Geopolitics of Russian-Turkish Relations in the Black Sea Region

The Black Sea region has a special geopolitical significance for at least two states - Russia and Turkey. In order to identify the key factors that complicate regional cooperation between the two countries, the article considers the main problems of Russian-Turkish cooperation in the Black Sea area under the conditions of post-crisis resumption of bilateral relations after the 2015 incident. Regional contradictions between Moscow and Ankara are largely caused by different positions on such issues as Crimeas joining to Russia, the regime of the Black Sea Straits as well as the policy of pan-Turkism pursued by Turkey towards the Turkic-speaking peoples of the region in the strive to form a Turkic world. In conclusion the authors explain the need to further strengthen versatile bilateral cooperation with Turkey and to pay special attention to security and humanitarian fields.

Discovering the opposite shore: How did hominins cross sea straits?

Understanding hominin expansions requires the comprehension of movement processes at different scales. In many models of hominin expansion these processes are viewed as being determined by large-scale effects, such as changes in climate and vegetation spanning continents and thousands or even millions of years. However, these large-scale patterns of expansions also need to be considered as possibly resulting from the accumulation of small-scale decisions of individual hominins. Moving on a continental scale may for instance involve crossing a water barrier. We present a generalized agent-based model for simulating the crossing of a water barrier where the agents represent the hominin individuals. The model can be configured to represent a variety of movement modes across water. Here, we compare four different behavioral scenarios in conjunction with a set of water barrier configurations, in which agents move in water by either paddling, drifting, swimming or rafting. We introduce the crossing-success-rate (CSR) to quantify the performance in water crossing. Our study suggests that more focus should be directed towards the exploration of behavioral models for hominins, as directionality may be a more powerful factor for crossing a barrier than environmental opportunities alone. A prerequisite for this is to perceive the opposite shore. Furthermore, to provide a comprehensive understanding of hominin expansions, the CSR allows for the integration of results obtained from small-scale simulations into large-scale models for hominin expansion.

Reconciling Conflicting Interests of Coastal and Riparian States: The Hard Case of Black Sea Straits

There are two basic understandings of the regime of the Black Sea straits: the Black Sea straits as a legal regime and the Black Sea straits as a political regime [1]. The legal assessment of the Black Sea Straits regime requires determining what the existing regulation of the Straits is, how open the Straits are to international navigation, and if closed, whether there are real legal grounds for closing straits while the reference to the Black Sea Straits as a political regime allows for the possibility that straits may be closed for ensuring the security of Turkey and the Black Sea riparian states [1]. It is worth noting that arguments advanced by international legal scientists on the Black Sea straits as legal regime fundamentally differ from each other. Some scientists consider the Montreux Convention to be a major problem in the legal regulation of the Black Sea straits. They consider it necessary for Turkey to recognise the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea as a legally binding treaty [2]. Others argue that the main problem in regulating the Black Sea straits is the unilateral regulations adopted by Turkey (1994, 1998 and 2003 Regulations), which, in their view, violate the basic norms of the Montreux Convention, especially the regime of free passage through the straits established by this Convention [3; 4]. Another group of scientists believes that although the regime of the Black Sea straits is significantly restricted by Turkish unilateral regulations, these acts are aimed at protecting the marine environment and safety, and, therefore, the Turkish policy of regulating the Black Sea Straits is legally justified [1; 5]. This article is dedicated to the international legal regulation of navigation in the Black Sea Straits. The aim of the paper is to evaluate the current regime of the Black Sea Straits, the relationship and differences between the regime established by the Montreux Convention and the unilateral acts adopted by Turkey on the regulation of traffic in the Black Sea Straits, and to answer the question whether the urgent need to protect the natural environment and maritime safety entitles Turkey to restrict the regime established by the Montreux Convention. Thus, special attention will be drawn to the Montreux Convention, the rules and recommendations adopted by the International Maritime Organisation and the case law of international courts. In the view of the authors, the environmental and safety arguments put forward by Turkey for restricting navigation through the Black Sea Straits have two conceptual dimensions. First, these arguments are acceptable when it comes either to introducing norms related to the movement of ships to ensure safety of navigation or providing an obligation of notification to the Turkish authorities [6]. Another important thesis advanced by this article is that in each particular case, the regulations adopted by Turkey should be interpreted in the light of the recommendations made by the International Maritime Organisation. The main rationale of this argument is that under the existing regulations, Turkish authorities can still suspend the movement of ships in the straits for various reasons, some of which are quite vague. However, the article showcases that Turkey can, in case of pressing environmental need, when there is an urgent interest in the protection of the natural environment, act with the motive of protecting the natural environment, regardless of whether this action derives from a particular international treaty.

Overland and oversea migration of white storks through the water barriers of the straits of Gibraltar

Soaring landbirds typically exploit atmospheric uplift as they fly overland, displaying a highly effective energy-saving locomotion. However, large water bodies lack thermal updrafts, potentially becoming ecological barriers that hamper migration. Here we assessed the effects of a sea surface on the migratory performance of GPS-tagged white storks (Ciconia ciconia) before, during and after they crossed the straits of Gibraltar. Oversea movements involved only flapping and gliding and were faster, traversed in straighter, descending trajectories and resulted in higher movement-related energy expenditure levels than overland, supporting the water barrier hypothesis. Overland movements at both sides of the sea straits resulted in tortuous routes and ascending trajectories with pre-crossing flights showing higher elevations and more tortuous routes than post-crossing, thus supporting the barrier negotiation hypothesis. Individual positions at both ends of the sea narrow were predicted by zonal winds and storks´ location at entry in the European hinterland, and birds did not show compensational movements overland in anticipation to subsequent wind displacements oversea. The length of the water narrow at departure shore, the elevation therein and the winds on route affected major components of sea crossing performance (such as distances and times overwater, minimum elevations, climb angles, speeds and energy expenditure), supporting the departure position and oversea winds hypotheses. In summary, our study provides a prime example at high temporal resolution of how birds adjust their behavior and physiology as they interact with the changing conditions of the travelling medium, reallocating resources and modifying their movement to overcome an ecological barrier.