Danish Straits

Posted: December 22nd, 2022

Danish Straits

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Danish Straits

Introduction

The present-day practice of moving cargo through waterbodies dates back to ancient times. Passing through oceans and seas sometimes require navigators to use links or connectors called straits to reach particular destinations. The Danish straits are examples of international straits that generate varying reactions from the states passing through the waterways. Whereas some countries feel that they have the freedom to navigate through international waters, the countries where international straits pass feel they have the mandate to determine the nature of transit as provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982. The conflicting interests surrounding the use of international straits as prescribed by the Law of the Sea resulted in a court battle between Finland and Denmark in 1991, with Finland opining that the building of a bridge across the Great Belt would obstruct movement of vessels in the Baltic Sea. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provides guidance for both the bordering countries as well as for states passing through international straits, and expects that each side adheres to the guidelines. The bordering countries have the power to designate lanes and to make adjustments, but must share any decisions with the public and international maritime authorities before implementing any decision. The navigating groups, too, need to adhere to the set rules and regulations, and to avoid engaging in harmful conduct such as polluting the waterways.

However, some stakeholders have expressed the opinion that bordering states should facilitate the freedom to navigate the high seas through these waterways, and have urged bordering states to respect Article 44 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, which forbids much restriction or suspension of use. The groups working towards protecting the Danish straits should focus on developing proper policies to ensure that the waterways are used for their intended purposes without any conflicts or dissatisfaction experienced by navigators. 

Definition of a Strait

In definition, a strait is a naturally occurring feature connecting two water bodies. It also occurs as a water channel located between lands. Not all straits are navigable because they may either be too shallow or have reefs that are not navigable (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). It is common to use other terms to refer to a strait, such as ‘firth’ and ‘channel’.

Many manmade channels, usually referred to as canals, have been built to link two waterbodies, as in the case of the Suez Canal. Canals and rivers sometimes serve as passage between two large waterbodies such as a lake as a sea and these waterways seem to meet the meaning of strait (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The term strait, however, is strictly and usually used to refer to wider and larger water passages in the marine environment. Straits usually serve essential purposes as they allow ships to sail from one place to the other. To date, the navigation of straits has resulted in numerous conflicts, with different states seeking to control them (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999).

Description of International Straits

An international strait refers to a relatively narrow passage between seas and oceans that is bordered by coasts and which usually connects two large waterbodies and is used for global navigation. All aircrafts and ships enjoy the right to pass over or through an international strait, which shall not be violated unless the strait is created by an island of a country bordering the strait and mainland (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). Aircrafts and ships while passing through a transit passage such as a strait should proceed without any delay and shall desist from displaying any threat or use of force against the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and political freedom of the countries bordering the strait. They should also avoid, in any other ways, a breach of the guidelines of international law embedded in the Charter of the UN.

Today, some international straits stand out because they serve vital transit purposes. The Malacca strait that borders Malaysia and Indonesia and which joins the South China Sea and Andaman Sea is a primary example of an international strait. The Palk Strait, bordering India and Sri Lanka and joining Bay of Bengal and Palk Bay, and the Yucatan strait that borders Cuba and Mexico and links the Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico are also some of the straits that are significant for their navigation use (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). Some other international straits are the Mesina Strait along the border of Sicily and Italy, the Otranto Strait separating Djibouti and Yemen and joining the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea, and the Cook Strait in New Zealand that connects to the South Pacific Ocean (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). This analysis focusses on the Danish straits that fall under Denmark’s territory.

Description of the Danish Straits

The Danish straits link the North Sea to the Baltic Sea through the Skagerrak Strait. The latter strait, running between the southeast of Norway and Kattegat, is a 31,000 square kilometer large sea area bounded by the Danish straits islands to the south, the provinces of Bohusian, Halland, and Scania to the east, and the Jutlandic peninsula to the west. The Danish straits historically served as waterways of Denmark and were used locally (Elferink, 2000). Following territorial segregation and separation, the Fehmarn Belt that links the Bay of Mecklenburg and the Bay of Kiel and Oresund that acts as the Swedish-Danish border, separating Sweden,(formerly called Scania) and Zealand in Denmark, are now shared with Germany and Sweden (Elferink, 2000). The Little Belt and the Great Belt, however, remain part of the Danish territorial waters.

