'Badr' alliance: Türkiye grows stronger through new alliances
This opinion piece argues that Turkey is successfully building a network of strategic alliances, such as the recent 'Badr' pact involving Pakistan, Qatar, and Indonesia, to navigate a shifting multipolar global order. The author attributes the failure of the post-Cold War neoliberal order to rising security risks, positioning these new partnerships as essential for national stability. The text highlights the unanimous ratification of a maritime boundary agreement between Turkey and Libya by the Libyan House of Representatives, criticizing European leaders for dismissing the treaty as illegitimate. The author frames European reactions as an overreach rooted in outdated colonial attitudes, asserting that sovereign decisions between independent states should not be interfered with. By detailing the military and demographic strengths of the new allies, the article presents Turkey as a central hub of power capable of managing multiple geopolitical fronts simultaneously.
Libya’s eastern-based House of Representatives unanimously approved a maritime boundary agreement with Türkiye on Tuesday, October 20, effectively reversing a five-year standoff between the two governments. The parliament in Benghazi voted to adopt the memorandum of understanding originally signed in November 2019 between Türkiye and Libya’s former Government of National Accord (GNA). In the same session, lawmakers repealed two resolutions adopted in 2020 that had previously rejected the ratification of bilateral agreements and severed political ties with Ankara. This legislative action ends a period of formal opposition by the eastern administration, which had maintained a boycott of the deal despite its registration with the United Nations in October 2020. The agreement establishes the delimitation of maritime jurisdiction areas in the Mediterranean Sea, defining the exclusive economic zones of both nations. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan held separate telephone conversations on Tuesday with Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah of the Tripoli-based Government of National Unity and Saddam Haftar, the deputy commander of the eastern-based Libyan National Army. Fidan thanked both officials for the adoption of the accord. The Turkish Foreign Ministry stated that the agreement safeguards the rights and interests of both countries under international law and the principle of equity. Ankara emphasized that the treaty had technically been in force since 2019, although internal Libyan divisions had prevented its practical implementation until now. The vote follows a series of diplomatic engagements aimed at reconciling Libya’s rival factions. Earlier this month, on October 6, the parliament elected Al Saleheen Abdulnabi as its new speaker, replacing Aguila Saleh, who had been a vocal opponent of the maritime pact. On the day of the vote, Turkish intelligence chief İbrahim Kalın was present in Tripoli, where he met with Prime Minister Dbeibah. Security sources indicated that their discussions focused on efforts to reconcile Libya’s rival administrations and military forces. This engagement builds upon a broader strategic shift initiated last year, which included military-to-military contacts between Ankara and the Libyan National Army, culminating in a July agreement to develop military facilities and advanced surveillance systems. Reactions from the parties involved highlighted a consensus within Libya regarding the strategic value of the deal. Saddam Haftar, son of eastern military commander Khalifa Haftar, welcomed the parliamentary approval, describing it as a step toward overcoming historical disputes. He characterized the agreement as a tool to protect Libya’s economic interests and referred to Türkiye as a significant regional power. The foreign ministry of the Tripoli-based government also labeled the vote a positive development for bilateral relations, stating that cooperation would proceed in accordance with international law. Lawmaker Tarek al-Jeroushi noted that while some neighboring states might object, the primary concern for Libya is its national interest. Another lawmaker, Aisha al-Tabalqi, confirmed that specialized parliamentary committees had reviewed the provisions in detail prior to the final vote. The approval has drawn sharp criticism from Greece and the European Union. European Council President António Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen issued a joint statement expressing regret over the decision. They asserted that the agreement infringed upon the sovereign rights of third states, violated the law of the sea, and was therefore null and void. Both leaders reaffirmed the European bloc’s support for Greece and the Republic of Cyprus. The Greek Foreign Ministry rejected the validity of the vote, arguing that Türkiye and Libya do not possess opposite or adjacent coasts that would provide a legal basis for delimiting maritime zones. Athens contended that the agreement disregards the rights of Greek islands situated between the two nations' coasts. The