USA: +1-206-973-7012 
Sign in
Danish Straits
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Danish Straits
Introduction
Travelling and moving cargo through water bodies is an ancient practice and is still applicable today. 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 Sea resulted in a court battle between Finland and Denmark in 1991 when Finland felt that the building of a bridge across the Great Belt would obstruct movement in the Baltic Sea. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 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 members of the public and international maritime authorities before implementing any decision. The navigating groups, on the other hand, need to adhere to the set rules and regulations, and to avoid engaging in harmful conduct such as pollution. However, some groups feel that bordering states need to adhere to the freedom of navigating the high seas, and urge bordering states to respect Article 44 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, which forbids much restriction or suspension. The groups working towards protecting the Danish straits should focus on developing proper policies to ensure that the waterways continue to serve their purposes without experiencing wrangles or dissatisfaction from some navigators.
Defining a Strait
A strait refers to a navigable waterway that formed naturally, and usually connects two large water bodies. A strait could also refer to a channel of water that stands between two masses of land. Not all straits are navigable because they may either be too shallow, or because they have reefs that are not navigable (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). It is common, however, to use other terms to refer to a strait such as firth and channel. Straits usually serve essential purposes as they allow ships to pass from one place to the other, and so far numerous fights have occurred with different states seeking to control them (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). Many man-made channels, usually referred to as canals have been built to link two water bodies as it happens with the Suez Canal. Although canals and rivers sometimes serve as passage between two large water bodies such as a lake as a sea, and these seem to meet the meaning of strait, they are often termed as such (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The term strait is usually used to refer to wider and larger water passages in the marine environment.
Describing International Straits
An international strait refers to a relatively narrow passage on sea that is bordered by coasts in the opposite sides, and usually connect two sides of large water bodies, used is used for global navigation. All aircraft and ships enjoy the right to pass over or through an international strait, which shall not be violated unless if the strait if 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 shall proceed without any delay over or through the strait, and shall stay away from any threats or use of force against the territorial integrity, sovereignty, or political freedom of countries bordering the strait, or in other way in 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 joins South China Sea and Andaman Sea is a good example of an international strait. 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 purposes (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). Other international straits are the Mesina strait along the border of Sicily and Italy and, the Otranto strait separating Djibouti and Yemen and join the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea, and the Cook Strait in New Zealand that connects to the South Pacific Ocean (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The analysis, however, pays close attention to the Danish straits that are under Denmark’s territory.
Describing the Danish Straits
The Danish straits link the North Sea to the Baltic Sea through the Skagerrak strait that runs between the southeast of Norway and Kattegat, which is a 31,000km2 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 that were used locally (Elferink, 2000). Nonetheless, following territorial segregation and separation, 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 used with Germany and Sweden (Elferink, 2000). The Little Belt and the Great Belt, however, remain to be part of the Danish territorial waters.
Describing 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 it is regarded as one of the major three Danish straits. The Great Belt that divides Denmark into two was earlier served by ferries around the 19th centuries until the islands were connected in 1998 by the Great Belt Fixed Link. The Great is ranked the largest and most essential of the three Danish straits that join the Baltic Sea to the Atlantic Ocean and the Kattegat strait. The Great Belt is about 38 miles (61 kilometers) and stretches 11-21 miles (17-33 kilometers) wide (Elferink, 2000). The Great belt flow around to large islands, which are the Langeland in the southern part of Denmark and Samso in the northern part (Elferink, 2000). The Great Belt separates into the West Channel and the East Channel at Sprogo Island and both are separated by the Great Belt Bridge. A tunnel, however, 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 burst its outlets around Gothenburg region causing it to tip over in the southern part. The Dana River as the Great Belt was initially called is perceived to have formed massive erosion taking away rich sediments and cleared so many trees along its way. Consequently, the Ancylus Lake initially dropped in level over several hundreds of years (Elferink, 2000). Increasing sea levels permitted it to flow over Dana River creating the Great Belt and making it a suitable sea way, and in the process the Ancylus Lake transformed into the Littorina Sea. Historically, the Great Belt was navigable by ships traversing the ocean, and it still serves the same purpose today (Elferink, 2000). The Danish Navy takes charge of monitoring maritime traffic around 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 open for foreign shipping (Elferink, 2000). The 1885 Copenhagen Convention legally categorized the eastern part of the Great Belt as a waterway that is open for international shipping. The entire of 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) and its width varies from 5 kilometers (2.6 miles) to 29 kilometers (18 miles). The Oresund measures 5 km wide at the place where it narrows the most between Helsingborg in Sweden and Helsingor in Denmark (Elferink, 2000). Other than being one of the busiest waterways globally, the Oresund Bridge that connects the City of Malmo in Sweden and Copenhagen serves vital economic purposes in the way it allows trains and automobiles to pass through it since its inauguration on July 2000 (Elferink, 2000). The Oresund Bridge that is about 4 kilometers links a bi-national metropolitan area with almost 4 million people. Furthermore, the HH Ferry pass way between Helsingborg, Sweden and Helsingor, Denmark, in the northern side of Oresund, is one of the globe’s busiest international routes that ferries use with at least 69 departures from each harbor every day (Elferink, 2000). The 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 caused much debate between the Danish and Swedish governments since historical times. 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 of Roskilde (Elferink, 2000). King Eric Pomerania introduced a taxation system for those using the strait in 1429, and the practice remained intact 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 it 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 did not want much fight with the Danish over the Oresund and developed two projects that would increase its independence; the Gothernborg in 1621, and the building of the Gota Canal that was built from 1810 to late 1832.