Description of the Major Danish Straits in Detail

The Great Belt

The Great Belt is a strait that passes between the main islands of Funen and Zealand in Denmark and is regarded as one of the three major Danish straits. This feature is demarcates Denmark in two portions. Historically, in the 19^th century it was used by ferries, however this activity halted with the islands connecting through the facilitation of the Great Belt fixed link. Globally, this feature is considered the largest in terms of size and important as it connects the Baltic Sea, Kattegat Strait to the Atlantic Ocean. The Great Belt is about 38 miles (61 kilometers) in length and stretches 11-21 miles (17-33 kilometers) wide (Elferink, 2000). The Great Belt flows around two large islands, Langeland in the southern part of Denmark and Samso in the northern part (Elferink, 2000). This strait separates into the West Channel and the East Channel at Sprogo Island, both of which are linked by the Great Belt Bridge. A tunnel also passes beneath the East Channel.

Geologists believe the Great Belt came into existence about 8800-9000 years ago when a post-glacial rebound formed the Ancylus Lake that covered the Baltic and burst its outlets around the Gothenburg region, causing it to tip over in the southern part. The Dana River, as the Great Belt was initially called, is believed to have caused massive erosion, taking away rich sediments and clearing many trees along its way. Consequently, the Ancylus Lake dropped in level over several hundreds of years (Elferink, 2000). With escalated sea levels, there was an overflow in the Dana River. This event led to the Great Belt formation established as a sea war. Additionally, the Anyclus Lake enlarged and become the Littorina Sea. Historically, the Great Belt was navigable by ships traversing the ocean, and it still continues to serve the same purpose today (Elferink, 2000). The Danish Navy is tasked with the responsibility of regulating the maritime traffic within the Great Belt. The Danish government started to get a significant portion of its income from the Great Belt by taxing merchant ships passing through the link. Ships that did not honor the tax risked having their vessels confiscated or sunk. The Danish government, however, terminated the practice after receiving international monetary compensation, and consequently the waters in Denmark were opened for international shipping (Elferink, 2000). The 1885 Copenhagen Convention legally categorized the eastern part of the Great Belt as a waterway open for international shipping. The entire Western part, however, and all other sections of the Danish traits fall under Danish jurisdiction and are termed as Danish territorial waters.

Oresund

Oresund, also called ‘The Sound’, is a strait creating the Swedish-Danish border separating Denmark and Sweden. It is 118 kilometers (about 74 miles) in length and its width varies from five kilometers (2.6 miles) to 29 kilometers (18 miles). The Oresund is 5-km wide where it narrows the most, between Helsingborg in Sweden and Helsingor in Denmark (Elferink, 2000). Apart from the Oresund being one of the busiest waterways globally, the Oresund Bridge that connects the City of Malmo in Sweden and Copenhagen serves vital economic purposes by enabling the passage of trains and automobiles since its inauguration in July 2000 (Elferink, 2000). The Oresund Bridge, which is about four kilometers long, links a bi-national metropolitan area with almost four million people. Furthermore, the HH Ferry passway between Helsingborg in Sweden and Helsingor in Denmark, which is on the northern side of Oresund, is one of the globe’s busiest international routes for ferries. The HH Ferry passway sees at least 69 departures from each harbor every day (Elferink, 2000). This strait is relatively younger compared with the Great Belt, with geologists believing that it formed about 8500-8100 years ago due to increasing sea levels.

