bilateral and regional co-operation notes _ ias mains.pdf

8/14/2019 Bilateral and regional co-operation notes _ IAS MAINS.pdf

1/14

9/27/13 IAS Syllabus | Bilateral and regional co-operation notes | IAS MAINS

www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation

CATEGORY ARCHIVES: B ILA TERAL AND REGIONAL CO-OPERATION

Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting Indias int

Peace and Tranquil ityagreement between Nar simh a

rao and hi s coun terpart Li peng.

Chin a Tibet issue

IR India Chinarelation Major irritants and issuesPostedon June 8, 2013by admin

Following things are covered in this note

Common global concerns

Major Areas of contentions

1. Border Disputes Aksai Chin, NEFA Arunanchal pradesh

2. Issue of Tibet

3. Issue of chinas assistant to Pakistans nuclear and missile programs

4. Other recent issues

From IR China border disputes other issues, posted by Iasmains New Patternon 6/08/2013 (7 items)
https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/943265_141339749390053_557114172_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/s720x720/249148_141339839390044_92144752_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/s720x720/971847_141339836056711_783267935_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/941635_141339946056700_524207062_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/943265_141339749390053_557114172_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/s720x720/249148_141339839390044_92144752_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/s720x720/971847_141339836056711_783267935_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/941635_141339946056700_524207062_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/943265_141339749390053_557114172_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/943265_141339749390053_557114172_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/s720x720/249148_141339839390044_92144752_n.jpghttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issueshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issueshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issueshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issueshttp://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100005420863027https://www.facebook.com/album.php?fbid=141339069390121&id=100005420863027&aid=1073741831http://www.iasmains.in/study_material/author/adminhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issueshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issueshttps://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/941635_141339946056700_524207062_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/s720x720/971847_141339836056711_783267935_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/s720x720/249148_141339839390044_92144752_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s720x720/943265_141339749390053_557114172_n.jpg


2/14


www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation 2

Issue of Chi na s assi stan ce toPak nuclear and missile

programs

Chin as help to Pak i ndianconcerns

Other recent issu es

Generated by Facebook Photo Fetcher 2

Posted in Bilateral and regional co-operation, General Studies III, Internal Security- external and

non-state actors| Tagged China, International Relations, Pakistan, Tibet| Leave a reply

Xi Jingping Five point proposal for Indo-China relationsPosted on April 15, 2013by admin

Chinas President Xi Jinping listed a five point proposal for guiding India-China

relations. These are:

1. maintain strategic communication and keep bilateral relations on the right track;

2. harness each others comparative strength and expand win-win cooperation in

infrastructure, mutual investment and other areas;

3. strengthen cultural ties and increase mutual understanding and friendship between

our peoples;

4. expand coordination and collaboration in multilateral affairs to jointly safeguard the

legitimate rights and interests of developing countries and tackle global challenges;

5. accommodate each others core concerns and properly handle problems and

differences existing between the two countries.

Clearly, the last of the five points raised by Xi requires further elaboration and

consideration.India would, understandably, want to know what exactly China has in

mind when it talks of core interests today. For its part, China too must be mindful of
http://www.iasmains.in/study_material/author/adminhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation/xi-jingping-five-point-proposal-for-indo-china-relationshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation/xi-jingping-five-point-proposal-for-indo-china-relationshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_iii/ir-india-china-relation-major-irritants-and-issues#respondhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/tag/tibethttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/tag/pakistanhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/tag/international-relationshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/tag/chinahttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_iii/internal_security-_external_and_non-state_actorshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_iiihttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operationhttps://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/s720x720/600550_141340159390012_1372343147_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s720x720/397408_141340132723348_1471782578_n.jpghttps://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/s720x720/988474_141340122723349_1592069964_n.jpg


3/14



Indias core interests, especially because it has grievously hurt at least one Indian

core interest by enabling the nuclear weaponisation of Pakistan.

