Figure 1. Determining the borders in the Mediterranean. Source: Unsplash.
There is a long history of clashes and conflict in the Eastern Mediterranean, the region which, encompasses Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Palestine, and Israel. Even from the ancient times, the strategic significance of the area was the main cause of the power struggle between the Mediterranean countries over the control of key territories and something that will enable to establish their dominance over land and naval trade routes. At the present time, several events have made again the Eastern Mediterranean a region of global interest. The countries of the Eastern Mediterranean are taking steps to create Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) these days, and the heavily trafficked Mediterranean is no exception, putting unspoken power balances in jeopardy and forcing future alliances.
A trip down memory lane
In 1974, Cyprus was invaded by Turkey in response to a Greek-backed coup. In the aftermath of the invasion, the island was partitioned into the internationally recognised and EU member-state, majority-Greek Republic of Cyprus in the south, and the de facto Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) in the north, which is recognised only by Turkey. Additionally, in the Eastern Mediterranean Arab States, the Arab Spring was the cause of drastic changes in the politics of the Eastern Mediterranean Arab States. Ten years after the fall of Muammar Qaddafi, Libya continues to struggle to put an end to its violent internal conflict, which developed into a proxy war fueled by external actors, and to rebuild its state institutions. In Egypt widespread protests in 2011, led to the resignation of the longtime president Hosni Mubarak. The post-revolution political crisis was resolved by a coup d'état in 2013 led by the current president, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
As it is evident, the Eastern Mediterranean still remains a region of high tensions especially in the recent years where Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, Egypt and Libya have butted heads over the EEZs that grant rights to exploration and drilling for newly discovered hydrocarbon resources.
Figure 2. What is mine and what is yours? Source: Unsplash.
The importance of UNCLOS
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) adopted the idea of an EEZ after several years of diplomatic conflicts and peace efforts. This was accompanied by the requisite technological advances that allowed deep-sea exploration and natural resource extraction from the seabed. The special rights regarding the exploitation of maritime resources, which are granted by an EEZ to a sovereign state can be of extreme financial value.
When it comes to sea boundaries, a coastal state does not need to make any declarations or take any formal actions to create a continental shelf because it automatically belongs to the appurtenant state under international law. Ships seeking passage through an EEZ are permitted to do so under UNCLOS, but the sovereign state retains the right to defend its EEZ, protect it from environmental harm and any other type of damage, and undertake any form of research within it.
An EEZ gives a sovereign state the right to exploit and use natural resources in the sea, on the seabed, and underground, as the name implies. The coastal state has complete control over all activities relating to the discovery and extraction of living (and non-living) resources, which inevitably include offshore oil and gas resources. The discovery of natural gas reserves in Cyprus, Egypt, and Israel's EEZ has caught the interest of global powers and energy firms in the region. Despite high monetisation costs and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on energy markets, Turkey's recent exploration activities have posed a major threat to regional security and reignited conflicts over maritime zone delimitation between Eastern Mediterranean littoral states.
Figure 3. Hagia Sophia, Istanbul, Turkey. Source: Unsplash.
Party Politics?
Greece claims that each island in the Aegean Sea is entitled to an EEZ, with UNCLOS backing this argument which is however limited to islands of notable size. Greece's role in the "Mediterranean Energy game”, and particularly in the delimitation of EEZs, is critical, not only because of the country’s geographic location, but also because of its proximity to Turkey. Normally, EEZs would have been established by now with little controversy, but Turkey has its own ideas about where the lines should be drawn.
Turkey deliberately attempts to dispute parts of Greece’s EEZ. Greece treats its islands in compliance with UNCLOS and plans to create a 12-nautical-mile territorial water zone, which would cover a significant portion of the Aegean Sea. Turkey, a non-party state, and therefore not bound by UNCLOS, refuses this claim by arguing that no islands (including Cyprus) can have full EEZs as the precedent of the Canada–France Maritime Boundary Case and Nicaragua v. Colombia dictates. Furthermore, according to Turkey, the Greek claims violate the principle of fairness of international law as small islands close to the Turkish coast (such as Rhodes and Kastellorizo) reduce drastically the Turkish EEZ.
Figure 4.Turkey's claims in the EEZ. Source: Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy.
Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, officially manifested Turkey's claims in September 2019, unveiling his own unique vision and, more precisely, the new borders of Turkey with a "Blue Motherland" map.
Later in 2019, Turkey's defense minister, Hulusi Akar, released maps depicting Turkey and Libya sharing maritime boundaries, ignoring the fact that the two countries are separated by enormous (like Crete) and smaller Greek islands. Tayyip Erdogan and Fayez al-Serraj, the president of the Tripoli-based administration, signed the agreement. This move produced strong reactions from Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt, whereas the East Libyan government, headed by General Hafter, has also condemned it.
Greece has officially acknowledged that Turkey has legitimate interests regarding its EEZ that might require some international process of arbitration or compromise between the two sides. The unresolved nature of the Cyprus crisis further complicates the problem as the internationally unrecognised TRNC claims part of Cyprus’ EEZ. Additionally, it seems that the two sides cannot find common ground on a framework within which to address the disputes, as Greece favors the option of international arbitration, while Turkey prefers bilateral negotiations. Should the two countries refer to the ICJ regarding the delimitation of the EEZs, the court cannot decide using the UNCLOS provisions directly as Turkey is not a signatory of the treaty. The debate is now shifted on whether UNCLOS is established as an international legal custom and a regional legal custom in the Eastern Mediterranean, binding to even non-party states.
Figure 5. Caryatids, Acropolis, Athens, Greece. Source: Unsplash.
Is there a solution?
The future in the Eastern Mediterranean will be shaped according to the will of all actors in the region. The goodwill of all parties for a peaceful resolution of their disputes according to international law, would greatly contribute to regional peace and stability. As for most international disputes, Greece and Turkey can deescalate the tensions through negotiations. Strict conditions and dedication to the framework set by international law on the issue of EEZs delineation are essential, as open-ended agendas rarely lead to tangible results. The ICJ, should the two countries agree to refer the case to the court, can help settle the dispute by ruling in favor of mutual compromises. The agreements of the two countries with third parties are a proof of the crucial role of good faith in the process of the negation and conciliation for the resolution of a regional dispute.
In the hands of every ill-intentioned user, a concept that was designed to ensure stability, protection, and foster prosperity can eventually be turned around and used as a tool. EEZs have played an important role in maritime security, as well as, in assisting states in resolving disputes and will continue to do so in the future their concept appears to be more of a catalyst than a challenge in and of itself. The EEZ concept has fueled aggressive claims from some regional players, especially Turkey, in the Mediterranean, particularly in the eastern portion. Nevertheless, the fact is that these conflicts will arise sooner or later, in some form or another.
Will the countries be able to successfully settle their differences and prosper, or will peace have to be sacrificed on the altar of indecisiveness and fragmentation?
Comments