The Oresund like other straits in Denmark lies at the border between the Baltic Sea, which is far much salty and oceanic salt water with a salinity surpassing 31. Whereas the Baltic sea has brackish water meaning that it is neither too acidic nor alkaline, the water in the Oresund tend to shift its nature with stream from the Baltic Sea making it less saline, although the streams can alter their 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 where the salinity is oceanic at all times below a particular depth that ranges between 11-16 meters (Elferink, 2000). The depth is 5-7 meters in the southern part, and this is the appropriate border of oceanic salt water, thereby serving as a suitable habitat for several maritime species where about 53 identified salt-water animals reside, compared to the more than 1500 species in North Sea (Elferink, 2000). Researchers believe about 605 species reside in different parts of the Oresund with some of the identified forms include crabs, certain forms of jellyfish, lobsters, and specific species of flatfish among others.
The tides occur daily, although the attractions from the lunar forces cannot compel much water to shift from east to west, or the other way round, especially in narrower waters where the current is either southbound or northbound. Not much of the variation in water levels in the Oresund is as a result of daily waves (Elferink, 2000). The current has a much impactful effect than the tides on the water level, but the strong winds could tamper with the water level. 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). The 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 north side 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 side.
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 and drain to the Baltic Sea. Many glacial moraines shaped the area around the Little Belt, with the initial glacial forming during the Weichsel glaciations period around 22000-25000 years ago (Elferink, 2000). Ice arrived from the southern part during the Weichsel glaciations that happened much later nearly 14000-15000 years ago, and 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, and it is about 82 meters (267 feet), which makes it deeper than the Great Belt. It happens that a lot of small Danish islands fall within the Little Belt, mainly because of its depth. Furthermore, about 10% of the waters passing between the Kattegat and the inner Baltic Sea move through the Little Belt. The strait stretches from Juelsminde in the northern part of Denmark to southern part in the island of Als, taking a winding pattern in between (Elferink, 2000). The northern side is the widest with more than 16 kilometers (9.4 miles), and from there it passes to the southwest, narrowing slightly about 1 kilometer (0.63 miles) at a place commonly referred to as The Narrows, where the two bridges traversing the Little Belt are situated (Elferink, 2000). The Little Belt widens to about 9 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.
The Provisions of the Ramsar Convention protect the Little Belt as a wetland. The area is a good breeding place for a number of species and birds that keep migrating from time to time. Some of the protected species in the area include terns, owls, mergansers, eagles, swans, crakes, harriers, and avocets among others (Elferink, 2000). The place has the largest population of harbour porpoise globally, and is home to several thousands of people, thereby serving as the only place where people have settled in the interior Danish waters (Elferink, 2000). Local and international tourists are welcome to observe the marine life, but have to part with some fee. Other species such as fin whales, humpbacks, and minke also visit the Little Belt, but not as frequently.
Historical Analysis of the Little Belt
A considerable human population inhabited the Little Belt during the Stone Age, and hunted reindeers and anchors, as well as other game animals in the forests and tunnel valleys. Geological and climatic changes, however, introduced new animals and plants to the place and formed the fish in this area a vital source of food (Elferink, 2000). Temperatures increased again during 4000 BC when the Funnelbeaker community was dominant in the area. Archeologists, however, can identify traces of other cultural groups that settled in the region, with adequate evidence showing the existence of Neolithic culture. The settlements widened and populations continued to grow throughout the Bronze, Iron, and Viking Ages, and during the 14th century, the towns of Vejle and Kolding gained the status of merchant towns, and are still important trading centers today (Elferink, 2000). The hunting of harbour porpoise became rampant starting from the Middle Ages up to the end of the 19th 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, but otherwise, the hunters got 750-850 porpoises in most of the winters. The practice had continued since the 1590s when laws were created to guide the practice. A royal decree, however, cancelled the practice of hunting porpoises in 1899, but when fuel shortages hit during the First and the Second World Wars the hunters were forced to go back to 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-German border, and several Germanic compositions mention the strait as it appears in one of the works by Ernst Arndt as well as in the third verse of the national anthem in Germany. Today the strait attracts many divers who seek to explore the shipwrecks beneath, as well to gather archaeological information.
