menas borders

Disputed waterway between Iran and Iraq reopens

2012-02-08T07:10:00.000-08:00

Commercial traffic has resumed on the Shatt al-Arab waterway between Iraq and Iran for the first time in 30 years, reflecting decreased tensions over the disputed marine boundary between the countries.

The reopening of the waterway, which runs for 120 miles down from the Gulf, follows the opening of a new jetty by Shell designed to support operations at the Majnoon oilfield on the border with Iran. The new facility is situated about 50 miles up the Shatt al-Arab: ships travelling there must first pay customs duties at the port of Umm Qasr on the edge of the Gulf.

Although there are other small harbour facilities down the course of the Shatt al-Arab, the Shell facility is the first major facility to be established there since the Iran-Iraq war interrupted southern Iraq’s oil operations in 1980. The war began in part due to a dispute over the border line through the Shatt-al Arab, which provides vital access to the Gulf.

The opening of the port suggests that the boundary dispute over the waterway, although not settled, is not proving an impediment to commercial activity there. Most of the remaining sections of the border have been agreed, and in late 2010 the Iraqi government said that the demarcation of the Shatt al-Arab line would begin under the auspices of the UN.

It seems that the process of demarcation is still underway. Nonetheless it seems that Iran is willing to accept – at least for now – some common usage of the waterway. This illustrates the warming political ties between Baghdad and Tehran and their willingness to move onwards from the disputes of the past.

Sources: AFP, France 24

South Sudan insists on border deal for oil

2012-01-31T03:25:00.001-08:00

South Sudan has demanded that a border agreement with Sudan should be signed before it restarts oil exports, amid a growing row over the situation along their boundary.

On 29th January, South Sudanese Oil Minister Stephen Dhieu Dau said that “oil production will restart when we have a comprehensive agreement and all the deals are signed”. The country has shut down all its oil production over the past few weeks after Sudan started taking oil in lieu of fees which it claims are owed by South Sudan.

The north controls the oil export pipelines but most of the actual production is concentrated in the south. After the south became independent last July, this became a major point of contention between the two Sudans. Oil accounts for 98% of South Sudan's budget, so the oil shutdown will have serious economic effects; however, the north is also heavily dependent on oil transit and export fees.

South Sudanese officials are now demanding that the sides settle a whole host of issues before oil exports restart. One of the most significant is the status of the broder and the disputed region of Abyei. “Sudan must recognize the 1956 border, which means they must give back all the areas under occupation,” according to Dau.

This would mean handing over control of Abyei, a nexus for local rebellions and cattle raids which have killed hundreds in recent months. Juba has accused Khartoum of supporting local gunmen who have rampaged through the border region; the north, in turn, accuses the south of backing insurgents who were affiliated with the ruling southern party but were left in Sudan after the secession agreement.

The UN has called on both sides to pull back from Abyei, insisting that the presence of police and security forces there was destabilising the border situation. However with the UN peacekeeping force there still under-strength and unable to control the region, neither side is willing to pull back until it has secured a favourable verdict on the border region and its oil wealth.

Sources: Telegraph, Reuters, Sudan Tribune

Norway to open up Barents for exploration after border demarcation

2012-01-27T06:42:00.000-08:00

The Norwegian government is to propose exploration of a new sector of the Barents Sea, after a maritime boundary there was finally agreed with Russia.

Oil Minister Ola Borten Moe has said that the new area in the south-east Barents, covering around 44,000km2, could be explored from spring 2013. The government has already started seismic assessments in the region.

The demarcation of the maritime border with Russia was formally ratified last summer. Russia and Norway had been locked in a territorial dispute over the region since 1970, when Norway argued that the boundary should be drawn at the middle point between the nearest land areas belonging to both sides. Russia used claims drawn up by Stalin (unilaterally) that proposed a 'sectoral' approach along certain meridian lines.

A moratorium on oil and gas drilling in the disputed zone was announced in 1975, and the border was demarcated in 2010 based on a compromise which divides the disputed zone into two roughly equal parts.

Exploring the Barents Sea will allow Norway to begin offsetting its dependence on its North Sea oil and gas reserves, which are steadily declining. 181 blocks in the region have been nominated by oil companies in the preliminaries for the latest exploration round, the highest ever number. Nominating companies include ExxonMobil, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Total and Statoil.

The Oil Ministry will assess the nominations and announce which blocks are an offer by the summer, with full exploration work expected to go ahead by next year.

Sources: Upstream, Reuters, BBC

Indonesia to send observers to mediate Thailand-Cambodia border dispute

2012-01-17T03:07:00.000-08:00

Indonesia has announced that it will deploy military observers to mediate the long-running border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia, after the two sides agreed to request Jakarta's involvement.

The announcement makes a breakthrough for the dispute, which has seen a number of deadly clashes between Thai and Cambodian troops around the Preah Vihear temple. The temple was given to Cambodia by the International Court of Justice in 1962, but Thailand continues to claim the surrounding land.

After flares in violence over the past two years, Bangkok and Phnom Penh have begun talking about de-escalating the situation and finding a compromise. The Association of South East Asian Nations, with Indonesia playing a leading role, has been instrumental in bringing the two sides to the negotiating table.

In late December Thailand and Cambodia agreed to simultaneously redeploy their troops from the disputed border area, and agreed to set up a working group to do so. Progress has been slow, however, and international observers were requested to oversee the process.

Indonesian military officials are still calculating the exact terms of their deployment but are expected to deploy within the next few months. They will work in joint teams with Thai and Cambodian observers along the disputed zone.

They will not, however, make any recommendations or decisions regarding the actual ownership of the border zone around the temple. The process of determining ownership will only start when troops have been withdrawn and military tensions are reduced.

Sources: Jakarta Post, AFP

China and India restart attempts to settle border

2012-01-13T03:23:00.000-08:00

China and India have announced a new round of talks over their long and disputed border, following further tensions.

The new talks are not, strictly speaking, new – they are rescheduled from late November, when Beijing cancelled discussions over India's hosting of a conference attended by the Dalai Lama.

A host of issues are expected to be addressed in the fifteenth round of negotiations, which will be conducted by the respective Special Representatives Dai Bingguo and Shivshankar Menon. The land border between them, which is around 4,000km long, is disputed in both the west and the east. In the west, China does not recognise India's claims to Jammu and Kashmir; in the east, the two sides disagree over the status of the Indian state of Arunchal Pradesh.

India has also accused China of constructing military infrastructure in the border regions and boosting its troop presence there. Recently, a senior Indian general announced that in July 2011 Chinese forces damaged a wall along the border, which VK Singh dismissed as “a childish act” and said that in the event of a serious incident, “there will be enough noise and bloodshed and everyone will come to know”.

For some time the Special Representatives have failed to make headway on demarcating the border. Neither side appears to be willing to risk the political damage that would occur from compromising over territory. As border incidents remain rare, both Beijing and New Delhi seem to prefer to leave the status quo in place whilst they concentrate on building their bilateral relationship.

China has struck a conciliatory tone over the border, with Special Representative Bingguo insisting that disputes should be settled “wisely, calmly and properly”.

Sources: Times of India, Wall Street Journal

Iran, Saudi Arabia ink deal to develop joint oilfield

2012-01-10T06:29:00.000-08:00

Iran and Saudi Arabia have agreed to develop a gasfield which straddles their mutual maritime border, a rare positive sign amid growing military tensions in the Gulf and other disputes over divided resources.

Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi said on 6th January that Tehran and Riyadh have already signed a deal to develop the Farzad A field, which is shared between them. They are also set to sign a deal on developing the nearby Farzad B gasfield as well as the Arash oilfield. Development plans for all three fields will be released before mid-March, according to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).

The news about the Arash field is somewhat surprising: very recently, the Iranian government announced that it would begin unilaterally developing the field (which lies between Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) unless Kuwait finally agreed to joint development. That announcement followed a warning by a senior Iranian MP that Arab states were 'stealing' Iranian energy reserves from disputed fields.

Jointly developing the fields is part of an Iranian strategy to increase domestic gas and oil production in the face of tightening international sanctions. Iran is also rushing ahead with production on the giant South Pars field (shared with Qatar), where NIOC is working around the clock to bring subsequent production phases onstream.

Building a healthy working relationship with the Saudis will also help to reduce tensions between them over Iran's nuclear programme and its threats to close the Strait of Hormuz in reaction to any Western or Israeli airstrike. Iran's stance has alarmed Gulf Arab states, so working together on energy production will help to reassure Riyadh that Tehran is committed to a normal relationship:

Sources: Tehran Times, BBC

Iran threatens unilateral exploration at disputed Arash field

2012-01-03T04:45:00.000-08:00

Iran has warned Kuwait that it will unilaterally proceed with full-scale drilling at the disputed Arash gas field in the Persian Gulf, if Kuwait fails to agree on joint development. The warning comes amid heightened tension in the Persian Gulf between Iran and its neighbours as well as the US.

Head of the Iranian Offshore Oil Company Mahmoud Zirakchianzadeh told state media that “if Iran's positive diplomacy is turned down, we will be carrying on our efforts at Arash field unilaterally”. There was no immediate response from Kuwait. The Iranian statement comes just two weeks after a senior Iranian MP accused Arab states of stealing oil and gas from shared fields in the Persian Gulf.

Emad Hosseini specifically referred to the Arash field in his comments, in which he accused Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates of working together to exploit joint fields to Iran's cost .There are at least fifteen fields shared between Iran and its Gulf Arab neighbours, many lying close to maritime boundaries which are themselves often in dispute.

Negotiations on the Arash field have been ongoing since 2006, when Iran and Kuwait agreed in principle to jointly develop the field. In March 2010 they re-confirmed their commitment to joint development, but at the beginning of last month Tehran announced that it would begin drilling four wells at the field.

The maritime border between Iran and Kuwait remains unconfirmed, despite numerous rounds of talks between the two sides. Although essentially a technical issue, political tensions in the Gulf and the presence of joint gas fields has stymied progress on defining the border.

Sources: Reuters, IRNA

More confrontation and collaboration in the South China Sea

2011-12-12T04:16:00.001-08:00

A South Korean coastguard was stabbed to death by Chinese fisherman on 11th December, even as Beijing began joint patrols along the Mekong River with Burma, Laos and Thailand.

The South Korean coastguard was killed when his vessel sought to detain the Chinese fishermen, who were fishing illegally near South Korea's territorial waters. It comes after South Korea announced a crackdown: 430 Chinese vessels have been seized for illegal fishing this year, up from 370 last year. A number of clashes have occurred but this is the first time that a member of the coastguard has been killed while detaining fishermen.

Seoul has lodged a formal protest with Beijing. The incident is likely to stir tensions between the two neighbours, and be seen as further evidence of China's lack of regard for maritime boundaries in the South China Sea. Similar incidents in 2010 provoked a serious diplomatic crisis between Japan and China.

Elsewhere, however, China is demonstrating a willingness to cooperate with South-East Asian states. Following the death of 13 Chinese sailors on the Mekong river in October (believed to be by drug smugglers), Chinese forces have begun joint patrols along the Mekong, in conjunction with their counterparts from Thailand, Burma and Laos.

The extent of their jurisdiction and their authority is so far unclear. Most regional states are wary of Chinese intentions and would be unwilling to allow Chinese police to kill or arrest their citizens on local soil. Regardless of the specifics, the patrol marks a major step forward for China's security forces in operating overseas.

Sources: BBC, Wall Street Journal

India and China cancel border talks after Dalai Lama row

2011-12-05T03:09:00.001-08:00

China and India have cancelled a round of talks to settle their border dispute after India allowed the Dalai Lama to participate in a global Buddhist conference.

Beijing insisted that New Delhi block the exiled Tibetan leader's speech at the conference; it refused to do so and cancelled this week's dialogue instead. Both Indian and Chinese officials did not address the issue publicly, stating simply that the date of the next round of talks was still being decided; however, the Indian ambassador to Beijing was reportedly brought back to New Delhi for consultations.

China regularly criticises governments which host the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibet's Buddhists and a man who the Communist Party considers to be a dangerous troublemaker and separatist. He has lived in India since fleeing Tibet in 1959, although the Indian government is wary of allowing him to use the country as a base for political opposition to China.

The cancellation of talks comes at a time when the two sides are making substantial progress towards settling their disputed border, a major source of tension as both emerge on to the world stage. They have been developing “Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on Border Affairs” to resolve disputes which occur along the boundary line.

Tensions persist along the border, however. China is apparently angry at Indian plans to develop a Mountain Strike Corps of 100,000 soldiers to be deployed along the border; India, for its part, is concerned about the development of Chinese infrastructure near the boundary line, which could be used for military purposes.

Despite the postponement of talks both sides are keen to insist that cooperation will continue. India's Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna said on 30th November that defence talks, scheduled for December, would go ahead.

Sources: The Hindu, Voice of America

Nigeria, Cameroon request international funding to finalise border demarcation

2011-11-29T05:17:00.000-08:00

The governments of Cameroon and Nigeria have requested international assistance to fund the final demarcation of their border.

The border demarcation has been overseen by the Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission since 2002 after a ruling by the International Court of Justice which ended years of sporadic clashes over the poorly marked border.

The ICJ ruling gave ownership of the Bakassi Peninsula, the focal point of much of the tension and a potentially rich source of oil, from Nigeria to Cameroon. The ruling was based on myriad colonial-era documents, including correspondence between British and German colonists and treaties between the imperial powers and local rulers. Nigeria protested the ruling but eventually began a two-year phased withdrawal in 2006.

The two sides made their request for further international funding at a meeting with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon. Ban called the meeting, with Cameroon's Deputy Justice Minister Maurice Kamto and Nigeria's Justice Minister Mohammed Bello Adoke, to push the sides towards a final demarcation of the border by 2012, the tenth anniversary of the ICJ ruling.

Considerable progress has been since 2002. Authority in Bakassi has been transferred from Nigeria to Cameroon; the maritime boundary has been agreed upon; and around 1700km of land border have been demarcated.

The two sides are now looking for the final funding for the border demarcation, and have also pledged to begin winding up the activities of the Mixed Commission.

Sources: AFP, UN News Center

Sudan refuses border demarcation as risk of confrontation grows

2011-11-16T02:38:00.000-08:00

The Sudanese government has turned down an African Union proposal for a new round of negotiations with South Sudan, as military tensions along their disputed border rise sharply.

On 15th November, a South Sudanese minister complained that Khartoum has suspended the talks, which were being held under the auspices of the African Union High Level Implementation Panel (AUHIP), chaired by former South African leader Thabo Mbeki. AUHIP talks have been struggling on for two years, but have failed to make progress on key issues such as border demarcation and oil sharing.

The suspension of talks comes at a critical time in relations between Sudan and South Sudan, which formally seceded in July. Rebels linked to Juba's ruling Sudan Liberation People's Movement, operating in border states within Sudanese territory, have intensified their battle against the Sudanese military.

According to local NGOs, Khartoum has responded with a major bombing campaign against border regions. There have been persistent accusations that it has launched airstrikes against refugee camps, including one across the border with South Sudan. Oxfam has pulled out its staff in response to the violence. The Sudanese military has also allegedly boosted its military presence near the boundary, with refurbished airfields and greater deployments of armoured forces.

The military build-up has provoked fears of a new war. South Sudanese president Salva Kiir has warned that Khartoum is seeking to invade South Sudan and steal its oilfields. Sudan's leader Omar al-Bashir, for his part, has said that he is ready for conflict if Juba provokes it.

Although a full-blown military conflict remains unlikely, the harsh rhetoric makes it more difficult for the two sides to demarcate the border, agree on oil-sharing, and prevent cross-border cattle raids which have killed hundreds. The AUHIP does not seem to have the political clout needed to calm tensions and push both sides into a compromise.

Sources: Sudan Tribune, AFP

Congolese soldiers detained at Tanzanian port

2011-11-08T02:37:00.000-08:00

The Tanzanian army has detained more than 20 soldiers from the Democratic Republic of Congo after they crossed the border into Tanzania.

According to the Tanzanian military, the soldiers, travelling in a boat, landed at the port of Kigoma on the shores of Lake Tanganyika, which borders both countries. They claimed that they were pursuing rebels who had fled into Tanzania to seek medical treatment.

The soldiers were heavily armed with machine guns and rocket launchers, provoking anger among the Tanzanian soldiers who detained them. One of the Tanzanian officers said that “we might as well regard this as an invasion”. The Congolese soldiers have been detained and may be charged with illegally entering the country.

The incident is unlikely to spiral into a diplomatic row but it has refocused attention on the porous and often unstable border region around Tanzania, DRC and Burundi. The confused fighting in eastern DRC between militia groups, criminals and loosely organised government forces has caused thousands of refugees to flee into neighbouring states, and has also pushed armed groups across the borders.

Last year Tanzanian MPs called on President Jakaya Kikwete to set up a special police zone around Kigoma after a spike in violent crime there, attributed to refugees and criminals moving in from neighbouring states. Recently a gang of robbers, believed to be from the DRC, hijacked a bus in Kigoma and rampaged through the area, killing and wounding several people before disappearing.

Tanzania may be frustrated with the influx of refugees and rebels from the DRC but has little ability to do anything about it. While the situation in the eastern DRC remains so chaotic, and the Kinshasa government so weak, the only remedy is to try and tighten controls along the border. This is so porous and poorly marked, however, that it will remain a Herculean task for the Tanzanian government.

Sources: BBC, The Citizen

Syria cracks down on porous Lebanese border

2011-11-03T03:40:00.000-07:00

In an effort to clamp down on safe havens and sources of weapons for the opposition, Syria's government has begun mining its porous border with Lebanon.

Lebanese witnesses living along the border have reported that the Syrian army has been planting the mines in the Wadi Khaled region. The boundary in the area is demarcated only by piles of earth, and many locals have circulated freely to visit relatives and businesses on either side of the border. Crossing the border is now extremely hazardous, and several people have been injured in recent days trying to move between Syria and Lebanon.