Indian anxieties on this score have been enhanced by Chinas investment in strategic

assets like the Gwadar Port in Pakistan. While China cannot be blamed, perhaps not

even implicated, in the rising trend of Indias South Asian neighbours trying to play theso-called China card, India cannot remain oblivious to this trend. It would, at some

point, impact on Indias core interests.

Indian Express article:

Panchseel:

Non interference in internal affairs

Mutual respect for each others territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Mutual non-aggression

Equality and mutual benefit

Peaceful co-existence

Posted in Bilateral and regional co-operation| Leave a reply

Indias economic relations with Latin America- an overviewPosted on March 13, 2013by admin

Latin America has remained at the periphery of Indian political and economic strategy,

having presented no significant challenges, received marginal Indian migration (mainly

in the Caribbean/Atlantic), and, depending on the country, having limited or no historic
http://www.iasmains.in/study_material/author/adminhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation/indias-economic-relations-with-latin-america-an-overviewhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation/indias-economic-relations-with-latin-america-an-overviewhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation/xi-jingping-five-point-proposal-for-indo-china-relations#respondhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operationhttp://www.indianexpress.com/news/five-thoughts-on-china/1092790/0


4/14



or cultural connections with India.

In this century, however, economic exchanges, particularly in the energy sector have

been significant. The South American continent, along with Central America and the

Caribbean (LAC), and their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) are rich in oil and gas,

with probable, and even proven, estimates of reserves rising every year.

In Venezuela, whose hydrocarbon reserves, as per latest estimates of the OPEC, at

296.5 billion barrels exceed those of Saudi Arabia, ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) signed a

joint venture (JV) agreement with Venezuelas state oil company PdVSA, acquiring a

40 percent share in the San Cristobal oil field. In May 2010, three Indian public sector

companies acquired 18 percent (OVL 11 percent; Indian Oil Corporation 3.5 percent

and Oil India Ltd 3.5 percent) in a JV with PdVSA, Repsol and Petronas, to exploit thegigantic Carabobo-I heavy oilfield with estimated reserves of 27 billion barrels in place.

The total Indian investment in Venezuela so far is about $3 billion and production from

all fields is expected to cross 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2016, with option for

our companies to transfer up to 70,000 bpd to India, over a licence term of 25 years,

extendable by a further 15 years.

In Brazils rich offshore basin, OVL has obtained four concessions, envisaging

investment commitments exceeding $1 billion. Indian companies BPCL and Videocon

in consortium acquired a 40 percent share in 10 offshore Brazilian blocks in September

2008.

In Colombia, in consortium with Chinas Sinopec, OVL acquired a 50 percent share in

Mansarovar Energy Colombia Ltd (MECL) which operates a cluster of oilfields in

central Colombia producing over 30,000 bpd, along with a 189-km pipeline.

In September 2007, OVL acquired 40 percent and 50 percent shares in three offshore

gas fields and in December 2008, it acquired 50 percent and 100 percent respectively in

two blocks in eastern Colombia. OVLs overall investment till date in Colombia

amounts to over $600 million.


5/14



In December 2007, Reliance Industries Limited was awarded two blocks off the

Colombian Pacific coast. Another Indian company, Assam Oil, set up an office in

Colombia in 2010.

In Cuba, OVL acquired a 30 percent share, in consortium with Repsol and Petronas, in

seven deep water exploration blocks spread over almost 12,000 sq. km. in May 2006 inCubas EEZ with estimated reserves in excess of four billion barrels. In September

2006, OVL entered into a production sharing contract with CUPET, Cubas state oil

company, for two offshore blocks. Investment by OVL in Cuba till mid 2011 was over

$70 million. Cuba is estimated to have between five billion and 20 billion barrels of oil

reserves offshore.

In Trinidad and Tobago (T&T), Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) is activelynegotiating a $1 billion investment with NGL for the supply of liquefied natural gas. In

2011 Reliance signed an MOU with T&T for a plant to make synthetic crude from

hydrocarbon residue which will be used by Reliance in India to make bitumen.

