Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.39 N° 68
Enero
Junio
2021
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 39, Nº 68 (Enero - Junio) 2021, 866-881
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Recibido el 15/09/2020 Aceptado el 15/12/2020
Modern Threats to the National Security
of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal
Formalization Process of Ukrainian
State Border
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3968.56
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
1
*
Abstract
The border issue has become particularly urgent for Ukraine
since 2014 with the beginning of military aggression by the
Russian Federation, the illegal annexation of the Autonomous
Republic of Crimea and the city of Sebastopol, as well as the
temporary occupation of the part of Ukraine’s sovereign territory
in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The problem of the legal
formalization of the Ukrainian-Russian state border requires closer
examination in the context of complex relations between two states. This
article seeks to analyze the current situation of legal formalization of the
Ukrainian state border with neigh bouring countries and highlights the main
threats to Ukraine’s national security arising from the incomplete process
of formalizing the Ukrainian state border with the Russian Federation.
It was revealed that the incomplete process of legal formalization of the
state border threatened to lose the state part of sovereignty, territorial
integrity in sovereign territory. It is concluded that there is a potential
threat of escalation of border conicts and military clashes in Ukraine’s
border regions, as well as at Ukraine’s borders, and the spread of extremist,
terrorist, and separatist demonstrations on Ukraine’s state border.
Keywords: edge of the state; national security; Russian intervention;
Crimea; territorial occupation.
* First Deputy Head of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine, Administration of the State Border
Guard Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1452-2312. Email:
i797907@gmail.com
867
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
Resumen
La cuestión fronteriza se ha vuelto particularmente urgente para
Ucrania desde 2014 con el comienzo de la agresión militar por parte de
Rusia, la anexión ilegal de la República Autónoma de Crimea y la ciudad
de Sebastopol, así como la ocupación temporal de la parte del territorio
soberano de Ucrania en las regiones de Donetsk y Luhansk. El problema
de la formalización legal de la frontera entre Ucrania y Rusia exige un
examen más detenido en el contexto de relaciones complejas entre dos
Estados. Este artículo busca analizar la situación actual de formalización
legal de la frontera del Estado ucraniano con los países de la región y pone
de relieve las principales amenazas a su seguridad nacional derivadas del
proceso incompleto de formalización de la frontera estatal ucraniana con
la Federación rusa. Se reveló que el proceso incompleto de formalización
legal de la frontera puede signicar pérdida de soberanía e integridad
territorial para Ucrania. Se concluye que existe una amenaza potencial
de escalada de conictos fronterizos y enfrentamientos militares en las
regiones fronterizas, así como en las fronteras de Ucrania, y la propagación
de manifestaciones extremistas, terroristas y separatistas en la frontera
estatal de Ucrania.
Palabras clave: borde del estado; seguridad nacional; intervención
rusa; Crimea; ocupación territorial.
Introduction
State border is an important element of the State policy of institutional
integration and cultural assimilation (Vrban, 2018). The establishment of
State border always has been and will expectadly remain one of strategic
national security objectives of each country. Ukraine is not an exception in
this respect.
The issue of dening the borders of Ukraine has arisen after the
signature of the Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, the dissolution
of the former Soviet Union and creation of new independent states. In this
connection, on 12 September 1991, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted
the Law of Ukraine “On Legal Succession of Ukraine” (Verkhovna Rada,
1991). Article 5 states that “State border of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics separating the territory of Ukraine from other States and the
border between the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Byelorussian
Soviet Socialist Republic, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic,
the Republic of Moldova as of 16 July 1990 constitute the state border of
Ukraine” (Verkhovna Rada, 2003).
Ukraine has joint borders with seven states. Four of them are the
European Union Member States (the Republic of Poland, the Slovak
868
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
Republic, Hungary, and Romania). The length of border with the
mentioned EU Member States is 1,390,742 km, which is 20% of the whole
border length. Other three States which have joint borders with Ukraine are
MemberStates of the Commonwealth of Independent States (the Republic
of Moldova, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation). The
border length with the CIS Member States is 4,601,24 km, or 65 % of whole
length. More than 1,001 km (15 %) of Ukraine’s border passes along the
boundary of the territorial sea. The longest border segment of Ukraine is
the Ukrainian-Russian one and stretches for 2,295.04 km. The shortest
border segment of Ukraine is the Ukrainian-Slovak area (98 km). Ukraine
is bordered in the Black Sea with the sea areas of Romania, Turkey and the
Russian Federation.