This is exactly what the Syrian government wants. As the uprising against the regime of President Bashar Assad intensifies, Lebanon has become both a safe haven for dissidents and a source of weapons and money. Syrian forces have already staged a number of small cross-border raids onto Lebanese soil to pursue suspects.

Analysts say that weapons smuggling into Syria has boomed in recent months as the once-peaceful revolt begins to resemble an armed insurgency. Although some of the weapons are destined for renegade soldiers, many are believed to have been purchased by both pro- and anti-government citizens seeking to defend themselves.

The border situation has provoked anger among some Lebanese MPs, who accuse Syria of violating the country's sovereignty (a sensitive issue given the presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon until 2005). The divided government in Beirut, however, remains largely pro-Syrian and is coordinating closely with Damascus on cracking down on smugglers. The Lebanese militant group Hezbollah has boosted its forces along the eastern border with Syria.

Securing the border will be a difficult task. A retired Lebanese army general told AFP that there are over 50 illegal border crossings and shutting them all down will be extremely difficult. This is particularly true since the border is not demarcated for long stretches, and many villages straddle the two countries.

Sources; Daily Star, AFP

Kurdish and Iraqi authorities in border flag dispute

2011-10-24T06:47:00.000-07:00

Iraq's central government and the authorities of the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) are locked in a dispute over which flags are to fly at the border between their two jurisdictions.

KRG officials have insisted that they will not remove Kurdish flags from government buildings on the boundary line, defying instructions issued by Iraqi premier Nouri Al-Maliki in early October. An official from the peshmerga, the Kurdish security foreces, told Reuters that the Kurds “won't implement Maliki's order definitively unless the Kurdish people themselves lower the flag.”

The order from Maliki provoked strong reactions in the Kurdish region, particularly in border cities such as Mundhiriya and Khanaqin, where ethnic loyalties are most contested. Thousands took to the streets to protest the premier's instruction and subsequent statements by his office that raising the Kurdish flag in border areas was a “constitutional violation.”

The incident comes at a time of heightened tension between the Kurdish government in Erbil and Baghdad. The KRG is seeking to incorporate Khanaqin, as well as other border regions, into their jurisdiction, something which Baghdad refuses. The two sides are also still at loggerheads over the fate of the ethnically mixed city of Kirkuk, control of nearby oilfields, and an oil law which would determine the KRG's right to export oil.

Wider issues are also adding to the strains in the relationship. Last week's announcement that all US military forces would leave Iraq by the end of the year has refocused attention on the often tense relationship between Iraqi security forces and the peshmerga.

The US conducted joint patrols with Iraqi Arab and Kurdish military units in the border zones, helping to build trust and prevent stand-offs between the two forces. With their withdrawal, the future of the joint patrols is in doubt. Kurdish-only patrols in Arab-populated border areas will create tensions with the local community, and vice versa.

Another complicating factor is Turkey's cross-border operation against Kurdish militants, launched on 20th October. Although the KRG has sided with Turkey in its fight, the sustained presence of Turkish troops in Kurdistan is likely to cause a greater sense of national identity among Kurds. Combined with the flag issue, this is likely to cause greater tensions in the border regions between Kurds and Arabs.

Sources: AFP, Reuters

Kenyan forces cross into Somalia to hunt kidnappers

2011-10-17T02:28:00.000-07:00

In a significant escalation, Kenyan army units have crossed into Somalia to hunt for the kidnappers of two aid workers seized from a refugee camp on the border.

The two Medecins Sans Frontieres workers were kidnapped on 13th October by gunman and taken back into Somalia. The Kenyan government has repeatedly tried to seal off the border, which is regularly crossed by thousands of refugees fleeing Somalia's fighting and the country's drought.

Militants from Al-Shabab, which controls much of central and southern Somalia, are believed to have infiltrated the flow of refugees and have also fought along the border to recapture territory held by pro-government militias.

Previously the Kenyan military has focused on sealing the border, only launching brief raids into border regions of Somalia, but the intervention which began on 17th October appears to be on a much bigger scale. Hundreds of troops backed by tanks, artillery and helicopters have moved into Somalia. According to local residents, Al-Shabab units in the area have been forcibly recruiting locals to boost their numbers in a demonstration that they are preparing to fight.

The kidnapping of the aid workers was the trigger for the incursion, but for some time the Kenyan authorities have been concerned by the porous border situation and the ease with which Al-Shabab has managed to cross into Kenya, recruiting among refugees or kidnapping Westerners. The deployment of so much heavy weaponry indicates that freeing the hostages will come second to a punitive raid on Al-Shabab forces.

Kenyan officials have been blunt. Kenya's Internal Security Minister George Saitoti said that “Our territorial integrity is threatened with serious security threats of terrorism, we cannot allow this to happen at all.”

Saitoti also said that the government is sealing the border with Somalia, although this would be almost impossible to do effectively. For its part, Somalia's weak Transitional Federal Government (TFG) has denied that Kenyan forces have entered Somalia, stressing that although they welcomed Kenyan support they did not require military assistance.

Officials in Kenya and elsewhere would disagree. Although TFG forces backed by African Union peacekeepers have driven Al-Shabab out of most of Mogadishu in recent weeks, the militants still control vast swathes of the country and are more than a match for the TFG's underfunded and poorly-trained forces.

The extent and duration of the Kenyan intervention remains to be seen, but it demonstrates that the border situation continues to provoke regional instability.

Sources: BBC, AFP, AllAfrica

Indonesian ministers summoned over border dispute with Malaysia

2011-10-13T08:23:00.000-07:00

The Indonesian House of Representatives has said that it will summon key officials from the government of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to explain what progress is being made on a border dispute with Malaysia, amid angry protests.

The two states are at loggerheads over both their land and sea borders. Indonesian lawmakers have claimed that the Malaysian government has stepped up naval patrols on the border and sought to effectively annex nearly a kilometre of sea.

Their main area of dispute at sea is the Ambalat zone of the continental shelf between them, which is believed to contain huge undersea energy resources. Malaysia claimed the area in a map which it issued in 1979, but Indonesia rejects the claim. The dispute has not stopped each side from granting oil and gas contracts in the area, but tensions periodically spike, often including confrontations between the two navies.

The land border is the main subject of contention at present. In early October, Indonesia accused Malaysia of damaging several border markers in the West Kalimantan region, leaving parts of the border unclear.

Although the two sides have agreed to send a joint surveying team to the area and settle it as a technical issue, some Indonesian media outlets and officials responded by whipping up nationalist sentiments and declaring that over 1000 hectares of land had been taken by Malaysia.

On 13th October an angry crowd, organised by a group calling itself Forum Betawi Rempug gathered outside the Malaysian embassy in Jakarta and hurled missiles at the building, damaging a security post and forcing police to use tear gas.

The strong feelings on both sides will give added impetus to a plan by the two governments to set up Local Border Committees at each boundary crossing point. The idea was proposed by the head of the Malaysian customs department Datuk Seri Mohamed Khalid Yusuf at a bilateral cooperation meeting between the two sides.

Notwithstanding the willingness of some politicians to score political points from the dispute, the issue looks to be settled at a technical level; neither side has an interest in aggravating tensions.

Sources: Jakarta Post, Borneo Post

Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait meeting over maritime boundary dispute

2011-10-12T04:03:00.000-07:00

Amid a sudden deterioration in their bilateral relationship, Iran and Saudi Arabia have agreed to hold a meeting with Kuwait to settle their joint maritime border.

On 11th October, Kuwaiti foreign minister Sheikh Mohammad Al-Sabah announced that a tripartite meeting had been agreed in principle between the three sides. He said that it was “basically a technical issue but it will need a political decision from Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait”. No date was set for the meeting.

Kuwait and Iran have been in discussions for years over demarcating their joint sea border, in which Saudi Arabia is also involved, with little progress. Regional political tensions and uncertainties over their respective borders with Iraq have caused major delays.

Determining who has the right to the region's continental shelf is of importance largely because of the presence of the Dorra gasfield in the disputed zone. The field is estimated to contain up to 200 bcm of natural gas.

At present, all three states share the Dorra field. Kuwait has been actively working on developing its share of the field, and in April a senior executive from Kuwait Petroleum Corp said that a plan to start drilling by 2013 was still on schedule. Kuwait has, however, been cautious in proceeding due to the lack of agreement over ownership.

The plan to resolve the outstanding technical issues of the joint maritime border comes as relations between Tehran and Riyadh hit a new low. News of an alleged plot by Iranian agents to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador in Washington has prompted fears of a new phase in the 'cold war' between the two regional powers.

Although unlikely to directly affect the border negotiations, a crisis in relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia would make it more difficult for them to agree on sharing the resources of the Dorra field.

Sources; Al Arabiya, AFP

Turkmenistan plans naval patrols on disputed Caspian border

2011-10-11T04:32:00.000-07:00

Turkmenistan, the Caspian's most cautious and least well-defended state, has announced plans to boost its navy and patrol its maritime borders as questions loom over the future of the Caspian sea.

Speaking at a naval shipyard where two new missile patrol boats have recently been delivered, President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov said that Turkmenistan “needs ships to patrol its maritime borders, to maintain their security and counter negative phenomena and modern challenges”, while stressing that Turkmenistan's naval doctrine was purely defensive in nature.

Although Turkmenistan's naval capabilities are weak and its political will doubtful, Berdimuhamedov's speech was a clear statement that the country is keen to defend its waters amid growing tension over the division of the Caspian.

The EU's decision to open negotiations with Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan on a Trans-Caspian Pipeline (TCP) last month, to bring Central Asian gas west to Europe, has been strongly opposed by Russia and Iran. The Caspian's two strongest states argue that a TCP would cause serious environmental damage and cannot be agreed without the consent of all five littoral countries.

Their real objection, however, is that a TCP would permit an avenue for Central Asian gas to reach Europe without crossing their territory, weakening their regional influence.

In addition, the status of Caspian borders remains contested while the littoral states debate how large a share each should take. This has not stopped exploration of oil and gas deposits, but it has created zones of uncertainty. A recent Wikileaks cable revealed that in 2009, Iran moved an oil rig into disputed waters between it and Azerbaijan, prompting fears of conflict in Baku. Turkmenistan also fears Iranian intimidation.

The country's naval forces are ill-equipped to patrol its borders or defend its territory. It has a handful of rusting Soviet patrol boats operating from dilapidated facilities. The government has been busy purchasing more, however, including some from Ukraine and others from Russia and Turkey. The new missile patrol boats inspected by Berdimuhamedov were built by a joint Russian-Turkmen venture, with most of the work done by Russian firms.

Although the government wants the new navy to be completed by 2015, along with port facilities and a naval academy, Turkmenistan will continue to lag behind its neighbours. Its stated intention to patrol its borders, however, suggests that it is taking its position in the Caspian very seriously.

Sources; Turkmenistan.ru, Eurasianet

India and China agree to new border mechanism

2011-10-10T08:31:00.000-07:00

Asia's two most powerful states have agreed to establish a new institutionalised mechanism to manage their lengthy land border, amid growing disputes over boundaries at sea.

On 6th October India's Defence Minister A.K. Antony told journalists that New Delhi and Beijing were working on setting up a new process involving diplomatic and military agencies from both sides, and that the mechanism would be up and running within around three months.

A new system to resolve border disputes is sorely needed. India regularly accuses Chinese forces of entering its territory, which China denies. The two sides fought a brief but bloody border war in the Himalayas in 1962, and the border between them is still hotly disputed. China claims most of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh in northeastern India, arguing that the McMahon Line which Tibet concluded with the British Empire in 1914 – and which now serves as the de facto border between India and China - was invalid.

The situation along the line of control in India's northeast remains tense. New Delhi has recently announced plans to boost the number of troops in the region by up to 50,000, as well as building airstrips near the border. Beijing has warned that a military build-up would be destabilising for the region, but has been accused of increasing its own presence there. In September, India accused Chinese air and ground forces of violating its territory.

The new proposed mechanism would reinforce the existing arrangements, in which ad hoc meetings of military officials, diplomats or expert groups are organised to discuss any pressing issues. The new arrangement, however, will bring all these groups together in a regular process. The inclusion of diplomatic policymakers is vital for keeping the situation under control and informing the central governments of both states.

It is not clear exactly when the mechanism will come into force but it seems that both sides acknowledge the need to reduce tensions there. Smoothing relations over the 3,500 km land border would be a positive note in the Sino-Indian relationship, currently undergoing tensions over disputed maritime boundaries in the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean.

India is working closely with southeast Asian states as a counterweight to China, which has alarmed smaller countries with its aggressive claims to sovereignty over the sea and its associated resource bonanza. Meanwhile India has watched with concern as China builds up its economic and military presence in a 'string of pearls' around the Indian Ocean, including Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Pakistan.

Sources: The Diplomat, The Hindu

Monastery dispute stalls Azerbaijan-Georgia border demarcation

2011-10-03T03:14:00.000-07:00

Talks on demarcating the border between Azerbaijan and Georgia have stalled again, according to officials at the Georgian foreign ministry. The main issue to be settled is the fate of a 6th century monastery complex which straddles the mutual border.

The demarcation process has been drawn out for years, despite the cordial relations between Baku and Tbilisi and their joint interest in facilitating greater cross-border ties. The old Soviet borders are currently used as a placeholder, whilst the Alazan river also forms a natural boundary along some of the 480km of their boundary.

According to Georgian officials, 160km still remains to be demarcated. The biggest issue is the fate of the David Gareja Monastery, known as the Keshish Dag in Azerbaijan, which sprawls across a mountain slope dividing the two countries – both sides claim that the bulk of the complex lies within their territory. The monastery was founded in the 6th century and is Georgian Orthodox, giving it great significance for modern Georgia.

For Azerbaijan the monastery is significant for two reasons. Firstly it is claimed to be the work of 'Caucasian Albanians', believed to be the ancient inhabitants of Azerbaijan and regularly used as a historical weapon in Azerbaijan's battle with Armenia over who has the 'right' to the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region. Secondly and more prosaically, the site is viewed as a strategic height which Azerbaijan is reluctant to give away.

Although officials have downplayed the long-running dispute, public opinion is vociferously opposed to any compromise. The rest of the border can probably be delimited without much controversy, but it remains to be seen whether a compromise can be struck over the fate of the monastery.

The lack of a demarcated border has not been much of an impediment to relations between Azerbaijan and Georgia, which are close and based on extensive energy and infrastructure projects. Given nationalist sensibilities in both countries, however, sacrificing anything believed to be an integral part of national history would be a major headache for the authorities. In the South Caucasus 'compromise' is often equated with 'surrender'.

It seems, therefore, that the commission working on border demarcation is simply seeking to put off the issue of the monastery complex for as long as possible. It has not stopped cooperation, and the ambivalence of the status quo seems to be a situation which everyone can live with, for now.

Sources: News.az, Institute for War and Peace Reporting

Turkish government pushes for cross-border operation

2011-09-30T07:32:00.000-07:00

Amid a sharp rise in the number of attacks by Kurdish militants, the Turkish government is urging parliament to renew a mandate empowering it to pursue the rebels into their sanctuaries in northern Iraq.

The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) submitted the motion on 27th September, and it is expected to be discussed as a top priority as soon as the legislature reconvenes on 1st October. The AKP's domination of parliament, along with widespread opposition support for a tough stance, makes it a near-certainty that the motion will pass.

The Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) has launched a wave of attacks in Turkey's predominantly-Kurdish southeast since August. Dozens of soldiers and police have been killed, as well as civilians, and the PKK has also recently taken to kidnapping teachers. On 20th September, a car bomb in the capital Ankara was claimed by a PKK offshoot.

A wave of air and artillery strikes has been carried out in northern Iraq since August, but has failed to stop the upsurge in violence. The government now appears determined to launch a ground offensive across the border, as it has done sporadically for the last four years.

The motion now before parliament would renew the government's existing mandate to conduct cross-border operations, which was granted in 2007 and renewed each year. The current mandate expires on 17th October, suggesting that the AKP is planning a lengthy offensive. Large-scale troop movements in the area also indicate that the operation will be substantial.

Cross-border operations would provoke new tensions with the autonomous government of Kurdish northern Iraq (the KRG). The authorities in Erbil have repeatedly protested against Turkish and Iranian raids on Kurdish rebels within Iraq, accusing them of killing civilians. Although the KRG has affirmed its desire to root out militants using its territory as a safe haven, longstanding ties between them make it difficult for Kurdish authorities to dislodge the PKK and its offshoots.

A sustained Turkish ground offensive would ring alarm bells in both Erbil and Baghdad, which is already under pressure from various sides and concerned that, with the US presence rapidly fading, the Kurdish north is slipping away into an independent state fighting its own wars. It would also raise concerns that the borders between Iran, Iraq and Turkey are increasingly permeable and irrelevant.

Sources; Today's Zaman, Hurriyet

Venezuela criticies Guyana over new border line

2011-09-29T03:15:00.000-07:00

A new row has erupted between Guyana and Venezuela over a planned extension to the former's maritime boundaries, which Venezuela says was decided without consultation.

Earlier in September Guyana applied to the UN for permission to extend its continental shelf by 150 miles, which would expand the border beyond the standard 200 miles of the Exclusive Economic Zone. Venezuela has complained that it was not informed by Guyana, with which it has a long-running border dispute stretching back into the nineteenth century. The new maritime border, Venezuela says, would interfere with its own offshore zone.

Guyana has dismissed the allegations, saying that it informed Caracas of the requested changes as long ago as 2009. The document submitted to the UN, however, contains the assertion that “there are no disputes in the region relevant to this Submission of data and information relating to the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles”, despite the unsettled nature of the border.