The control of the Oresund has historically caused much debate between the Danish and Swedish governments. The Danish government deployed its military personnel along the fortress of Kronborg and spread them to Helsingborg on the eastern side and Elsinore on the western part, until the shore on the east was awarded to Sweden in 1659 following the treaty Treaty of Roskilde (Elferink, 2000). King Eric Pomerania introduced a taxation system for those using the strait in 1429, and the practice remained in place for more than 400 years, until 1858 (Elferink, 2000). The dues collected from the strait served as a vital source of income for the government at the time and helped finance most of its projects. The Copenhagen Convention of 1857, nevertheless, outlawed the dues, and classified the Danish strait an international waterway (Elferink, 2000). Sweden, not desiring further conflict with the Danish over the Oresund, developed two projects that would increase its independence: the Gothernborg, built in 1621, and the Gota Canal, built from 1810 to late 1832.

The Oresund, like other straits in Denmark, lies at the border between the Baltic Sea, which is one of the most salty oceanic waterbodies. Whereas the Baltic Sea has brackish water, meaning that it is neither too acidic nor alkaline, the water in the Oresund tends to shift, with streams from the Baltic Sea making it less saline, although the streams can alter in nature from time to time (Elferink, 2000). The fluctuating conditions are the reason why the salinity ranges from 11-12 in the northern side, but increases to 20 in the northern part of Helsingor (Elferink, 2000). The conditions tend to be stable near the seafloor where the sea is quite deep with the salinity being at oceanic levels at all times below a particular depth of 11-16 meters (Elferink, 2000). The depth is five to seven meters in the southern part, and this area marks the appropriate border of oceanic salt water, thereby serving as a suitable habitat for several maritime species. About 53 identified salt-water animals are found in this area, compared to the 1500-plus species in the North Sea (Elferink, 2000). Researchers believe about 605 species reside in different parts of the Oresund, with some of the identified forms including crabs, certain forms of jellyfish, lobsters, and specific species of flatfish.

The occurrence of tides is on a daily basis. Notably, the lunar forces attractions are not compelling enough in shifting water from the east to the west region. This shift is even harder within narrower waters where the current is neither northbound nor southbound. Not much of the variation in water levels in the Oresund is thus a result of daily waves (Elferink, 2000). In comparison, current imposes a larger impact that water tides. Another factor effective in tampering with water levels include strong winds. During certain conditions, such as hurricanes and storms, for example, the oceanic waters may abruptly flow into the Baltic Sea which causes the deep waters in the southern Baltic Sea to become increasingly saline (Elferink, 2000). These conditions make it favorable for cod to breed, something that would not be possible if it were not for such inflow of oceanic waters into the Baltic Sea. Usually, when the currents shift from the northern to the southern part, they do not turn 180 degrees with the same speed; instead, the current drops to zero and then starts to flow in the opposite direction.

The Little Belt

The Little Belt is a Danish strait passing between the Jutland Peninsula and the Island of Funen in Denmark. It is one of the three straits in Denmark that connect to and drain into the Baltic Sea.. Ice moved from the southern part during the Weichsel glaciations that happened much later, nearly 14000-15000 years ago; as a result, one part became the Little Belt, forming hilly terrains. The Little Belt is about 51 kilometers (31 miles) long and about 799 meters (2,499 feet) to 27 kilometers (16 miles) wide (Elferink, 2000). The deepest part of the Little Belt is at Marens Hul, at about 82 meters (267 feet) depth, which makes it deeper than the Great Belt. A number of small Danish islands fall within the Little Belt, mainly on account of its depth. The northern side is the widest at more than 16 kilometers (9.4 miles), and from there it passes to the southwest, narrowing slightly by about 1 kilometer (0.63 miles) at a point commonly referred to as The Narrows. This is the point where the two bridges traversing the Little Belt are situated (Elferink, 2000). The Little Belt widens to about nine kilometers (6.1 miles) at the Faeno until it arrives at the Baltic Sea close to Als. The western coastline of the Little Belt is mainly divided by irregular sections known as fjords, and both ends have steep sand formations. and avocets, among others (Elferink, 2000). The place has the largest population of harbor porpoise globally, and is also home to several thousands of people; it is thus the only region near the interior Danish waters where people have settled (Elferink, 2000). Local and international tourists can view the local marine life at a fee. Other species such as fin whales, humpbacks, and minke also pass through the Little Belt, but not frequently.

