' involvement in mineral extraction is dependent on the consensus of all the Caspian states, and requires the partaking of all Caspian littorals in the profits to be made from the export of the Caspian oil. But Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan opposed the Russian thesis that the littoral states should enjoy sovereignty over their territorial waters and economic zones.
Therefore Russia presented a new settlement formula which indicated that Moscow was ready to accepted sectoral division of the sea. Furthermore, Moscow was prepared to discuss, on a case-by-case basis, national jurisdiction over oil and gas deposits beyond the 45?mile line at sites where drilling was already in progress. All the remaining deposits, however, should be 'commonly owned' through joint-stock companies of the five Caspian states. Moreover Moscow proposed a 'double tender' system giving riparian countries first claim, ahead of non-Caspian bidders, in all future oil and gas contracts.
The common jurisdiction as outlined by Moscow would entitle Russia to share in the other countries' mineral resource, secure a substantial cut in extraction projects undertaken by Western companies. It would enable Moscow to restrict the ability of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to make their own transactions with Western partners. It would also introduce an unpredictable Iranian factor into the equation.
Based on the result of this paper, author provides some implications. Russia holds such carrots and sticks as geographical advantage, political and military clout by raising the issue of legality of the oil and gas contracts. Partly Russia has one more victory by coming up with a new Caspian sea legal regime proposal.
In early stage of the legal dispute, Russian had a position which maintain its sphere of influence in the region. Therefor Russia has asserted after 1991 that outside companies' involvement in mineral extraction is dependent on the consensus of all the Caspian states, and requires the partaking of all Caspian littorals in the profits to be made from the export of the Caspian oil. But Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan opposed the Russian thesis that the littoral states should enjoy sovereignty over their territorial waters and economic zones.
Therefore Russia presented a new settlement formula which indicated that Moscow was ready to accepted sectoral division of the sea. Furthermore, Moscow was prepared to discuss, on a case-by-case basis, national jurisdiction over oil and gas deposits beyond the 45?mile line at sites where drilling was already in progress. All the remaining deposits, however, should be 'commonly owned' through joint-stock companies of the five Caspian states. Moreover Moscow proposed a 'double tender' system giving riparian countries first claim, ahead of non-Caspian bidders, in all future oil and gas contracts.
The common jurisdiction as outlined by Moscow would entitle Russia to share in the other countries' mineral resource, secure a substantial cut in extraction projects undertaken by Western companies. It would enable Moscow to restrict the ability of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to make their own transactions with Western partners. It would also introduce an unpredictable Iranian factor into the equation.
Based on the result of this paper, author provides some implications. Russia holds such carrots and sticks as geographical advantage, political and military clout by raising the issue of legality of the oil and gas contracts. Partly Russia has one more victory by coming up with a new Caspian sea legal regime proposal.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 카스피해에 관한 기본조약의 특성
Ⅲ. 카스피해 법적지위 논쟁과 갈등구조
Ⅳ. 카스피해 법적지위에 관한 러시아의 입장
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (11)
참고문헌 신청
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2005 / 트랜스코카서스 중앙아시아의 ‘신거대 게임’과 러시아의 대응
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2000 / 카스피해 에너지 수송체계를 둘러싼 최근변화 분석
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 1999년 / 러시아와 카스피해의 석유정치 39
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2003 / Геополитика каспийского Региона
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2002 / Междугародно-правовойстатус Каспийского моря; вчера, сегодня, зав-тра
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2000 / 카스피해 에너지 수송체계를 둘러싼 최근변화 분석
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 1999년 / 러시아와 카스피해의 석유정치 39
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2003 / Геополитика каспийского Региона
[학술지(정기간행물)] - / 2002 / Междугародно-правовойстатус Каспийского моря; вчера, сегодня, зав-тра
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
카스피해에서 러시아의 국가이익과 경계획정 문제에 대한 입장 변화
슬라브학보
2011 .03
-
‘바다’로 합의된 바다 : ‘카스피해’의 영유권 분쟁과 해결
해항도시문화교섭학
2019 .10
-
문화변인에 의한 유라시아 지역협력 지형도와 에너지 실크로드 - 카스피 해에서 흑해로, 문화변인들의 에너지 환류에 대한 영향력 분석을 중심으로
외국학연구
2015 .01
-
러시아, 미국, EU의 카스피해에너지 운송전략
슬라브학보
2007 .12
-
중앙아시아 카스피해 연안 주요 산유국의 에너지 자원 개발역사와 문제점 - 아제르바이잔과 카자흐스탄을 중심으로-
슬라브硏究
2004 .01
-
해양경계획정 분쟁에서 러시아의 입장과 전략: 카스피해와 북극해 사례를 중심으로
슬라브硏究
2019 .01
-
이란 카스피해지역의 동서 문화교류의 고고학적 연구
역사와실학
2008 .09
-
고유가의 영향과 동북아 석유 수요 구조 하에서의 한국의 전략방안 - 대체공급원으로서의 러시아를 중심으로 -
슬라브硏究
2005 .01
-
At Sea
Korea Journal
1986 .06
-
감금된 언어의 공간을 불러내기: <캐스피언 왕자>에 나타난 아들의 욕망과 언어
동화와 번역
2009 .01
-
명례궁약정과 한러비밀협정을 통해본 모스크바대관식(1896)
역사와현실
2017 .12
-
러시아와 유라시아
러시아어문학연구논집
2015 .01
-
에너지와 러시아 정치 : 1992~1998
슬라브학보
2000 .12
-
러시아 대외정책의 변화 : 집권 2기 푸틴 정부의 대 이란 및 대 북한 외교정책 비교
슬라브학보
2009 .09
-
메드베데프 대통령의 분쟁섬 구나시리방문 이후 러-일관계 변화
슬라브학보
2011 .06
-
러시아사
역사학보
2001 .09
-
러시아
역사학보
1989 .12
-
카스피해 서안-코카서스 남록에서 동서 문화의 접변
역사학보
2015 .06
-
Особенности газовой и нефтяной промышленности России
외국학연구
2017 .01
-
러·중 에너지 관계의 변화 : 협력과 갈등, 경쟁
슬라브학보
2011 .09
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
신 거대게임 : 카스피해 에너지자원을 둘러싼 강대국간 지정학적 경쟁
강삼구
전남대학교 글로벌디아스포라연구소 국내학술회의
2008
.10
카스피해에서 러시아의 국가이익과 경계획정 문제에 대한 입장 변화
제성훈
슬라브학보
2011
.03
국제정치(경제)학의 미국 의존성 문제
김학노
국제정치논총
2008
.03
센카쿠(댜오위다오)열도 영토분쟁을 둘러싼 일·중 간 전쟁 발발 가능성 전망 : 전쟁의 단계 이론 적용과 함의
김기주
,
황병선
국제정치논총
2013
.06
탈냉전기 러시아-몽골관계의 변화 : 지정학적‘완충국’개념을 중심으로
제성훈
국제정치논총
2010
.06
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-309-018826956