Venezuela has reacted coolly. Although it has described the Guyanese claim as an “irregular situation” and a source of disagreement, the usually-bombastic President Hugo Chavez has told his diplomats to “walk on eggshells” regarding the dispute. The UN has stated that it will begin studying the Guyanese claim in April, a process which could take years.

The argument is particularly acute at the moment due to the large oil and gas reserves which are believed to lie beneath the sea. In early September Tullow struck a potentially huge oilfield off the coast of nearby French Guiana, sparking speculation that the whole region was rich in reserves.

The maritime boundary is unsettled in large part because the land boundary between the two is still contested. In the nineteenth century, the border was effectively drawn up by the British, which became a bone of contention with Venezuela. US-backed arbitration in 1899 set a line largely in Britain's favour, but the claim was revived in the 1960s.

Since becoming independent in 1966, Guyana has administered the territory, but Venezuela insists that the boundary is a colonial hangover which is null and void, and refers to the disputed area as a “zone of reclamation”.

The argument is unlikely to escalate into anything serious, with Venezuela aiming at a cordial solution, but until the outlines of a settlement are reached it introduces a further degree of uncertainty into regional oil and gas exploration.

Sources: El Universal, Latin American Herald Tribune

Renewed fighting at Kosovo border leads talks to collapse

2011-09-28T06:29:00.000-07:00

New violence on the contested border between Kosovo and Serbia has left many wounded and led to the cancellation of the latest round of talks aimed at settling the dispute.

The latest fighting flared on 27th September, near a border crossing which has been the focal point for issues of control and sovereignty. At least four peacekeepers from NATO's KFOR were wounded, as were at least 16 Serbs.

Accounts of the fighting are disputed. NATO, which moved its peacekeepers to the border crossing recently in a bid to defuse tensions, said that its forces were attacked by a crowd who threw pipe bombs, wounding four, which led the peacekeepers to respond with tear gas and rubber bullets. Serb sources, however, say that NATO used live rounds which wounded at least six protestors.

The violence occurred after NATO dismantled roadblocks set up by the Serbs near the disputed checkpoint. The barricades are intended to prevent ethnic-Albanian Kosovan police from taking control of the border post and to guard a new path into Serbia constructed by the Serbs which avoids the NATO checkpoint.

Both sides condemned the violence, with Serbia laying the blame on NATO and Kosovo attributing it to “criminal structures” in the ethnically-Serb north of Kosovo. A new round of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, mediated by the EU, was due to take place later on 27th September, but was called off by Serbia.

The talks were intended to settle 'technical' issues such as customs, property rights and managing the flow of people and goods. Serbia has said that it will not resume them until it has assessed what happened at the border crossing.

Sources: BBC, Reuters, AP

South Sudan to close borders with north as fighting flares

2011-09-28T02:27:00.000-07:00

The South Sudanese government has announced that the border with Sudan will be closed from December, in retaliation for an allegedly illegal blockade imposed by the north. The move comes amid renewed fighting with pro-southern rebels in Blue Nile state.

Atem Garang, a senior figure in the South Sudanese government, announced the border closure on 24th September, following months of accusations that Khartoum had sealed off border crossings. The breakdown in trade has contributed to high prices and food shortages which have affected thousands.

The closure suggests that Juba's patience with Khartoum is running out. Last week, South Sudanese President Salva Kiir called for greater cooperation with Sudan on key issues including border demarcation.

It also takes place amid a sharp deterioration in the security situation along their 1250 mile border. A major offensive by Sudanese forces against rebels in the border state of Blue Nile has displaced tens of thousands, according to aid agencies. The military operation is aimed at the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement North (SPLM-N), which is politically and ethnically linked to South Sudan and which has been fighting northern forces for several months.

Since the independence of South Sudan in July, Khartoum has been seeking to reassert control over border regions which have a heavy SPLM-N presence. The Sudanese military is now using aerial bombardments and ground assaults against the region, leading to widespread accusations of civilian casualties. A UN-backed call for demilitarisation, which both sides agreed to, seems moribund.

Officials in the SPLM-N have called on the US to impose a no-fly zone along the border region, warning that the Khartoum government's offensive threatened the independence of South Sudan. US officials have rejected the request.

The fighting, as well as Sudan's efforts to block access to Blue Nile and South Kordofan, another rebel province, is also hampering cross-border trade and communication. Any further intensification of the conflict would make it even more difficult to freely cross the border, and lead to a serious deterioration in relations between Khartoum and Juba.

Sources: Sudan Tribune, Guardian, AFP

China and India in tussle over Vietnamese oilfield

2011-09-26T03:41:00.000-07:00

The exploration of oilfields off Vietnam's coast by India's state energy firm has provoked a stern response by China, opening yet another front in the contest over maritime boundaries in the South China Sea.

India's ONGC is working with PetroVietnam on exploring a block close to the disputed Vietnam-China maritime border. At the time the contract was won, back in 2006, China protested that the area was within its waters. Now, ONGC's return to the area after a pause for technical reasons has resulted in a number of outspoken warnings by China.

The state-run Global Times, a Chinese newspaper, published an editorial accusing India of a “serious political provocation” which could “push China to the limit”. The foreign ministry in Beijing has also said that India's actions were “illegal and invalid”. New Delhi has brushed off the warnings, saying that its actions are in line with international law and that the block is within Vietnamese waters.

The spat is another escalation in tensions between China and its neighbours in the South China Sea, of which it claims a significant area. Vietnam has been a particular focus of Beijing's ire, with a summer marked by tit-for-tat naval drills and mutual recriminations.

They appeared to make up in early September, with an agreement to compromise through friendly consultations, but the rapprochement seems to have fallen apart just as quickly. On 13th September, Hanoi also announced that it would start conducting joint patrols with Indonesia along their mutual border, in a bid to shore up stability in the area.

On 23rd September, the Philippines announced that their efforts to forge a common position among South China Sea states had been successful, with delegates from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations agreeing that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea should be used to settle regional territorial disputes.

Growing concern at China's claims and gunboat diplomacy is creating an opportunity for India in the region, as the ONGC episode shows. New Delhi is becoming increasingly confident in its dealings with China, and has the potential to begin acting as a counterweight to Beijing for smaller states in the area.

Sources: AFP, Wall Street Journal, Times of India, Global Times

Cyprus pledges to share oil resources in bid to cool tensions

2011-09-23T04:05:00.000-07:00

In an attempt to defuse an increasingly tense stand-off in the eastern Mediterranean, Cypriot President Demetris Christofias has promised to share the proceeds of any oil found offshore with the island's Turkish Cypriot community.

Christofias insisted that a peace treaty between the EU-member Greek south and the largely unrecognised Turkish north of Cyprus had to be found, but that “even before a settlement we shall find a way to use revenues to the benefit of both communities”. He stated that the discovery of offshore oil and gas would be another incentive for the two sides to find a peaceful solution to their long-running dispute.

The Cypriot move appears to be a limited concession to the Turkish Cypriots, who this week signed a deal with their patron in Turkey to jointly explore the sea off the island's northern coastline. The agreement was a response to Cyprus's own decision to start drilling offshore, a move which Ankara denounced as a provocation which infringed the rights of the Turkish Cypriots. Turkey has also threatened to blacklist any energy firms which cooperate with the Greek Cypriots.

On 23rd September Turkey dispatched a seismic exploration ship to the waters off northern Cyprus. Three warships were dispatched to the area on 21st September and Turkish officials have warned that they will escort exploration vessels as required, although there is no suggestion that the Cypriots would seek a military confrontation. Nonetheless Turkish Energy Minister Taner Yildiz has said he does not expect the region to heat up.

Working with the Greek Cypriots, US firm Noble Energy began drilling to the south of Cyprus earlier this week. They are expecting to find large gas deposits near the maritime border with Israel. Noble has recently discovered a series of major gas fields in Israeli waters, and Cyprus has expressed interest in energy cooperation with Israel, including the development of undersea pipelines. A separate deterioration in Turkish-Israeli relations has contributed to the tensions in the area.

It is unclear whether Christofias's suggestion of sharing revenues is entirely realistic: it may simply be an attempt to reduce the antagonistic atmosphere in the eastern Mediterranean, but it seems unlikely that Turkey will back down on its exploration with the Turkish Cypriots. Joint exploration and drilling would help to calm Turkey and encourage progress on a peace deal, but whether the political will exists to do so is another matter.

Sources; Hürriyet, Reuters, Today's Zaman

Iran, Russia oppose cross-border Caspian pipeline

2011-09-20T03:15:00.000-07:00

Iran and Russia have both announced their opposition to a pipeline across the Caspian Sea, which was backed by the EU last week as a means to bring Caspian gas to Europe.

A trans-Caspian pipeline, running west from Turkmenistan to Azerbaijan along the Caspian seabed, has been under discussion for years, but has never got off the ground due to a lack of commercial imperative and political will. An ongoing dispute between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan over their maritime border, and associated gas and oil fields, has also stymied progress.

On 13th September, however, the EU's Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger announced that the EU was would start negotiating a legally binding treaty between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to build a trans-Caspian pipeline. Europe, said Oettinger, “is now speaking with one voice” – previous efforts to coordinate the 'Southern Corridor' to bring Caspian gas to Europe have been hamstrung by competing European agendas and approaches. The new mandate will empower it to arrange the legal and commercial requirements of a trans-Caspian system.

The pipeline would enable Turkmen gas to reach Europe without crossing Russian or Iranian soil. The EU is keen to reduce its energy dependence on Russia and avoid politically problematic Iran, whilst Turkmenistan is looking to diversify its energy export routes.

Tehran and Moscow have reacted angrily to the EU's intervention. Iran has stated that it opposes the project on ecological and legal grounds. Russia expressed its regret, and warned that the project did not account for “the actually existing international legal and geopolitical situation in the Caspian Basin today”.

The reference to geopolitics is significant, as it indicates the main reason for Russian and Iranian opposition (notwithstanding ecological protestations) – that a Caspian pipeline would enable Central Asian gas to avoid their territory, reducing their political and commercial leverage.

The other objection is that the legal status of the Caspian Sea, including the littoral states' maritime boundaries, is still unclear. Although most of the states have simply got on with developing gas and oil fields in their presumed sectors, the exact boundaries and the right of states to undertake major projects – like a subsea pipeline – is still legally unclear.

It is likely that Russia and Iran will apply a range of legal and political pressures to stop the pipeline from going ahead. The EU's internal problems and lack of focus towards the Caspian region may make it an unreliable patron for Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, and unable to push the pipeline through against Russian and Iranian opposition.

Sources: Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Reuters

Abyei remains contested, says South Sudan

2011-09-19T03:00:00.000-07:00

A senior official from South Sudan has said that the oil-rich border region of Abyei will remain disputed, until the governments of Sudan and South Sudan agree on a deal which will protect the rights of its residents.

Speaking on 17th September, Luka Biong Deng, a co-chair of the Abyei Joint Oversight Committee (set up to monitor the implementation of agreements there), said that Abyei would retain a special status until a legal and binding decision is made.

Biong said that the current agreement governing the administration of Abyei, which was signed in June, is not a permanent mandate. Abyei is nominally controlled by both states under UN supervision, since a referendum to decide its fate – alongside the vote which led to South Sudan's independence – was not held due to disputes between Juba and Khartoum.

Biong asserted, however, that the international community continues to work under the impression that Abyei belongs to north Sudan, and is therefore unable to provide the necessary support and assistance to it. At present, both Sudan and South Sudan have forces stationed in Abyei; there is also a UN peacekeeping force, composed of Ethiopian troops. Both sides are due to withdraw their forces by the end of September.

Troop withdrawal, said Biong, is a key first step towards a plebiscite. With the UN in charge, both governments will continue to administer it "until the final status of the area can be determined in a manner that respects the will of the residents of Abyei".

Biong's statement is intended to emphasise that the current arrangement, with both states jointly administering the region, is not permanent. It reflects a confidence that Abyei's residents, which have tended to support the south and have a range of grievances against the government in Khartoum, will agree to join South Sudan in any referendum and thereby handing control of the region's oil wealth to Juba.

Any flare-up in fighting would provide a good excuse for the north's government to maintain forces in the region and put off a referendum. Ensuring a smooth, demilitarised transition is therefore critical for the South Sudanese government.

Sources: Sudan Tribune, BBC

Turkey, Israel, and Greece weigh in on Cyprus drilling plans

2011-09-16T04:11:00.000-07:00

The rapidly shifting politics of the eastern Mediterranean have become even more complex in recent days, as Turkey has warned Cyprus to avoid exploratory drilling off the coast - work which would be undertaken with Israel, fast becoming Turkey’s regional rival.

Greek-speaking Cyprus is pledging to press ahead with plans to begin exploring its offshore resources, despite a lack of agreement on the exact maritime boundary with Turkish-speaking Northern Cyprus, which is only recognised by Turkey. EU member Cyprus has turned to Israel for support: the two countries demarcated their maritime boundary in December 2010, and both have contracted Noble Energy to explore the offshore deposits along their mutual border.

Turkey has responded angrily, warning against “adventurist policies” by Cyprus and threatening to agree a maritime border with Turkish Cyprus, which would enable them to pursue oil and gas exploration but would also stoke tensions with other regional players. Speaking on 8th September, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said that Turkey, "as a guarantor of the Turkish republic of north Cyprus, has taken steps in the area, and it will be decisive and holding fast to the right to monitor international waters in the east Mediterranean”.

Greece has also weighed in to back Cyprus – it is also likely to have been the driving force behind an EU statement on 9th September that warned Turkey to refrain from threats.

Turkey has no relations with Cyprus, and once-warm ties with Israel have plummeted to a new low, with Ankara repeatedly threatening to deploy warships into the eastern Mediterranean. Along with an increasingly tense dispute between Israel and Lebanon over their maritime boundary (and the gas fields in the border area), the situation in the eastern Mediterranean is becoming increasingly fraught and tangled. Indeed, rumours have circled that Cyprus is planning to keep its military on alert during offshore drilling.

The next steps are not clear. Turkey’s recent bullish behaviour is mainly directed at Israel, but the connection between Cyprus and Israel over developing gas fields is widening the dispute significantly. Ankara’s sudden insistence on joint exploration with Turkish Cyprus seems partly a rhetorical move: to date, Turkey has shown little passion for prospecting in the area.

Given Ankara’s deteriorating relationship with Tel Aviv, however, and Erdoğan’s fiery assertiveness in the foreign arena, it is plausible that Turkey will actively work to bar Cyprus from drilling in the Mediterranean and start working with the Turkish Cypriots to start exploring energy resources offshore. This could set the stage for an increasingly tense and complex regional situation.

Sources: Reuters, Hürriyet, Bloomberg

Serbia warns Kosovo on disputed border crossings

2011-09-14T03:27:00.000-07:00

Serbia has cautioned that attempts by Kosovo to take control of disputed border outposts in northern Kosovo could spark renewed tensions between the two neighbours.

Serbia's President Boris Tadic made the warning on 13th September, calling Kosovo's plan to deploy police and customs officials at the outposts on the Serbian border “the height of irresponsibility and dangerous behaviour” and demanding dialogue with international mediators.

The plan, announced last week by Kosovo's Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, has prompted serious discontent in northern Kosovo, which is mainly populated by ethnic Serbs, unlike the Albanian-majority southern areas. Serb community leaders in northern Kosovo have threatened to block the roads if the government in Pristina attempts to deploy police and border units. The region exists in administrative limbo, within Kosovo's international borders but without much trace of the Albanian-dominated state apparatus.

The rise in tensions follows a summer of border violence, when a previous attempt by the Kosovan government to take control of the outposts was met with violent protests from ethnic Serbs who reject Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia. One ethnic Albanian policeman was killed in the rioting, which prompted NATO's peacekeepers to take control of the checkpoints, despite Serb roadblocks.

The most recent war of words comes despite a trade agreement between Belgrade and Pristina, signed on 2nd September, under which the two sides agreed to lift tit-for-tat import embargoes. Thaci's decision to try and regain control of the border, as part of a wider drive to strengthen control over the Serbian north of Kosovo, suggests that the EU-brokered trade deal has led to overconfidence in Pristina.

Redeployment of police units to the border could jeopardise the fragile progress made so far on bilateral trade ties. It would also risk damaging both countries' painstaking path towards EU membership. Brussels has made it clear that a stable and peaceful relationship between Pristina and Belgrade is a prerequisite for either of them to move closer towards full EU membership.

Serbian officials have demanded that international mediators intervene to prevent Kosovo's latest moves. Until the Kosovan government renounces its right to police the border, however, it is unlikely to back down, and a new border confrontation seems increasingly likely.

Sources: Reuters, Voice of America, Bloomberg

Japan criticises Russian moves around disputed Kuril Islands

2011-09-13T03:16:00.000-07:00

The Japanese government has slammed a visit by a high-ranking Russian official to the disputed Kuril Islands, calling it “unacceptable”, as Russia acknowledged that its air force conducted drills close to Japanese airspace.

The 11th September visit of Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev is the latest in a string of visits by high-ranking officials to the Kuril Islands, including a trip by President Dmitry Medvedev in November, after which the Russian leader pledged to bolster the defences of the disputed territories.

The islands lie to the north of the Japanese island of Hokkaido and to the south of Russia's Sakhalin peninsula. They were administered by Japan until the end of the Second World War, when Russian forces overran them. The islands have been a point of contention between Moscow and Kyoto ever since, particularly given growing expectations about the quantity of oil and gas in the surrounding sea.

Russia has engaged in regular sabre-rattling over the islands, insisting that they are an indivisible part of Russia and promising to deploy advanced weapon systems to defend them.

Despite the recent spike in tensions, however, both Japanese and Russian officials have expressed their desire to settle the dispute amicably. On 9th September Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told his Japanese counterpart Koichiro Gemba that Moscow is happy to discuss a peace treaty “in a calm atmosphere”, although he reiterated that Russia ruled out any negotiations of its sovereignty over the Kurils.