ministry stated that geography and international law cannot be altered by unilateral parliamentary decisions and warned that Greece would take all appropriate measures to safeguard its sovereign rights. The Greek Cypriot administration similarly condemned the move, labeling the memorandum illegal and void. Background on the dispute reveals deep-seated tensions in the eastern Mediterranean. The original 2019 agreement was signed during a critical phase of the Libyan civil war, when Turkish military support helped repel an offensive by Khalifa Haftar’s forces against Tripoli. Since then, Greece has pursued maximalist claims in the region, seeking to limit Türkiye’s maritime access to a narrow zone around the Gulf of Antalya. Conversely, the Libyan-Turkish accord aims to counter unilateral delimitations made by Greece and Cyprus. The deal also carries significant economic implications, as it includes provisions for Turkish hydrocarbon exploration within Libyan territorial waters. In 2022, the two nations signed a separate hydrocarbon memorandum allowing Turkish companies to conduct seismic surveys and drilling operations. Most recently, on June 25, 2025, the Turkish Petroleum Corporation signed a memorandum with Libya’s National Oil Corporation for a two-dimensional seismic survey in four offshore blocks covering an area of 10,000 square kilometers. Data from these surveys is scheduled to be processed within nine months. The geopolitical landscape further complicates the situation, as Greece, Cyprus, and Israel have recently intensified their cooperation in the eastern Mediterranean. Greece has actively lobbied Khalifa Haftar against the agreement, arguing it infringes upon Greek maritime rights. Despite these external pressures, the unanimous vote in Benghazi signals a consolidation of ties between Ankara and the eastern Libyan establishment. The removal of the 2020 boycott resolutions clears the path for deeper institutional integration, potentially influencing future negotiations on energy resources and security cooperation in the region. The immediate focus now shifts to how the Tripoli-based government and the eastern authorities will coordinate the implementation of the maritime and hydrocarbon clauses amidst ongoing domestic fragmentation.
Libya’s parliament has unanimously approved a maritime boundary agreement with Türkiye, reversing its prior rejection of the deal and a decision to cut political ties with Ankara. The agreement was originally signed in November 2019 between Türkiye and Libya’s former Government of National Accord to define maritime jurisdictions in the Mediterranean. The parliament also revoked two resolutions from 2020 that had opposed the agreement and called for severing relations with Türkiye. The move is seen as a counter to Greece and Cyprus’s unilateral actions in defining maritime boundaries in the region, which Türkiye views as violating principles of equity.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the event factually, noting the parliamentary approval, the reversal of previous decisions, and the geopolitical implications without overtly favoring any side. It includes references to regional tensions involving Greece and Cyprus but does not exhibit clear bias toward Türkiye
Why factuality (90): The article accurately states that Libya's House of Representatives approved the maritime boundary agreement on October 20, reversing its previous rejection. It provides specific details about the repeal of Resolutions No. 1 and No. 6 of 2020. The timeline of events is clear, including the 2019 sign
Why objectivity (75): The article maintains a relatively neutral tone, presenting facts without overt bias. It includes some contextual analysis regarding Greece's actions but frames them objectively. The mention of 'unilateral steps taken by Greek Cyprus' introduces a slight interpretive angle but remains within accepta
Libya's eastern-based parliament approved a 2019 maritime agreement with Turkey, reversing previous rejections of the deal and cutting political ties with Ankara. This decision has drawn strong objections from Greece and the European Union, who argue the agreement violates international law and infringes on their sovereign rights. The Turkish Foreign Ministry defended the agreement, stating it protects both nations' legal rights under international law and promotes stability in the Mediterranean. The EU reiterated its stance that the agreement is 'null and void,' expressing support for Greece and Greek Cyprus. Meanwhile, Libya's new parliament speaker, Al Saleheen Abdulnabi, replaced a longtime opponent of the agreement, and Turkish intelligence chief İbrahim Kalín met with Libyan Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah to discuss reconciliation efforts.
Bias read (Center): The article presents multiple perspectives without overtly favoring any side. It includes statements from Turkish authorities, the EU, and Greece, providing balanced coverage of the dispute over the maritime agreement. There is no clear editorializing or biased language that leans toward one party.