Taking into account the uncertain legal status of the Ukrainian-Russian
segment of state border, Ukraine has faced a potential threat of the loss of
the sovereignty and territorial integrity under direct military intervention
of the Russian Federation. It is obvious that the ongoing attempts by
the political leadership of the Russian Federation to redene new state
borders in modern world constitute one of the most blatant violations of
international law, which in turn could trigger or repeat a territorial dispute
between neighbours (Harrison, 2007).
Ukraine remains one of the important contributors to international
peace and stability. My state pursues peaceful policies being committed to
all international principles of mutual non-use of force or threat of its use.
This course of Ukraine is unchanged and xed, inter alia, in the National
Security Strategy of Ukraine. Undoubtedly, peace is a key to Ukraine’s
development. Peacemaking and the restoration of the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized State
border is the highest priority of the State (President of Ukraine, 2020).
Improvment of the effectiveness of State policy in the area of State
border and sovereign rights protection has been identied as one of the
main directions of the State’s foreign and domestic political activities in
order to preserve its national interests and security Ukraine in its exclusive
maritimeeconomic zone, and also migration which also makes it necessary
to examine the problems of the legal formalization of the Ukrainian state
border. That is why under nowadays conditions researches regarding
search for effective enforcement mechanisms and an optimal model of
ensuring national security of the States from internal and external threats
gain particular relevance (Kuryliuk and Khalymon, 2020).
1. Analysis of resent research
State borders were conceived with the advent of international law,
especially after the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, as a direct delimitation
869
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
of state territories – the division of the world into nation states. They
were seen as signs of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the state.
Since then, the state territory looks like a whole entity, separated from
neighbours by clear geometric lines. In addition to arguments in favour
of self-determination and linguistic separation, claims for acquisition and
alteration of borders are also based on the idea of “natural borders”.
Border and territorial disputes are worldwide actual topic for scientic
research, including the countries of the post-Soviet area. The principles of
territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders are central to modern
system of international law, they are democratic governing source of
international law and norms of a universal character (Corten, 1998).
The problems of territorial disputes remain relevant for both domestic
and foreign researchers. In Ukraine, various scholars have devoted attention
to the problems of the legal formalization of the state border.
Adamchuk I. studied forms and methods of changing existing inter-
state borders which were legalized by international law during the interwar
period (1918–1939), as well as Soviet compliance with the requirements
and norms of existing international law during the reunication of
Northern Bukovyna and Transcarpathian Ukraine with Soviet Ukraine
(Adamchuk, 2010). In their work, Kyslovskyi and Truhan made a research
of the problems of dening the frontier of internal sea waters as a part of
sovereign maritime territory with a view to demilitarizing maritime area
(Kyslovskyi and Truhan, 2012).
The current сondition of public administration in the sphere of legal
formalization of the state border was researched by Sitsinskyi V. He made
the conclusion that the legal formalization of the state border of Ukraine
throughout its length is a key foreign policy priority of national security of
Ukraine (Sitsinskyi, 2012).
Sitsinskyi N. noted that the State border of Ukraine is not legally
formalized and does not allow the introduction of effective mechanisms
of public administration to protect the sovereignty, territorial integrity,
and independence of the state. It is also impossible to introduce effective
mechanisms for ensuring the regime of the state border, in particular the
procedure for its maintenance and the development of the relevant border
infrastructure and conduction of economic and environmental activities,
ensuring the safety of navigation in border waters, as well as carrying
out various industrial activities in the continental shelf and the exclusive
(maritime) economic zone of Ukraine (Sitsinskyi, 2014).
The subject of Nick Megoran’s research was border and territorial
disputes between Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. The author
studied the problems of the delimitation of national territories and the
drawing of borders, as well as the results of the Soviet-era policies that
continue to have a complex impact on the region (Megoran, 2004).
870
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
The researchers (Nematov, 2018) note that the actions of the leaders
of Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan are the classic example of the
settlement of complex issues through negotiation and diplomacy and
are fully in line with the norms and principles of the United Nations
Organization (Megoran, 2007).