Japan's new prime minister Yosihiko Noda, in a telephone conversation with Medvedev, also stated his willingness to sign a peace treaty and settle the issue. He may try and seek a resolution on the Kurils as a way of making his mark in office, although the range of other challenges facing him may make the dispute with Russia somewhat less of a priority.

In the meantime, Russia's military manoeuvres around the disputed area are likely to continue. The Defence Ministry has dismissed Japanese concern, pointing out that its strategic bombers did not violate Japan's airspace; Russia is also planning to conduct large-scale naval drills in the region.
Sources: Russia Today, RIA Novosti, Voice of Russia

India and Bangladesh sign border deal, but fail to agree on water resources

2011-09-09T04:06:00.000-07:00

A deal between the leaders of India and Bangladesh has resolved one of the world's most convoluted borders, swapping over 150 enclaves and agreeing on the demarcation of their 4,000km boundary, although they failed to agree on sharing water resources.

In Dhaka on 6th September, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his Bangladeshi counterpart Sheikh Hasina signed the long-awaited border agreement, which has been a point of contention between the two neighbours since Bangladesh became independent from Pakistan in 1971. It settles the status of 162 enclaves (111 Indian enclaves within Bangladesh and 51 Bangladeshi enclaves within India), in which approximately 200,000 people live in a state of limbo without proper citizenship of either state.

The deal is a net loss of around 40 km2 for India; insignificant for a country of its size, but one which has led to accusations by the opposition that the government is abandoning Indian territory. Such criticisms are closely connected with fears about illegal immigration from Bangladesh and the associated danger of infiltration by Islamist militants. These fears, and the torturous and unclear nature of the boundary, have led to border guards killing hundreds over the past decade.

The simplification of the boundary line will help to reduce cross-border tensions; at Dhaka University, Singh said that he is “acutely conscious of the problems that arise due to the incidents on the border. We have now put in place mechanisms which we hope will greatly reduce the scope for such incidents and strengthen mutual trust and goodwill”.

Some of the other deals which Singh and Hasina signed will also help to improve bilateral ties. Under the new accords, India will allow the duty-free import of Bangladeshi textiles; both sides will improve border infrastructure to facilitate trade (while India will assist in providing a rail link between Bangladesh and Nepal); and they will work towards connecting their power grids.

Just as important, however, are the deals which Singh and Hasina did not sign. They failed to agree on the sharing of water resources from the Teesta river. In principle India had agreed to a deal which gave Bangladesh 48 per cent of the river's water, but West Bengal's Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, said the deal would harm farmers in the state and cancelled her plans to accompany Singh to Dhaka.

Bangladeshi officials have privately expressed anger at the collapse of the deal, and Singh expressed his disappointment. He was also at pains to point out that India would work to ensure that its Tipaimukh dam project on the Barak river would not harm Bangladesh, as many have feared.

Sources: The Hindu, Voice of America, The Tribune

Somali regions agree truce after border clashes

2011-09-07T03:44:00.000-07:00

The leaders of two of Somalia's autonomous regions have agreed a UN-backed truce, after heavy border fighting, blamed on either clan feuding or Islamist militants, killed at least 30.

The fighting broke out on 1st September in Galkayo, a town of around 500,000 which lies on the administrative border between the autonomous regions of Puntland, in Somalia's north-east, and Galmadug. Unlike Somaliland to the northwest, neither region is seeking outright independence from Somalia. Given the impotence of the beleaguered government in Mogadishu, however, both areas largely run their own affairs, with their own military forces.

Control of Galkayo is divided between the two regions, with Puntland governing the northern area of the town and Galmadug administering the southern tip. In February 2011, the two regions signed an accord agreeing to coordinate on security and economic affairs, in Galkayo and in the wider border region.

This accord did not prevent the recent round of clashes, which involved heavy artillery and killed the head of Puntland's paramilitary forces. The Puntland Interior Ministry claimed that their security forces raided areas of the town to fend off an attack by the Al-Shabab militia, which dominates central and southern Somalia. They accused the Galmadug authorities of “aiding the terrorists by providing safe refuge, medical assistance and even ammunition.”

The Galmadug administration denied the charges, and insisted that the fighting was between two sub-clans. Media outlets supporting this version of events claimed that the recent deployment of police forces from a rival sub-clan to most Galkayo police officers created friction which boiled over into gun battles.

The ceasefire was brokered by the UN Political Office in Somalia, which brought together the two regional presidents in Mogadishu. According to a press release, the two sides “agreed to (1) establish and maintain direct communication at the highest level, (2) address future issues in a cooperative manner and (3) recognize that they face a common threat from insurgent groups.”

Previous accords have been insufficient to stop the violence. The divided nature of Galkayo's administration, the lack of government control over local militias, and the ongoing threat from al-Shabab, make it plausible that violence will flare up again the future.

Sources; Garowe Online, AFP, BBC, UN Political Office in Somalia

Lebanon-Israel boundary dispute goes to UN, while Turkey boosts regional naval presence

2011-09-06T03:41:00.000-07:00

On 5th September Lebanon filed a formal complaint with the UN over its maritime dispute with Israel, warning that the Israeli proposal for the border line “puts international peace and security at risk” and urging the UN “to take all necessary measures to avoid conflict."

The Foreign Ministry in Beirut has sent a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon rejecting the northern boundaries of Israel's claim, which was submitted to the UN in July. Some weeks earlier, the Lebanese parliament approved a draft law which demarcates the country's maritime borders, following a formal proposal to the UN last year.

Lebanon's case is that over 860 km2 of its exclusive economic zone, in which a state has 'sovereign rights' over marine resources, is infringed by the Israeli claim. The area in question contains significant quantities of oil and gas, and US-listed explorer Noble Energy has already begun developing large gas fields in the Israeli sector of the Mediterranean.

Lebanon's decision to file a formal complaint raises the stakes further, although by moving the ball into the UN's court it maycommit both parties to arbitration and reduce the risk of conflict. Pursuing the case through arbitration would also help to marginalise the Lebanese Shia militant group Hezbollah, which has threatened reprisals if Israel begins drilling in disputed waters.

There have been further signs of tension in the Levant over the past few days, however. On 4th September, Lebanon accused Israeli jets of violating its airspace: a common enough refrain over the past few years, but one which takes on additional significance when relations between the two sides, still technically at war, are so strained.

The collapse in the Turkey-Israel relationship is also adding to tensions in the Levant. On 2nd September the Israeli ambassador in Ankara was expelled after Israel again refused to apologise for the Gaza flotilla raid in May 2010, in which nine Turkish citizens were killed.

On 6th September Turkey's blunt-talking Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, announced that all remaining ties with Israel would be cut, and Turkish warships “will be seen more frequently” in the eastern Mediterranean. Erdogan has cast himself as the champion of the Arab world, and a greater naval presence could tempt Turkey into intervening in the Israel-Lebanon spat. Given the disputed nature of the region's maritime borders, the chances for accusations and miscalculations are likely to increase even further.

Sources: AFP, Daily Star, Reuters

Kurdish rebel groups agree to coordinate operations against Iran

2011-09-05T03:04:00.000-07:00

On 3rd September Kurdish militant groups fighting in Turkey and Iran announced that they are coordinating their activities, following an upsurge in attacks by the Iranian and Turkish militaries.

The Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK), which operates in south-eastern Turkey, and the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK), fighting in north-western Iran, will combine forces against the Iranian military in response to an onslaught against their safe havens along the borders with Iraq.

The PKK, of which the PJAK is a subsidiary, announced the move, stating that “the goal of Iran is eliminating the Kurdish people, and not the PJAK party, and these are the reasons that led us to take this decision”.

Iranian forces, spearheaded by the elite Revolutionary Guard, launched a major offensive against the PJAK in July. Reports indicate that dozens of rebels and Iranian soldiers have been killed in the fighting. Meanwhile Turkey began its own offensive after the PKK ambushed a number of military convoys in the volatile south-east.

Both operations have seen numerous cross-border attacks into northern Iraq. Turkish warplanes have bombed dozens of targets in the Qandil Mountains in Iraq, whilst Iran has sent ground forces over the border to destroy PJAK bases. The government of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region has complained about both the military incursions and the continuing provocations by the PKK and PJAK, which have used the mountainous region as a base for many years.

On 9th August the PKK's leader Murat Karayilan told Kurdish media outlets that he was withdrawing PJAK forces from the Iranian border to PKK camps as a “unilateral measure to prevent any further attacks”. However in the same statement he announced that PKK forces would be based on the border instead, and did not wish to fight Iran but would do so if Iranian forces attacked PKK units.

The latest statement seems to amount to a declaration of war by the PKK against Iran. This suggests much greater practical coordination between the militant groups in the future, which in turn is likely to be met with increased cooperation by the Turkish and Iranian militaries. This raising of stakes will mean more cross-border operations and increased diplomatic tensions, both with the Kurdish authorities in northern Iraq and the central government in Baghdad.

Sources: AFP, Today's Zaman, Hurriyet, PRESS TV

China, Philippines positive on defusing South China Sea tensions

2011-09-01T09:11:00.000-07:00

China and the Philippines are closer to settling a long-running dispute over their maritime boundary, after a state visit by Philippine President Beningno Aquino to Beijing which began on 31st August. During the visit Aquino, who this summer has been bullish towards China, struck a conciliatory note. Calling for greater economic links between the two states, he announced that “the Philippines is indeed open for business”.

The Philippine President is accompanied by 300 business leaders in an attempt to boost bilateral economic relations, anticipating an increase to $60 billion in five years, up from $27.7 billion in 2010.

However the main focus of the visit is on the contested border in the South China Sea, where the Philippines – like many other Southeast Asian states – are at loggerheads with Beijing over maritime boundaries and the ownership of the isolated Spratly Islands. Disputes over the islands, or rather the extensive oil and gas reserves believed to lie beneath them, are a potential flashpoint for conflict.

Aquino and his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao released a joint statement on 1st September, in which they “agreed not to let the maritime disputes affect the broader picture of friendship and cooperation” and “reiterated their commitment to addressing the disputes through peaceful dialogue”. Although this is standard diplomatic boilerplate, Aquino did reveal some signs of progress the previous evening.

Speaking to reporters after meeting Hu, Aquino revealed that China is now calling for a legally binding code of conduct for all nations operating in the South China Sea. This would go beyond the non-binding 'guidelines' which regional states had agreed on at a meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in July. Aquino was buoyed by the news, calling the Chinese proposal “very significant”. Hu also contributed to the positive atmosphere, calling for the South China Sea to develop into “a sea of friendship, peace and cooperation”.

A legally binding code of conduct would be difficult to draw up, if the wrangling over the July guidelines is any guide. Disagreements between the ASEAN nations ensured that the proposals were ambiguous and vague. Other regional states will be watching carefully to see if China's proposed code of conduct would favour Beijing or be designed to exclude the US, which has backed the smaller states, from regional affairs. Given China's assertive stance in the South China Sea, it is unlikely to make any concessions.

In any case, a code of conduct would be extremely difficult to enforce. Most regional states have strayed from the spirit if not the letter of the 'Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea', agreed in 2002. It would be surprising if a legally binding code of conduct would seem sacrosanct when other legal tools, such as international arbitration, have yet to prevent regional disputes and confrontations.

Sources: AFP, Reuters, Bloomberg, Xinhua

Sudan refers Kordofan border clashes to UN Security Council

2011-09-01T08:49:00.000-07:00

Following intensive clashes in the border region between Sudan and newly-independent South Sudan, the Khartoum government has filed a complaint with the UN Security Council accusing its neighbour of fomenting instability.

The clashes in South Kordofan began in June, a month before the formal declaration of South Sudanese independence, but have flared up recently, with the Sudanese government accused of indiscriminate aerial bombing of civilian areas. Around 200,000 are believed to have fled their homes. An unexpected government ceasefire announced on 23^rd August does not appear to have ended the fighting.

Sudanese government forces are seeking to neutralise armed rebels from the Nuba ethnic group. Although now located north of the border, many of the Nuba sided with the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army during the southern group's twenty-year war against Khartoum. Non-Arab like most of South Sudan's population, the Nuba community also complained of discrimination and oppression by the Arab-dominated government in Khartoum.

Sudan now views the pro-southerners which are left within its territory as a potential fifth column for the new government in Juba. In its complaint to the UN, the Sudanese government has accused South Sudan of arming and instructing the rebels in the Nuba Mountains. A Sudanese government spokesman said on 30^th August that Khartoum has “documented proof” that the insurrection is being orchestrated by Juba.

The complaint also cited numerous alleged border violations by South Sudan, including the deployment of military forces in the disputed, oil-rich area of Abyei (which borders South Kordofan) in violation of the 2005 peace deal, and failing to withdraw forces from a disputed border strip. Juba has denied all the accusations.

This new international element to the long-simmering rebellion increases risks for the wider border situation between Sudan and South Sudan. South Kordofan is adjacent to Abyei, a focal point of north-south tensions because of its oil wealth.

An uptick in fighting between the Sudanese army and the rebels, or cross-border raids, could raise the prospect of the southern Sudanese military – at this point still a cobbled-together force of former rebels – becoming involved.

Sources: BBC, Reuters, Sudan Tribune

Philippines stands to increase continental shelf through Benham Rise claim

2011-08-22T04:14:00.000-07:00

The Philippines may gain 13 million hectares of territory should the UN approve its government's claim of the Benham Rise, reports the Philippine Daily Inquirer. The Benham Rise is situated off the eastern coast of the Philippines and may be recognised, under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), as a part of its continental shelf in 2012. The Philippines is the only claimant to the Rise, a situation which represents a contrast to that off its western coast where title to the Spratly Islands remains disputed.

Given the seemingly straightforward nature of the claim, the government of the Philippines is keen to incorporate the Rise which, with its huge methane deposits, has the potential to make the Philippines a natural gas exporter. Should, under UNCLOS, Benham be determined to be a part of Philippines territory then there would be a legal basis for the government to negotiate exploration rights with private companies.

The Philippines claim was submitted to the UN under UNCLOS in 2009, and the Environment Secretary of the Philippines, Ramon Jesus Paje, has said that the UN intends to approve the claim in 2012.

Paje has said that the Philippines has only recently categorically defined the Benham Rise as attached to the continental shelf which, under UNCLOS, is the seabed and subsoil that extend beyond its 12 nautical mile territorial sea. Nevertheless, there is anticipation in the Philippines that the eventual incorporation of the Benham Rise will mark an important step towards energy self-sufficiency.

Continuing tension along the Israel-Lebanon borders

2011-08-03T09:13:00.000-07:00

Lebanon has filed a complaint against Israel at the UN after a border incident on Monday (1 August) which involved an exchange of fire. An Israeli Defence Force (IDF) patrol is alleged to have entered Lebanese territory at Wazzani. Reports vary, but the extent of the incursion is put at a matter of metres (between 15 and 70).

Reports also vary as to the supposed sequence of events. Some sources claim that the presence of IDF soldiers on Lebanese territory prompted Lebanese forces to fire at them; others counter that Israeli forces were not on Lebanese territory but that they did return the fire of the Lebanese forces.

Neither side sustained any casualties during the incident. In its complaint Lebanon argues that the the Israeli incursion represented a violation of its sovereignty, a breach of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Moreover, Lebanon argues that the incursion breached UN Security Council resolution 1701 which ended the month-long war of 2006 end extended the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) mandate.

Israel made its own complaint to the UN, on Tuesday (2 August), about shots fired (by a Lebanese soldier at an IDF patrol) from across the border. Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to the UN has argued that incidents such as this potentially threaten the ceasefire that currently holds between the two states; another similar event has allegedly taken place in the last two weeks.

This notwithstanding, the low-level conflict that characterises the formal ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon has been interpreted in news sources as indicative of comparative calm along the land border. The focus in recent weeks has been on the maritime border between the two states, and a disputed area of approximately 850 square kilometres which, potentially, is rich in oil and gas deposits.

Neither side is willing to modify its stance, the Lebanese claiming a maritime boundary that runs several kilometres to the south of the line approved by the Israeli cabinet on 10 July. International parties are pushing for a negotiated settlement to the dispute, but as the states are technically at war they will not negotiate. Compounding the problem is Lebanon's non-recognition of Israel. It has therefore proposed that the UN resolve the matter. The UN, for its part, says it cannot because UNIFIL holds no mandate to deal with maritime boundaries. Therefore, perhaps the most satisfactory course of action is for both parties to permit a mediation process to begin—face-to-face negotiations are, at best, unlikely and probably impossible—while the states explore for oil and gas outside of the disputed area. It has been argued that the continued uncertainty over the maritime boundaries will cause international investors to stay away from the Levantine Basin but, arguably, this is not clear cut. Energy companies are, for example, involved in exploration and exploitation activities in a number of disputed areas including the disputed waters off Morocco and Western Sahara.

Indeed, both parties are free to explore areas of the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) that are undisputed. However, Lebanon, which perhaps has the stronger case in international law, has not yet begun any exploration of its own. Hezbollah plays an important role in the new Lebanese cabinet; its leader, Hassan Nazrallah, has warned Israel—which has carried out exploratory work—to stay away from Lebanon's offshore resources.

Sources: Channel News Asia, Daily Star (Lebanon), Haaretz, The Jerusalem Post

International reaction to violence on the Kosovo-Serbia border

2011-08-03T06:47:00.000-07:00

After last week's clashes in northern Kosovo which left a Kosovan policeman dead and NATO/KFOR peacekeepers under fire, additional peacekeeping forces were sent to the region on Tuesday (2 August) to relieve those that had been involved since the start of the crisis. NATO has stressed that this does not represent a reaction to the escalation of the crisis which began when Kosovan police attempted to take over two border crossings, and ethnic Serbs subsequently attacked a border post on 28 July.

