DOCSLIB.ORG

Entry Regulations for Cyprus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Entry Regulations for Cyprus Entry regulations for Cyprus Entry regulations apply only to the areas controlled by the Government of the Republic Cyprus. Passport: Required, except for holders of: 1. Laissez-Passer issued by the United Nations. 2. Document issued to stateless persons and recognised refugees. 3. Further to the above, citizens of the European Union countries, as well as of Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway may enter Cyprus with their national identity card provided there is a photo. Admission and transit restrictions: The Government of the Republic of Cyprus refuses admission to: 1. Holders of Former Yugoslav Republic’s passports bearing a renewal stamp with the name “Macedonia”. Entry is only allowed to holders of Yugoslav passports without the above-mentioned stamp. 2. Holders of “passports” issued illegally by the secessionist entity, the so-called “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”. Other nationalities having stamps or visas of the so-called “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” in their passports are only allowed to enter Cyprus after the above-mentioned visas/stamps are cancelled by the Immigration Authorities of the Republic of Cyprus. 3. For those intending to be employed in Cyprus the issue of an employment permit by the Migration Officer is required and no visa is required in order to travel to Cyprus. ------------------------------- * “TRNC” has been denied any international recognition and has been condemned and declared as illegal by the whole of International Community through Security Council Resolutions 541/83 and 550/84” Additional information: 1. The legal ports of entry into the Republic of Cyprus are the airports of Larnaca and Paphos and the ports of Larnaca, Limassol, Latsi and Paphos, which are situated in the area under the effective control of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus. Any entry into the territory of the Republic of Cyprus via any other port or airport in the area of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic does not exercise effective control (Turkish occupied area) is illegal. Categories of visas 1. Short-stay or travel visas: multiple-entry visas: This visa entitles aliens who seek to enter the territory of Cyprus, for reasons other than immigration, to pay a continuous visit or several visits, the duration of which does not exceed three months in any half-year from the date of first entry. As a general rule, this visa may be issued for one or several entries. In the case of aliens who need to travel frequently to Cyprus, for example on business, short-stay visas may be issued for several visits, provided that the total length of these visits does not exceed three months in any half-year. This multiple entry visa may be valid for one year, and in exceptional cases, for more than a year but for no more than five years for certain categories of persons. 2. Airport Transit Visa (ATV) This visa entitles aliens who are required to have such a visa to pass through the international transit area of Cypriot airports without actually entering the national territory of Cyprus, during a stop-over or transfer between two stages of an international flight. The requirement to have this visa is an exception to the general right to transit without a visa through Cyprus. Nationals from the countries listed in the Table below and persons who are not necessarily nationals of those countries but who possess travel documents issued by their authorities are required to possess this type of visa. List of third countries whose nationals are subject to the airport transit visa requirement, where holders of travel documents issued by these third countries are also subject to this visa requirement.1 1. AFGHANISTAN 2. BANGLADESH 3. CONGO (Democratic Republic) 4. ERITREA 5. ETHIOPIA 6. GHANA 7. IRAN2 8. IRAQ 1 The following persons shall be exempt from the ATV requirement: - flight crew who are nationals of a Contracting Party to the Chicago Convention. 