Our shelf

Our shelf



Currently, the application of our country is being discussed in the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. We are talking about the application for the expansion of the very continental shelf - in the Arctic Ocean. The commission includes more than 20 people representing various countries of the world, including those in Europe and Latin America.

Russia, on the basis of international law, claims a seabed area outside the 200-mile zone in the entire Russian polar sector with the inclusion of the North Pole zone and the southern extremity of the Gakkel ridge. This is the area of ​​the extended continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean, which is 1,2 million square kilometers.
Russia has all legal rights for this. Everything!

It should be noted that the use and development of various zones of the oceans are governed by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​1982. To date, 155 countries are parties to the Convention, including the Russian Federation, which has ratified the Convention 20 years ago.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has defined the continental shelf of the coastal state (hereinafter the dry and ornate language of international jurisprudence) as "The seabed and subsoil of underwater areas extending beyond the territorial sea throughout the natural extension of its land territory to the outer limit of the submarine continent or at a distance 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the width of the territorial sea is measured when the outer boundary of the submarine continent margin does not extend to such a distance " (Section 1 Art. 76).

“In cases where the margin of the continental shelf of a coastal state extends more than 200 nautical miles, the coastal state can carry the outer limit of its shelf beyond these same 200 nautical miles, taking into account the location and real extent of the shelf, but under all circumstances the outer limit of the continental shelf must be no further than 350 nautical miles from baselines from which the width of the territorial sea is measured, or no further than 100 nautical miles from the 2500-meter isobath, which represents line connecting 2500 depth m ' (Section 5 Art. 76).

It is important - for those who a priori oppose the application of Russia, declaring that Russia will thus also claim "half of the Arctic Ocean with its resources": the rights of the coastal state over the continental shelf do not affect the legal status of covering waters and airspace above them. All countries have the right to lay submarine cables and pipelines on the continental shelf - regardless of whose property this shelf is. But scientific research within two hundred nautical miles on it can be conducted only with the consent of the coastal state.

The rights of the Russian Federation on the continental shelf are defined in Article 5 of the Federal Law “On the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation” dated 30.11.1995 (as amended by 04.11.2006). These include:
- sovereign rights for the exploration of the continental shelf and the development of its mineral resources and aquatic bioresources;
- the exclusive right to authorize and regulate drilling operations on the continental shelf for any purpose;
- the exclusive right to construct, as well as to decide and regulate the creation, operation and use of artificial islands, installations and structures;
- jurisdiction in relation to: marine scientific research; mineral resource development; laying and operation of submarine cables and pipelines of the Russian Federation, etc.


In addition to Russia, there are a number of countries that claim to different parts of the Arctic Ocean bottom. These are Canada, Denmark, Norway and the USA. The interest of these countries in the northern seas is dictated by the fact that their subsoil contains astronomical mineral reserves: at least 83 billion tons of fuel equivalent (only according to general “estimates”). Of these, 80% falls on the Barents and Kara Seas. At the same time, the likelihood of discovering new large oil and gas fields in practically unexplored zones of the shelf is very high.
Russia is the first (back in 2001 year) has submitted an application to the United Nations to establish the outer limit of the continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean. Subsequently, the RF application was rejected. The experts concluded that the information provided is not sufficient to satisfy it.

For several years, Russia conducted in-depth geological studies to prepare a revised application for territories in the Arctic Ocean, collecting impressive data files to convince the United Nations bureaucrats.

In 2005-2014 Seven expeditions were carried out on the scientific vessel Akademik Fedorov, as a result of which seismic surveys were carried out, bottom sediment samples were collected from a depth of several kilometers.

Rosnedra organized a large expedition in which two icebreakers, a submarine, and special underwater vehicles participated. In the course of the research, fragments of hard rock that had broken away from the crust were raised from the bottom. They turned out to be the same age as the substance of the continent itself.

In June, 2007, a group of 50 Russian scientists returned from a six-week expedition with the news that the Lomonosov Ridge is connected to the territory of the Russian Federation, thereby supporting Russia's claims for oil and gas, with which the triangle is rich.



The territory contains 10 billion tons of gas and oil, scientists say.

Having studied the basalts and dolerites extracted from the bottom of the northern and southern parts of the submarine range, the scientists found that they have the same nature as the ancient base of the Novosibirsk Islands, which is an integral part of the continental shelf.