Historical Analysis of the Little Belt

Geological and climatic changes, however, introduced new animals and plants to the region and led to the emergence of fish species in this area, which served as a vital source of food (Elferink, 2000). Temperatures increased again during 4000 BC when the Funnelbeaker community was dominant in the area. Archeologists, however, have identified traces of other cultural groups that settled in the region, with adequate evidence pointing to the existence of a neolithic culture. The settlements widened and populations continued to grow throughout the Bronze, Iron, and Viking ages, and, during the 14^th Century, the towns of Vejle and Kolding gained the status of merchant towns and are important trading centers till today (Elferink, 2000). The hunting of harbor porpoises became rampant in the region, starting from the Middle Ages up to the end of the 19^th Century. The oil from the marine animal was utilized as lamp oil until the invention of electricity, when the hunting ceased. The winter of 1854-1855 marked the year when the most porpoises were captured, with a total of 1,743 caught during the period; otherwise, hunters caught 750-850 porpoises during most winters. The practice was in prevalence since the 1590s, when laws were created as guidelines. A royal decree, however, banned the hunting of porpoises in 1899, but when fuel shortages hit during the first and second World Wars hunters were forced to resume the practice (Elferink, 2000).

The groups calling for the unification of Germany advocated for the use of the Little Belt as the northern border of Denmark and Germany. Several Germanic compositions mention the strait; for instance, it appears in one of the works of Ernst Arndt as well as in the third verse of the national anthem of Germany. Today, the strait attracts many divers who seek to explore the shipwrecks beneath its waters and to gather archaeological information.

Transit in the Danish Straits

The Danish straits serve as the major link between the Baltic Sea and the other oceans of the world. The guidelines for passage through the straits has caused much debate, with Denmark holding that it has majority control over the channels despite them being perceived as international gateways to the rest of the world. The Danish straits, according to Biresselioglu et al. (2014), are increasingly becoming vital as a route to the larger Europe, in particular for Russian oil exports. With regard to the future prospects of Russian oil, the country is projected to accommodate nearly half of the total oil in the Arctic region. This projected trend would indicate that the Danish straits are likely to become more important in the coming years, especially in promoting global energy security (Biresselioglu et al., 2014). Even though the straits of Dardanelles and Bosporus in Turkey also play essential roles in promoting the distribution of Russian oil to other parts of the world, Russia has changed its direction of exporting oil towards the Baltic ports. The change in Russia’s oil exportation plan has had some effects on the Turkish straits, with the waterways failing to generate much needed revenue for the Turkish government (Biresselioglu et al., 2014). It is a debatable matter whether the Turkish straits will continue to serve as the channel for Russian oil exports, or whether the Danish straits will take over the position in accordance with the progress on oil resources recorded in the Arctic region (Biresselioglu et al., 2014). The illustration of the extent to which the Danish straits attract operations of other countries stand as adequate evidence for their significance as international waterways and the need for access to them while taking into account the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982.

Traversing the Danish straits as an international waterway has resulted in some legal issues over the years. Most of these cases come under the ambit of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), since the government of the Kingdom of Denmark, in accordance with Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, declared that it prefers the ICJ for the settlement of disagreements over the application or interpretation of the Convention. The Danish government has declared, in line with Article 298 of the Convention, that it neither accepts nor recognizes an arbitral tribunal formed in line with Annex VII for any form of dispute outlined in Article 298. Denmark’s compliance with the directives of the Convention led Denmark and Finland to battle a case at the ICJ in 1991 regarding the use of the Danish straits as an international waterway (Koskenniemi, 1996). The Republic of Finland brought before the ICJ a dispute between the two states regarding a project by the Danish government to build a fixed traffic link for both rail and road traffic across the Great Belt strait (Koskenniemi, 1996). Finland claimed that the construction of a low-lying bridge for rail and road traffic over the West Channel of the Great Belt and the development of a bridge for road traffic over the East Channel would permanently block passage to the Baltic for ships or other vessels that are over 65 meters high.