2 The following persons shall be exempt from the ATV requirement: - holders of diplomatic and service passports. 9. NIGERIA 10. PAKISTAN 11. SOMALIA 12. SRI LANKA 13. TURKEY 3. Transit visas This visa entitles aliens who are travelling from one Third State to another Third State to pass through the territory of Cyprus. This visa may be issued for one, two or exceptionally several transits, provided that the duration in each case does not exceed five days and provided that the entry of the alien into the territory of the destination Third State is guaranteed and that the route taken normally requires transit through Cyprus. 4. Group Visas This is a transit visa or a visa limited to a maximum of thirty days, which may be affixed to a group passport - except where national legislation provides otherwise - issued to a group of aliens formed prior to the decision to travel, provided that the members of the group enter the territory, stay there and leave it as a group. Group visas may be issued to groups of between 5 and 50 people. The person in charge of the group shall possess an individual passport and, where necessary, an individual visa. 5. Long-stay visas Visas for visits exceeding three months for the following categories: a. Employment b. Study c. Business TABLE I List of third countries whose citizens are required to have a visa : States 1. AFGHANISTAN 2. ALBANIA 3. ALGERIA 4. ANGOLA 5. ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA 6. ARMENIA 7. AZERBAIJAN 8. BAHAMAS 9. BAHRAIN 10. BANGLADESH 11. BARBADOS 12. BELARUS 13. BELIZE 14. BENIN 15. BHUTAN 16. BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA 17. BOTSWANA 18. BURKINA FASO 19. BURMA/MYANMAR 20. BURUNDI 21. CAMBODIA 22. CAMEROON 23. CAPE VERDE 24. CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC 25. CHAD 26. CHINA 27. COLOMBIA 28. COMOROS 29. CONGO 30. CUBA 31. DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO 32. DJIBOUTI 33. DOMINICA 34. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 35. EAST TIMOR 36. ECUADOR 37. EGYPT 38. EQUATORIAL GUINEA 39. ERITREA 40. ETHIOPIA 41. FIJI 42. FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA 43. GABON 44. GAMBIA 45. GEORGIA 46. GHANA 47. GRENADA 48. GUINEA 49. GUINEA-BISSAU 50. GUYANA 51. HAITI 52. INDIA 53. INDONESIA 54. IRAN 55. IRAQ 56. IVORY COAST 57. JAMAICA 58. JORDAN 59. KAZAKHSTAN 60. KENYA 61. KIRIBATI 62. KUWAIT 63. KYRGYZSTAN 64. LAOS 65. LEBANON 66. LESOTHO 67. LIBERIA 68. LIBYA 69. MADAGASCAR 70. MALAWI 71. MALDIVES 72. MALI 73. MARSHALL ISLANDS 74. MAURITANIA 75. MAURITIUS 76. MICRONESIA 77. MOLDOVA 78. MONGOLIA 79. MOROCCO 80. MOZAMBIQUE 81. NAMIBIA 82. NAURU 83. NEPAL 84. NIGER 85. NIGERIA 86. NORTH KOREA 87. NORTHERN MARIANAS (ISLANDS) 88. OMAN 89. PAKISTAN 90. PALAU 91. PAPUA NEW GUINEA 92. PERU 93. PHILIPPINES 94. QATAR 95. RUSSIA 96. RWANDA 97. SAMOA 98. SAO TOME AND PRINCIPE 99. SAUDI ARABIA 100. SENEGAL 101. SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO 102. SEYCHELLES 103. SIERRA LEONE 104. SOLOMON ISLANDS 105. SOMALIA 106. SOUTH AFRICA 107. SRI LANKA 108. ST KITTS AND NEVIS 109. ST LUCIA 110. ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES 111. SUDAN 112. SURINAME 113. SWAZILAND 114. SYRIA 115. TAJIKISTAN 116. TANZANIA 117. THAILAND 118. TOGO 119. TONGA 120. TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 121. TUNISIA 122. TURKEY 123. TURKMENISTAN 124. TUVALU 125. UGANDA 126. UKRAINE 127. UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 128. UZBEKISTAN 129. VANUATU 130. VIETNAM 131. YEMEN 132. ZAMBIA 133. ZIMBABWE Entities and territorial authorities 134. TAIWAN 135. PALESTINIAN AUTHORITIES TABLE II NO visa is required for a stay of up to 90 days for all bona fide tourists nationals of the following countries States 1. ANDORRA 2. ARGENTINA 3. AUSTRALIA 4. AUSTRIA 5. BELGIUM 6. BOLIVIA 7. BRAZIL 8. BRUNEI DARUSSALAM 9. BULGARIA 10. CANADA 11. CZECH REPUBLIC 12. CHILE 13. COSTA RICA 14. CROATIA 15. DENMARK 