Die neue Vereinbarung der Türkei mit Libyen über die Grenzen im Mittelmeer verschärft die Probleme mit Griechenland und der EU

Libya’s House of Representatives in Tobruk unanimously approved a maritime delimitation agreement with Turkey on Tuesday, reversing years of opposition from the eastern government. The pact establishes a direct maritime economic corridor connecting the southern coast of Turkey to the northern coast of Libya. While Turkey initially secured the deal in 2019 with the United Nations recognized Government of National Accord in Tripoli, ratification stalled due to resistance from the rival administration in the east. That resistance has now vanished, clearing the path for implementation. The move has immediately intensified diplomatic friction with Greece and the European Union, who view the arrangement as a violation of international law and sovereign rights. The agreement targets a region where large oil and gas deposits were recently identified. Estimates suggest that natural gas reserves worth several hundred billion US dollars may lie beneath the seabed in this area. Both Ankara and Tripoli aim to secure economic rights to these raw materials and pursue joint exploitation. The proposed corridor effectively ignores nearby Greek islands, including Crete, Karpathos, and Rhodes. Athens insists that it holds a comprehensive exclusive economic zone surrounding these territories. Consequently, the Greek government has announced firm opposition to the accord, describing the legislative vote in Libya as invalid. Greece’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement on social media platform X, declaring that the country firmly rejects the agreement. The ministry noted that the European Union supports this stance. It quoted Brussels describing the Turkish-Libyan memorandum as null and void. The EU argued that the document violates the sovereign rights of third states and fails to align with the Law of the Sea. Kaja Kallas, the European Union high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, echoed these sentiments. She stated that she raised the issue following the Libyan vote, emphasizing that the infringement affects the sovereign rights of third parties. The EU expressed a strategic interest in maintaining a stable and secure environment in the eastern Mediterranean, urging all nations to respect the sovereign rights of member states in accordance with EU and international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The core legal dispute centers on whose territorial claims are legitimate under international maritime law. Greece relies heavily on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, specifically Article 121. This article stipulates that inhabited islands capable of supporting an independent economic life possess the same right to an exclusive economic zone as mainland territory. Athens argues this provision applies directly to Crete, Rhodes, and Lesbos. To bolster its position, Greece cites a 2022 ruling by the International Court of Justice involving Colombia and Nicaragua. In that case, the court found that Colombia had violated Nicaragua’s sovereign rights by authorizing fishing activities within its exclusive economic zone. The ruling established that when interests overlap, a fair demarcation must consider coastline lengths, geographical conditions, and the implications of the resulting boundary. Ankara presents a counter-argument based on the unique geography of the Mediterranean. The Turkish government contends that granting full exclusive economic zones to every small Greek island located off the coasts of Turkey and Cyprus would largely cut Turkey off from access to the open sea. Ankara argues that this geographical reality must receive greater weight during boundary demarcation processes. Unlike Greece, Turkey has never signed the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As a result, Turkey refuses to submit the dispute to a UN arbitration tribunal. Even among international experts specializing in maritime law, there is no consensus on what constitutes a fair division in this specific context. The shift in Libya’s eastern parliament marks a fundamental change in regional dynamics. When Turkey pushed for the agreement in 2019, a brutal civil war was still raging in Libya. At that time, Turkey intervened militarily in the west to support the government in Tripoli, helping to repel an offensive led by eastern Libyan General Khalifa Haftar. Since then, relations have evolved significantly. A sustained diplomatic effort by the Turkish government appears to have altered the political landscape in the east. The former opponent of the deal, Haftar, has reversed his position after opposing it for years. This reversal allows the eastern parliament to endorse the treaty, removing the primary domestic obstacle to its ratification. The approval is likely to exacerbate existing tensions in the eastern Mediterranean. Greece and the EU maintain that the agreement undermines the stability of the region by disregarding established maritime boundaries. They assert that the corridor encroaches on waters where Greece exercises jurisdiction. Turkey views the partnership as essential for energy security and regional influence. With the eastern Libyan government now aligned with Tripoli on this issue, the legal and diplomatic battle over the status of the eastern Mediterranean is set to intensify. The differing interpretations of maritime law continue to drive the conflict, with both sides citing distinct principles to justify their positions.