As Fang and Li point out, territorial disputes can last for decades, possibly
more than a hundred years. Some of those disputes did not end even after
hostilities; a defeated party could simply waive its claims. Moreover, states
are not always prepared to incur incidental costs for the settlement of such
disputes, in view of the considerable costs related with tension and the
threat of war (Fang and Li, 2019).
The historical aspects of territorial disputes in Africa have also made
signicant contributions to the scientic literature on these issues. The
book “Demilitarization and Demarcation of borders in Africa” (Wafula,
2013) indicates that border disputes continue to follow African states
because of the European perception of the division of territory in Africa
during the colonial period (Powell and Wiegand, 2014). Europeans believed
that Africans had no state.
As a result, Europeans gained control over African territories that they
did not recognize as states. While states are members of international
community where mutual interdependence, globalization and non-state
actors have an increasing role, the state is still the central actor in the
community. So, the most convenient approach for the study of borders is
the relationships between states. Their formula is foreign policy that range
between war and peace, conict, and cooperation. Even today, the main aim
of State’s foreign policy is acquisition of strategic, military, and economic
advantages over other states.
Unresolved territorial disputes often lead to military conicts. In 1990,
Saddam Hussein used the old border dispute as a reason for Iraq’s invasion
of Kuwait, as that country was one of the former Ottoman territories
(Tymchenko and Kononenko).
We fully agree with the view of Carter and Goemans who mentioned
that the way the borders are established in is important for international
stability: borders established within pre-existing internal or external
administrative border will cause fewer territorial disputes in the future
and have signicantly lower risk of militarized confrontation in case of
controversy (Carter and Goemans).
Transformation of administrative borders between the Union Republics
within the USSR into their state borders based on the uti possidetis principle
demonstrate certain maturity of states and their desire to apply the norms
of international law. According to international scholars this principle is the
right of newly formed states to determine their own borders. It also helps to
871
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
protect the borders of the newly independent states and serves as a shield
against further destructions. The uti possidetis principle asserts that: “New
states that have gained independence remain with the same borders as they
had when they were part of a colonial power” (Hasani, 2003: 7).
The selection of previous administrative borders, both internal and
international, effectively minimizes uncertainty and costs, and effectively
solves the practical difculty of consideration all possible boundaries that
could be established to separate two states (Marcus, 1996).
A review of scientic literature on Ukraine’s border and territorial
disputes with neighbouring countries and similar disputes in other
countries of both the former Soviet Union and other countries of the world
points to several factors which can provoke border conicts and disputes.
Such factors include the inuence of third countries or the inuence of
pseudo-patriotic (nationalist) forces. The existence of such factors could
resolve a military conict between peaceful countries that would not have
a diplomatic solution. At the same time, the settlement of issues relating
to legal formalization of the state border of Ukraine makes it necessary to
conduct further scientic research on this topic.
2. Historical aspects
The legal formalization of the Ukrainian state border with the EU
Member States was based on the general principle of succession to bilateral
international legal treaties between the former USSR and these countries.
Ukraine’s current State borders with the Republic of Moldova, the
Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation have been established
by bilateral international treaties, which, xed the transformation of the
administrative borders between the union republics within the USSR into
their State borders on the basis of the uti possidetis (Tunkin, 1997) principle.
The State border of Ukraine with the Slovak Republic was established by
the Agreement between Ukraine and the Slovak Republic on the Common
Border of 14 October 1993, with Hungary – by the Agreement between
Ukraine and the Republic of Hungary on the regime of the Ukrainian-
Hungarian State Border, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance on Border
Issues of 19 May 1995, with the Republic of Poland – by the Agreement
between Ukraine and the Republic of Poland on the Legal Regime of the
Ukrainian-Polish State Border, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance on
Border Issues of 12 January 1993.
The line of the State border between Ukraine and Romania was
established on the principle of succession, with the exception of the point
of junction of the territorial seas, which was not dened in Soviet times
and became the subject of negotiations between Romania and independent
872
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
Ukraine. As a result of the negotiations, the Agreement between Ukraine
and Romania on the Regime of the Ukrainian-Romanian State Border,
Cooperation and Mutual Assistance on Border Issues was signed on 17
June 2003. It conrmed the passage of the state border between Ukraine
and Romania on the area as it was dened in the Soviet-Romanian treaties
and demarcation documents. This Agreement alsodened the geographical
coordinates of the point of intersection of the state borders (territorial seas)
of Ukraine and Romania in the Black Sea: 45°05′21″N, 30°02′27″E.