16. EL SALVADOR 17. ESTONIA 18. FINLAND 19. FRANCE 20. GERMANY 21. GREECE 22. GUATEMALA 23. HOLY SEE (STATE OF THE VATICAN) 24. HONDURAS 25. HUNGARY 26. ICELAND 27. IRELAND 28. ISRAEL 29. ITALY 30. JAPAN 31. LATVIA 32. LIECHTENSTEIN 33. LITHUANIA 34. LUXEMBURG 35. MALAYSIA 36. MALTA 37. MEXICO 38. MONACO 39. NETHERLANDS 40. NEW ZEALAND 41. NICARAGUA 42. NORWAY 43. PANAMA 44. PARAGUAY 45. POLAND 46. PORTUGAL 47. ROMANIA 48. SAN MARINO 49. SINGAPORE 50. SLOVAKIA 51. SLOVENIA 52. SOUTH KOREA 53. SPAIN 54. SWEDEN 55. SWITZERLAND 56. UNITED KINGDOM 57. UNITED STATES 58. URUGUAY 59. VENEZUELA 3. Special Administrative Regions of the People's Republic of China 60. HONG KONG S.A.R. 61. MACAO S.A.R. Additional categories of persons who do NOT require visa 1. holders of diplomatic, service or other official passports 2. civilian air and sea crew 3. the flight crew and attendants on emergency or rescue flights and other helpers in the event of disaster or accident 4. the civilian crew of ships navigating in international waters 5. the holders of laissez-passer issued by the United Nations to their officials 6. School pupils having the nationality of a third country listed in ANNEX I who reside in a third country listed in Annex II and are travelling in the context of a school excursion as members of a group of pupils accompanied by a teacher from the school in question. 7. all persons who are in possession of work permit issued by the Migration Officer. 8. all persons who possess permanent or temporary residence permit issued by the Migration Officer. 9. all persons who possess study permit. Issue: Visas will be issued by the Embassies and General Consulates of the Republic of Cyprus (see for the list at the site of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus: http://www.mfa.gov.cy), and additionally by the British High Commissions/Embassies in the following countries: ARGENTINE REPUBLIC BAHREIN HONG KONG JAPAN JORDAN KAZAKSTAN KUWAIT NORWAY OMAN SWITZERLAND SUDAN UAE (ABU DHABI, DUBAI) UZBEKISTAN and by the Greek Embassy in: KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA and the Honorary Consulates in the rest of the countries.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Impact of Tariff Preference Levels on US Textile and Apparel
    Office of Industries Working Paper ID-053 September 2018 The Impact of Tariff Preference Levels on U.S. Textile and Apparel Trade Mahnaz Khan Abstract Certain U.S. bilateral or multilateral free trade agreements contain tariff preference levels (TPLs) that permit a limited quantity of specified finished textile and/or apparel goods to enter the U.S. market at preferential duty rates despite not meeting the agreement’s required tariff shift rules. This article seeks to examine the effect of TPL provisions that have expired, or will expire in 2018, on U.S. textile and apparel imports and exports from certain FTA partners, including Bahrain, Nicaragua and Costa Rica (under CAFTA-DR), Morocco, Oman, and Singapore. It will discuss import and export trends after TPL implementation and in some cases, TPL expiration, in the context of an FTA partners’ industry structure and competitiveness as a U.S. textile and apparel supplier. Such trends vary widely across countries, and analysis of the factors influencing these trade flows suggests that the effectiveness of TPLs is dependent upon myriad factors, including the structure of the partner country’s textile and apparel sector, the country’s competitiveness as a U.S. supplier, and existence or absence of relationships with U.S. textile firms. Disclaimer: Office of Industries working papers are the result of the ongoing professional research of USITC staff and solely represent the opinions and professional research of individual authors. These papers do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. International Trade Commission or any of its individual Commissioners. The Impact of Tariff Preference Levels on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • QATAR V. BAHRAIN) REPLY of the STATE of QATAR ______TABLE of CONTENTS PART I - INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I - GENERAL 1 Section 1