Reliance is understood to have acquired four hydrocarbon blocks in Peru. Jindal,

another Indian conglomerate, has also been granted concessions in Peru, while it has

discovered gas in southern Bolivia, where it is exploiting large iron ore deposits. InArgentina, OVL has signed an MOU with ENARSA for possible oil exploration.

Energy security earlier focussed on the possibility of concluding term contracts at fixed,

reasonable rates, a prospect that appears increasingly difficult now, given the recent and

foreseeable volatility in crude prices. Today, the focus is on participation in exploration

and exploitation. OVL has secured billions of barrels of reserves which it can safely

exploit over the next decades, while other state and private Indian companies are

following its example.

Reliance has been importing oil from Brazil from 2000 in exchange for supplying diesel,

accounting for over 40 percent of bilateral trade between India and Brazil over the past

decade. Combined with a lesser volume purchased by Essar, total crude purchases by

India from Venezuela in 2010 amounted to $5.167 billion.


6/14



Economic prospects on other areas:

Another dimension of Indias energy partnership with Latin America lies in alternative

fuels. Although collaboration in solar, wind and nuclear energy (supply of uranium) is

yet to come on the drawing board, joint ventures and even import of ethanol and bio-

diesel from Brazil, including transfer of technology, are a reality. India has donated

solar energy panels to a few LACs in the past years. The considerable landmassavailable in Latin America for cultivation of sugarcane, jatropha and other sources of

alternative fuels offers exciting possibilities in the future.

Latin America is also a rich source of coal. Several private Indian companies are

examining the economics of shipping coal to India and the assurance of supply has to

be worked out before this sector can be added to hydrocarbons as an area of significant

interest, though there have been some shipments of thermal coal to India fromColombia.

Posted in Bilateral and regional co-operation| 1 Reply

Italian Fiasco Italian Govt reverses its orderPosted on March 13, 2013by admin

The Hindu Story

Italian government has reversed its order to not send its two marines involved in

shooting and killing of two Indian fishermen in Indias maritime Contiguous zone that

extends upto 24 nautical miles in sea.

The refusal to send back Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone the Marines

aboard the merchant ship Enrica Lexieaccused of shooting and killing two fishermen off

the Kerala coast after mistaking them for pirates may win the new Italian

government brownie points at home but is conduct unbecoming of a responsible nation.

Background
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/its-our-boat-our-courts/article4538854.ecehttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/author/adminhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/italian-fiasco-compromising-diplomacy-over-political-gainhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/italian-fiasco-compromising-diplomacy-over-political-gainhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation/indias-economic-relations-with-latin-america-an-overview#commentshttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation


7/14



The duo were permitted by the Supreme Court to visit Italy to cast their votes in the

February 22 national election, on a promise by the Italian government that they would

return to India to face trial. From day one, Italy has questioned Indias jurisdiction in

the matter, as according to it, the incident took place in international waters. The

Supreme Court ruled in January that while India indeed had jurisdiction, only

the Union government and not Kerala could investigate or try the case.

Accordingly, it ordered a special court for the purpose. But the rulings high seas

description of Indias Exclusive Economic Zone beyond the 12-nautical mile line that

marks the formal extent of the maritime boundary was certainly favourable to the

Italian side. The Court also went so far as to leave the jurisdiction question open,

saying Italy could challenge Indias right to try the two men in the special court. With

all this, the Italians could hardly have claimed that the legal process was biased against

them.

While India-Italy ties will not be the same again, the Supreme Courts decision to allow

the two accused men to leave India is also curious. Permission was given on the basis

of a Kerala High Court order that granted the Marines a two-week sojourn in Italy

during Christmas. That was in itself a highly unusual decision. The Supreme Court

seems to have persuaded itself to believe that having returned once, they would

certainly return again. But having done that, it laid down none of the stringent

conditions to ensure the Marines came back, as the High Court had done. Those

included execution of a Rs 6 crore bank guarantee, and undertakings by the Italian

envoy taking responsibility for their return. The fact that it did not press these issues in

February is another embarrassment for the UPA, which stands exposed for allowing

itself to be taken for a ride so easily by a foreign government.