The agreements about the state borders of Ukraine with the the Slovak
Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Romania conrmed not only delimitation
but also all the demarcation documents between them and the Soviet Union
on the principle of succession. Joint inspections of the State border line on
the area take place at these stations.
The fact that the process of legal formalization of the common borders
with the Russian Federation has not been completed, as well as the events of
the past six years, give reason to note that this issue is a threating problem
for Ukraine and has a critical importance for its future, sovereignty, and
territorial integrity.
3. State of legal formalization of the Ukrainian-Russian area
of border
The total length of the land border of the Ukrainian-Russian border
is 1,974 km, which extends through the territories of Chernihiv, Sumy,
Kharkiv, Luhansk and Donetsk regions.
Delimitation of the state border between Ukraine and the Russian
Federation was completed in 2003 with the signing of the Agreement
between Ukraine and the Russian Federation on the Ukrainian-Russian
state border. According to it, the Ukrainian-Russian state border passes as
it is indicated in the Description of the passage of the state border between
Ukraine and the Russian Federation and depicted by a continuous red
line on the maps of the state border between Ukraine and the Russian
Federation. Description of the passage of the state border and maps of the
state border form an integral part of it. The relevant treaty was registered by
Ukraine in the United Nations Secretariat on 1 December 2016, No. 54132
and published by link.
In accordance with Article 2 of the Agreement between Ukraine and
the Russian Federation on the Demarcation of the Ukrainian-Russian
state border of 17 May 2010, the parties established Joint Ukrainian-
Russian demarcation commission. In addition to the agreement on the
Ukrainian-Russian state border and the above-mentioned agreement, the
legal formalization basis for the activities of the Joint Ukrainian-Russian
873
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
demarcation commission is the «Regulation on the Joint Ukrainian-
Russian demarcation commission» signed on 21 June 2011 in Kyiv.
Field demarcation commenced on 2 April 2012 the rst border sign in
the area of the junction of the state borders of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus
was installed and ofcially opened. Totally, there were held 18 meetings
of the Joint Ukrainian-Russian demarcation commission. The nineteenth
meeting of the Commission scheduled for 18–20 February 2014 in Kyiv
didn’ttake place because the Russian Federation delegation did not arrive.
As is known, at the end of February 2014 the Russian Federation grossly
violated norms of international law and the provisions of inter-state legal
acts on border issues, has carried out an armed annexation of part of the
state territory of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. The
entire international community has already severely condemned these
irresponsible actions by the Russian side as threatening to the security of
the entire European continent. Unfortunately, «strategic partners» from
the Russian Federation are once again implementing their annexationist
and Anti-Ukrainian plans, the essence of which consists in the military
annexation of certain border regions of Ukraine and spread of separatist
and extremist sentiments among the population of the state.
Today’s actions of Moscow on the common area of the state border
represent a particular threat to the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and
cathedral of Ukraine. Every day, numerous criminal groups try to enter
Ukraine through the Ukrainian-Russian state border. Their aim is to
destabilize the domestic political situation in our state. For the rst time
since Ukraine’s independence, a powerful group of military forces and
assets on both sides of the border with Russia have been accumulated in
full combat and mobilization readiness for military action. In the present
conditions of statehood, Ukraine faces with a potential threat of the loss of
the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state in the conditions of a
direct military threat from the Russian Federation.
During the period of the Commission’s work, graphical projects for the
installation of border signs in the Chernihiv-Bryansk region (222 km) and
in the Sumy-Bryansk region (150 km) were developed and approved. In
the rst region there were implemented 222 km of the state border, 106
main and 147 intermediate border signs. In the second region there were
implemented 96 km of the state border, 381 locations for border signs
were identied. Graphic projects of border signs places in the Sumy-Kursk
region (299 km) and in the Sumy-Belgorod region (109 km) are at the
nal stages of development. They were to be conrmed at the nineteenth
meeting of the Commission, which did not take place. Graphical projects
for the installation of border signs were not prepared and demarcation
work was not started on the areas of the state border within Kharkiv (281
km), Luhansk (739 km) and Donetsk (174 km) regions.