    CASE CONCERNING MARITIME DELIMITATION AND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS BETWEEN QATAR AND BAHRAIN (QATAR V. BAHRAIN) REPLY OF THE STATE OF QATAR _____________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I - INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I - GENERAL 1 Section 1. Qatar's Case and Structure of Qatar's Reply Section 2. Deficiencies in Bahrain's Written Pleadings Section 3. Bahrain's Continuing Violations of the Status Quo PART II - THE GEOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND CHAPTER II - THE TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF QATAR Section 1. The Overall Geographical Context Section 2. The Emergence of the Al-Thani as a Political Force in Qatar Section 3. Relations between the Al-Thani and Nasir bin Mubarak Section 4. The 1913 and 1914 Conventions Section 5. The 1916 Treaty Section 6. Al-Thani Authority throughout the Peninsula of Qatar was consolidated long before the 1930s Section 7. The Map Evidence CHAPTER III - THE EXTENT OF THE TERRITORY OF BAHRAIN Section 1. Bahrain from 1783 to 1868 Section 2. Bahrain after 1868 PART III - THE HAWAR ISLANDS AND OTHER TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS CHAPTER IV - THE HAWAR ISLANDS Section 1. Introduction: The Territorial Integrity of Qatar and Qatar's Sovereignty over the Hawar Islands Section 2. Proximity and Qatar's Title to the Hawar Islands Section 3. The Extensive Map Evidence supporting Qatar's Sovereignty over the Hawar Islands Section 4. The Lack of Evidence for Bahrain's Claim to have exercised Sovereignty over the Hawar Islands from the 18th Century to the Present Day Section 5. The Bahrain and Qatar Oil Concession Negotiations between 1925 and 1939 and the Events Leading to the Reversal of British Recognition of Hawar as part of Qatar Section 6.
    [Show full text]
  • United Arab Emirates (Uae)
    Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Country Profile: United Arab Emirates, July 2007 COUNTRY PROFILE: UNITED ARAB EMIRATES (UAE) July 2007 COUNTRY اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴّﺔ اﻟﻤﺘّﺤﺪة (Formal Name: United Arab Emirates (Al Imarat al Arabiyah al Muttahidah Dubai , أﺑﻮ ﻇﺒﻲ (The seven emirates, in order of size, are: Abu Dhabi (Abu Zaby .اﻹﻣﺎرات Al ,ﻋﺠﻤﺎن Ajman , أ مّ اﻟﻘﻴﻮﻳﻦ Umm al Qaywayn , اﻟﺸﺎرﻗﺔ (Sharjah (Ash Shariqah ,دﺑﻲّ (Dubayy) .رأس اﻟﺨﻴﻤﺔ and Ras al Khaymah ,اﻟﻔﺠﻴﺮة Fajayrah Short Form: UAE. اﻣﺮاﺗﻰ .(Term for Citizen(s): Emirati(s أﺑﻮ ﻇﺒﻲ .Capital: Abu Dhabi City Major Cities: Al Ayn, capital of the Eastern Region, and Madinat Zayid, capital of the Western Region, are located in Abu Dhabi Emirate, the largest and most populous emirate. Dubai City is located in Dubai Emirate, the second largest emirate. Sharjah City and Khawr Fakkan are the major cities of the third largest emirate—Sharjah. Independence: The United Kingdom announced in 1968 and reaffirmed in 1971 that it would end its treaty relationships with the seven Trucial Coast states, which had been under British protection since 1892. Following the termination of all existing treaties with Britain, on December 2, 1971, six of the seven sheikhdoms formed the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The seventh sheikhdom, Ras al Khaymah, joined the UAE in 1972. Public holidays: Public holidays other than New Year’s Day and UAE National Day are dependent on the Islamic calendar and vary from year to year. For 2007, the holidays are: New Year’s Day (January 1); Muharram, Islamic New Year (January 20); Mouloud, Birth of Muhammad (March 31); Accession of the Ruler of Abu Dhabi—observed only in Abu Dhabi (August 6); Leilat al Meiraj, Ascension of Muhammad (August 10); first day of Ramadan (September 13); Eid al Fitr, end of Ramadan (October 13); UAE National Day (December 2); Eid al Adha, Feast of the Sacrifice (December 20); and Christmas Day (December 25).