As a result, a repeated Russian application for expanding its borders at the expense of the continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean was submitted to the UN in 2015 year.

The application mentions the Lomonosov Ridge, the Submariners Basin, the Mendeleev Ridge, the Chukot Basin, which are a continuation of the Siberian Continental Platform.

Trying to make up for the lost positions in the dispute over primacy to possess the Arctic territories, Norway, Denmark and Canada have so far filed their applications with the UN Commission. The United States is also preparing to send its application. And to apply, the States first need to ratify the Convention. The United States Congress, which had previously kicked it off, now suddenly realized that ratification is needed, and urgently. Discuss. Vote. But there is no hint of such large-scale studies that Russia conducted, no one who has submitted or has submitted an application to the UN.

Having considered the peculiarities of the international legal regime of the continental shelf, it can be concluded that the territorial problems associated with the maritime spaces were and continue to be among the most acute problems of international relations. This is particularly confirmed in modern conditions, when individual countries are trying to redraw the world map, and openly declare various regions of the globe, including almost all areas of the World Ocean, to be their zone of vital interests.

Today the Arctic Ocean is a free water area where any country can carry out various activities. According to the principles of the International Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​1982, the bottom of the central part of the Arctic Ocean can be divided between the Arctic countries, and specifically Russia, Canada and Denmark.

The main argument of Russia: a significant part of the underwater territory, which our country claims to be, is a continuation of the continent, constituting a whole with it, there are no gaps filled with oceanic crust. Simply put, it is a part of the continent that, for various reasons, has sunk under the water, so the Lomonosov Ridge and the Mendeleev Ridge can be considered the territory of our continental shelf.

Of course, under international law, each of the Arctic countries has its own territorial waters in the Arctic Ocean, but, as is known, the Arctic continental shelf is the ocean floor, which is a continuation of the continent. Its length under the Convention on the Continental Shelf 1958 of the year is determined - without restrictions to the shelf of the opposite state. Therefore, putting forward their claims on the Russian shelf, Canada, Denmark, Norway and the United States, who consider themselves the main champions of democracy and the protection of the foundations of legal regulation of relations between states, are in fact violating international law.

However, I want to believe that international cooperation in the Arctic will still be based on the principles of mutual respect, taking into account the national interests of each country. That's just the fact that our "partners" are ready to take into account the interests of Russia, which, due to its unique geographical position, is an important link in ensuring the security of the Arctic region, even taking into account the fact that international law in this case is on the Russian side hard to believe. The whole main struggle for the shelf and the Arctic as a whole is still ahead.
Author:
Photos used:
Twitter
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy 10 February 2017 05: 48 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    Russia has all legal rights for this. Everything!
    Already have the opinion of "concerned" Poland. "Not permissible!"
    1. 210ox 10 February 2017 06: 32 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Legally, this is all good .. But recently, decisions in the international arena have not been made in favor of Russia .. Politics, her mother’s mother .. am
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Russia has all legal rights for this. Everything!
      Already have the opinion of "concerned" Poland. "Not permissible!"
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. ARES623 10 February 2017 21: 47 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          When you hear about the “liquid and stinking filling of the Kremlin,” you are once again convinced that the writer can be extremely short-sighted and desperately incorrigibly ungrateful, capable of nothing but envy and bile. One thing is good - there are many others ...
        2. Trinity 10 February 2017 22: 10 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Volzhanin // you need to treat your head, go to the doctor.
      2. Asadullah 12 February 2017 13: 43 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        But recently, decisions in the international arena have not been handed down to Russia ...


        It is not a matter of politics or decisions. The case is in the application for rights, and they seem to be declared even under Stalin. Or even earlier. Until the Convention on the Law of the Sea was signed in 1997. What drove Russia dozens of years ago in this matter. Why? And just look who signed this convention: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ This, by the way, is information for those who idealize Chernomyrdin. Today, the Russian Government needs to start all over again, and even from a position of strength that our ancestors once simply drew on the map and no one objected.
    2. Olgovich 10 February 2017 07: 19 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Russia has all legal rights for this. Everything!