Indian court has jurisdiction on Enrica Lexie fiasco?

Samir Saran and Samya Chatterjee have argued in their article Who governs the high

seas? (June 26) that India is wrong in prosecuting the two Italian marines aboard the

tanker Enrica Lexie for shooting two Indian fishermen. Italys contention which

Saran and Chatterjee have echoed is that Enrica Lexie was under its flag. Hence, in


8/14



accordance with the U.N. Convention of Law of Seas (UNCLOS), Italy should try the

two marines. Indias position is that St. Anthony, the fishing vessel aboard which the

two fishermen were killed, was an Indian vessel; and under Indian law and the

Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence Against the Safety of

Maritime Navigation (SUA Convention), India has jurisdiction.India and Italy are

signatories to both these conventions. But while Italy needs to show exclusivejurisdiction, India only needs to show that it also has jurisdiction.

Saran and Chatterjee do not discuss a larger question that provides a context to this

case. This is the issue of Somali piracy and the danger of putting armed guards on

board merchant vessels. In their view, the Italian marines were doing something

laudable controlling Somali piracy. What they overlook is the complaint of Somali

fishermen that trigger-happy armed guards have been preventing them from fishing.

The collapse of the Somalian state meant that it was no longer able to protect its

waters. To a great extent, the present problem of piracy has its origins in the complete

collapse of the fishing industry. This collapse can be clearly linked to illegal fishing in

Somali waters by foreign fleets and the dumping of toxic wastes.

For the rest of the world, the collapse gained importance only because the consequence Somali piracy threatens the trillion-dollar maritime industry. International piracy

caused an estimated loss of about $7 billion in 2011 globally. As against this, the total

annual illegal fishing losses worldwide is between $10 billion and $23.5 billion. This is

the other piracy to which the international community is turning a blind eye.

The trial question

In the Enrica Lexie imbroglio, the controversy is not about the facts of the case, but

about the question of who has the right to try the two Italian marines. The Italian side

which Saran and Chatterjee endorse has invoked UNCLOS to assert its

jurisdiction. Article 97 of UNCLOS, which Saran and Chatterjee quote, refers to a

collision or incident arising out of navigation on the high seas. The shooting of

Indian fishermen was not a collision; nor was it an incident arising out of navigation. It


9/14



also did not take place on the high seas. At best it took place in Indias economic zone,

which under UNCLOS is not defined as high seas. Italy is on thin ground here. Even

if UNCLOS were applicable, the question of which is the flag state under UNCLOS

remains. This requires a legal examination of where the incident occurred on the

Enrica Lexie or on the St. Anthony.

A case similar to the Enrica Lexie one was previously adjudicated by the Permanent

Court of International Justice in 1927. In this case, a French steamer, the Lotus,

collided with a Turkish vessel, the Boz-Kourt, on the high seas, killing eight of her crew

and passengers. Upon the French vessels arrival in Istanbul, the French crew was tried

by the Turkish authorities. France adopted arguments similar to those used by Italy in

the present matter.

Holding against the French, the court, inter alia, observed that:

What occurs on board a vessel on the high seas must be regarded as if it occurred on

the territory of the State whose flag the ship flies. If, therefore, a guilty act committed

on the high seas produces its effects on a vessel flying another flag or in foreign

territory, the same principles must be applied as if the territories of two different States

were concerned, and the conclusion must therefore be drawn that there is no rule ofinternational law prohibiting the State to which the ship on which the effects of the

offence have taken place belongs, from regarding the offence as having been committed

in its territory and prosecuting, accordingly, the delinquent (Emphases added).

India has also claimed its jurisdiction under the SUA Convention. Dennis Hollis, who

writes a well-known legal blog Opinio Juris, writes that under Article 6 read with 3 of

SUA, India can claim jurisdiction an opinion also endorsed by a number of experts

in international maritime law.