    [Show full text]
  • BAHRAIN and the BATTLE BETWEEN IRAN and SAUDI ARABIA by George Friedman, Strategic Forecasting, Inc
    BAHRAIN AND THE BATTLE BETWEEN IRAN AND SAUDI ARABIA By George Friedman, Strategic Forecasting, Inc. The world's attention is focused on Libya, which is now in a state of civil war with the winner far from clear. While crucial for the Libyan people and of some significance to the world's oil markets, in our view, Libya is not the most important event in the Arab world at the moment. The demonstrations in Bahrain are, in my view, far more significant in their implications for the region and potentially for the world. To understand this, we must place it in a strategic context. As STRATFOR has been saying for quite a while, a decisive moment is approaching, with the United States currently slated to withdraw the last of its forces from Iraq by the end of the year. Indeed, we are already at a point where the composition of the 50,000 troops remaining in Iraq has shifted from combat troops to training and support personnel. As it stands now, even these will all be gone by Dec. 31, 2011, provided the United States does not negotiate an extended stay. Iraq still does not have a stable government. It also does not have a military and security apparatus able to enforce the will of the government (which is hardly of one mind on anything) on the country, much less defend the country from outside forces. Filling the Vacuum in Iraq The decision to withdraw creates a vacuum in Iraq, and the question of the wisdom of the original invasion is at this point moot.
    [Show full text]
  • Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North the Role of the Arab States Africa Programme
    Briefing Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North The Role of the Arab States Africa Programme Yossi Mekelberg Summary and Greg Shapland • The positions of several Arab states towards Israel have evolved greatly in the past 50 years. Four of these states in particular – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and (to a lesser extent) Jordan – could be influential in shaping the course of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. • In addition to Egypt and Jordan (which have signed peace treaties with Israel), Saudi Arabia and the UAE, among other Gulf states, now have extensive – albeit discreet – dealings with Israel. • This evolution has created a new situation in the region, with these Arab states now having considerable potential influence over the Israelis and Palestinians. It also has implications for US positions and policy. So far, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Jordan have chosen not to test what this influence could achieve. • One reason for the inactivity to date may be disenchantment with the Palestinians and their cause, including the inability of Palestinian leaders to unite to promote it. However, ignoring Palestinian concerns will not bring about a resolution of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which will continue to add to instability in the region. If Arab leaders see regional stability as being in their countries’ interests, they should be trying to shape any eventual peace plan advanced by the administration of US President Donald Trump in such a way that it forms a framework for negotiations that both Israeli and Palestinian leaderships can accept. Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking: The Role of the Arab States Introduction This briefing forms part of the Chatham House project, ‘Israel–Palestine: Beyond the Stalemate’.
    [Show full text]
  • Oman: Politics, Security, and U.S
    Oman: Politics, Security, and U.S. Policy Updated May 19, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RS21534 SUMMARY RS21534 Oman: Politics, Security, and U.S. Policy May 19, 2021 The Sultanate of Oman has been a strategic partner of the United States since 1980, when it became the first Persian Gulf state to sign a formal accord permitting the U.S. military to use its Kenneth Katzman facilities. Oman has hosted U.S. forces during every U.S. military operation in the region since Specialist in Middle then, and it is a partner in U.S. efforts to counter terrorist groups and other regional threats. In Eastern Affairs January 2020, Oman’s longtime leader, Sultan Qaboos bin Sa’id Al Said, passed away and was succeeded by Haythim bin Tariq Al Said, a cousin selected by Oman’s royal family immediately upon Qaboos’s death. Sultan Haythim espouses policies similar to those of Qaboos and has not altered U.S.-Oman ties or Oman’s regional policies. During Qaboos’s reign (1970-2020), Oman generally avoided joining other countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates , Bahrain, Qatar, and Oman) in regional military interventions, instead seeking to mediate their resolution. Oman joined but did not contribute forces to the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State organization, nor did it arm groups fighting Syrian President Bashar Al Asad’s regime. It opposed the June 2017 Saudi/UAE- led isolation of Qatar and had urged resolution of that rift before its resolution in January 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • US “Peace Plan” for the Middle East
    AT A GLANCE US 'Peace Plan' for the Middle East On 28 January 2020, United States President Donald Trump released his administration's 'vision for Israeli- Palestinian peace'. The White House Plan, coupled with earlier Trump administration moves, marks a distinct departure from past US policy on the Middle East Peace Process. Key elements are illegal under international law, as they advocate the annexation of occupied territory. Israeli leaders have welcomed the plan, seen as meeting Israel's key demands. The leadership of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas have been united in rejecting the proposal, and the PA has since cut ties with Israel and the USA. The plan is meant to serve as the basis for future direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, to stretch over four years. However, the Israeli government has announced plans to implement parts of it unilaterally in the near future. Key points of the White House plan Palestinian statehood. The 'Peace to Prosperity' plan would see Israel agree to the creation of a future Palestinian state as set out in 'a conceptual map'. However, the establishment of a – demilitarised – Palestinian state within four years is subject to several conditions, which are difficult to meet under current circumstances. They include the Palestinian Authority (PA) taking control in Gaza, the disarming of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other armed groups, a commitment to non-violence and recognition of Israel as 'the nation state of the Jewish people'. The capital of the Palestinian state would comprise a Palestinian town outside the city of Jerusalem and several eastern Jerusalem neighbourhoods (see below).