In addition, Kosovo has imposed a de facto trade embargo on Serbia. The timing, if not the nature, of this development is surprising for it has been three years since the Serbian government in Belgrade banned imports from Kosovo as a consequence of Pristina's unilateral declaration of independence.

The Belgrade government and the Serb minority in northern Kosovo have never recognised the independent government of Kosovo. On 31 July a declaration of the Serbian government criticised the actions of the authorities in Pristina. Since then, Belgrade has been sure to signal its commitment to the peaceful resolution of the present crisis through dialogue; President Tadic has stated that, in light of the recent history of the Balkans, that the preservation of regional stability is the priority.

Nonetheless, elements of the minority Serb population in northern Kosovo have perceived a provocation to violence in the activities of the Kosovan government. 60,000 Serbs live in the north; among this population there is little acceptance of the region's control by Pristina. Accordingly, the authorities there exercise little effective control in the north of the territory that is defined by their Republic's Constitution. With this, and an associated measure of pragmatism in mind, the international players that have recognised Kosovo's independence over the last three years have encouraged it to pursue an incremental strategy in this respect.

Nonetheless, recognising the more conciliatory and cooperative stance adopted by the present Belgrade government towards the international community, external actors have signalled their general disapproval of the Pristina's actions. The EU High Representative on foreign affairs, Catherine Ashton, indicated the EU's disapproval, and the US State Department criticised Pristina for not coordinating its actions with the international community. At the UN, the Secretary-General called for restraint and dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina facilitated by the EU. China—the only power to abstain at the formulation of Security Council resolution 1244 (1999), which mandated the international presence in Serbia/Kosovo, and one which was highly critical of the NATO action in 1999—expressed its regret over the Pristina administration's activities which it blamed for the increasing tensions.

Internationally, then, there seems to exist the recognition that the present crisis has been brought on by the provocation of the Pristina government led by Hashim Thaci. This, however, will not affect the international community's line on Kosovo. The UN General Assembly and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have emphasised the inviolability of Kosovo's territorial integrity since its independence, and this will continue to guide practice.

In 2010, in its advisory opinion, the ICJ stated that Pristina's declaration of independence in 2008 did not violate international law; eighty states including, crucially, most EU members have recognised the Republic of Kosovo. Pristina's challenge to the status quo has been heavily criticised by the international actors but, nonetheless, there is little that the Serbian government can do to avoid its present bind. Having extradited the war criminals, Mladic and Hazdic, to the Hague Tribunal, President Tadic has sought to bring Serbia's EU accession closer. But with the main international players recognising the personality and territorial disposition of Kosovo, the status of the Serb enclave—and the issue of territorial cession and the unsavoury precedent that it could set for other parts of the Balkans—will have to be addressed. The resolution of territorial disputes is a longstanding condition of EU membership and the recent provocation by Pristina will cause a headache in Belgrade, where the government appears convinced of a need to move away from its own past and towards the EU.

Sources: Al Jazeera, BBC, Dallas Morning News, Spiegel, United Nations

Violence on Kosovo-Serbian border leaves one dead

2011-07-29T04:53:00.000-07:00

77 countries have recognised Kosovo's independence from Serbia

NATO has deployed peacekeepers to the north of Kosovo after clashes broke out on Kosovo's border with Serbia.

Kosovo's government ordered special police forces to take over two border posts in order to enforce a ban on imports from Serbia on the night of Monday 25th July. The post had previously been manned by ethnic Serb police, and Kosovo's government suspected them of turning a blind eye to banned imports.

Serbian nationalists in the region responded immediately, and in violence on Tuesday 26th July, a Kosovar police officer was killed, reportedly with a gunshot to the head. Four others were injured

A group of about 200 Serbian nationalists in Kosovo again attacked the Jarinje border post on Wednesday 27th July. They forced the Kosovar police and customs officers, as well as their EU counterparts, to flee, before burning down the border post.

The attackers also reportedly fired shots at a nearby outpost run by the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR). The attackers were described as masked men, armed with axes, clubs, pipes and guns.

NATO said that its troops were able to retake control of both border crossings on Thursday, despite being attacked by Serbs, armed with fire bombs.

NATO has been involved in the region since 1999 when it intervened to stop the ethnic cleansing of Albanians by Serb forces. It currently has around 6,000 troops stationed in the region, but given the most recent outburst of violence, analysts are questioning whether it is enough.

Kosovo's Prime Minister Hashim Thaci defended the move, saying the operation was necessary, and that “it was a concrete step in establishing the rule of law” in Kosovo's volatile north. The operation was called “provocative” by the US and was similarly criticised by the EU.

Kosovo, which declared its independence from Serbia in 2008, has an Albanian ethnic majority. Serbia, however, does not recognise its former province as an independent state, and some 60,000 Serbs living in the north of the country are still loyal to Belgrade.

The current border situation has to do with Kosovo's custom stamp. Serbia does not recognise the stamp, fearing that doing so would be tantamount to recognising the country's independence. As such, exports from Kosovo to Serbia are effectively banned.

In retaliation, Kosovo's government recently implemented an import ban on Serbian goods, and seized the border posts in the north to ensure the ban was being enforced.

The UN Security Council held a closed meeting on Thursday 28th July in order to discuss the issue.

Solving the conflict with Kosovo is among the conditions Serbia must meet before it can be considered for EU accession. EU-mediated discussions have been taking place between Kosovo and Serbia, but little progress has been made.

Sources: AFP, BBC News, Spiegel, Voice of America

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Border Focus: South China Sea

2011-07-28T09:16:00.000-07:00

Chinese actions have led to protests in Vietnam

What is disputed?

The South China Sea (known as the East Sea in Vietnam) is a semi-enclosed sea in the Pacific Ocean, and covers over 3.5 million square kilometres.

Seven states make claims to part or all of the South China: China, Republic of China (Taiwan), Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei and the Philippines. China makes the biggest claim: Beijing sees 80 per cent of the region as historically belong to it. The dispute has led to numerous navel clashes over the past 50 years and plenty of diplomatic tension.

While ownership of the sea itself is disputed, there are also territorial disputes in the region, the two most important of which revolve around the Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands.

The Spratly Islands are a group of more than 750 reefs, islets, atolls, cays and islands, which lie between Vietnam, the Philippines, China, Malaysia and Brunei. There are no native islanders, although some 45 islands are occupied by military forces from Vietnam, China, Taiwan, Malaysia and the Philippines.

The Spratlys are claimed in full by China, Taiwan and Vietnam, and in part by Malaysia, the Philippines and Brunei (who claim a fishing zone around Louisa Reef). Various islands within the Spratlys are currently administered by China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines.

The Paracel Islands are a much smaller grouping of islands, made up of some 30 islets and reefs. The archipelago is a similar distance from the coastlines of Vietnam and China (through its southern-most island of Hainan). Taiwan, Vietnam and China all claim the islands, although China has administered them since 1974.

Why is it disputed?

The South China Sea is the second busiest shipping route in the world (after the Mediterranean) and the economies of the Asia-Pacific region depend on the daily journeys of up to 200 large-tonnage ships that come through the waters.

It also contains vast hydrocarbon reserves: it has 7.7 billion barrels of proven oil, with an estimated 28 billion barrels in total. Natural gas reserves are estimated to total around 266 trillion cubic feet.

The area is also significant in terms of fish stocks and marine biodiversity.

What is the history of the dispute?

What is at issue in the South China Sea is a conflict between what some countries see as historically belonging to them, or at least lying within their sphere of influence, and other countries applying modern international maritime law.

In 1982, the UN adopted its Convention on the Law of the Sea which accepted a 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). If no country is assumed to own the disputed islands, most of the Spratlys would fall into the Philippines and Malaysia's EEZ, whereas the Paracels lie in Vietnamese and Chinese waters.

Vietnam, Taiwan and China, however, claim the disputed islands as their own based on 'historic rights' which would then give them the right to claim the waters around the islands.

The idea that any country can claim the region based on 'historic rights' is hard to justify, given that the islands were viewed as little more than uninhabitable hazards to fishermen until the twentieth century.

Interest in the two archipelagos heated up in the 1930s when China released official maps which showed the whole region as Chinese territory, despite the fact that France, then ruler of Indochina, actually governed both archipelagos.

China claimed that its southernmost maritime boundary was 4 degrees north latitude, thus extending all the way south to include the James Shoal, which lies just north of Malaysia.

China released its famous 'U-shaped' map in 1947, which outlined its claims to the region. It started as an 11-dotted line map, but was amended to a nine-dotted line in 1953, omitting claims over some of the Gulf Of Tonkin, which has since seen a maritime boundary agreed between China and Vietnam.

At the 1951 San Francisco Conference, set up to end the war between Japan and the Allied Powers, Japan renounced all claims to the islands. A proposal to return both archipelagos to China was put forward, but was rejected.

In 1956 the picture became further unclear as a retired Filipino admiral took possession of four fifths of the Spratly archipelago on behalf of the Philippines.

Vietnam and China fought for dominance of the Paracels throughout the 1950s and 1960s, however in 1974 China took advantage of internal instability in Vietnam and took full control of the island group.

Vietnam and Taiwan had occupied some of the Spratly islands since the end of WWII, however in 1988, China used its navy to occupy a number of islands Vietnam had previously administered.

In 2002, ASEAN and China signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), in which all sides agreed to seek peaceful solutions to disputes.

A number of states have submitted what they see as their territory to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. China submitted a note, with a map of the nine-dotted line, in 2009, to which Vietnam immediately protested.

What has happened recently?

Tension has risen over the disputed islands in recent years, as states have looked more closely at the potential gains from confirmed ownership. Last July, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US supported freedom of navigation in the area and offered to facilitate multilateral talks on the dispute, an offer which was sharply rebuked by China.

In March 2011, two Chinese patrol boats confronted a Philippino vessel in Reed Bank, near the Spratly Islands. The Philippines sent two aircraft to the area, and filed a protest with the UN.

In May, China was accused of aggression again, when video footage emerged of a Chinese boat appearing to cut the cables of a Vietnamese oil exploration ship, the Binh Minh 02.

The incident prompted anti-China protests in China, and both Vietnam and the Philippines have carried out military exercises near disputed waters in recent months.

The Phillipines' President Benigno Aquino said in July that his country will defend what it sees as its territory, and that it will shore up its military capabilities to ensure it is able to do so. There has been talk of the US supporting the Philippines's military.

The South China Sea has become the crucial talking point on whether China's rise can be peaceful, and Beijing's insistence that foreign powers – primarily the US – stay out of the discussion is not winning it any friends. Indeed, it seems to be pointing the other claimants closer to the US, and heightening regional tensions.

For further information, including possible settlement routes, see the full Border Focus, here.

UN-backed Cameroon-Nigeria border commission urges swift resolution

2011-07-28T04:06:00.000-07:00

The UN-backed Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission, set up to help Cameroon and Nigeria resolve their border disputes has called for “swift agreement” to resolve the remaining border disputes.

The Commission was set up at the request of the West African neighbours after the 2002 International Court of Justice (ICJ) decision on the ownership of the Bakassi Peninsula, in order to help implement the decision.

It has already reached agreement on more than 1,600 kilometres of the border, however it is still working on the final 350 kilometres of the land border which needs to be demarcated.

The most recent meeting of the Commission, which took place for two days in Abuja last week, had planned to reach an agreement on the remaining 350 kilometres, however it was not successful.

The Commission instruct its sub-commission on demarcation to find "effective and practical solutions" on the remaining areas, which include previous skipped areas, areas of disagreement, and inaccessible areas.

In a press release at the end of the meeting on Friday 22nd July, Cameroon and Nigeria reiterated their commitment to complete the demarcation by the end of next year.

The commission, chaired by the UN Secretary General's Special Representative for West Africa Said Djinnit also noted the progress made by the two nations regarding the confidence-building initiatives for the populations affected by the demarcation.

A draft agreement was reached at the meeting however, on other issues such as the exploitation of hydrocarbons on the border of Nigeria and Cameroon.

Nigeria's President Goodluck Jonathan said on Tuesday 26th July that he would form a committee to consider the draft agreement for ratification, after which the document would be signed by the leaders of both countries.

Jonathan also said it was critical for the two countries to work together to ensure security along the border.

The next session of the commission will be held in Yaoundé, Cameroon, on 8-9th December.

Sources: Punch, The Nation, UN News Centre

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

UN warns of war crimes in South Kordofan

2011-07-22T04:02:00.000-07:00

A UN report has warned that war crimes may have been committed in Sudan's border state of South Kordofan, according to reports from 18th July.

The report said that both government and rebel forces were guilty of atrocities, but that the army's actions were “especially egregious”, according to the BBC.

The report called for an investigation into the conflict in South Kordofan, which has been ongoing since 5th June, and has displaced some 70,000 people.

The violence started when South Kordofan's newly elected governor, Ahmed Haroun, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for alleged war crimes in Darfur, order the disarmament of those fighters aligned with South Sudan's ruling party, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM).

The fighters, mostly from the Nuba Mountains, resisted and there has been fighting ever since, despite the signing of a peace deal in June.

There have been reports of aerial bombardments and specific targeting of the Nuba, which may amount to ethnic cleansing.

South Kordofan borders South Sudan, which became independent on 9th July, 2011.

Sudan was embroiled in a two-decade long civil war, which ended with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005. While the CPA established the framework which led to the South's independence, little was specified for numerous groups of people in the north – including the Nuba – who fought alongside the SPLM.

South Sudan's President Salva Kiir has said he would work with Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir to ensure they achieve more rights, but with the number of challenges currently facing the new state of South Sudan, it seems unlikely that the fate of their northern neighbours will be a priority.

Sudan's President al-Bashir, who is also wanted by the ICC for actions in Darfur, has said South Sudan should not interfere with the north's affairs.

Khartoum has recently accused aid agencies of giving logistical support for the rebels in South Kordofan; similar accusations led to Sudan expelling 10 humanitarian organisations from Darfur in 2009.

Despite an African Union-mediated peace agreement being signed in Addis Ababa in June, it appears the ceasefire has not lasted long in South Kordofan, and by 11th July, reports were emerging that Sudan's military had restarted its bombing campaign in the region.

It also appears that rebels in the Nuba Mountains are unwilling to give up the fight, and the northern segment of the SPLA now claims to control much of South Kordofan.

The SPLA-N seized El-Hamra, a government garrison town southeast of the state capital Kadugli, on 1st July, seizing government vehicles and weapons.

It appears that troops from the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), a leading rebel group in Darfur, have been supporting the rebels in South Kordofan, and Khartoum claimed on Thursday 21st July to have captured JEM's military commander, Brigade-General Al-Toom Toto during clashes in Al-Tais on 17th July.

The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) had previously dismissed reports that JEM forces had participated in the Al-Tais attack.

Sudan's official news agency SUNA quoted Toto as saying he had received logistical support from the Government of South Sudan on his journey from Darfur to South Kordofan.

Sources: AFP, Al-Jazeera, BBC News, Sudan Tribune

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

South Sudan sells first oil, but still no agreement on transit fees

2011-07-21T09:23:00.000-07:00

South Sudan's President Kiir is taking a hard line on oil revenues

South Sudan has sold its first oil as an independent country this week, despite the lack of an agreement on oil revenues with Sudan.

South Sudan, which declared independence from Khartoum on 9th July, sold 1 million barrels to Chinese buyer Chinaoil, a Petrochina subsidiary, on Monday 18th July. Reuters estimates the shipment to be worth US$110 million.

Director General for Energy in South Sudan, Arkangelo Okwang, said they would ship a further 600,000 barrels on 23rd July.

Okwang said he expected the north to bill the South for the use of its facilities, but that nothing had yet been decided.

Sudan fought a decades-long civil war, which ended with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005. The CPA outlined a revenue-sharing agreement for oil, in which Sudan and the autonomous South Sudan each received 50 per cent.

Three-quarters of Sudan's 500,000 barrel-a-day output comes from the South, and is crucial to both countries economy. While much of the oil lies in South Sudan, the new nation lacks the infrastructure to exploit its reserves, and so the oil has to be moved to market through the north.

While South Sudan's President Salva Kiir said in June, 2010 that it would be possible for oil revenues to continue to be shared, he has taken an increasingly hard line in recent months.

On Wednesday 20th June, Kiir threatened to stop using the pipelines in Sudan if Khartoum insisted on sharing oil revenues as opposed to receiving transit fees.

“I am saying that we will rent the North's oil pipelines and we will give them money for our oil to be transported, and we will of course pay and there is no problem," Kiir said at a speech to a military base in South Sudan.

"However, this offer is unaccepted by the North. We have agreed on one thing that the oil issue should not be disrupted. They [Sudan] need oil. But we fought for 21 years without oil and we can still go for 3 years until we build our own oil infrastructure,” Kiir added.

Lead negotiator for South Sudan on oil issues, Pagan Amum, was reported in the Sudan Tribune as saying that the north had asked for “unfair and unreasonable” conditions of passage.

“They came with crazy ideas saying they are going to impose several transit fees – a usage fee, something called a normal transit fee, then something called a special fee – maybe $15 per barrel, even more – then maybe other charges, and they wanted revenue-sharing to continue,” Amum said.

Amum said the south was instead prepared to offer $3bn in “assistance” to the north and offered transit fees in line with international norms, citing 41 cents per barrel charged by the Chad-Cameroon pipeline, which is a similar-length.

Khartoum is keen to salvage as much from the south's oil supplies as possible, and Sudan's Finance Minister Ali Mahmood Hassanein said on 19th July that Khartoum was in the process of crafting laws which would set the fees they would expect the South to pay.

He said the fees would contain three levels based on the fact that oil passes through Sudan which requires the imposition of sovereign fees.

Khartoum has threatened to cut shipments of oil from the south along its piplines if the south refuses to pay transit fees or continuing sharing oil revenues. Likewise, Juba has said it will build its own oil infrastructure, moving the oil south, if Khartoum doesn't agree on transit fees.