      Rights must be backed up by a force-powerful icebreaker fleet, military bases on the Arctic coast, and a strong Northern Fleet.
      Otherwise, the Russian rights of the "partners" will turn into their own: most of them everywhere ....
      1. antivirus 10 February 2017 08: 15 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Rights must be backed up by a force-powerful icebreaker fleet,
        The next nuclear-powered icebreaker should be called "Semyon Dezhnev" or the name of the Duma clerk. who wrote the order for the expedition.
        Of these, 80% are in the Barents and Kara Seas. At the same time, the probability of discovering new large oil and gas fields on the practically unexplored shelf zones is very high.
    3. weksha50 10 February 2017 10: 43 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Already have the opinion of "concerned" Poland. "Not permissible!"



      We need to somehow tell Trump pranksters, hint that Poland, with her manners in international politics, wants to take the US palm ... Oh, what will be ...
    4. KaPToC 12 February 2017 09: 54 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Already have the opinion of "concerned" Poland. "Not permissible!"

      Legal rights are needed to calm conscience and the public when we declare that our shelf
      1. Mavrikiy 12 February 2017 10: 07 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: KaPToC
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        Already have the opinion of "concerned" Poland. "Not permissible!"

        Legal rights are needed to calm conscience and the public when we declare that our shelf

        Qualification. The conscience of the state is nonsense; it has only national interests. the public - to the world community .. when we declare - our sector of the Arctic has long been defined, It remains to bomb, so that Greenpeace writes ... out of the zone.
    5. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
  2. LÄRZ 10 February 2017 05: 58 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Russia has all legal rights for this. Everything!
    Like it or not, we are the first with our application. And the fact that we now want to legally “stake out” this shelf on the international level does honor the foresight of our leadership.
    Russia was the first (back in 2001 year) to file an application with the UN for establishing the outer border of the continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean. In addition to Russia, a number of countries are claiming various sections of the bottom of the Arctic Ocean. These are Canada, Denmark, Norway and the USA. Trying to make up for lost ground in the dispute over the primacy to own the Arctic territories, Norway, Denmark and Canada have so far submitted their applications to the UN Commission.
    While Russia did not deal with this issue closely, nobody was in the business, and now they started to twitch. Particularly gifted didn’t even bother to ratify this agreement ... But let them not forget that now we are going FIRST along this path and we will present them all the far-fetched claims against us. Let’s do such research, prove your rights with facts on hand, come on!
    The only fact is that our "partners" are ready to take into account the interests of Russia, which, due to its unique geographical position, is an important link in ensuring the security of the Arctic region, even taking into account the fact that international law in this case is on the Russian side, - hard to believe. All the main struggle for the shelf and the Arctic as a whole is yet to come.
  3. Thunderbolt 10 February 2017 06: 15 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Currently, the application for our country is being discussed at the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf ... The commission includes more than 20 people representing various countries of the world, including the states of Europe and Latin America.
    Our shelf, but I would like to know by what principle the commission was chosen and how they vote there. Because, I can assume that some members can play along with our Arctic rivals. I think that something can be proved for a long time in the ornate international "jurisprudence." that’s right, you should always respect international decency and be polite. But at the same time, the military argument should be developed, as well as try to be as independent as possible in the technologies of high-latitude marine production (it’s easy for the Arabs to scatter the sand and hit the fountain, and there the planet is in no hurry to reveal its untold riches to people). a lot of work --- and lawyers and military and scientists.
  4. aszzz888 10 February 2017 07: 26 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    Russia was the first (back in 2001) to file an application with the UN for establishing the outer border of the continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean. Subsequently, the application of the Russian Federation was rejected


    There are absolutely no guarantees that this time Russia will be refused. They will say that there is still not enough evidence ... And again, for a dozen or two years, they will be forced to collect this evidence again. And they will refuse simply for politicized reasons. First time or what?
  5. Fox
    Fox 10 February 2017 07: 58 New
    • 11
    • 0
    +11
    simple question: And Cho!? ... now, they discovered Antarctica like the Russians ... whose it? and also, it seems, some kind of laws were there. and all international law.
  6. Galleon 10 February 2017 08: 42 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    Sorry if a little off topic. Now there is a Moscow festival Moskino "Traveling in Russia", dedicated to the Arctic and those who are working there now. Yesterday I happened to be one of the guests. Impressions: lively, genuine event. A small room is full of questions, discussions ... I did not regret the time spent.
  7. Gormenghast 10 February 2017 10: 17 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Here is the correct Soviet shelf:



    As rightly noted, the United States has not ratified the Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is curious if the Yeltsinites had not ratified it, what status would the Convention have now? am

    And so it is necessary, like, to beg.
    1. DMoroz 10 February 2017 12: 26 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      if it weren’t for Alaska, Sysha would not have participated at all ... They hadn’t thought about selling ...
      1. MPK105 12 February 2017 14: 04 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        When they sold, there was no oil, only ice and pine ... And now no one will look at these cards, who is stronger, that is the Arctic.
  8. BAI
    BAI 10 February 2017 10: 23 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    The coolest thing is that Denmark is applying for a shelf that intersects with the Russian application, based on Russian studies. That's what it means to chop off Greenland in time. Where is Greenland and where is Denmark and sizes compare.
  9. weksha50 10 February 2017 10: 41 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    "putting forward claims on the Russian shelf, Canada, Denmark, Norway and the USAwho consider themselves the main champions of democracy and protection of the foundations of legal regulation of relations between states, actually violate international law"...

    Well, the USA is not the first time ... to violate, or to force to remake international laws is like a finger on the asphalt, or just how to breathe ...
    Only now the question arises: "And who is the aggressor?"
    Because the international politics of the USA, and of Canada-satellite-vassal, everywhere and everywhere is conducted only in an aggressive form ...
  10. Monster_Fat 10 February 2017 11: 25 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Guess "once" - whose side will take the notorious "UN Commission" when considering this issue? Here it is.
  11. CYBERNINJA 10 February 2017 11: 44 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    It’s time to annex the North Pole, polar bears, according to their will after a referendum, decided to join the Russian Federation laughing good
    1. The comment was deleted.
  12. legkostup 10 February 2017 11: 47 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A lip was rolled up on the shelf. First master Siberia.
    1. Gunxnumx 10 February 2017 13: 00 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      legkostup? go easy ...
      1. legkostup 11 February 2017 01: 49 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And what am I wrong, Gun70?
        1. Pulya 11 February 2017 11: 57 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: legkostup
          And what am I wrong, Gun70?


          My dear little man ... master the desert. And do not go to our SIBERIA. Wise guy pancake
          1. MPK105 12 February 2017 14: 36 New
            • 5
            • 0
            +5
            It’s not even Siberia-the Arctic that is at stake ... And there are those who like it, China, Australia ... So that's it ...
        2. KaPToC 12 February 2017 10: 08 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: legkostup
          And what am I wrong, Gun70?

          You are wrong that after the phrase
          Quote: legkostup
          First master Siberia.

          It is necessary to determine by what parameters development can be determined, Russia conducts economic activity in Siberia - Siberia is mastered.
        3. Gunxnumx 13 February 2017 11: 55 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          legkostup, I apologize for the poorly veiled rudeness. The reflex worked - no matter how much we swore inside: on tariffs, venal elites, etc., but I do not tolerate criticism from the outside.
        4. andj61 13 February 2017 16: 15 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: legkostup
          And what am I wrong, Gun70?

          Yes, in the fact that in the next 100 years, NOBODY will develop the Arctic shelf. It is much cheaper to extract oil and gas from shale. Arctic oil will be profitable only at a price of over $ 100 per barrel. And even that is not a fact. Our only oil platform operates less than 3 months a year. In such a scenario, there is no question of payback. Here the question is exclusively in priorities - and nothing more.
    2. BARKHAN 12 February 2017 13: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: legkostup
      First master Siberia.

      And what is Siberia for her? It was, is and will be. Regardless of the person. And people live there. Where they want. And enough for our children. It is already OUR! And the shelf will be ours ... and you stop us.
  13. kartalovkolya 10 February 2017 12: 24 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    What is ours is ours! We can’t find someone else’s, but we won’t give our own to anyone! And let all those who disagree go "in the shallow forest", we will show the direction, we are not robbers like the same West!
    1. KaPToC 12 February 2017 10: 10 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      but we won’t give it back to anyone

      Antarctica, Alaska, California, Manchuria - is that how we do not give our own? Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan!
  14. Comrade Kim 10 February 2017 12: 48 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Quote: Gormengast
    Here is the correct Soviet shelf:



    As rightly noted, the United States has not ratified the Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is curious if the Yeltsinites had not ratified it, what status would the Convention have now? am

    And so it is necessary, like, to beg.