Transit in the Danish Straits
The Danish straits serve as the major link between the Baltic Sea and other oceans of the world. The guidelines for passage through the straits has caused much debate, with Denmark holding that it has much 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, and in particular for Russian oil exports. Looking at the future prospect of Russian oil, the country is projected to accommodate nearly half of the total oil in the Arctic region, thereby suggesting 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 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 that do not generate the much needed revenue by the Turkish government (Biresselioglu et al., 2014). It is a debatable matter whether the Turkish straits will continue to serve as the outlet of Russian oil exports, or whether the Danish straits will take over the position in accordance with the oil resources progress in the Arctic region (Biresselioglu et al., 2014). The illustration of how the Danish straits attract the operations of other countries adequately portrays the waterways as significant international waterways that should be traversed while taking into account the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982.
Traversing the Danish straits as an international waterway has since generated some legal issues. Most of such cases proceed to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) because 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 regarding the application or interpretation of the Convention. The Danish government declares 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. It is because of Denmark’s compliance with the directives of the Convention that 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 which arose 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, which is one of the Danish straits linking Kattegat and the Baltic (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 bridge for road traffic over the East channel would permanently block the passage to the Baltic for ships or vessels that are past 65 meters high.
According to Finland, the Great Belt is an international strait that should permit free passage across the Great Belt, and that vessels have the right to pass freely as provided for by the Treaty of Copenhagen (1857) on the banning of taxation commonly known as sound dues. Furthermore, Finland 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 for 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 rub 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 lacks the merits to push it further and make it weighty (Koskenniemi, 1996). Judge Tarassov voted for the Court’s decision, albeit not without some disagreements. According to judge Tarassov the continued construction works on the East Channel Bridge passing over the Great Belt creates significant threat to unobstructed passage of international ships through the international strait (Koskenniemi, 1996). The opinion of Vice-President Oda supported the Court’s ruling terming the claims by Finland as lacking urgency.
The realization by Turkey that it would experience significant fall in its economy if Russia opts 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 that are protected by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (United Nations, 2019). The states bordering the straits, therefore, which is Denmark in this case, may adopt laws and regulations to direct transit passage via the straits. 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 traffic separation scheme for navigation along the straits where necessary to safeguard the safe transit of ships (United Nations, 2019). Denmark in this instance has the right when necessary, and after sharing the decision with the public, substitute particular traffic separation schemes or sea lanes for any other schemes or lanes it previously prescribed or designated. Denmark, however, should ensure that the newly formed separation schemes and sea lanes adhere to widely acknowledged international directives (United Nations, 2019). Denmark, however, should remember that before substituting or designating the separations schemes or sea lanes, it should refer proposals to the right 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 need to clearly outline all traffic separation scheme 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 no option, but to adhere to the directives guiding 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 as provided for in Article 42 need to watch out for illegal fishing practices, as well as watch out for the loading or offloading of any commodities, people, or currencies in violation of the immigration, fiscal, customs, or sanitary laws of states bordering the straits (United Nations, 2019). Denmark while applying the requirements of Article 42, however, needs to understand that it shall not discriminate against other ships in its development of regulations that protect the 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, however, need to be conversant with Article 44 of the Law of Sea, which implies that the states bordering the straits must not interfere with transit movement and shall offer necessary publicity to any dangers to over-flight or navigation within or over the straits of which they are aware (United Nations, 2019). Furthermore, Denmark needs to understand that it has no powers to suspend transit passage over the Danish straits as provided for in the Law of Sea.
Apart from the idea that Denmark has the power to develop the regulations that define 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 keep away from use of force or threat against the political independence, territorial integrity, or sovereignty of countries or states bordering the passage (United Nations, 2019). The vessels passing through international straits should not act in any manner that happen to violate the directives of the guidelines of international law enshrined in the Charter of the UN (United Nations, 2019). Ships passing through international straits have to adhere to the set international directives, practices, and procedures for safety at the water body, as well as conditions set by the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. Ships passing through international straits have to adhere to the regulations, practices, and procedures for control, prevention, and reduction of pollution. The aircrafts passing through international straits must adhere to the Rules of the Air created by the International Civil Aviation Organization (United Nations, 2019). The aircraft should at all times follow the radio frequency assigned by a recognized by the competent globally recognized air traffic control body or the suitable international radio frequency.