A delegation from the South is expected to travel to the north to carry out talks soon.

Sources: Sudan Tribune, Reuters

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Bolivia seeks entry into Chile-Peru ICJ case

2011-07-18T09:25:00.000-07:00

The maritime border dispute between Chile and Peru got a lot more complicated last week, when Bolivia announced its intention to get involved in the case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague on Monday 11th July.

A press statement from Bolivia's Ministry of Foreign relations said “Bolivia's main goal regarding the maritime dispute is to inform the ICJ regarding its views on a subject of vital interest for the Bolivian person, which is its right to sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean.”

Bolivia has been landlocked since 1884, when it was defeated by Chile in the War of the Pacific (1879-1883). Previously, Bolivia had sea access through what is now northern Chile.

Gaining Bolivia sea access has been one of the driving issues of President Evo Morales' time in office. He announced in March that he intended to sue Chile at the ICJ for sovereign sea access. He has already created a maritime claim organisation to prepare legal actions for a future Bolivia-Chile ICJ case.

While Chile will undoubtedly be unhappy about Bolivia's interest in its case with Peru, how Peru will react is not yet clear. In 2010 Peru granted Bolivia access to the Pacific through a 99-year lease on a small strip of land in the south of the country.

For many Bolivians, however, this is not enough, and while some critics say Morales should focus on domestic issues, the loss of Bolivia's sea access in 1884 remains an issue of national outrage.

Peru took Chile to the ICJ over their maritime border is 2007. Peru, which also lost territory to Chile in the War of the Pacific, argues that the maritime border should follow the downward curve of the land border, which would give it control of an additional 37,900 square kilometres of ocean territory.

Chile, however, argues that the border should follow longitudinal lines.

A decision is not expected until 2013, however, if Bolivia's request to intervene is granted, a decision could take significantly longer to reach.

Sources: Santiago Times, UPI

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

ICJ issues provisional ruling on Cambodia-Thailand temple case

2011-07-18T08:32:00.000-07:00

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a ruling on provisional measures in the Cambodia-Thailand Preah Vihear temple case, on Monday 18th July.

The Court, the UN's highest body, ordered both sides to immediately withdraw their military personnel from a newly defined provisional demilitarised zone.

It also ruled that Thailand should not obstruct Cambodia's free access to the Preah Vihear temple, prevent it from providing supplies to non-military personnel, and should restart talks though ASEAN.

The Court unanimously rejected Thailand's request for the case, which was introduced by Cambodia, to be thrown out.

Both sides appear to have accepted the ruling. Thailand's acting foreign minister, Kasit Piromya, said the Thai government would comply with the order, and that he was pleased that the order applied to both countries, rather than just Thailand as Cambodia had hoped for.

Cambodia's Foreign Minister Hor Namhong also viewed the ruling as a victory. “It will be tantamount to the cessation of aggression of Thailand against Cambodia,” he was quoted in the New York Times as saying.

At the heart of the dispute is the eleventh century Preah Vihear temple. In 1962, the ICJ ruled that the temple lay within Cambodian territory, based on a 1907 French-Thai map. But the territory around the temple was not demarcated, and has caused problems ever since.

Cambodia won unilateral UNESCO World Heritage Status for the temple in 2008, which sparked a brief border conflict. There have been further clashes since, and over 30 people have died in a series of border clashes in 2011 alone.

Monday's decision is the first in what promises to be a lengthy and complicated judicial process, according to the BBC.

Sources: BBC News, ICJ, MCOT, New York Times

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Census starts in Indian and Bangladeshi enclaves

2011-07-18T07:35:00.000-07:00

Sheikh Hasina and Monmohan Singh are expected to discuss the enclaves in September

Census-taking has started in India and Bangladesh's enclaves as on Thursday 14th July, ahead of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Bangladesh.

Enclaves are pieces of land detached from a country's main territory and surrounded by foreign land. India has 111 enclaves inside Bangladesh and Bangladesh has 51 Bangladesh enclaves inside India.

Folklore has it that the enclaves resulted from the losses incurred by the Maharaja of Cooch Behar and the Mughal Faujdar of Rangpur gambling on pieces of land during chess matches.

Historians, however, believe the situation came out of peace treaties between the kingdom of Cooch Behar, now in the Indian state of West Bengal and the Mughal Empire, which ruled much of South Asia, according to the Times of India.

The current census, which is expected to take a week to complete, is the first of its kind since 1971, when Bangladesh gained independence from Pakistan.

In 1974, Bangladesh's prime minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman signed a pact with his Indian counterpart Indira Gandhi to exchange the enclaves. The agreement was never followed through on, and poor bilateral relations has meant that the enclave issue remains unresolved.

The enclaves remain hugely underdeveloped, with its inhabitants often lacking access to running water, electricity, health, education and security facilities. In reality, the enclaves inhabitants are largely stateless. They formed the Bharat Bangladesh Enclave Exchange Coordination Committee (BBEECC) to agitate for greater rights, and have carried out a number of limited censuses.

The 2011 census will be carried out by 56 teams working in Bangladeshi enclaves and 91 teams in Indian enclaves. Each team is made up of one official from each country.

The number of people in the enclaves is estimate to range from 150,000 to 300,000, although even with this new, focussed survey, getting an exact number of residents will be difficult.

BBEECC's leader Diptiman Sengupta welcomed the initiative, but warned the difficulties the census-takers will face. "Both governments will have to be aware that touts are active to register intruder's name in the list. Similarly, there are several people who reside outside for a living. And several families have lost their land in river bank erosion. Officials will have to take necessary action to sort out these problems to get a genuine account."

Regardless of the technical difficulties the census officials may encounter, the process is undoubtedly a positive step forward for those who live in the enclaves. Singh is due to visit Dhaka in September, and it is thought that he might sign an agreement on the enclaves with his Bangladeshi counterpart, Sheikh Hasina. It is thought that some of the smaller enclaves may be swapped.

It is understood that residents of the enclave will be allowed to chose which country to be resident of when the enclaves are finally swapped.

Sources: AFP, Times of India

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

A new 'flashpoint'? The Israel-Lebanon maritime border dispute

2011-07-13T08:05:00.000-07:00

Overview

At first glance, a new flashpoint in the Middle East appears to be emerging in the form of the disputed maritime border between Israel and Lebanon. The states have not successfully formalised their maritime borders, and this has become problematic with the discovery of natural gas reserves in the Levantine Basin. The discovery of the Tamar and Leviathan fields has prompted speculation that other, similar discoveries stand to be made along the coastline of the eastern Mediterranean. This suggests the increasing criticality of precisely delimited maritime boundaries between the states' exclusive economic zones (EEZs), within which they exclusive rights over natural resource exploitation.

Four hundred and thirty square miles are contested in the present dispute which is made further problematic by the diplomatic relations between the state parties: Lebanon, for example, does not recognise Israel and has left the matter open for resolution by the UN. The UN has said that it cannot take any such action on the basis that the delineation of the maritime boundary between the states is no part of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) mandate. For its part, Israel includes the maritime boundary as but one aspect of the generalised political crisis that it says characterises the entire maritime and land border that separates it from Lebanon. The other major player, the US, has appeared to support the Lebanese position for instrumental reasons, and its representative has sought to depoliticise the current crisis, and frame it in technical and legal terms.

It would seem that the US is on its own, at least in this respect. Media reports have speculated on the potential for a repeat of the war fought between Israel and Lebanon five years ago, with the maritime border as the new, critical factor. But while the dispute may be overtly political it seems that risks of a new confrontation are being exaggerated. Moreover, it may also be that the position adopted by the US with respect to its ally, Israel, is not as unusual as it may first appear; rather, it is the continuation of policy through more nuanced means.

The nature of the dispute

In August 2010 the Lebanese government submitted a map to the UN which, through the use of a border line, defined the extent of its EEZ. This line is to the south of the equivalent line proposed by Israel on 10 July 2011, but its position has been endorsed by the US government. Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel has argued that the Lebanese line contradicts both the lines that both Lebanon and Israel have agreed with Cyprus in, respectively, 2007 and 2010, on the western extents of their EEZs.

In international law, the principle of acquiescence suggests that a right to a claim may be lost if a party remains silent when a unilateral move, i.e. the claim to territory articulated by the Lebanese submission of a map, is made. It was for this reason that the Israeli cabinet approved its own border delimitation during the last week. Lebanon's response has been to signal its commitment to protecting the 2010 borders. The hydrocarbon reserves enclosed by the limits of these overlapping claims are those at the centre of the present dispute. Energy analysts have discussed how Israeli control of them would make Israel a gas-exporting state whereas, at present, its supply is under threat of disruption, the pipeline from Egypt having been repeatedly bombed in recent months.

Elements within the Israeli government have argued that protestations to the Israeli line are made by elements within Lebanon, principally Hezbollah, intent on provoking a conflict. This, to Israeli officials, may represent a maritime Shebaa Farms—the area of territory that Hezbollah has long accused Israel of occupying illegally, but claimed, by Israel, as a part of the Golan Heights—and, thereby, offer the pretext to a conflict. As in the case of the Shebaa Farms, their policy view is that the territory is legitimately held, and that the existence of the dispute and the competing claims presents little more than a rationale for a confrontation provoked by the hostile powers that surround Israel. Indeed, a position used by Israeli politicians is that the present dispute is symptomatic of a relationship with Lebanon, in which elements within the country will seek to thwart everything that Israel seeks to do.

The Lebanese government's position has been that Israel has violated international law, and Lebanese sovereignty, in coming to the 2010 agreement with Cyprus. In January 2011 the Lebanese Foreign Minister wrote to the UN Secretary-General to ask that the UN work to prevent Israeli exploitation of hydrocarbon reserves in within the EEZ determined in the maps submitted by his ministry in August 2010. The Energy Minister, Gebran Bassil, has said that the government plans to auction off concessions in 2012; before then he has said that Lebanon will seek to counter Israel's continuing aggression and retaliate through political and diplomatic means.

The position of the US, and of the senior US diplomat in charge of the Israel-Lebanon brief, Frederic Hof, has been to ensure that the dispute cannot become the pretext for conflict that the Israeli government anticipates. Hof has sought to ameliorate tension through the appearance of appeasement, if not appeasement outright. The US, after all, has a number of private commercial interests within this context; companies are involved in exploratory and research activities in the Levantine Basin. Hof has appeared to back, at least in part, the Lebanese line, and has suggested that Israel submit the dispute to the UN, and indirectly negotiate with Lebanon through this channel, given the non-recognition problem. (Israel has, of course, refused this option and called upon Lebanon to negotiate all of the current border issues, both on land and at sea.) Its commercial interests considered—and its future access to the reserves in question—it is in US interests to adopt a policy that does not automatically privilege its longstanding regional ally in the Middle East. The US has recognised the danger of the pretext in the specific setting and played its hand accordingly; it will back the Lebanese claim to avoid a Shebaa Farms situation at sea and protect the interests of American firms and investors.

The way ahead

Perhaps this apparent marginalisation of Israel by the US makes more sense than at first it might appear. Granted, the commercial interests are important, but two other concerns should also be considered: Israel's energy security (and recognition of the potential disruption of the gas supply to Israel, and the increase in prices that this would dictate); and the actual scale of the natural resource reserves in the disputed area. A third factor, the likelihood of a new conflict, five years on from the border war, is also debatable despite the line peddled by news sources.

The disruption inflicted by recent attacks upon the gas pipeline between Egypt and Israel have shown that attacks on Israeli gas facilities will not be borne lightly. In this sense the US and Israel can work together: Israel can perform a display of jealously guarding its sovereignty, while its more powerful ally can adopt a pragmatic, conciliatory line, and support the Lebanese claim. This may reduce the potential for gas supply disruption to Israel given that the justification for Hezbollah sabotage could evaporate; the US conciliates so that Israel does not have to appear to stoop so low.

With respect to the scale of the deposits in the disputed area, it may be that the problem is being inflated quite falsely. According to one source, the border route that follows the Lebanese course affects only the northern parts of the Alon and Ruth licences which, although they may contain smaller oil and gas deposits, are not the prime concerns of Noble Energy and Delek, the firms that own the licences. Their primary interests are situated further south. If this view is correct then the major consequence of adopting the Lebanese maritime line would only be to delay—and by no means permanently forestall—the development of the less consequential Alon and Ruth licences.

Hof has attempted to frame the dispute in technical and economic terms and to ensure that it does not become a political matter. Perhaps this is in line with an overall US strategy, concerned with protecting Israel but, moreover, with appeasing Iran, Syria and Hezbollah. Put simply, perhaps the stakes are not as high, and maybe Israel is not conceding as much, as the US and Israel might like it to appear at first sight.

In any case, as Eyal Zisser of Tel Aviv University has argued, a conflict between Israel and Lebanon is unlikely. Both sides have a great deal to lose. Rocket attacks on Israel, and the destruction of Lebanese infrastructure would be the consequences, and the 2006 war is still a memory fresh enough to provide a measure of deterrence. Supporting the Lebanese interpretation of the maritime boundary therefore provides the US with a route to protect the Israeli energy supply, articulate a show of its own strength (and independence from Israel), at cost (in resource terms) that is lower than it seems.

Sources: Al Arabiya, Bloomberg, The Financial Times, Haaretz, The Independent, Jerusalem Post, Jewish Week, New Zealand Herald

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

South Sudan ready to declare independence

2011-07-08T09:13:00.000-07:00

Musicians prepare for South Sudan's independence celebrations

South Sudan is getting ready to celebrate as it counts down the hours until it becomes Africa's newest nation on Saturday 9th July.

According to the BBC, the celebrations will begin after midnight local time around the countdown clock in the centre of South Sudan's capital, Juba.

At noon, Sudan's flag will be lowered in central Juba and replaced by a giant South Sudan flag, measuring six metres by four metres. It will be raised on a 32 metre flagpole, which is claimed to be the tallest on the continent

Independence has been a long time coming for residents of South Sudan, as the country has been embroiled in civil war for much of the last 50 years.

The second civil war ended with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005, which established the mechanism through which South Sudan has achieved independence.

Southerners voted overwhelmingly to split from the north in a January independence referendum.

Sudan has announced its official recognition of its new neighbour, the first country to do so.

"The Republic of Sudan announces that it recognises the Republic of South Sudan as an independent state, according to the borders existing on January 1, 1956," Minister of Presidential Affairs Bakri Hassan Saleh said in a statement broadcast on state television.

While violence has broken out in numerous parts of the Sudan-South Sudan border since the referendum, Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir pledged, earlier this week, to support South Sudan, saying he wanted the new country to be “secure and stable”.

“We will bless our brothers in the south over their country and we wish them success,” al-Bashir said.

Al-Bashir will attend the independence ceremonies in Juba on Saturday, which has caused considerable difficulties for the western diplomats attending.

Al-Bashir is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur, and Western officials generally try to avoid meeting him.

To get around the issue, while South Sudan's President Salva Kiir will sit next to al-Bashir, Western diplomats will be seated on Kiir's side to keep them away from al-Bashir. African Union delegates who are sympathetic to al-Bashir will be seated on his side, according to the Sudan Tribune.

The UK will be represented by Foreign Secretary William Hague. The French foreign minister Alain Juppe will also attend and he has specifically said that he will make no contact with al-Bashir. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon will also be in attendance.

South Sudan will face numerous difficulties once it has become a new country. It is one of the world's least developed countries, having suffered decades of marginalisation and war.

A strong government will likely to be crucial in fostering development, and the South Sudan parliament ratified an interim constitution on Thursday July 7th, which is an important first step. Analysts and opposition members, however, have expressed concern that it concentrates too much power in the president's hands.

South Sudan still has numerous disagreements with Sudan, including border demarcation, the ownership of the disputed border region of Abyei, and oil revenues.

Moreover, the Sudan Tribune reported that on Thursday 8th July, al-Bashir rejected the Addis Ababa agreement on Southern Kordofan state. Southern Kordofan has been experiencing widespread violence since 5th June, primarily between representatives of the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and soldiers linked to the South's ruling party's northern counterpart, the Sudan People's Liberation Movement - North (SPLM-N).

Tens of thousands of people have been displaced and there have been reports of ethnic cleansing of the Nuba, an ethnic group that largely sided with the south during the civil war.

Sources: BBC, Guardian, Sudan Tribune

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Sudanese troops mass near border as South Sudan prepares for independence

2011-07-07T05:15:00.000-07:00

Salva Kiir will declare South Sudan an independent state on Saturday

With just days until Africa sees its newest state born, violence continues in Sudan's northern border state of Southern Kordofan.

The Satellite Sentinel Project (SSP) has identified an apparent massing of northern troops in Southern Kordofan's capital, Kadugli. There appears to be a convoy with Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) vehicles and artillery stretching two kilometres in length, and manned by approximately 1,000 troops.

SSP has also released satellite imagery from Monday 4th July which shows SAF aircraft and helicopter gunships at the Kadugli airfield, which seems to support reports that SAF had used helicopters to hunt Nuba people in Southern Kordofan's Nuba Mountains region.

According to UN reports, over 70,000 people have fled the state since violence began in early June, many of whom have crossed into what will soon be South Sudan.

A UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) report issued on 5th July confirmed violence in and around Kadugli every day from 30th June to 5th July, which suggests the situation is not getting any less volatile.

While there have been rumours that the agreement between Sudan's ruling National Congress Party (NCP) and the northern sector of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM-N) that was signed in late June in Addis Ababa, had collapsed, the NCP has insisted it is holding.

A NCP spokesperson said that Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir had met with former South African president Thabo Mbeki, who has led the African Union mediation efforts, which showed that the agreement was still being upheld.

Mbeki told reporters that he met with Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir on 6th July to discuss Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile.