What remains of Saran and Chatterjees argument is that the Italian marines are in the

service of the Italian state and so have sovereign immunity. If we accept that Indian

courts have jurisdiction over the matter, then we should leave it to the courts to decide

on this claim.


10/14



UNCLOS:

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law

of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty, is the international agreement that

resulted from the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS

III), which took place from 1973 through 1982. The Law of the Sea Conventiondefines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the worlds

oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the

management of marine natural resources.UNCLOS came into force in 1994, a year

after Guyana became the 60th state to sign the treaty.[1] To date, 162 countries and

the European Community have joined in the Convention. However, it is uncertain as to

what extent the Convention codifies customary international law.

While the Secretary General of the United Nations receives instruments of ratificationand accession and the UN provides support for meetings of states party to the

Convention, the UN has no direct operational role in the implementation of the

Convention. There is, however, a role played by organizations such as the International

Maritime Organization, the International Whaling Commission, and the International

Seabed Authority (the latter being established by the UN Convention).

The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully definedbaseline. (Normally, a sea baseline follows the low-water line, but when the coastline is

deeply indented, has fringing islands or is highly unstable, straight baselines may be

used.) The areas are as follows:

Internal waters

Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal state

is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of

passage within internal waters.

Territorial waters

Out to 12 nautical miles (22 kilometres; 14 miles) from the baseline, the coastal state is

free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of

innocent passage through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the

passage of military craft as transit passage, in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain

postures that would be illegal in territorial waters. Innocent passage is defined by the


11/14



convention as passing through waters in an expeditious and continuous manner, which

is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security of the coastal state. Fishing,

polluting, weapons practice, and spying are not innocent, and submarines and other

underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to show their flag.

Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their

territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of its security.Archipelagic waters

The convention set the definition of Archipelagic States in Part IV, which also defines

how the state can draw its territorial borders. A baseline is drawn between the

outermost points of the outermost islands, subject to these points being sufficiently

close to one another. All waters inside this baseline are designated Archipelagic Waters.

The state has full sovereignty over these waters (like internal waters), but foreign

vessels have right of innocent passage through archipelagic waters (like territorial

waters).

Contiguous zone

Beyond the 12 nautical mile limit, there is a further 12 nautical miles from the territorial

sea baseline limit, the contiguous zone, in which a state can continue to enforce laws

in four specific areas: customs, taxation, immigration and pollution, if the

infringement started within the states territory or territorial waters, or if this

infringement is about to occur within the states territory or territorial waters. This

makes the contiguous zone a hot pursuit area.

Contiguous zone jurisdiction

Indias legal claim to jurisdiction over its maritime zones flows from Article 297 of the

Constitution of India. It is amazing to note that Article 297 does not (and did never inthe past, whether in 1950 or after the amendment of 1963) specifically refer to the

Contiguous Zone of India, but to other maritime zones. This provision, as it stands

today, was substituted by the 40th Amendment Act, 1976, in order to take advantage

of the third U.N. Conference on the Law of the Sea, and was immediately followed by

the adoption by Parliament of the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive

Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976 (the Maritime Zones Act, for


12/14



short). This was probably encouraged by the development of new concepts like the

EEZ and overwhelming state practice in favour of a 12 nautical mile (NM) territorial

sea. Needless to say, the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea stands out for its

functionalist approach to law of the sea issues, particularly to issues of state jurisdiction

in diverse maritime zones.

Section 5 of the Maritime Zones Act establishes a 24 NM Contiguous Zone of India

and empowers the Central Government to exercise such powers and take such

measures in or in relation to the contiguous zone as it may consider necessary with

respect to,- (a) the security of India, and (b) immigration, sanitation, customs and other

fiscal matters. It also empowers the government to extend to the Contiguous Zone any

law in respect of (a) and (b). There is evidently no reference to extension of coastal

criminal jurisdiction to the Contiguous Zone.