    [Show full text]
  • So Close, So Far. National Identity and Political Legitimacy in UAE-Oman Border Cities
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Open Research Exeter So Close, So Far. National Identity and Political Legitimacy in UAE-Oman Border Cities Marc VALERI University of Exeter This manuscript is the version revised after peer-review and accepted for publication. This manuscript has been published and is available in Geopolitics: Date of publication: 26 December 2017 DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2017.1410794 Webpage: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14650045.2017.1410794 1 Introduction Oman-United Arab Emirates border, Thursday 5 May 2016 early morning. As it has been the case for years on long weekends and holidays, endless queues of cars from Oman are waiting to cross the border in order to flock to Dubai for Isra’ and Miraj break 1 and enjoy attractions and entertainment that their country does not seem to offer. Major traffic congestions are taking place in the Omani city of al-Buraymi separated from the contiguous United Arab Emirates city of al-Ayn by the international border. Many border cities are contiguous urban areas which have been ‘dependent on the border for [their] existence’ or even ‘came into existence because of the border’. 2 Usually once military outposts (Eilat/Aqaba, on the Israel-Jordan border 3), they developed on either side of a long established border (Niagara Falls cities, on the Canada-USA border) after a border had been drawn (Tornio, on the Sweden-Finland border; 4 cities on the Mexico-USA and China- Russia 5 borders). Furthermore, split-up cities which were partitioned after World War II, including in Central Europe (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Oman: Politics, Security, and U.S
    Oman: Politics, Security, and U.S. Policy Updated May 19, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RS21534 SUMMARY RS21534 Oman: Politics, Security, and U.S. Policy May 19, 2021 The Sultanate of Oman has been a strategic partner of the United States since 1980, when it became the first Persian Gulf state to sign a formal accord permitting the U.S. military to use its Kenneth Katzman facilities. Oman has hosted U.S. forces during every U.S. military operation in the region since Specialist in Middle then, and it is a partner in U.S. efforts to counter terrorist groups and other regional threats. In Eastern Affairs January 2020, Oman’s long-time leader, Sultan Qaboos bin Sa’id Al Said, passed away and was succeeded by Haythim bin Tariq Al Said, a cousin selected by Oman’s royal family immediately upon Qaboos’s death. Sultan Haythim espouses policies similar to those of Qaboos and has not altered U.S.-Oman ties or Oman’s regional policies. During Qaboos’s reign (1970-2020), Oman generally avoided joining other countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, and Oman) in regional military interventions, instead seeking to mediate their resolution. Oman joined but did not contribute forces to the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State organization, nor did it arm groups fighting Syrian President Bashar Al Asad’s regime. It opposed the June 2017 Saudi/UAE- led isolation of Qatar and had urged resolution of that rift before its resolution in January 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Qatar ν Bahrain in the International Court of Justice at the Hague
    Qatar ν Bahrain in the International Court of Justice at The Hague Case concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions1 Year 2001 16 March General List No. 87 JUDGMENT ON THE MERITS 1 On 8 July 1991 the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the State of Qatar (here- inafter referred to as "Qatar") filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against the State of Bahrain (hereinafter referred to as "Bahrain") in respect of certain disputes between the two States relating to "sovereignty over the Hawar islands, sovereign rights over the shoals of Dibal and Qit'at Jaradah, and the delimitation of the maritime areas of the two States". In this Application, Qatar contended that the Court had jurisdiction to entertain the dispute by virtue of two "agreements" concluded between the Parties in December 1987 and December 1990 respectively, the subject and scope of the commitment to the Court's jurisdiction being determined, according to the Applicant, by a formula proposed by Bahrain to Qatar on 26 October 1988 and accepted by Qatar in December 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the "Bahraini formula"). 2 Pursuant to Article 40, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Court, the Application was forthwith communicated by the Registrar of the Court to the Government of Bahrain; in accordance with paragraph 3 of that Article, all other States entitled to appear before the Court were notified by the Registrar of the Application. 3 By letters addressed to the Registrar on 14 July 1991 and 18 August 1991, Bahrain contested the basis of jurisdiction invoked by Qatar.