The Addis Ababa agreement said the NCP would recognize the SPLM-N's right to continue "as a legal political party in Sudan." Al-Bashir said on 4th July that the SPLM-N had yet to conform to laws on creating political parties, and therefore could not yet be recognised.

While the agreement dedicated both sides to working on a ceasefire agreement, on Friday, 1st July, Al-Bashir instructed the SAF to continue military operations in Southern Kordofan, according to the Sudan Tribune.

It is alleged that northern forces have been targeting the Nuba people, many of whom fought on behalf of the SPLM/A during Sudan's two decade long civil war.

The 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement which brought the civil war to an end established the process by which South Sudan will now become independent. But very little, other than ill-defined popular consultations, was specified for those in the north who had fought against Khartoum.

In the run up to the South's independence, southerners in the northern army have been being dismissed. The final group will be dismissed in a 'dismissal ceremony' on 7th July.

According to SAF spokesman Al-Sawarmi Khalid Sa'ad, all of the dismissed had received their full financial and pension entitelements.

Sa'ad was scathing in regards to the SPLA's actions in the north, and said that SPLA fighters from the Nuba Mountains and Blue Nile were dismissed without financial entitlement or moral support.

“The SPLA left the northern Sudanese who fought alongside it to face an unknown future”, Sa'ad said.

South Sudan has planned considerable celebrations for Saturday 9th July, when they will declare their independence. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has said he will attend.

Sudan's Al-Bashir announced on 7th July that he planned to attend.

The US has announced it will send a delegation that includes a number of high ranking diplomats and military figures and will be headed by US envoy to the UN, Susan Rice. There was originally speculation that US President Barack Obama would attend, but it does not appear this will happen.

While South Sudan will be an independent nation as on Saturday, it still has not resolved a number of issues with the north, including border demarcation, ownership of Abyei, and how to deal with oil revenues.

Sources: Egyptian Gazette, Satellite Sentinel Project, Sudan Tribune, Sudan Vision, Times of India, UN OCHA

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Cambodia welcomes Thai election results

2011-07-06T09:09:00.000-07:00

Thaksin Shinawatra described his sister Yingluck as his "clone"

Cambodia has expressed its pleasure at Thailand's election results, as Thailand's opposition Puea Thai Party won a landslide victory on Sunday 3rd July.

Puea Thai's leader, Yingluck Shinawatra, who only entered politics six weeks ago, is the youngest sister of former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who in 2009 and 2010 served as a special economic advisor to Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen.

“We cannot hide that we are happy with the victory of the Puea Thai Party,” Cambodia's Foreign Minister Hor Namhong told reporters after making a toast with a glass of champagne with diplomats.

“We hope this new government will solve the problems with Cambodia more positively and more peacefully,” Hor said.

The Phnom Penh Post reported that incoming prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra, said on 4th July that restoration of ties with neighbouring countries would be a priority for the new government.

While she did not name any specific countries, it is understood that she was referring to Cambodia.

Tension between the two southeast Asia neighbours resulted in border clashes in February and April this year. The fighting left nearly 30 people dead and destroyed many homes.

Much of the tension revolves around the eleventh century Hindu Preah Vihear temple. While the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the temple lay in Cambodian territory in a 1962 ruling, the grounds around the temple were not demarcated and have proved a thorny issue since.

The difficulties between Cambodia's Hun and Thailand's outgoing prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva were well known. In 2009, Hun said Abhisit had “no family honour” and said he was the most difficult Thai leader he had ever worked with, according to the Phnom Penh Post.

Hun's relationship with Thaksin, who was ousted in a military coup in 2006, is known to be very close. Hun has called Thasin his “eternal friend” and he appointed him an economic advisor.

Thaksin, who was convicted in absentia on corruption charges, now lives in self-imposed exile in Dubai.

Analysts believe the election of a pro-Thaksin government in Bangkok will bring in a period of closer relations with Cambdoia.

“Cambodian officials have said border conflicts surrounding old temples can be resolved [immediately with a new Thai government]. The prospect is better now than under Democrat Party rule,” University of Indonesia Southeast Asian political expert Cecep Hidayat was quoted in the Jakarta Post as saying.

Indonesia, as current chair of ASEAN, played a large role in trying to encourage talks between the two sides in recent months. It is expected to make a push to resume negotiations once Yingluck has taken office.

The Bangkok Post reported that as news of the election results came in, Cambodian soldiers at the border expressed delight at the news and said the atmosphere relaxed considerably.

Sources: Bangkok Post, Jakarta Post, Phnom Penh Post, Reuters

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Afghanistan, Pakistan in unreported border war

2011-07-05T07:50:00.000-07:00

According to UN Dispatch, there is an “undeclared and intensifying border war” between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In the past month, shells coming from the Pakistani side of the border have forced thousands of people from their homes in Afghanistan's eastern Kunar and Nangarhar provinces.

While it has long been known that events on the Pakistani side of the border influence what happens in Afghanistan, reports of Pakistani soldiers crossing the border in raids against Afghan militants have increased in recent months, and public anger towards Pakistan is rising in Afghanistan.

While Pakistan has denied the shelling of Afghan territory, saying its troops may have fired a few accidental rounds while pursuing Afghan militants, its role in Afghanistan is murky.

Pakistan was a key ally of the Taliban until joining the US-led “war on terror” in 2001 and many have accused Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) of continuing to train the Taliban and tacitly or actively supporting Afghan insurgents.

While Pakistani officials point out that it has 140,000 troops in the northwest fighting a Pakistani Taliban insurgency, it is undeniable that rebel safe havens remain, primarily in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

“When Pakistan says it will crack down on them [Taliban fighters], it is just pretending. The Pakistan government protects them,” says Wali Shah, an Afghan district governor.

“Pakistan doesn't want the violence here to stop. It doesn't want Afghanistan to develop,” he told AFP.

Pakistan has recently launched a military offensive against insurgents in the Kurram tribal region, according to the BBC. The area is near the Afghan border, and is thought to hold a large number of militants who have fled another military operation in Orakzai.

NATO forces, who have primarily concentrated in Helmand and Kandahar provinces in southern Afghanistan, are aware that the focus will have to change.

The outgoing commander of US and NATO forces, General David Petraeus said on Monday, 4th July, that by autumn, more special forces, intelligence, surveillance and air power will be concentrated in areas along Afghanistan's porous border with Pakistan in the east of the country.

The attacks do not just go one way, however, and Pakistan's government rebuked the Afghan government for allowing Afghan militant groups to “terrorize Pakistani villages and attack Pakistani soldiers”, according to UN Dispatch.

In early June, for example, hundreds of militants from Kunar crossed the border and attacked a village in Pakistan. The incursion triggered a two day battle that left 66 people dead.

For Afghan civilians living in border regions, the situation seems to be deteriorating. Afghan scholar Orzala Ashraf Nemat wrote in a recent essay for the Guardian of his fears for the region.

“The greatest concern for people in this region is the increase in rocket attacks from the Pakistani border side, which continues to take the lives of ordinary villagers over the past months. We are worried about a direct invasion by Pakistani forces, even as the world is watching.”

Throughout June, death tolls rose in Afghanistan as Pakistani strikes continued. On 28th June, the eastern regional commander of the Afghan Border Police, Aminullah Amarkhel, said artillery shells launched from Pakistan into Kunar the day before had killed 20 civilians.

While this figure has not been verified, if true, it would make the attack the single deadliest incident in the low-level border conflict to date.

The government in Kabul is also starting to pay attention to what is happening along its border.

In late June, Afghan president Hamid Karzai warned Pakistan to cease strikes against Afghan territory and parliamentarians demanded that their government authorise military action against Pakistan if the shelling continues.

The border situation presents the possibility of full-on war breaking out between Afghanistan and Pakistan. With both sides resisting admitting and solving the problem of cross-border militancy, what UN Dispatch calls an 'undeclared border war' could continue to escalate indefinitely.

Sources: BBC News, Express Tribune, Sydney Morning Herald, UN Dispatch

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

South Korea to submit claim to East China Sea

2011-07-04T05:16:00.000-07:00

South Korea has decided to submit a claim to an extended portion of the continental shelf in the East China Sea, the government said on 3rd July, risking rekindling a dispute with China and Japan, who also claim the territory.

South Korean news sources reported on Sunday that Korea will submit a claim to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), arguing that its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) stretches beyond the currently claimed 200 nautical miles.

According to the UN Law of the Sea, countries wishing to delimit their continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles have to submit information on the claim to the CLCS.

Korea will claim that its continental shelf stretches to the Okinawa Trough in the East China Sea, however China has also claimed that the Okinawa Trough is part of its natural continental shelf extension.

Korea made a preliminary submission to the UN CLCS in May 2009, claiming 19,000 square meters outside of its 200 nautical mile sea. According to South Korea's Yonhap news agency, the claimed territory is located in the Korea-Japan Joint Development Zone, south of Jeju island.

An unnamed government official was quoted by Yonhap as saying South Korea expected China to follow with an official claim of its own.

"Final settlement of continental shelf territory determination will be made through mutual demarcation between the two countries," the government official said.

"The government is participating in the negotiation under the goal of securing as large an exclusive economic zone and continental shelf as possible," he said.

China also claims Ieo-Do, an island which lies in the overlapping part of the two countries' EEZs, and on which Korea has an observation station.

Parts of the East China Sea are claimed by China, Japan, Taiwan and Korea, and the region is thought to contain huge natural gas and oil deposits.

South Korea is scheduled to hold separate working-level meetings with China and Japan to discuss issues on the sea border demarcation later this year.

Sources: China Post, Reuters, Yonhap

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Bashir says Halayeb dispute to be resolved through dialogue

2011-07-04T04:10:00.000-07:00

Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir affirmed his government's willingness to resolve the border dispute with Egypt through dialogue on 30th June.

Speaking on his way home from China, al-Bashir said that former Egyptian ruler Hosni Mubarak had taken over the disputed Halayeb region while Sudan was embroiled in civil war.

Al-Bashir said Khartoum was waiting to discuss the issue with a new government in Cairo.

On 20th June, al-Bashir was quoted on Sudanese radio as saying that relations between Sudan and Egypt would improve as a result of the revolution in Egypt that overthrew Mubarak.

In May, Egyptian diplomat Nabil ElAraby, who became foreign minister in March 2011, before stepping down in June to become Secretary-General of the Arab League, said Halayeb would be a "joint investment area" between Egypt and Sudan.

Also in May, Sudan's ambassador to Egypt, Abdel Rahman Ser al-Khetm said Egypt and Sudan would announce a solution to their dispute in June.

While this announcement has obviously not happened, Bashir's comments are positive.

The Halayeb triangle, a 21,000 square km stretch of land overlooking the Red Sea, has been disputed since the late nineteenth century.

In 1899, the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium Agreement, which saw Britian and Egypt jointly manage Sudan, set the boundary between Egypt and Sudan at the 22nd parallel, placing the Halayeb triangle inside Egyptian borders.

In 1902, however, the British drew a separate “administrative boundary” that placed the triangle under Sudanese administration because its inhabitants were closer to Khartoum than Cairo.

The area remained under joint Egyptian-Sudanese control until 1992, when Sudan allowed a Canadian oil company to explore the waters offshore the Halayeb coast, provoking Cairo's ire.

The area has been under Cairo's control since the mid-1990s, and Sudan withdrew in 2000, whilst still maintaining its claim to the region.

Sudan has submitted a memorandum to the UN over Halayeb, but has resisted registering voters in the region for elections, despite claims that it was a constituency.

Last June, al-Bashir made a surprise assertion over Halayeb, saying “Halayeb is Sudanese and will stay Sudanese”. Egypt dismissed his comments, saying its southern borders “are well known at latitude 22°".

It appears that the two countries are planning some form of economic integration for Halayeb, although what this will entail is not yet clear.

Sources: AllAfrica, AlMasry Al Youm, Sudan Tribune

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

North Korea threatens 'retaliatory sacred war'

2011-06-30T03:39:00.000-07:00

South Korean troops had used pictures of Kim Jong Il as target practice

North Korea has threatened to launch a "retaliatory sacred war" against South Korea after news emerged that southern soldiers had erected signs in military camps on the border slandering the North's “army, system and dignity”.

"This is little short of a clear declaration of war," a government spokesman said in the North's official Korean Central News Agency. "We will react to the enemy's provocation with a stern punishment and counter its war with a merciless retaliatory sacred war."

South Korea's Hankyoreh newspaper reported on Tuesday 28th June that some South Korean army units near the border had set up anti-North Korea slogans. One army unit in Cheolwon, a town near the demilitarized zone had a banner reading “Let's ram guns and swords into the chest of North Korean puppet soldiers!”

According to the newspaper, there were also signs saying “Let's hack the three Kims into pieces”, a reference to the late North Korean founder Kim Il Sung, his son and the current leader Kim Jong Il, and his grandson and heir-apparent Kim Jong Un.

The reference to the Kims is a particularly touchy subject at the moment, as North Korea threatened to attack last month after it emerged that South Korean troops were using photos of the family as targets during firing practice.

South Korea's Defence Ministry told military units to stop using the photos as targets in response to Pyongyang's reaction, but according to Time Magazine it has no immediate plans to stop troops from using anti-North Korean signs.

The Defence Ministry said some army units have taken such measures to bolster their soldiers' mental toughness against North Korea

Tensions have been high on the Korean peninsula since March 2010, when a South Korean warship was torpedoed, killing 46 sailors. A Seoul- and Washington-led international investigation found North Korea responsible, however Pyongyang has always denied its involvement.

A second incident occurred last November, when in response to South Korea carrying out live fire drills in disputed waters, North Korea shelled the South Korean border island of Yeonpyeong, killing four.

Despite the fact the two sides held talks on a stalled jointly-run tourism project at Mount Kumgang on Wednesday 29th June, Pyongyang has pledged to carry out unspecified military measures "mercilessly" until the South apologises for the signs.

While inflammatory rhetoric from both sides is nothing new, what makes the current situation alarming, according to the Guardian, is South Korea's hardline stance.

President Lee Myung-bak was criticised domestically for his supposedly weak response to the three previous incidents, and has threatened to respond harshly to any further attacks.

The South Korean military is preparing new rules of engagement which would allow its frontline troops to respond "robustly" to an attack without consulting Seoul, according to the Guardian.

There is also talk that instead of promising a "proportionate" response to North Korean aggression, it would chose an aggressive enough response to dissuade Pyongyang from further action.

South Korea has been upping its defensive capabilities in the border region, and have brought in Israeli-made Delilah missiles, which have a range of 150 miles: enough to hit Pyongyang.

Some analysts believe Pyongyang is upping the rhetoric because its offers to talks in the last few months have been ignored by the south.

"North Korea has been trying this peace offensive for the past seven months. Now is the time for the North Koreans to change their mode towards more a conflictual approach," a former South Korean official and government adviser predicted in the Guardian.

Some suspect Pyongyang will use a third nuclear test to get the other parties back to the negotiating table, but Seoul has said it will not return to talks until it recieves an apology for the previous incidents.

Sources: BBC News, the Guardian, Korea Herald, Time Magazine

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Thailand withdraws from World Heritage Convention over border dispute

2011-06-29T06:13:00.000-07:00

Cambodian troops at Preah Vihear are on high alert

Thailand announced on Saturday 25th June that it was withdrawing from the World Heritage Convention with immediate effect, after the World Heritage Committee (WHC) refused to postpone discussion of Cambodia's Preah Vihear temple management plan.

Thailand's Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti, who led the Thai delegation at the WHC meeting in Paris said Thailand would leave the Convention and withdraw from the 21-member WHC because it continues to ignore Thailand's concerns that Cambodia's plans could negatively affect Thailand's sovereignty and territory.

Thailand and Cambodia have long disputed the border in the territory of the eleventh century Hindu Preah Vihear temple, which was awarded to Cambodia by the International Court of Justice in a 1962 ruling.

The ruling did not, however, rule on the territory around the temple, and in particular, a 4.6 square kilometer area has become particularly disputed.

Cambodia and Thailand have had a number of border clashes in the region of the temple in the last year, and Suwit had asked the WHC to defer discussion of Cambodia's plan until border demarcation was completed.

Thailand opposed the terminology of Cambodia's proposal, which called for 'urgent repair and restoration', preferring instead 'protection and conservation'.

UNESCO's Director-General Irina Bokova has sent a letter expressing her regret over Thailand's decision to withdraw from the World Heritage Convention.

“The World Heritage Committee did not discuss the management plan of the Preah Vihear temple nor did it request for any reports to be submitted on its state of conservation. Moreover, it needs to be clarified that UNESCO's World Heritage Centre never pushed for a discussion of the Management Plan by the Committee,” Bokova said in the letter.

Acting government spokesman Panithan Wattanayakorn said that while Thailand has no objection to the work of UNESCO in preserving and protecting the world's cultural and natural properties, it should not impact on border disputes.

He also rejected Cambodia's claim that troop reinforcements had been sent to the border and said that Thailand was ready to cooperate with its neighbour.

Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen said on Monday 27th June that troops stationed on Cambodia's border with Thailand had been put on high alert.

“They [the Thai WHC delegates] were angry walking out from the summit and they whispered to one ambassador that they will go back to fight. Therefore, I ordered the military to immediately [start] monitoring the situation from midnight [on Sunday],” he claimed, adding that all troops along the border were on high alert.

Thai National Army chief Prayuth Chanocha had also put his border forces on alert. “Thai and Cambodian soldiers have been in contact on a regular basis since the last clashes along the border, but there's not a high degree of trust between them yet,” the Bangkok Post quoted Prayuth as saying.

Thailand is set to go to the polls on Saturday, 3rd July, and Cambodia's Hun said Thailand might launch an attack across the border to create an excuse to cancel the election.

Democrat Party leader Abhisit, who is campaigning for re-election said the border conflict with Cambodia was not a factor that could derail the election.

