درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Terrorism in the seas and fighting against it is one of the issues discussed in international law, especially the international law of the seas, so that the first measures in this direction also go back to the era of the League of Nations. Maritime terrorism, especially in areas where other maritime crimes are prevalent, is considered a serious threat to the peace and security of the seas due to the creation of criminal links between the perpetrators of these crimes. The organized nature of these crimes makes fighting against them effective only through collective efforts. Meanwhile, due to the increasing spread of terrorist acts since 1963, several conventions to fight terrorism have been approved. Modern maritime terrorism has endangered maritime security and international trade so much that it has led to intervention by international organizations such as the International Maritime Organization. One of the challenges of dealing with maritime terrorism is the inefficiency of the tools to deal with it, included in the Convention on the Law of the Sea. In fact, maritime terrorism has been carried out using new technologies, but the tools to deal with it are old. For a serious fight against maritime terrorism, tools beyond this convention are needed.

Background and Theoretical Foundations : The Bab al-Mandeb Strait constitutes one of the most strategically significant international waterways, serving as a vital maritime corridor linking the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and the wider Indian Ocean. Its geopolitical sensitivity arises from the convergence of regional rivalries, global power competition, and the presence of non-state threats, all of which have transformed the Strait into a critical arena for maritime security governance. Under the international law of the sea—particularly the principles governing straits used for international navigation—state behavior in this region carries profound legal and strategic implications. For Iran, whose economy and energy exports rely heavily on secure maritime routes, developments in the Bab al-Mandeb directly affect national interests and influence the direction of its maritime diplomacy. Methodology : This research adopts a descriptive-analytical approach, drawing upon international legal instruments, geopolitical analyses, security studies, and academic literature published between 2000 and 2024. By examining regional dynamics, the involvement of global naval powers, and the practices of coastal states, the study evaluates how these intertwined legal and geopolitical factors shape the Strait’s security environment. The research further analyzes Iran’s maritime diplomacy and strategic naval deployments within the framework of customary international law and UNCLOS principles. Findings : The analysis indicates that the Bab al-Mandeb Strait has become increasingly affected by multilayered geopolitical competition, including regional conflicts, great-power rivalry, and the activities of non-state actors. These conditions have amplified the vulnerability of maritime traffic and heightened the need for effective cooperative security mechanisms. Within this context, Iran’s maritime diplomacy—centered on legal compliance, anti-piracy operations, and bilateral cooperation with Red Sea littoral states—has contributed to safeguarding its sea lines of communication. Iran’s strategic naval presence in the northern Indian Ocean and near the Bab al-Mandeb has enhanced maritime security, strengthened its legal standing as a responsible maritime actor, and supported the stability of international navigation. Conclusion : The findings demonstrate that the security of the Bab al-Mandeb Strait is deeply influenced by the legal and geopolitical behavior of regional and global actors. Iran’s reliance on maritime diplomacy and strategically justified naval presence constitutes an essential component of its broader security and foreign policy. While geopolitical tensions continue to challenge the stability of this critical chokepoint, Iran’s legally grounded maritime engagement provides opportunities for strengthening regional cooperation, enhancing navigational safety, and safeguarding national interests. Future research should explore multilateral legal frameworks and confidence-building measures that could reduce tensions and support sustainable security governance in international straits.

Background and Theoretical Basis: In today's world, due to the relatively complex procedures of judicial proceedings in national and international courts, the use of arbitration for the resolution of disputes is expanding. International maritime arbitration has a special place because more than 90 percent of goods and maritime trade is carried out by sea and ships, and this type of arbitration has been identified as a special category of arbitration in the guidelines of the International Bar Association (IBA). Relatively few law firms specialize in maritime arbitration, and there is a need to pay attention to the resolution of disputes between shipping companies at the national and international levels, given the high volume of international trade. Methodology: In this research, using a descriptive-analytical method, the identification of the parties and the entry of a third party into the arbitration of maritime disputes were studied and analyzed. The purpose of this article is to analyze and discuss the approaches adopted by arbitral tribunals and courts regarding the legal status of non-signatory parties in the context of the two main centers of maritime arbitration: London and New York. Findings and Conclusion: As a matter of principle, only parties who have executed an arbitration agreement will be bound by it. However, there are exceptions where parties may be allowed to refer to or be forced to arbitrate even though they have not signed an arbitration agreement.  In the maritime industry, the issue of determining whether an arbitration clause is binding on third parties is critical. The structure of this section is susceptible to disputes involving non-signatories. Usually, maritime contracts are concluded by third parties in the framework of agency relationships, and contracts are assigned. Also, whether bills of lading can bind the holder to the charter party's arbitration clause is often disputed. The complexity of today's maritime trade has resulted in operators such as ship-owners, charterers, and cargo owners often operating in a corporate group structure where affiliates in specific business areas are interrelated and sometimes operate as an organization. "Front" for other companies.