However, quite interestingly, Section 7 of the Act establishes the Exclusive Economic

Zone of India as an area beyond and adjacent to the territorial waters, and the limit of

such zone is 200 nautical miles, in other words encompassing the Contiguous Zone. In

the result, the Section further provides that the Central Government may, by

notification in the official Gazette,- (a) extend, with such restrictions and modifications

as it thinks fit, any enactment for the time being in force in India or any part thereof tothe exclusive economic zone or any part thereof; and (b) make such provisions as it

may consider necessary for facilitation of the enforcement of such enactment, and any

enactment so extended shall have effect as if the exclusive economic zone or the part

thereof to which it has been extended is a part of the territory of India. This omnibus

clause obviously empowers the government to extend criminal jurisdiction to EEZ, at

least for the reason that with increasing economic and mining activities in EEZ, there is

bound to be scope for criminal jurisdiction. However, application of various laws into

the coastal zones (other than the Territorial Waters) is still found wanting as highlighted

by the case ofLarson and Toubro v. Commissioner Commercial Taxes(in which the

Gujarat High Court found in 2011 that the Central Sales Tax Act had not been

extended to the Continental Shelf and that therefore Larson and Toubro were not liable

to pay tax on goods dispatched to the Bombay High. This certainly resulted in a heavy

revenue loss to the Central Government).


13/14



Exclusive economic zones (EEZs)

These extend from the edge of the territorial sea out to 200 nautical miles (370

kilometres; 230 miles) from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole

exploitation rights over all natural resources. In casual use, the term may include the

territorial sea and even the continental shelf. The EEZs were introduced to halt theincreasingly heated clashes over fishing rights, although oil was also becoming

important. The success of an offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico in 1947 was

soon repeated elsewhere in the world, and by 1970 it was technically feasible to operate

in waters 4000 metres deep. Foreign nations have the freedom of navigation and

overflight, subject to the regulation of the coastal states. Foreign states may also lay

submarine pipes and cables.

Continental shelf

The continental shelf is defined as the natural prolongation of the land territory to the

continental margins outer edge, or 200 nautical miles from the coastal states baseline,

whichever is greater. A states continental shelf may exceed 200 nautical miles until the

natural prolongation ends. However, it may never exceed 350 nautical miles (650

kilometres; 400 miles) from the baseline; or it may never exceed 100 nautical miles

(190 kilometres; 120 miles) beyond the 2,500 meter isobath (the line connecting the

depth of 2,500 meters). Coastal states have the right to harvest mineral and non-living

material in the subsoil of its continental shelf, to the exclusion of others. Coastal states

also have exclusive control over living resources attached to the continental shelf, but

not to creatures living in the water column beyond the exclusive economic zone.

Maritime Security Regimes are codes and conventions of behavior agreed upon by

coastal states to provide a degree of security within territorial waters and on the high

seas.

One of the best known International Maritime Regimes is the United Nations

Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS. While UNCLOS is only one of many

regimes, or sets of rules, laws, codes and conventions that have been created to

regulate the activities of private, commercial and military users of our seas and oceans,


14/14


it provides the legal framework for further maritime security cooperation. Most

maritime regimes, including UNCLOS, have been created through the United Nations

International Maritime Organisation (IMO) in consultation with its member states, and

refer to navigation, resource allocation and ownership, prevention of pollution and

environmental protection. The United States has not yet ratified UNCLOS (see United

States non-ratification of the UNCLOS) but it does adhere to its conventions, and hasbeen the driving force behind other maritime security initiatives, including PSI, CSI,

ISPS Code and counter-piracy agreements to address piracy against commercial

shipping in the Gulf of Aden, Horn of Africa region.

Posted in Bilateral and regional co-operation, General Studies II| Leave a reply
http://www.iasmains.in/study_material/general_studies_ii/italian-fiasco-compromising-diplomacy-over-political-gain#respondhttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_iihttp://www.iasmains.in/study_material/topics/general_studies_ii/bilateral_and_regional_co-operation

bilateral and regional co-operation notes _ ias mains.pdf

Documents