According to Finland, the Great Belt is an international strait that should afford free passage for vessels, as provided for by the Treaty of Copenhagen (1857) which banned taxation commonly known as sound dues. Furthermore, Finland has cited the 1958 Geneva Convention and its directives on contiguous zone and territorial sea, as well as the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea that permits free passage through an international strait such as the Great Belt. Finland, therefore, wanted the ICJ to declare that other states have a right of free passage via the Great Belt, which extends to all vessels entering and exiting Finnish shipyards and ports, and to rule that the right is applicable to oil rigs, drill ships, and other forms of ships (Koskenniemi, 1996). Finland further wanted the Court to call for negotiations between the two countries. Denmark, on the other hand, requested the Court to rule out the charges and to ask Finland to pay the necessary compensation should the jury rule out the application (Koskenniemi, 1996). The Court unanimously turned down the requests by Finland and ruled in pursuant of Article 41 of the Statute that the case lacked merit to push it further (Koskenniemi, 1996). Judge Tarassov voted for the Court’s decision, albeit not without some disagreements. According to the judge, the continued construction of the East Channel Bridge passing over the Great Belt posed a significant threat to the unobstructed passage of ships through the international strait (Koskenniemi, 1996). The opinion of Vice-President Oda aligned with the Court’s ruling and termed Finland’s claims as lacking urgency.

The realization by Turkey that it would experience significant negative impact on its economy if Russia opted to use the Danish straits to export its oil, and the complaints by Finland that the construction of the bridge over the Great Belt would block the waterway, implies that the Danish straits are international channels protected by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (United Nations, 2019). The states bordering the straits (Denmark in this case), therefore, may adopt laws and regulations to direct transit through the waterways. The Law of the Sea requires Denmark to develop mechanisms for the safety of navigation and the regulation of maritime traffic in accordance with Article 41.

States bordering such international straits, as provided for in Article 41, may designate sea lanes and take charge of a traffic separation scheme for navigation along the straits where necessary to safeguard the transit of ships (United Nations, 2019). Denmark, in this instance, has the right when necessary to substitute, after sharing the decision with the public, particular traffic separation schemes or sea lanes it had previously prescribed or designated with any other schemes or lanes. Denmark, however, should ensure that the newly formed separation schemes and sea lanes adhere to the widely acknowledged international directives (United Nations, 2019). Denmark should also remember that, before substituting or designating the separations schemes or sea lanes, it should refer proposals to the appropriate international body for approval. The international body may only accept such lanes and separation schemes if they are credible and if others do not find any problem with the substitution. Denmark, while outlining the separation schemes and the sea lanes, needs to clearly outline all traffic separation schemes and sea lanes and sensitize the public about them using appropriate charts and other visual aids (United Nations, 2019). The vessels passing through the straits have to adhere to the directives on traffic separation schemes and sea lanes.

Article 42 is also essential in determining the role of states bordering international straits. The Article requires Denmark in this case to uphold the safety of transit and the regulation of traffic as directed in Article 41. Denmark is required to ensure illegal fishing practices are prevented as stipulated by article 42. In facilitating the perfect execution of this measure the monitoring bodies should monitor of loading and loading activities of currencies, people, and a combined commodities that are in complete violation of the customs, fiscal, and immigration as well as sanitation laws outlined by the states (United Nations, 2019). Denmark, while applying the requirements of Article 42, however, needs to understand that it should not discriminate against other ships in its development of regulations that protect or safeguard such international straits (United Nations, 2019). Denmark should also remember to offer enough information to the public on how it plans to handle and protect the straits. Foreign vessels passing through such straits should also play their part by observing the laws and regulations set by the bordering states. Denmark needs to be observant of Article 44 of the Law of the Sea, which implies that the states bordering the straits must not interfere with transit movement and shall offer necessary publicity of any dangers to flight or navigation over or within the straits of which they are aware (United Nations, 2019). Furthermore, Denmark needs to understand that it has no powers to suspend transit through and passage over the Danish straits as provided for in the Law of the Sea.

