All
 
|
 
 


The Conflict Potential of the Eastern Mediterranean
 
PIIS013122270019339-3-1
DOI10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-3-130-138
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Pavel Gudev 
Occupation: Leading Research Fellow, Institute of World Economy and International Relations
Affiliation: Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO)
Address: Moscow, Russian Federation
Journal nameMirovaia ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia
EditionVolume 66 Issue 3
Pages130-138
Abstract

In recent years, the Eastern Mediterranean has become an area of confrontation between regional powers, with extra-regional countries, including the U.S. and the EU, also influencing the situation. The specificity of the situation stems from the fact that uneasy and often tense relations between the states in the region (Greece–Turkey; Israel–Palestine; Israel–Lebanon; Turkey–Syria), which are often at war or do not even have diplomatic relations, are complemented by their desire for access to the water areas as well as living and non-living resources of the sea. Who gets this access will determine the prospects for its social and economic development in the very long term. Discovered oil and gas reserves as well as the plans of certain states to build their respective pipelines intensify competition for resources. In turn, this process inevitably faces the need for maritime delimitation between countries, both with adjacent and opposing coasts, in which no one is prepared to make any concessions. It is primarily a question of delimiting the exclusive economic zones and the continental shelf, where coastal states have sovereign rights and jurisdiction to explore and exploit resources. The situation is aggravated by the presence of a series of island formations in the region, key among which is the Greek island of Kastelorizo, which also claims to form all the prescribed maritime zones of sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction. Turkey, which has the longest coastline in the region, cannot accept the infringement of its rights if the islands are given such rights to form extended maritime zones. Ankara as a non-party to the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea believes that any delimitation must be equitable and not based solely on the existing law. Turkey is firmly against any delimitation based on the median (equidistance) line method. It has pursued a highly provocative policy both to conduct seismological surveys in areas it considers its own and to conclude bilateral demarcation agreements where others perceive its maritime borders. The essence of these actions is to show that it is Turkey, not Greece or the Republic of Cyprus as an island state, that has the right to draw any maritime boundaries. The culmination of this policy was the 2019 Turkey–Libya Memorandum on Maritime Delimitation, which, although rejected by the international community, showed Ankara's true agenda and its insistence on promoting its national interests.

Keywords1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, continental shelf, maritime delimitation, median line, islands regime, Kastelorizo Island, Turkey, NAVTEX, seismological surveys
Received24.03.2022
Publication date23.03.2022
Number of characters30803
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной

Table of contents

СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ПРАВО И ДОСТУП К РЕСУРСАМ
ПРОВОКАЦИОННАЯ СДЕЛКА
БИТВА КАРТ И РОЛЬ ОСТРОВА КАСТЕЛОРИЗО
ПОЗИЦИЯ ТУРЦИИ И МЕЖДУНАРОДНАЯ ПРАКТИКА
ПРАКТИЧЕСКИЕ ДЕЙСТВИЯ ТУРЦИИ
1

СОВРЕМЕННОЕ ПРАВО И ДОСТУП К РЕСУРСАМ
2 Как известно Конвенция ООН по морском праву 1982 г. (далее – Конвенция 1982 г.) закрепила так называемый зональный подход к разделению пространств Мирового океана на зоны суверенитета (внутренние воды, территориальное море), суверенных прав и юрисдикции (прилежащая зона, исключительная экономическая зона (далее – ИЭЗ), континентальный шельф (далее – КШ)), предоставив прибрежным государствам расширенные права по использованию пространств и ресурсов той его части, которая раньше являлась открытым морем. В пределах 200-мильной ИЭЗ и соответствующего ей континентального шельфа они были наделены исключительными правами, то есть неотъемлемыми, по разведке и разработке живых (водных биологических) и неживых (в том числе углеводородных) ресурсов.
3 Несмотря на то что Конвенция 1982 г. вступила в законную силу в 1994 г., страны средиземноморского региона не спешили устанавливать режимы ИЭЗ и КШ не только в связи с неизбежным в значительном числе случаев вопросом об их разграничении между побережьями смежных и противолежащих государств, но и в силу возможного ограничения традиционных видов использования тех или иных морских пространств, прежде всего рыболовства. В пределах 200-мильной ИЭЗ действует лишь три свободы открытого моря – судоходства, полетов, прокладки кабелей и трубопроводов, а важнейшая свобода – свобода рыболовства – отсутствует. Например, такие средиземноморские страны, как Испания, Франция, Марокко устанавливали 200-мильный зоны в Атлантическом океане, но не в Средиземном море [1]. Однако открытие месторождений нефти и газа, появление технических возможностей работы на больших глубинах стали тем катализатором, который запустил процесс установления соответствующих зон в регионе, приведя к неизбежному наложению претензий между странами.
4 ПРОЦЕСС ДЕЛИМИТАЦИИ
5