874
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
O. Melnikov (2008) noted that during the delimitation and demarcation
work, there were identied number of so-called «crisis points» (the railway
track on the area Rozsosh-Chortkove-Milove). It has not been possible to
resolve these issues in 12 years. The situation worsened in 2014 with the
beginning of military aggression carried out by the Russian Federation.
As of July 2020, the updated composition of the Ukrainian delegation
to the Commission has been approved by the Decree of the President of
Ukraine «On amendments to the Decrees of the President of Ukraine of 28
April 2011 No 509 and of 31 October 2011 No 1008» No 177/2017 of 5 July
2017.
The process of legal formalization of the Ukrainian-Russian state border
and the work of the Commission can be re-established only after the complete
cessation of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation and return
of control over the Ukrainian-Russian state border and the restoration of
constitutional order in the territories of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions
which are temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation.
For a long time, the Ukrainian-Russian state border has been actively
used by numerous international criminal groups for illegal migration,
trafcking in human beings, smuggling, drug trafcking and the illegal
movement of weapons, explosives, means of terror across the border and
other illegal activities at the border. Consequently, the activities of cross-
border criminal groups along the common State border between Ukraine
and the Russian Federation have always posed a potential threat to the
national security of the state.
As Zhaimagambetov (2015) noted in his research «Russia has proven
itself as incapable mediator to solve border disputes».
That is obviously, it is difcult to expect decent behaviour from the
Russian Federation in a process of legal formalization of Ukrainian-Russian
state border, especially after the annexation of the Autonomous Republic of
Crimea and the city of Sevastopol as well as the occupation of part of the
territory of Donetsk and Luhansk regions.
As of summer, 2020, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine had taken
measures to update and optimize the personal composition of the Ukrainian
delegation. A draft Decree of the President of Ukraine «On amendments to
the Decree of the President of Ukraine of 31 October 2011 No. 1008» has
been sent to the authorities involved (letter of 3 July 2020 No 72/14-412-
1471). It is obvious that the incomplete status of legal formalization of the
state border, the exclusive (maritime) economic zone and the delineation
of the Black Sea continental shelf is one of the external threats to national
security (Marchenko, 2009).
875
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
4. State of legal formalization of the Ukrainian-Moldovan
area of border
The state border of Ukraine with the Republic of Moldova was established
by the Agreement between Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova on the
state border of 18August 1999. After the entry into force of the Agreement
on the state Border and in order to implement its provisions, the parties
concluded the Regulation on the Demarcation of the state border between
Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova of 29 January 2003 (in the form of an
intergovernmental agreement).
The demarcation process began in March 2002. In accordance with
article 7 of the Agreement, the parties established a Joint Ukrainian-
Moldovan Demarcation Commission.
Unfortunately, the demarcation process has been stalled for a long time
because of the political unresolved issues on the part of the self-proclaimed
Transnistrian Moldovan Republic. This prevented the beginning of practical
work on the demarcation of the central (Transnistrian) Ukrainian-Moldovan
area of the state border (452 km). The demarcation process of this segment
of the state border has made signicant progress on 29 January 2010. With
the participation of the Heads of the foreign affairs of Ukraine and the
Republic of Moldova, there was established the rst intermediate border
sign 0204 in the central section: Velyka Kisnytsa, Iampil area, Vinnytsia
region (Sitsinskyi, 2014).
As of March 2020, 66 meetings of the Commission had been held.
On the outcomes of work establishment of the border line on the ground
was nished: 1,222 km (99.9%) of the border line has been established,
including 452 km in the central (Transnistrian) section; 4198 border signs
were installed; As of 2020, the Ukrainian-Moldovan border is demarcated
at 99.9%.
Problematic issues remain demarcation of the State border in the area of
the water-ow dam of the buffer hydro-unit of the Dniester complex hydro-
unit; demarcation in the area of Giurgiulesti (delimitation points 712–713).
Demarcation of the Ukrainian-Moldovan area of border in regions of
the water-ow dam of the buffer hydro-unit of the Dniester complex hydro-
unit and settlement Giurgiulesti is provided due to the implementation of
so-called «package agreements» recorded in the Protocol of the thirteenth
meeting of the Intergovernmental Ukrainian-Moldovan Mixed Commission
on Trade and Economic Cooperation (10–11 November 2011, Chisinau).
