Issues and Prospects

The Turkish Straits: History, Politics and Strategic Dilemmas

André Gerolymatos Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada

Introduction

The Arab Spring, a term that encompasses a variety of political upheavals, is destabilizing the Middle East and will do so for the foreseeable future. These conflicts could potentially threaten the transportation of petroleum and natu- ral gas from the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia to the rest of the world.1 As a result of this regional instability, oil and gas from Central Asia and from the Caucasus to the Black Sea or Turkey offers a critically important alternative route. Concurrently, the transformation of international relations in the after- math of the Cold War and the return to a multi-power world is once again bringing about a consensus approach to international problems through con- stellations of temporary alliances similar to the Concert of Europe in the 19th century. The new “Great Powers” of the 21st century include the United States, Russia, China and their respective regional allies, both long- and short-term, and minor Great Powers such as the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Iran. An ongoing challenge for these powers is to secure access to or export petroleum and natural gas. In this context, the geopolitical significance of the Straits2 and Turkey will increase and continue to have economic as well

1 Some argue that the term Middle East is Eurocentric and a synonym for the Near East. The latter term was used to define the maximum extent of the Ottoman Empire. Despite its draw- backs, contemporary writers and quite a few academics continue to employ the term Middle East to describe Western Asia, excluding the Caucasus. For the purposes of this article, the Near and Middle East will be used in the context of the periods under consideration. 2 There is a great deal of variety in how the Straits are named. In older historical accounts, the Dardanelles and Bosporus are usually referred to as the “Straits.” More recently, particularly after the conclusion of the Montreux Convention, the “Straits” are increasingly called the “Turkish Straits.” Yuksel Inan argues that: “To identify the Straits as the Turkish Straits has historical, political and legal justification, such as: respect for past and present general practice; due regard to Turkey’s sovereign

Ocean Yearbook 28: 58–79 © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2014 | doi 10.1163/9789004270589_003 The Turkish Straits 59 as military implications for the West and Asia as a gateway to vital sources of energy.

Historical Overview: The Struggle for Control of the Straits

Ever since the Trojan War,3 control of the Straits has been contested between Western and Asian powers that sought to dominate access to and from the Black Sea.4 The ancient Athenians built a maritime empire and secured their food supply by taking over the city of Byzantium (later Constantinople and today Istanbul). Control of Byzantium allowed the Athenians to secure access to vital grain supplies from the Black Sea through the Straits. When the Romans incorporated the Greek world into their empire, they continued to maintain the trade routes that connected Asia and Europe and, in the 4th century ad, transferred their capital to Byzantium, renaming it Constantinople. In 1453, “the role of the Straits as a significant commercial highway connect- ing East and West changed dramatically” writes DeLuca, “when the Ottoman

rights over this particular area and to its jurisdiction according to established principles of international law; and to indicate and emphasize the location of the Straits, like the other Straits of the world.” (See Y. Inan, “Perceptions,” Journal of International Affairs 6, no. 1 (2001), 1.) He cites the Third United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names, held at Athens in 1977 and attended by 152 participants representing 59 countries, with observers from 11 non-governmental and international scientific organizations. The objective of the Conference was to use national names to standardize the identification of geographical locations. As a result of the Conference resolutions, Turkey began to use the name “Turkish Straits” for the Dardanelles and Bosporus. The International Maritime Organization (IMO), Inan adds, “as a consequence of this UN document, started to refer to the Straits as the Strait of Istanbul, Strait of Çanakkale and the Marmara Sea.” For the pur- pose of brevity I will use the term “The Straits” for the “Turkish Straits” and shorthand for the Dardanelles and Bosporus. 3 The traditional date for the Trojan War was circa 1194–1184 bc, but recent scholarship has established the date at 1260 and 1240 bc. 4 The Straits consist of the Dardanelles, the Bosporus and the Sea of Marmara. The Dardanelles is 61 kilometers long and 1.2 to 6 kilometers wide, averaging 55 meters deep with a maximum depth of 103 meters. The Bosporus Strait is 31 kilometers long, has a width of 3329 meters at the northern entrance and is 2826 meters at the southern end. Its width is 3420 meters and is 700 meters at its narrowest. The Sea of Marmara connects the Black Sea through the Bosporus to the Aegean via the Dardanelles. The Sea has a surface area of 11,350 square kilometers and a maximum depth of 1370 meters. In addition, it includes two islands groups: the Princes and the Marmara islands.