    [Show full text]
  • Oman, Zanzibar, Their Relationship – and Our Trip
    Oman, Zanzibar, Their Relationship – and Our Trip http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/True_Negros/Assorted/Oman_Zanzibar_Sultanate.htm Oman and Zanzibar are separated by 2,400 of the Indian Ocean. Oman is in the Middle East (in Asia); Zanzibar part of Africa. So why is the University of Arizona Center for Middle Eastern Studies’ 2016 Fulbright-Hays Group Project Abroad combining these two regions? Historically, the two areas have been in close contact with each other and provide an interesting case study of cross-regional relations. The curriculum-development program will explore these political, linguistic, and religious ties and will develop ways to integrate the information into elementary and secondary classes. From the 1st century CE, traders from the Arabian peninsula – as well as Persia and India – were in regular contact with Zanzibar and the East African coast; such cultural and trade relations increased by the 11th century. Political ties date from the early 1500s when both Oman and Zanzibar came under Portuguese colonial rule. Nearly 200 years later, Omanis overthrew Portuguese control and took charge of both Oman and Zanzibar. The latter became a center of Arab trade in slaves, spices (particularly cloves), and ivory. Many Arabs moved to the island, bringing with them Ibadi Islam, a very small school of Islamic thought which is the main faith of Oman and an important force in Zanzibar. By the 19th century, Zanzibar had become a center of Islamic scholarship: a contact zone between Ibadi Islam and other variants of the Muslim faith. The height of Arab association with Zanzibar occurred in 1840 when Omani ruler Sayyid Said bin Sultan al-Busaid moved his capital from Muscat, Oman, to Stone Town, Zanzibar.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gulf States and the Middle East Peace Process: Considerations, Stakes, and Options
    ISSUE BRIEF 08.25.20 The Gulf States and the Middle East Peace Process: Considerations, Stakes, and Options Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, Ph.D, Fellow for the Middle East conflict, the Gulf states complied with and INTRODUCTION enforced the Arab League boycott of Israel This issue brief examines where the six until at least 1994 and participated in the nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council— oil embargo of countries that supported 1 Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Israel in the Yom Kippur War of 1973. In Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates 1973, for example, the president of the (UAE)—currently stand in their outlook and UAE, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, approaches toward the Israeli-Palestinian claimed that “No Arab country is safe from issue. The first section of this brief begins by the perils of the battle with Zionism unless outlining how positions among the six Gulf it plays its role and bears its responsibilities, 2 states have evolved over the three decades in confronting the Israeli enemy.” In since the Madrid Conference of 1991. Section Kuwait, Sheikh Fahd al-Ahmad Al Sabah, a two analyzes the degree to which the six brother of two future Emirs, was wounded Gulf states’ relations with Israel are based while fighting with Fatah in Jordan in 3 on interests, values, or a combination of 1968, while in 1981 the Saudi government both, and how these differ from state to offered to finance the reconstruction of state. Section three details the Gulf states’ Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor after it was 4 responses to the peace plan unveiled by destroyed by an Israeli airstrike.
    [Show full text]