Next to the demarcation, the mutual recognition and formalization
of the ownership rights of Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova over
the facilities located in the territories of the parties, including part of the
Dniester complex hydro-unit, located on the territory of the Republic of
876
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
Moldova, and the issue of ensuring the proper functioning of the Dniester
complex hydro-unit belong to the “package arrangements”.
Determination of the midpoint of the hydro technical structures – the
water-ow dam of the buffer reservoir of the Dniester complex hydro-unit
– is a technical issue which is currently being considered in the Working
Group on reciprocal processing of ownership in accordance with the
Protocol of the 14th meeting of the Intergovernmental Ukrainian-Moldovan
Mixed Commission on Trade and Economic Cooperation (held on 18-19
September 2017 in Odessa).
Joint Ukrainian-Moldovan Demarcation Commission prepares draft
decisions on the demarcation of the state border in Dniester complex hydro-
unit and settlement Giurgiulesti after receiving from the authorized state
bodies of Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova the specic parameters of
the midpoint of the hydro technical structures.
The issue of the nal demarcation documents is a derivative one: they
can be nalized in a relatively short time, provided that the problem of the
Dniester complex hydro-unit and settlement Giurgiulesti will be resolved.
The problems arose due to the fact that the cartographers of the Soviet
Union never considered the established borders as borders of independent
republics, since their planning approaches were considered on a uniform
basis from the point of view of water supply, gas supply and transport
networks. In addition, industrial, transport and agricultural projects of one
republic could be freely extended to the territory of a neighbouring republic
(Megoran, 2004).
5. State of legal formalization of the Ukrainian-Belarusian
area of border
The state border of Ukraine with the Republic of Belarus was established
by the Agreement between Ukraine and the Republic of Belarus of 12 May
1997. Ukraine ratied the agreement on 18 July 1997 and the Republic of
Belarus in 2010. The Agreement entered into force on 18 June 2013.
To implement its provisions, the parties concluded an Agreement
between the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the Government of the
Republic of Belarus on the approval of the Regulation on the Demarcation
of the state border between Ukraine and the Republic of Belarus of 30 July
2014.
In accordance with article 3 of Agreement on state border, the
demarcation of the state border between the parties shall be carried out
by a Joint Commission. The Joint Commission shall operate under the
Regulation on the Demarcation of the state border between Ukraine and
877
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
Republic of Belarus, which shall be approved by the Governments of the
parties.
Since 24 June 2014, eld work has begun on establishment of the state
border line and the identication of border signs locations. 23 meetings of
the Joint Ukrainian-Belarusian Demarcation Commission were held.
As of July 2020, project for the placement of border signs at the state
border (1084.2 km) was developed; 873 km of border has been established
on the ground; dened 1,944 sites for the installation of border signs,
including 24 in 2019; 416 border signs installed by the Ukrainian side;
the coordinates and heights of 693 border signs have been determined; a
joint geodetic network along the state border has been established; work
has been done on the installation and development of the Ukrainian border
pillar of the border sign «Bug» (trilateral junction point of the borders of
Ukraine, the Republic of Belarus and the Republic of Poland).
However, there are concerns about the recent social and political
occurrences in the Republic of Belarus caused by the results of the
presidential elections which have not been recognized by the international
community because of massive violations. Minister for Foreign Affairs
of Ukraine Dmytro Kuleba (2020) stated that «in view of the electoral
campaign in Belarus and further occurrences, the «inauguration» of
Lukashenko О. did not signify his recognition as the legitimate head of the
Belarus». The ofcial reaction of the Ukrainian authorities to the results
of the elections, and the response of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Republic of Belarus, could jeopardize the completion of the procedure for
the legal formalization of the Ukrainian-Belarusian area of the state border.
Conclusions
An analysis of the legal formalization for Ukraine’s state border with
neighbouring countries makes it possible to identify the most signicant
threats to Ukraine’s national security.
Firstly, the incomplete process of legal formalization of the state border
threatens to lose the state part of sovereignty, territorial integrity in the
sovereign territory. This threat is caused by the intensive politicization of
issues the state-territorial structure of certain regions of Ukraine, incitement
of separatist and extremist sentiments among the population of the border
areas by some neighboring countries intending to revise the existing and
regulatory common areas of state borders.
Secondly, there is a signicant obstacle to the realization of the strategic
foreign policy direction of the state towards European integration. Indeed,
one of the main conditions for a State’s accession to the European Union
is the settlement of issues relating to the legal formalization of the state
border and the absence of territorial claims by neighbouring states.
