Shabtabnews In this dark night, I have lost my way – Arise from a corner, oh you the star of guidance.
Iranwire- Eight years after the signing of the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea in Aktau, Kazakhstan, Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration has submitted the ratification bill to the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Parliament) with single-urgency status. The move has reignited intense political and legal debate surrounding Iran’s maritime rights and sovereign share in the inland sea.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei stated that ratifying the convention aims to complete the legal framework governing the Caspian Sea and prevent interference or exploitation by non-regional actors, emphasising that the document establishes a foundation for security and cooperation among the five littoral states. Hassan Ghashghavi, Spokesperson for Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, also highlighted the security necessity of ratifying the convention, noting that Iran remains the sole littoral state that has not yet approved it through parliament. He added that ratifying the agreement aligns with Iran’s status as the upcoming host of the Caspian Littoral States Summit.
Signed in August 2018 by the leaders of Iran, Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan, the Aktau Convention requires formal parliamentary ratification by all five signatory nations before entering into force. While the other four states have completed ratification, Iran has delayed legislative approval. The treaty establishes general frameworks for regional security, navigation, fisheries, and legal principles after more than two decades of negotiations.
Despite the bill being submitted to parliament, the core of the debate centres on Iran’s actual share of the sea. Critics argue that approving the text before defining baseline boundaries would reduce Iran’s negotiating leverage and weaken its claims in the southern Caspian.
They contend that, because Iran’s concave coastline creates distinct geographical disadvantages, sovereign rights remain uncertain without a binding, separate baseline treaty. In response, the government maintains that the convention specifies no percentage shares, leaving seabed and subsoil boundary determinations to separate bilateral or multilateral agreements.
Officials emphasise that negotiators secured the inclusion of the “Principle of Equity” in the convention text specifically to compensate for Iran’s geography when drawing baselines.
Security provisions also remain a major point of discussion among lawmakers and legal experts. Supporters emphasise that the convention explicitly bars the military presence of third-party non-littoral states and forbids countries from allowing their territory to be used for foreign military actions against neighbouring states. However, critics question whether these legal guarantees can fully shield the Caspian from escalating regional conflict dynamics, especially following recent security developments such as the war involving Iran, Israel, and the United States, as well as a Ukrainian drone attack on an Iran-linked vessel in the Caspian.
Historically, agreements signed in 1921 and 1940 between Iran and the Soviet Union regulated navigation and surface use but left seabed and subsoil boundaries undefined. The collapse of the USSR in 1991 increased the number of littoral states from two to five by adding Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan, rendering the old legal frameworks inadequate for modern offshore resource extraction and territorial limits and ultimately prompting the lengthy process that led to the current convention.
