Problems of formation of an international regime of the joint use and protection of international watercourses

The article is devoted to the problem of formation of modern international legal regime of joint use and protection of international watercourses that is aimed at effective provision of water to the States of international watercourse with due respect to new challenges and threats that have a negative impact on international water resources. The model is based on the concept of “international watercourse” that has the following features: 1) international watercourses include surface and ground waters; 2) a spatial and territorial criterion of an international watercourse that means crossing of the border between two or more States or being on their border; 3) the use of international watercourses affects the interests of two or more States; 4) the special international legal regime for the use of international watercourses that has developed within the framework of international law development; 5) special requirements for the protection of ecosystems of international watercourses that include protection from pollution and other forms of degradation of lands and forests adjacent to international watercourses, their fauna and flora; as well as seas into which watercourses flow; 6) a high conflict potential in the use of water resources of international watercourses. The analysis of the provisions of the doctrines of joint use and protection of transboundary waters shows that the formation of international water law should timely take into account human factors, technological and socio-economic changes. The modern international law model of the joint use and protection of international watercourses is a system of international legal norms regulating inter-state relations in the following areas: prevention, limitation and reduction of transboundary impact; protection of ecosystems of international watercourses; rational use of waters of international watercourses, effective management of water resources of international watercourses (including establishment and functioning of international basin organizations); information support of the population with regard to international watercourses.

international watercourses, transboundary waters, international water law, doctrine of absolute sovereignty, doctrine of limited sovereignty, doctrine of optimal development, doctrine of priority

1. Bekyashev K. A. Pravovoy rezhim mezhdunarodnykh vodotokov [Legal regime of international watercoursesъ]. Lex Russica. 2009. No. 2. P. 471—483.(In Russ.)

2. Krishna R. Istoriya i usloviya razvitiya politiki Banka v otnoshenii proektov, kasayushchikhsya mezhdunarodnykh vodnykh putey [History and conditions of development of the Bank’s policy on projects related to international waterways]. Mezhdunarodnye vodotoki : Rasshirenie sotrudnichestva i uregulirovanie konfliktov [International watercourses : Enhanced cooperation and conflict resolution]. New York — Geneva, 2000. P. 27—37. (In Russ.)

3. Martens F. F. Sovremennoe mezhdunarodnoe pravo tsivilizovannykh narodov [Modern international law of civilized Nations]. St. Petersburg, 1898. Vol. 1. 464 p. (In Russ.)

4. Völkerrecht [International Law]. Wolfgang Graf Vitzthum [et al.]. Moscow, Infotropic Media Publ., 2011. 992 p. (In Russ)

5. Rogers P. Znachenie sotrudnichestva v razreshenii sporov po mezhdunarodnym rechnym basseynam [The Importance of cooperation in dispute resolution in international river basins]. Mezhdunarodnoe i natsionalnoe vodnoe pravo i politika [International and national water law and policy]. Tashkent, 2001. P. 22—39. (In Russ.)

6. Sluchevskaya Yu. A. Problemy ponyatiynogo apparata v mezhdunarodnom vodnom prave [Problems of conceptual apparatus in international water law]. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatelstva i sravnitelnogo pravovedeniya [Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law]. 2017. No. 2 (63). P. 134—139. (In Russ.)

7. Bleeker A. Does the Polluter Pay? The Polluter-Pays Principle in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice. European Energy and Environmental Law Abstract. 2009. December. P. 289—306.

8. Brochmann M. Signing River Treaties-Does It Improve River Cooperation? International Interactions. 2012. No. 38 (2). P. 141—163.

9. Brochmann M, Gleditsch N. P. Shared rivers and conflict: A reconsideration. Political Geography. 2012. 31. P. 519—527.

10. Carbone S. M., Schiano di Pepe L. States, Fundamental Rights and Duties. Oxford Public International Law, 2009.

11. De Stefano L., Petersen-Perlman J. D., Sproles E. A., Eynard J., Wolf A. T. Assessment of transitional river basins for potential hydro-political tensions. Global Environmental Change. 2017. 45. P. 35—46.

12. Dinar S. D., Katz L., De Stefano L., Blankespoor B. Climate change, conflict, and cooperation: global analysis of the effectiveness of international river treaties in addressing water variability. Political Geography. 2015. 45. P. 55—66.

13. Furlong K., Gleditsch N. P., Hegre H. Geographic opportunity and neomalthusian willingness: Boundaries, shared rivers, and conflict. International Interactions. 2006. 32 (1). P. 79—108.

14. Hatami H., Gleick P. Chronology of Conflict over Water in the Legends, Myths, and History of the Ancient Middle East. Water, war, and peace in the Middle East. Environment. 1994. 36 (3). P. 6.

15. Hensel P. R., Mitchell S. M., Sowers T. E., Thyne C. L. Bones of content: comparing territorial, maritime, and river issues. Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2008. 52 (1). P. 117—143.

16. Kibel P. S., Eckstein G. America First and the Harmon Doctrine’s Demise — a History Lesson. The NewJurist. URL: http://newjurist.com (accessed: 27.01.2018).

17. Lammers J. G. Pollution of International Watercourses: A Search for Substantive Rules and Principles of Law. 1984. 724 p.

18. McCaffrey S. C. The Harmon Doctrine One Hundred Years Later: Buried, Not Praised. Natural Resources Journal. 1996. No. 36. P. 549—590.

19. Nordas R., Gleditsch N. P. Climate change and conflict. Political Geography. 2007. No. 26 (6). P. 627—638.