878
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
Thirdly, there is a potential threat of escalation of border conicts and
military confrontations in the border regions of Ukraine, as well as at the
borders of Ukraine, and of the spread of extremist, terrorist, and separatist
manifestations on the state border of Ukraine. Separatism poses a threat
to the inviolability of the borders established in accordance with the norms
of international law and, consequently, to the political, economic, and
territorial security of the entire European space (Litvinenko, 2018).
Fourthly, a signicant threat to the national security of Ukraine is the
low level of organizational, logistical and nancial support for the activities
of the Ukrainian state authorities responsible for the legal formalization
of the State border, as well as insufcient equipment and resources for
military and law enforcement agencies to effectively counter crimes of a
cross-border nature and protect national interests at the state border and
in the exclusive (maritime) economic zone of Ukraine. The process of
delimitation and demarcation of the state border has been considerably
hindered by numerous cases of unresolved inter-state property relations
and the procedure for managing on border facilities and waters.
Fifthly, there is the potential threat of the loss of the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of a state in the situation of direct military aggression
by the Russian Federation. The undened legal status of the common part
of the State border of Ukraine with the Russian Federation is potentially
dangerous and could become a precondition for Ukraine to lose part of the
state territory on the border with Russia.
Bibliographic References
ADAMCHUK, Igor. 2010. International legal recognition of the State border of
Ukraine with Romania and Czechoslovakia (1939–1947). Apriori. Lviv,
Ukraine.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CABINET OF MINISTERS OF UKRAINE
AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS. 2014.
On the approval of the Regulation on the Demarcation of the state border
between Ukraine and Republic of Belarus. Available online. In: https://
cutt.ly/Qf8ICDz. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND ROMANIA. 2003. On the Regime
of the Ukrainian-Romanian State Border, Cooperation and Mutual
Assistance on Border Issues. Available online. In: https://cutt.ly/
Zf0Iyga. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS
ON THE STATE BORDER. 1997. Available online. In: https://cutt.
ly/7f3QQIy. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
879
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY ON
THE REGIME OF THE UKRAINIAN-HUNGARIAN STATE BORDER,
COOPERATION AND MUTUAL ASSISTANCE ON BORDER ISSUES.
1995. Available online. In: https://cutt.ly/pf0UVIr. Consultation date:
10/02/2020.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
ON THE STATE BORDER. 1999. Available online. In: https://cutt.
ly/9f3TKpW. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND.
1993. On the Legal Regime of the Ukrainian-Polish State Border,
Cooperation and Mutual Assistance on Border Issues. Available online.
In: https://cutt.ly/4f0IrnN. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ON
THE UKRAINIAN-RUSSIAN STATE BORDER. 2003. Available online.
In: https://cutt.ly/Of4mfUx. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN UKRAINE AND THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC ON
THE COMMON BORDER. 1993. Available online. In: https://cutt.ly/
lf0WsOr. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
CARTER, David; GOEMANS, Henry. 2011. “The Making of the Territorial
Order: New Borders and the Emergence of Interstate Conict” In:
International Organization. No. 2, No. 65, pp. 275–309.
CORTEN, Olivier. 1998. “Droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-memes et uti
possidetis: deux faces d’une meme medaille?” In: Revue Belge de Droit
International. No. 1, pp. 161–189.
FANG, Songying; LI, Xiaojun. 2019. “Historical Ownership and Territorial
Disputes” In: The Journal of Politics. Vol. 1, No. 82, pp. 345–360.
HARRISON, Wagner. 2007. War and the State; The Theory of International
Politics. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Michigan, USA.
HASANI, Elliot. 2003. “Uti Possidetis Juris: From Rome to Kosovo” In: Fletcher
Forum of World Affairs, Summer/Fall. No. 85, pp.1–9.
KURYLIUK, Yuriy; KHALYMON, Serhii. 2020. “Criminal prole of migrants’
smuggler across the State Border of Ukraine” In: Amazonia Investiga.
Vol. 9, No. 27, pp. 195–208.
KYSLOVSKYI, Vasyl; TRUHAN, Mykola. 2011. “Maritime zones of national
jurisdiction of Ukraine” In: Bulletin of Geodesy and Cartography. No. 6,
pp. 20–25.