    Not only Yeltsin, the hunchback with a Georgian Shevardnadze (who ruined his republic) began to sell his homeland.
    That's who you need to ask.
    The humpback must be buried alive to the stinking remains of Anthony until he himself is dead.
    He needs to learn from the Jews.
    They (the Israelis) imprisoned their prime minister (or whatever it was) for an insignificant violation of the law (looked askance at a young woman).
    I can imagine what they would do with a top-ranking official who sold part of Israel, and they would be punished approximately from his relatives.
    1. michajlo 12 February 2017 19: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Comrade Kim 10 February 2017 12: 48
      .
      #
      You are right dear "Comrade KIM"!
      But alas, there is a difference between punishment for violating the law of YOUR COUNTRY by a Jewish state official or even the prime minister in Israel and the PUNISHMENT of a Jewish leader, minister, deputy in Russia! As a result, in Israel, this violation is a matter of jurisdiction, but in Russia it is possible to receive an order or go on promotion !? And this is not a catch-up on my part, just a statement of the real state of affairs !, alas.
      Michael.
  15. Gunxnumx 10 February 2017 13: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    God forbid to burn out. Everything is justified. But with Western "double standards" it will not be easy to do this.
    It was recalled on the occasion that Shevardnadze and Medvedev were giving away huge water areas:
    http://igorpmigse.livejournal.com/148900.html
    http://www.newsinfo.ru/articles/2008-11-06/shevar
    dnadze / 538697 /
    http://svpressa.ru/economy/article/65057/
    http://www.gumilev-center.ru/putin-i-medvedev-pod
    arili-norvegii-shelf-v-barencevom-more /
  16. andrewkor 10 February 2017 17: 39 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    And if you fill the islands and set there "Bastions" !!!
  17. Sige 12 February 2017 12: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Below we ask the good gentlemen to assign to us what was ours already.
  18. captain 12 February 2017 13: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    How did Putin tell the child about the borders of Russia? "... the borders of Russia are not ending anywhere ...", I agree with our president in this matter by 100%.
  19. Vladimir Postnikov 12 February 2017 13: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It seems that the author was a drummer in childhood. Hooray, hooray, there’s a hole in the pope! Our shelf! He left everything in one heap, and ridges and hollows, the International Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Convention on the Continental Shelf, not forgetting to accuse the West of "actual violation of international law."
    In order to understand any issue without reels, it is advisable to find out the opinion of the opposing side, its claims. Nothing about that. And on the basis of what to make a judgment?
    First you need to decide what the shelf is before waving flags. We use the Mountain Encyclopedia (M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by E. A. Kozlovsky. 1984 — 1991.)
    "Shelf (a. shelf; n. Schelf; f. plateforme continentale, plateau continental; and. plataforma, plataforma continental) - relatively shallow (up to several hundred m) sections of the bottom of the oceans, marginal and inland seas, bordering continents and islands. The coastline serves as the boundary of the Sh. From the land side, the outer boundary is drawn along the edge - an inflection from the ocean side, below which the bottom depths increase sharply. The depth of the edge varies over a wide range from tens of meters (islands, for example, Kuba) to 400-500 (Labrador Peninsula) and even 600-700 m (Japanese m.). In those places where the edge is not expressed in the relief (for example, deltas of large rivers, such as the Ganges), the isnabate 200 m is taken as the outer border of Sh. - approximate cp. inflection depth. Pl. W. 31 194 thousand km2 (approx. 8% of the bottom area of ​​the World Ocean), cp. deep 132 m, wide from 1-3 to 1500 km. "
    What shelf definition does the author suggest?
    but, as you know, the Arctic continental shelf is the bottom of the ocean, which is a continuation of the mainland.
    Where does this new shelf definition come from? How did basins with depths of 2000-4000 meters become part of the shelf? And this "murderous" arugment - "as known". Who can determine to whom the Lomonosov Ridge or the Nansen Ridge clearly belong? They can be divided, but to prove that they belong to one of the parties is impossible. Just look at the relief map of the bottom.
    The patriotic fervor of the author of the article is understandable. But, if, as the author himself has already mentioned here, "international cooperation in the Arctic will still be based on the principles of mutual respect, taking into account the national interests of each country"then you should first calm down, stop knocking on drums, and start negotiations with a cold head on the principles of mutual respect.