Apart from the fact that Denmark has the power to develop the regulations defining passage through the channels, the vessels passing through the Danish straits must conform with the provisions of the UN Convention of Law of the Sea that regulate passage through all international straits. The vessels passing through international straits are required to desist from using force or threat against the political independence, territorial integrity, and sovereignty of the countries or states bordering the passage (United Nations, 2019). The vessels passing through international straits should not act in any manner that violates the directives or the guidelines of international law enshrined in the Charter of the UN (United Nations, 2019Ships transiting to the international trips are required to comply with international directives as well as procedures and practices in order to ensure the water body is safe. Additionally, in order to prevent collision or accidents at sea they are necessitated to consider international regulations. Another requirement, involves complying to procedures practices and regulations that ensure the ship’s crew and its operations operate in a manner that control, reduces and prevent pollution. The stipulations by the international civil aviation organisation must also be adhered to. Lastly, the water body should utilise the radio frequency assigned to it by a globally recognised sent air traffic control.

The Clashing Interests

There is barely any other regulation under international law which is as widely discussed as the freedom of passage and navigation through the high seas. Though the laws apply in the first instance to navigation in the high seas, the guidelines would be ineffectual and useless without addressing the right of navigation through international straits; thus, previously, access to the high seas and between various parts of it was not acknowledged (Lassen, 1978). Particularly in straits that are not so wide that they are wholly overlapped by the territorial seas, the freedom of navigation has been subjected to criticism because of the of the passage state’s right to regulate shipping in the area. Nevertheless, based on the present Law of the Sea Conference, it is suggested that the territorial area of  a state be expanded to 12 nautical miles. This regulation, if enacted, will result in many other international waterways being partly covered by the territorial sea, including such essential waterways as the straits of Gibraltar, Malacca, Hormuz, and Dover (United Nations, 2019). Whereas the right of navigation through international straits has been recommended simultaneously to safeguard maritime interests, some have opposed the view.  

Possible Navigational Hazards while Transiting the Danish Straits

The vessels passing through the Danish straits need to understand some of the possible navigational hazards that could affect their passage through the waterways. The Danish straits are the only natural outlets from the Baltic Sea to the North Atlantic. However, they are relatively shallow and narrow and have compressed channels throughout much of their course (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The Danish straits are usually open for cruising throughout the year. Even though the icy conditions of the water do not generally hinder vessels from passing from one end to the other, the ice can be problematic, especially in severe winters. Ice is usually a problem during January and February, especially on the Danish side of the Oresund and in particular harbors within the Great Belt (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). Furthermore, low ceilings and poor visibility can pose significant problems, especially from November to March. Additionally, sea mist, termed as havgusen fog, disrupts visibility during summers. Heavy fog with visibility of less than 5/7 of a mile, is usually prevalent for about 49 days every year at Copenhagen, particularly from October to March. Vessels passing through the Danish straits need to be aware of the currents that vary from time to time as well as the rip and tidal waves that are active in most parts of the straits (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The teams passing through the Danish straits must also be conversant with other severe navigational hazards such as protruding rocks, reefs, shoals, chemical dumping sites and ammunitions from World War II, mines, submarine cables, shipwrecks, and fishing nets that are sometimes situated, without much consideration, near shipping lanes.

Vessels passing through the Great and Little Belts, particularly, need to be aware of the possible factors that can affect their passage through the straits. Overall, the Great Belt is deep and wide; however, vessels still have to maneuver the many convoluted channels and a series of hazards. The Great Belt is known for its numerous coastal reefs and shoals that extend over a considerable distance offshore (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The vessels passing through the strait should also be aware of the strong currents, which vary in nature, usually achieving maximum speeds near the many rocky protrusions and sandbars bordering the meandering navigation lanes. Shipwrecks are a major concern for navigators moving across the Great Belt, with the highest possibility of accidents being around Korsor, Langeland, and Kalundborg (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). It is also worrying that some ports along the Great Belt have restrictive and narrow ship lanes, which have required much straightening and dredging over the years. The Dybe Rende (also called the Deep Channel) is perceived to be the most reliable waterway in the Great Belt, and serves as the most appropriate route for passage during stormy weather. The main issue with the Little Belt is that much of the adjoining coastline has shallow bays and fjords (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The northern side of the Little Belt is narrow, and the central part has many offshore rocks and shoals. Approaching Fredericia, the northern part has a difficult section called the Snaevringen or The Narrows, which becomes even more dangerous sometimes when strong currents obstruct the waterway’s flow. The most tricky part in the central section of the Little Belt is a tremendously narrow area southeast of Bago Island, where vessels usually need the guidance of people who know the area very well (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The southernmost part of the Little Belt, however, is the safest for passage, but most of the channels southwest of Fyn are only appropriate for relatively smaller vessels (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). Many navigators find the Little Belt to be quite conducive for navigation during bad weather compared to the Great Belt as the storm, waves, and tides do not have much intensity in the former waterway in comparison to the other.