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reflects the standard reporting on this event. It correctly identifies the actors (House of Representatives, Turkish FM, EU leaders, Greek FM) and their respective positions. The specific date (Oct. 20) aligns with historical records of the vote. The characterization of the EU
Why objectivity (90): The tone is neutral and journalistic. It presents the conflicting viewpoints (Ankara's welcome vs. Athens/Brussels' objection) without taking sides. The headline uses 'welcomes' and 'objections,' which are descriptive of the actions taken rather than editorial judgments. The structure balances the r
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan engaged in phone calls with Libyan leaders Abdul Hamid Dbeibah and Saddam Haftar after Libya's House of Representatives approved a maritime boundary agreement with Türkiye. This agreement, initially rejected by Libya, was signed in 2019 and officially registered with the United Nations in 2020. It defines maritime jurisdictions in the Mediterranean Sea and grants Turkey rights to explore hydrocarbons in Libyan waters. The deal is expected to strain relations with Greece, which opposes the agreement due to competing claims in the region. Recently, the Turkish Petroleum Corporation signed a new memorandum of understanding with Libya's National Oil Corporation to conduct seismic surveys in four offshore blocks. Fidan also participated in discussions at the European Policy Centre in Brussels during a ministerial meeting.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information about the maritime agreement between Türkiye and Libya, including its implications for regional dynamics and international reactions. There is no overtly biased language, one-sided sourcing, or omission of context. The report remains neutral in tone, focusing
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports that Libya's House of Representatives approved the maritime boundary agreement with Türkiye, reversing its previous rejection. It mentions the 2019 signing of the agreement and its registration with the UN in 2020. However, it lacks specific details about the exact dat
Why objectivity (70): The article presents the event neutrally but includes some interpretive statements such as 'will likely anger Greece,' which introduces a degree of speculation. The reference to 'rival Libyan leaders' may imply bias in framing the relationship between Libya's factions. Overall, the tone is mostly fa
Libya's Parliament ratified a 2019 maritime border agreement with Türkiye, reversing its earlier rejection of the deal and decisions to cut political ties with Ankara. The agreement defines Türkiye's maritime jurisdiction in the Mediterranean and includes provisions for Turkish hydrocarbon exploration in Libyan waters. This development is expected to strain relations with Greece, which opposes Türkiye's growing influence in the region. The deal was registered with the United Nations in 2020 but faced delays due to internal divisions in Libya. Recently, Türkiye's state-owned energy firm signed a new agreement to conduct seismic surveys in Libyan waters.
Bias read (Conservative): The article emphasizes Türkiye's expanding influence in the Eastern Mediterranean through the maritime agreement and highlights tensions with Greece, suggesting a pro-Türkiye perspective. It frames the agreement as a 'landmark move' and notes the potential backlash from Greece without providing a nu
Why factuality (80): The article accurately reports that Libya's House of Representatives approved the 2019 maritime boundary agreement, reversing its previous rejection. It correctly notes the repeal of the 2020 resolutions and the historical context of the agreement. However, it lacks specificity regarding the exact d
Why objectivity (65): The article presents the event in a largely neutral manner but includes phrases like 'opposing powers were courted by Ankara, which initially sided solely with one side,' which may introduce an implicit bias. The tone is generally factual but occasionally veers into interpretive commentary, particul
Daily SabahParty-alignedConservativeFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 30
This opinion piece argues that Turkey is successfully building a network of strategic alliances, such as the recent 'Badr' pact involving Pakistan, Qatar, and Indonesia, to navigate a shifting multipolar global order. The author attributes the failure of the post-Cold War neoliberal order to rising security risks, positioning these new partnerships as essential for national stability. The text highlights the unanimous ratification of a maritime boundary agreement between Turkey and Libya by the Libyan House of Representatives, criticizing European leaders for dismissing the treaty as illegitimate. The author frames European reactions as an overreach rooted in outdated colonial attitudes, asserting that sovereign decisions between independent states should not be interfered with. By detailing the military and demographic strengths of the new allies, the article presents Turkey as a central hub of power capable of managing multiple geopolitical fronts simultaneously.
Bias read (Conservative): The article employs highly nationalist and assertive framing, describing Turkey as a 'center of power' and characterizing European criticism as an 'overdose' and 'overreach' driven by lingering colonial arrogance. The tone is defensive yet aggressive regarding sovereignty, aligning with right-wing,鹰
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (30): Highly biased and nationalistic. The text uses emotionally charged and accusatory language towards Europe ('imperial background', 'dawn of the colonial age', 'overdose', 'crossing the line'). It frames the narrative entirely from a Turkish nationalist perspective, dismissing international criticism
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
TR
