The current crisis over the Russian occupation of the Crimea poses some serious challenges and opportunities to Turkey. The control of the access to the Black Sea depends on Turkey and the Turkish Navy at the pinch points of the Bosporus and the Straits of the Dardanelles, both parts of Turkey.     

The question of the free access to the Black Sea was settled at the Montreux Convention Regarding the Control of the Straits when it was signed on 29 July 1936. It is a recognised international agreement; registered in the League of Nations Treaty Series on 11 December 1936. It regulates the transit of naval warships.  The Convention gives Turkey full control over the Straits and guarantees the free passage of civilian vessels in peacetime. However, it also restricts the passage of naval ships not belonging to Black Sea states. The terms of the convention have been the source of controversy over the years, especially over the efforts of the Soviet Navy trying to get access to the Mediterranean through the Straits.

Without the permission of Turkey Russian warships are not allowed to pass freely through the Straits. The Convention provided that Turkey was authorised to close the Straits to all foreign warships in wartime or when it was threatened by aggression; additionally, it was authorised to refuse transit from merchant ships belonging to countries at war with Turkey.. Non-Black Sea state warships in the Straits must be less than 15,000 tons. No more than nine non-Black Sea state warships, with a total aggregate tonnage of no more than 30,000 tons, may pass at any one time, and they are permitted to stay in the Black Sea for no longer than twenty-one days.

When the Soviet Union made its pact with Hitler in 1939 it tried to use this agreement to force Turkey to abandon its control of the Straits. The Turks refused. In 1946 the Soviet Union demanded that the Turks relinquish sole authority over the Straits. This Turkish Straits crisis backfired on the Soviets when Turkey renounced its neutrality and accepted Truman’s offer of military aid. Turkey and Greece joined NATO in 1952. The U.S. worked with the Turks to set up air bases and signals bases on the Soviet border. Turkish troops fought alongside other NATO members in the Korean War. The Soviets continued to object but made no progress. In the 1960s the U.S. naval vessels were given regular, unheeded, access to the Black Sea. In April 1982 the Convention was amended to allow the Turkish authorities to close the Straits at its discretion.

Despite efforts by the Soviet Union and its successor Russia to change the rules of access through the Straits and to apply the United Nations Convention of the Laws of the Sea of freedom of movement, Turkey has refused to ratify that treaty and the Montreux rules still apply. Turkey has the right to close off the Straits to foreign shipping whenever it so wishes.

This is important in the current crisis in the Crimea. While the Russians assert that they have invaded the Crimea to protect the rights of the Russian-speakers in Crimea there are also thousands of Crimean Tatars in the Crimea (of Turkic origin) whose rights also need to be protected. Last week Mustafa Cemilev, the leader of the Crimean Tatars and member of the Ukrainian Parliament, called upon the international community to “stop the Russian attempts to invade Crimea” and to support the new Ukrainian Government. This has been circulated widely in Turkish newspapers and electronic media. The history of the Soviets attack on the Crimean Tatars is a testament to the treatment they might expect at nationalist Russian hands.

After the Red Army had reconquered the Crimea the Crimean Tatars were collectively accused of collaboration with the enemy. Their punishment was deportation. Almost half of the population died during the transportation to central Asia. Others were taken to the concentration camps of Sverdlovsk. All the place-names in the area of former Tatar residence in the Crimea were abolished and renamed with Russian names. Russians from central Russia were subsidised to resettle in Crimea. The official discrimination of the Tatars ended after Stalin’s death, and, in the 1960s, some Crimean Tatars returned to their home country. However the mass migration of the Crimean Tatars to their homeland accelerated after the fall of the Soviet Union as the hurried to escape from Russian rule. Now their old enemies are threatening them again. There is great pressure on Turkey to assist them.

This comes at a good time for Turkey as Erdogan has been suffering from a decline in power in Turkey as the result of political scandals. Turkish membership of the European Union has been hampered. Moreover the Turks are bitterly opposed to the Russian support for Bashar Assad in Syria and the deliveries of food, weaponry and ammunition to Tartus, the Russian naval base in Syria. It may well be a good time for the Turks to close the access to the Straits to Russian warships, denying them their only warm-water port. It is a far different matter for Russia to retaliate by attacking Turkey as it is a full member of NATO since 1952 and all NATO members are obliged to defend Turkey against any aggression.

In addition Turkey has mended some of its hostility towards Cyprus and negotiations have started on a possible reunification of the island; or at least a peaceful co-existence. This will allow the new gas production of Israel to be piped to Cyprus and Turkey and then delivered onward to the various European states now buying from Russia.

So, as the European Union dithers and blusters about sanctions against Russian interests they are missing the ‘killer blow’ at hand – asking the Turks to close off the Straits to Russian ships in defence of their Crimean Tatar homophones. There are plenty of other Turkic communities throughout Central Asia with whom Turkey maintains familial relations; all of whom are generally antithetical to Russian bullying. Defending the Crimea would be a very good start and something real and immediate to resolve the Crimean situation.