Possible Pollution Threats while Traversing the Danish Straits

The Danes have expressed the opinion that one of the primary goals of the Law of the Sea Conference is to marshal cooperative efforts to prevent marine pollution while avoiding unnecessary shipping restrictions. Article 42 is clear regarding the role of states bordering international straits in preventing pollution. The Article stipulates the reduction, control, and prevention of pollution, by offering effect to the relevant international guidelines concerning the emission of oily wastes, oil, and other pollutants in the strait (Lassen, 1978). The oil pollution that is likely to affect international waterways such as the Danish straits emanate in three major ways: through maritime accidents such as collusions, through loading and offloading processes, and through the intentional discharge of oil (Lassen, 1978). Today, oil pollution from casualties alone constitutes 10 per cent of the entire oil pollution from vessels. The issue of marine pollution has emerged recently and is mainly attributed to the advancement of global trade, the increased need for petroleum, and changes in shipping technology over the past 30 years. In 1973, for example, petroleum and petroleum products accounted for more than half of the entire ocean-created trade in tonnage (Lassen, 1978). With the escalating need for petroleum-based fuel, this percentage will likely rise. During 1962-1972, the total global generation of petroleum escalated from 1,172 to 2,488 million tons, and the world tanker tonnage expanded from 69 to 177 million tons. The total number of tankers also rose from 2, 2270 in 1952 to 6,391 in 1972 (Lassen, 1978). Denmark, while protecting the three straits and other vessels traversing the waterways, should also focus on preventing all forms of pollution, especially those resulting from oil spillage, to secure the state of such valuable waterways.

Conclusion

This paper focused on the Danish straits and elaborated how their status makes them international waterways that connect the Baltic Sea with other oceans. The Danish straits, namely, the Great Belt, the Oresund or the Sound, and the Little Belt are under the governance of the Danish Navy, and enjoy the status of international straits. The countries which operate vessels through the Danish straits feel that the Law of the Sea protects their right to use the international waterways without any inhibition, while Denmark feels the law mandates it to implement practices that would safeguard the channels. In past years, Finland has filed a lawsuit against Denmark citing its development of infrastructure that could jeopardize the passage of high vessels. In the long term, however, both groups need to follow the various regulations outlined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 that is clear on the roles to be fulfilled. More essentially, groups using the waterways should desist from any harmful activity that would affect the nature of the waters of the Danish straits.

References

Biresselioglu, M., et al. (2014). Danish straits versus Turkish straits: The potential impact of prospective Russian oil exports. The Romanian Journal for Baltic and Nordic Studies, 6(2), 223-239.

Central Intelligence Agency. (1999). The Danish straits and the Law of the Sea. Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP86T00608R000600140006-6.pd

Elferink, A. (2000). The regime of passage through the Danish straits. The International Journal of Marine and Costal Law, 15(4), DOI: 10.1163/157180800X00244

Ghosh, S. (1985). Superpower co-operation and transit passage through straits. Economic and Political Weekly, 20(18), 807-811.

Koskenniemi, M. (1996). Case concerning passage through the Great Belt. Ocean Development & International Law, 27(3), 255-289.

Lassen, S. (1978). Passage through straits. Nordic Journal of International Law, 47(3-4), 93-119.

United Nations. (2019). United Nations. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/