880
Volodymyr Nikiforenko
Modern Threats to the National Security of Ukraine Related to Incomplete Legal Formalization
Process of Ukrainian State Border
KYSLOVSKYI, Vasyl; TRUHAN, Mykola. 2012. “Internal sea waters of Ukraine”.
In: Bulletin of Geodesy and Cartography. No. 4, pp. 18–25.
LITVINENKO, Kyryl. 2018. Humanitarian factors of generating separatist
movements in Ukraine. Scientic Thought. Kyiv, Ukraine.
MARCHENKO, Borys. 2009. Administrative activities of the State Border
Service of Ukraine. Legal Help. Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine.
MARCUS, Andrew. 1996. “Border Disputes Continue to Roil Mideast-Despite
Arab-Israeli Moves, Disputes Abound” In: Wall Street Journal. Available
online. In: https://cutt.ly/Zf3WnoB. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
MEGORAN, Nick. 2004. “The Critical Geopolitics of the Uzbekistan–
Kyrgyzstan Ferghana Valley Boundary Dispute, 1999–2000” In: Political
Geography. No. 6, No. 23, pp. 731–764.
MEGORAN, Nick. 2007. “On Researching ‘Ethnic Conict’: Epistemology,
Politics, and a Central Asian Boundary Dispute” In: Europe-Asia Studies.
Vol. 2, No. 59, p. 253–277.
MELNIKOV, Olexandr. 2008. “On the issue of contractual and legal registration
of the state border of Ukraine” In: University scientic notes. Vol. 2, No.
26, pp. 27–33.
NEMATOV, Igor. 2018. “Legal registration of the state border is a concrete
result of the foreign policy of Uzbekistan” In: International Relations:
Politics, Economics, Law. No. 3, pp. 5–10.
POWELL, Edgar; WIEGAND, Krista. 2014. “Strategic selection: Political and
legal mechanisms of territorial dispute resolution” In: Journal of Peace
Research. Vol. 3, No. 51, pp. 361–374.
PRESIDENT of Ukraine. 2020. Decree “National security strategy of Ukraine”
No 392/2020 of 14.09.2020 Available online. In: https://cutt.ly/7f8DV9e
Consultation date: 16/09/2020.
SITSINSKYI, Vitaliy. 2012. “Analysis of сondition of public administration
in the sphere of legal formalization of the state border of Ukraine” In:
Investment: practices and experiences. No. 22, pp.113–116.
SITSINSKYI, Vitaliy. 2014. “The analysis of the current state of the legal
registration of the state border of Ukraine” In: Investment: practices and
experiences. No. 18, pp. 217–220.
TSYMBRIVSKYI, Taras. 2008. Respect for the principles of territorial integrity
and the inviolability of borders in international law. In: Scientic
Thought: Kyiv, Ukraine.
881
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 68 (Enero - Junio 2021): 866-881
TUNKIN, Harry. 1997. International law: Principles of public international law,
415 p.
TYMCHENKO, Lyubov; KONONENKO, Volodymyr. 2020. “The legitimacy
of acquisition of state territory” In: Juridical Tribune. Vol. 1, No. 10, pp.
149–161.
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE. 1991. The Law of Ukraine ‘On legal
succession of Ukraine’ No 1543-XII of 12.09.1991. Available online. In:
https://cutt.ly/ff8D14O.Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE. 2003. Regulation on the Demarcation of
the state border between Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova: Law of
Ukraine N 1372-IV of 10 December 2003. Available online. In: https://
cutt.ly/lf3TB5Z. Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
VRBAN, Dmytro. 2018. “Borders as an interdisciplinary problem: territoriality
and identity – past and present” In: Pravni vjesnik god. Vol. 1, No. 34,
pp. 9–50.
WAFULA, Ondine. 2013. “The Purpose and Functions of International
Boundaries: with Specic Reference to Africa”. In: Delimitation
and Demarcation Boundaries in Africa / ed. Addis Ababa. Ethiopia:
Commission of the African Union, Department of Peace and Security.
ZHAIMAGAMBETOV, Semen. 2015. The Protracted Border and Territorial
Disputes between Kyrgyzstan and Its Neighbors. Master’s Thesis Fort
Leavenworth, Kansas. Available online. In: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/
pdfs/ADA623960.pdf Consultation date: 10/02/2020.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en enero de 2021, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.39 Nº 68