The ships passing through international straits must adhere to sea lanes the separation schemes designated for international navigation. The states bordering international straits are responsible for designating sea lanes and prescribing traffic separation scheme to allow for appropriate navigation and to safeguard the safe passage of ships (United Nations, 2019). Such countries may, when necessary substitute other traffic separation scheme or sea lanes for any traffic separation scheme or sea lanes previously prescribed or designated by these states. Such traffic separation scheme and sea lanes shall adhere to generally acknowledged international guidelines (United Nations, 2019). States bordering international straits should know that before substituting or designating sea lanes or substituting or prescribing traffic separation scheme they need to submit their proposals to a widely acknowledged firm for approval (United Nations, 2019). The firm may accept only such traffic separation scheme or sea lanes as may be accepted with the countries bordering the straits, after which they may substitute, designate, or prescribe them. Usually, the states bordering international straits shall clearly outline all traffic separation schemes and sea lanes prescribed or designated by them.
The Clashing Interests
There is barely any other regulation of international law which is widely known as the freedom of passage and navigation through the high seas. Though the laws applies in the first instance to navigation in the high seas, the guideline would be ineffectual and useless if the right of navigation through international straits and thus access to the high seas and between various part of it was not acknowledged (Lassen, 1978). Particularly in straits that are not so wide that they are wholly overlapped by the territorial seas has the freedom of navigation 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 is suggested an expansion of the territorial area to 12 nautical miles, which if enacted will make many other international waterways to be partly covered by the territorial sea, including such essential waterways such 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, but the problem is 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, and even though the ice conditions in water do not really hinder vessels from passing from one end to the other, the ice could 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 be a significant problem, especially from November to March, as well as sea mists called havgusen fog that disrupt visibility more so during summer. Heavy fog with visibility less than 5/7 of a mile, usually occur about 49 days annually at Copenhagen, particularly from October to March. The groups 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 close to shipping lanes.
The vessels passing through the Great and Little Belts need to be aware of the possible factors that could tamper with their traversing the straits. Overall, the Great Belt is deep and wide, bust still vessels have to maneuver their way through the many convoluted channels and the most expansive series of hazards. The Great Belt is known for its numerous coastal reefs and shoals that extend for sizable length offshore (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The vessels passing through the strait should to be aware of the strong currents that vary in nature, usually achieving their topmost speeds near the many rocky protrusions and sandbars bordering the meandering navigation lanes. Ship wrecks are a major concern for navigators moving across the Great Belt with the biggest problem being around Korsor, Langeland, and Kalundborg (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). It is also worrying that some ports along the Great Belt have restricted 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 much is 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 section has a difficult section called the Snaevringen or the Narrows, which becomes even dangerous due to the strong currents that sometimes obstruct the waterway direction. The most tricky part of the central section of the Little Belt is an tremendously narrow section southeast of Bago Island that usually need guidance by people who know the area very well (Central Intelligence Agency, 1999). The southernmost part of the Little Belt, however, is the safest for passing, 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 because the storm, the waves, and the tides do not have much intensity in comparison to the other.
Possible Pollution Threats while Traversing the Danish Straits
The Danes have the feeling that one of the primary goals of the Law of the Sea Conference is to marshal cooperative efforts prevent marine pollution while avoiding shipping restrictions that are not necessary. Article 42 is clear regarding the role of states bordering international straits in preventing pollution. The Article stipulates that 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 pollute 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% of the entire vessel oil pollution. The issue of marine pollution emerged recently, and is due to the advancement in the past 30 years mainly attributed to the advancement of global trade, the increased urge for petroleum, the changes in shipping technology, and the increased awareness of the need to safeguard the marine environment. In 1973, for example, petroleum and petroleum products accounted for more than one half of the entire ocean-created trade in tonnage (Lassen, 1978). Because of the escalating need for petroleum-based fuel the percentage likely has and will expand. From 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 expanded 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 put much emphasis on preventing any forms of pollution, especially that which occur from oil spillage, to secure the state of such valuable links.
Conclusion
The study pays close attention to the Danish straits, and elaborates how their status make them international waterways that connects the Baltic Sea with other oceans in the world. The Danish straits, 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 crossing their vessels through the Danish straits feel that the Law of Sea protect them to use the international water ways without any inhibition, while Denmark feels the law mandates it to engage in practices that would safeguard the channels. So far, Finland has filed a lawsuit against Denmark blaming it for putting up infrastructure that could jeopardize the passage of high vessels. Both groups, however, need to follow the various chapters of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 that is clear on the roles each side ought to play. More essentially, the groups using the waterways should prevent any harmful activity that would tamper with the nature of the waters in 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.pdf
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/