Sources: Bangkok Post, MCOT, Phnom Penh Post, Thailand Business News

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Suwit's decision has not been universally welcomed in Thailand. He reported to the Cabinet his decision to walk out, and while caretaker prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva supported his decision, the foreign ministry did not, according to Thailand Business News.

Sudan parties reach agreement on Southern Kordofan

2011-06-29T03:57:00.000-07:00

The Sudanese government and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) in Sudan signed an agreement aiming for a full ceasefire in the northern border state of Southern Kordofan on Tuesday 28th June.

"In South Kordofan there was an agreement on general principles on cessation of hostilities the intention is to arrive to a ceasefire," SPLM minister for cooperation Deng Alor told AFP.

There has been heavy fighting in Southern Kordofan since 5th June between Sudanese government forces and northerners allied with the ruling party in the south, the SPLM.

The deal sets the framework for political and security arrangements in the two border states of Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan and is part of an ongoing mediation effort by the African Union (AU), led by former South African president, Thabo Mbeki.

The framework agreement stipulates that the National Congress Party (NCP), the ruling party in the north, will recognise the northern contingent of the SPLM as a “legal political party in Sudan.” NCP officials have previously said they will not allow the SPLM-North to exist after 9th July, when the South becomes a separate state, as it would mean the SPLM-North was an extension of a foreign party.

Under the agreement, fighters aligned with the SPLM in Southern Kordofan will “be integrated, over a time period and with modalities to be agreed, into the Sudan Armed Forces.”

There were two major catalysts for the current outbreak of violence in Southern Kordofan. The first was the election of NCP candidate Ahmed Haroun as governor of the state, in what the SPLM called a rigged election. Haroun is wanted be the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in Darfur, which borders Southern Kordofan.

Haroun beat SPLM candidate Abdel-Aziz Al-Hilu, who is also the leader of the Nuba, a non-Arab ethnic group who lives in the region.

The second catalyst was the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) announcement in May that the SPLM-North should disarm by 1st June, or else the SAF would do it by force.

The agreement signed in Addis Ababa on Tuesday will result in the two forces being combined eventually, although the actual mechanisms by which this would occur have not yet been decided.

It did specify that the NCP and SPLM-North would form a joint political committee to ensure that "the issue of governance in Southern Kordofan shall be discussed and resolved amicably…within 30 days.”

The two sides have also agreed to start working on a cease-fire agreement and to allow humanitarian access into the state.

Many people within Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states fought alongside the south in Sudan's decades-long civil war, fighting against repression and marginalisation by Khartoum.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), which brought the civil war to an end in 2005, set out the process that will on 9th July lead to the independence of South Sudan (although this was not the aim of the CPA), but very little was promised to the indisputably northern states of Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile except ill-defined 'popular consultations' on their future constitutional status.

In recent weeks there have been reports of 'ethnic cleansing' by northern troops in Southern Kordofan and Al-Hilu has said that over 3,000 people have been killed or have disappeared due to their ethnicity or political affiliation.

Southerners voted overwhelmingly to split from Sudan in a January independence referendum, but the period since has been marred by violence in a number of border states, including the oil-rich Abyei region, which is claimed by both sides.

South Sudan will become Africa's newest state on 9th July.

The UK's Minister for Africa Henry Bellingham said South Sudan's independence was "incredibly exciting".

"It is an historic moment for Africa and the world, the creation of a new country," he said, speaking from Malabo, which is to host an AU summit later this week.

"But we don't want the great celebrations of this new country to be undermined and marred by what's happening in Abyei and South Kordofan."

Sources: BBC News, Business Recorder, Sudan Tribune

UN votes for Abyei peacekeepers as Southern Kordofan violence continues

2011-06-28T05:51:00.000-07:00

The UN has voted to deploy peacekeepers to Abyei

The UN Security Council has voted unanimously to send a 4,200-strong Ethiopian peacekeeping force to the disputed Sudanese territory of Abyei, in line with the agreement signed between Khartoum and Juba on 20th June.

The force will monitor the withdrawal of Sudanese troops from Abyei, who occupied the region's main town on 9th June after being attacked by groups with links to the south.

The resolution establishes a new UN peacekeeping force, which will be called the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA). It will have a mandate to protect civilians and “to protect the Abyei area from incursions by unauthorised elements,” according to the BBC.

Sudan's UN Ambassador Daffa-Alla Elhag Ali Osman said northern troops would be withdrawn as soon as the Ethiopian troops had been deployed.

Abyei has been a crucial sticking point between the north and south as the country gets ready to split on 9th July. Oil-rich Abyei straddles the border and is claimed by both sides.

It was meant to have a referendum in January over whether it would join the south or remain with the north, but the vote was put off indefinitely due to disagreements over voter eligibility.

The southern Sudanese voted overwhelmingly to split from the north in a January referendum, established as part of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which brought Sudan's decades-long civil war to an end.

The US's Secretary of State Hillary Clinton welcomed the passage of the Abyei resolution, but expressed deep concern at the continuing violence in the northern border state of Southern Kordofan.

"Tens of thousands of people have been driven from their homes, and there are reports of very serious human rights abuses and violence targeting individuals based on their ethnicity and political affiliation," Clinton said.

Heavy fighting broke out in the border state three weeks ago, and renewed violence began last Wednesday, 22nd June in Southern Kordofan's Nuba Mountains, home to Sudan's indigenous non-Arab Nuba people.

Many Nuba fought on side the southern Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) during Sudan's civil war. While the civil war is usually categorised as a north-south battle, the fact that the Nuba, whose territory clearly lies within the north, fought on behalf of the south shows the situation to be far more complicated than it is often portrayed.

According to the Guardian, 16 people were killed and at least 32 injured in an aerial attack on Sunday 26th June in the Nuba mountains.

The aerial strikes, which have happened almost daily for the past three weeks, are said to have been carried out by Sudanese planes.

Senior Sudanese officers have told the African Union panel on Sudan, headed by former South African president, Thabo Mbeki, that the strikes are intended to prevent the SPLA from resupplying the Nuba.

But others say the air strikes and other attacks have targeted individuals due to their ethnic or political affiliation, and some have called the situation 'ethnic cleansing'.

Nuba leader Abdel Aziz al-Hilu told the AU panel that over 3,000 people had disappeared, “either killed or their whereabouts are not known, either because they are Nuba or they are SPLA.”

The UN peacekeeping force in Sudan, UNMIS, has been ordered to withdraw from Southern Kordofan by 9th July, the date South Sudan will declare independence.

UNMIS bases have been attacked and on 17th June, a UN patrol was detained by government troops and subjected to a mock firing squad in the state capital, Kadugli. They were allegedly told "leave South Kordofan... we will kill you if you come back here.”

The latest report from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said the situation in Southern Kordofan had calmed in recent days.

But the report also suggested that northern authorities were forcing some of the thousands of displaced people to return to Kadugli against their will.

A “combination of incentives through assistance and intimidation was used to exert pressure on the displaced people to return to Kadugli,” the OCHA report said.

According to the Christian Science Monitor, a variety of insidious methods have been used, some of which have been detailed in an internal UN report. Sudanese intelligence agents pretending to be Red Crescent workers allegedly entered an UN-protected camp and ordered the displaced people to go to a stadium.

Humanitarian agencies movements have been restricted and facts are hard to verify, but reports of forcibly moving populations bears worrying resemblance to many of the well documented allegations made against Khartoum's actions in Darfur.

Indeed, one of the catalysts for the current problems in Southern Kordofan was the election of Ahmed Haroun as governor of the state in mid-May. Haroun is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in Darfur, and his election was protested heavily by the South's ruling Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM).

Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir is also wanted by the ICC, which has created considerable difficulties in arranging the ceremony marking the secession of South Sudan, due to take place in under two weeks.

The US's President Barack Obama has said he will only attend South Sudan's independence ceremony if Al-Bashir is not there.

Al-Tayyar Arabic daily newspaper in Khartoum has said this is the case with a number of world leaders.

“A number of European heads of state, including the French President Sarkozy and UK Prime Minister as well as the US President Barack Obama, have in principle welcomed the invitation to attend the South's independence ceremony, but they conditioned their appearance in Juba on the non-attendance of the president of the republic Omar Al-Bashir, pointing to the crimes with which he is charged by the International [Criminal] Court,” the paper quoted an anonymous southern official as saying.

Whether Al-Bashir will attend is not yet clear.

Sources: AFP, BBC News, Christian Science Monitor, the Guardian, Sudan Tribune

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Syrian government widens border crackdown

2011-06-27T03:32:00.000-07:00

Some 12,000 Syrians have fled to refugee camps in Turkey

Uncertainty continues in Syria's border areas as the government's security forces widen their reach and thousands more are forced to flee from their homes.

On Saturday, 25th June, tanks moved into the village of Najia, after similar operations were carried out in Jisr al-Shughur on 12th June and Khirbet al-Joz on Thursday 23rd June.

Troops also moved into the village of Bdama on Saturday, which Reuters called a 'nerve centre', providing food and supplies to several thousand Syrians who have fled the besieged frontier towns, but have chosen to take shelter in fields on the Syrian side of the border, rather than cross into Turkey.

Umit Bektas, a Reuters photographer said he had seen armoured vehicles taking up positions on the Syrian hillside, apparently with the aim of preventing more Syrians from crossing the border.

It is believed that the government is carrying out a 'scorched earth' policy in the border region.

Some 12,000 Syrians have crossed into Turkey in recent weeks, and most are now residing in temporary refugee camps set up by the Turkish government.

The crackdown has been portrayed in a very different light by the Syrian government. The pro-government daily newspaper Al-Watan said of the attacks on Khirbet al-Joz, that the town was a "key crossing for armed groups from and to the Turkish" border. It said the army was 'now cleansing' the village of armed gangs, securing roads and protecting residents.

The State news agency SANA took a similar approach to the refugee question, saying families were returning from Turkey to Jisr Al-Shughur.

“Almost 730 people have returned…They had fled from the terror of the terrorist groups in the region,” it said.

There has been tension near Syria's borders with both Turkey and Lebanon

Violence is also occurring near the Lebanese borders, with activists saying people were forced to flee from the border towns of Al-Hit, Dweik and Quseir on Friday and Saturday.

At least five civilians were killed in Quseir on Saturday during house searches and funerals for anti-government protestors, killed during demonstrations on Friday. Quseir is located near the flashpoint city of Homs and only 15km from the Lebanese border.

The government of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad has been hit by waves of protests since mid-March.

Sources: Al-Jazeera, BBC News, Dawn.com, Reuters

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website here.

South Korea to develop border islands

2011-06-23T05:18:00.000-07:00

South Korea opts for the blue line, while North Korea argues for the red

The South Korean government has revealed plans to invest heavily in five islands near the border with North Korea, Prime Minister Kim Hwang Sik's office said on Wednesday 22nd June.

The 10-year, 910 billion won (US$848 million) plan will see investments in the security and living conditions on the islands of Yeonpyeong, Baengnyeong, Daecheong, Socheong and Udo.

Yeonpyeong island (labelled 1 on the map) was the site of a major confrontation between North and South Korea last November. The North's artillery attack on the island, following a Southern live fire military exercise, resulted in four people being killed and a number of buildings being destroyed.

All five islands are located just south of the UN-designed maritime border, the Northern Limit Line (NLL), which was established at the end of the Korean War (1950-1953). The North, however, does not recognise the NLL, and while it does not claim the islands themselves, it does claim the water around them.

The South's plan calls for efforts to stabilise the lives of the residents, as it is recognised that they live with considerable uncertainty, being located so close to the north.

Money will be provided to improve educational and medical access, and some 40 shelters will be built to improve security in the case of a North Korean attack.

Tourism and the fishery industry will also be invested in. The Prime Minister's office said “The plans will also be of great help in revitalizing the regional economy.”

Sources: Bloomberg, KBS World, Yonhap

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Border dispute blocks Heritage's progress in Malta

2011-06-23T03:50:00.000-07:00

Heritage's Area 7 is claimed by Libya and Malta

Border disputes got the attention of UBS this week, as it cuts its stock price target for Heritage Oil in a research note on Tuesday 21st June due to the continuing border dispute between Malta and Libya.

Heritage Oil, which operates Area 2 and Area 7 in the waters lying south of Malta, is contractually obliged to drill at least one well by the end of 2011, however this is looking unlikely as ownership over Area 7 continues to be disputed.

UBS's research note said “As the Libyan crisis shows little sign of abating we view it as unlikely the company can resume discussion between the two countries in the near term, and therefore assume a low probability that Heritage will drill in the next 12 months.”

The border dispute between Malta and Libya dates back to 1974, when Valetta awarded Texaco four blocks that lay north of the median line between Malta and Libya. When Texaco spudded their first well in 1980, Tripoli sent in a gunboat, and forced exploration activities to a halt.

The dispute was taken to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1982 and in 1985 it was decided that the border would lie 18' north of the median line in order to take into account the disparity in length of Libya and Malta's coastlines.

While both sides accepted the agreement, it only applied to a narrow strip of water and so border disputes have continued since. Area 7 lies to the east and south of the designated border, and as such, Libya considers it to be in its territory.

Soon after Heritage received the block in 2008, Libya's then National Oil Company head, Dr Shukri Ghanem sent a letter to Heritage's CEO Tony Buckingham, informing him that Area Seven lies within the Libyan continental shelf and was under contract with the Sirte Gulf Oil Company.

The dispute has not progressed since, and with civil war in Libya continuing, it is unlikely to get much attention anytime soon. As such, UBS decided Heritage was unlikely to drill within the next year and so removed the Malta prospect from their net asset value assessment for Heritage, which resulted in a stock target price of 230p, down from 280p.

Heritage released an operational update on 20th June, in which it said, “a seismic vessel has been mobilised to start acquisition of a 1,400 kilometre 2D seismic survey in Area 7 over the large Caravaggio target. Acquisition is expected to begin within two weeks. Processing and interpretation of this date, during the second half of 2011, will help define a precise drilling location.”

Sources: Citywire, Dow Jones, Heritage Oil, the Independent, Malta Today

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Sudan leaders agree to "full demilitarisation" of Abyei

2011-06-21T06:11:00.000-07:00

Thabo Mbeki (L), South Sudan's Salva Kiir and Sudan's Omar Al-Bashir in April, 2011

Leaders from north and south Sudan signed an agreement pledging to end fighting in the disputed border region of Abyei, on Monday 20th June.

The agreement was reached after days of mediation by former South African president, Thabo Mbeki, in the Ethopian capital of Addis Ababa.

The deal requires both northern and southern troops to leave Abyei, to be replaced by Ethiopian peacekeepers, in an agreement that Mbeki has said will provide for the "full demilitarisation" of Abyei.

Both Sudan and South Sudan claim the oil-rich border region of Abyei, and northern forces seized the town last month, causing over one hundred thousand people to flee, mostly to the south.

Violence in the northern border state of Southern Kordofan has also led to 60,000 people being displaced.

Some 4,000 Ethiopian troops are expected to be brought in after the Sudanese army has left, although the UN will determine the exact troop numbers and their mandate.

With South Sudan planning to declare independence on 9th July, 2011, Mbeki said in his announcement of the deal, it was crucial that the peacekeepers were brought in as soon as possible. He urged the UN Security Council to authorise their deployment without delay.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the agreement and pledged “the full support of the United Nations to the parties in facilitating its implementation.”

Ban also urged the two sides to resolve "all outstanding issues related to the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement and post-secession arrangement, and to reach an immediate cessation of hostilities in Southern Kordofan State and provide their full co-operation to humanitarian agencies in meeting the needs of the affected population."

The violence, which started on 5th June, continues in Southern Kordofan state. US permanent representative to the UN, Susan Rice, spoke of reports that alleged that forces aligned with the north had “searched for southern forces and sympathisers, whom they arrested and allegedly executed.”

Mbeki said political leaders from Southern Kordofan would be arriving shortly in Addis Ababa to hold talks on ending the conflict.

Violence broke out after residents in the state's Nuba Mountains, many of whom fought for the south during the country's decades-long civil war, were ordered to disarm by the new Khartoum-allied governor, Ahmed Haroun, who has been indicted for war crimes in Darfur by the International Criminal Court.

South Sudan voted overwhelming in favour of independence in a January referendum, prescribed by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) which brought civil war to an end.

Abyei was meant to have its own referendum on whether it would stay in the north or join the south, however the vote was postponed indefinitely over disagreements on voter eligibility, to do with the nomadic, Khartoum-backed Misseriya Arab tribespeople.

Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan states are clearly in the north, however many of their residents fought with the south during the civil war, and tension has been high as the South prepares to separate.

Sources: BBC News, the Guardian, RTT News

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.

Armenia and Iran plan joint border control

2011-06-20T05:02:00.000-07:00

The Meghri-Nourdouz crossing will be jointly managed

Armenia and Iran plan to jointly manage their sole border crossing in an effort to facilitate travel and transport communication, Azatutyun.am news website reported the Armenian government to have said on Friday 17th June.

The announcement was part of an Armenian-Iranian draft agreement that stresses “the need to elevate the level of good-neighbourly bilateral relations.”

The document outlines plans for immigration and customs bodies to provide joint services at the Meghri-Nourdouz crossing, in order to “facilitate international traffic of passenger, cargoes and transport vehicles.”

The agreement aims to simplify the border-crossing procedure, as individuals would only have to fill out customs declarations in the country of departure, and have their goods checked only in the country of entry.

Armenian and Iranian nationals currently need visas to enter the other country, something Tehran has long been pushing to do away with. Tehran has also been pressing for an Armenian-Iranian free trade agreement, however the two sides have yet to work out mutually accepted terms.

The two countries have also planned the construction of two large hydro-electric plants on the Armenian-Iranian frontier.

Source: Azatutyun.am

For more information, please see the Menas Borders website, here.