Одним из первых соглашений по разграничению ИЭЗ, если говорить о восточном Средиземноморье, стали договоренности между Кипром и Египтом от 17 февраля 2003 г. [2]. Для нас важно то, что это разграничение было основано на использовании достаточно универсального, но далеко не единственного метода срединной линии, то есть равноудаленной от побережий двух стран. Более того, исходя из опубликованной карты1 можно было сделать вывод, что крайняя фиксированная западная точка этого соглашения свидетельствует о наличии потенциальной морской границы Египта с Грецией, иными словами учитывает наличие ИЭЗ и КШ у греческого о. Кастелоризо, который с точки зрения Турции (подробнее об этом далее) находится на ее континентальном шельфе и не имеет права на формирование собственной ИЭЗ [3, p. 16]. В результате Турция выступила резко против этого соглашения, так как, по мнению Анкары, оно непосредственно затрагивает и ее интересы [4, p. 127].

 1. Deposit of a nautical chart showing the median line as referred to in the Agreement between the Republic of Cyprus and the Arab Republic of Egypt on the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone of 17 February 2003 and the list of geographical coordinates of points defining that line. Maritime Space: Maritime Zones and Maritime Delimitation. Available at: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/MAPS/CYP_MZN47_2004_00123.jpg (accessed 24.04.2021).

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 451

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Kaysi Danial A. The Law and Geopolitics of Maritime Delimitation in the Eastern Mediterranean. Thesis, 2013. 50 p. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/28172239/The_Law_and_Geopolitics_of_Maritime_Delimitation_in_the_Eastern_Mediterranean  (accessed 24.04.2021).
2. Agreement between the Republic of Cyprus and the Arab Republic of Egypt on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone 17 February 2003. Available at: https://www.marineregions.org/documents/EGY-CYP2003EZ.pdf  (accessed 24.04.2021).
3. Potka F. Geopolitics and the overlapping EEZ claims in Eastern Mediterranean: a Liberal Institutionalism approach for the resolution between Cyprus and Turkey. Europa-Universität Flensburg & University of Southern Denmark, Flensburg, 2016. 87 p. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/29570077/Geopolitics_and_the_overlapping_EEZ_claims_in_Eastern_Mediterranean_a_Liberal_Institutionalism_approach_for_the_resolution_between_Cyprus_and_Turkey  (accessed 24.04.2021).
4. The Law of the Sea Bulletin No. 54. New York, UN, 2004. 147 p. Available at: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/doalos_publications/LOSBulletins/bulletinpdf/bulletin54e.pdf   (accessed 24.04.2021).
5. Agreement between the government of the Republic of Lebanon and the government of the Republic of Cyprus on the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone. MEES. Available at: https://www.mees.com/2012/9/28/op-ed-documents/cyprus-lebanon-cyprus-israel-offshore-delimitation/f994d750-6d1a-11e7-9675-d5a0b0510107  (accessed 24.04.2021).
6. Treaties and international agreements registered or filed and recorded with the Secretariat of the United Nations. Vol. 2740 United Nations, New York, 2016. pp. 55-69. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%202740/v2740.pdf  (accessed 24.04.2021).
7. A letter dated 20 June 2011 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Emigrants of Lebanon addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations concerning the Agreement between the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone, signed in Nicosia on 17 December 2010. Maritime Space: Maritime Zones and Maritime Delimitation. Available at: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/communications/lbn_re_cyp_isr_agreement2010.pdf  (accessed 24.04.2021).
8. Declaration of the State of Palestine regarding the maritime boundaries of the State of Palestine in accordance with the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea. 24 September 2019. Maritime Space: Maritime Zones and Maritime Delimitation. Available at: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/PSE_Deposit_09-2019.pdf  (accessed 24.04.2021).
9. Agreement between the Government of the Hellenic Republic and the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt on the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone between the two countries (with annex and map). Cairo, August 6, 2020. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/No%20Volume/56237/Part/I-56237-080000028058a22f.pdf  (accessed 24.04.2021).
10. Ιωαννίδης Νικόλας. Νομική ανάλυση Συμφωνίας οριοθέτησης Αποκλειστικής Οικονομικής Ζώνης μεταξύ Ελλάδος και Αιγύπτου. [Ioannidis Nicholas. Legal Analysis of the Exclusive Economic Zone delimitation agreement between Greece and Egypt. (In Greek.)] Available at: https://www.olympia.gr/1414892/ellada/nomiki-analysi-symfonias-oriothetisis-apokleistikis-oikonomikis-zonis-metaxy-ellados-kai-aigyptou/  (accessed 24.04.2021).
11. Yiallourides C. Part I: Some Observations on the Agreement between Greece and Egypt on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone. Blog of the European Journal of International Law, 25.08.2020. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/18969-2/  (accessed 24.04.2021).
12. Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the Republic of Turkey and the Government of National Accord-State of Libya on Delimitation of the Maritime Jurisdiction Areas in the Mediterranean. November 27, 2019. United Nations Treaty Collection. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=080000028056605a&clang=_en  (accessed 24.04.2021).
13. Letter dated 26 December 2019 from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Libya to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/634 Available at: https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/74/634  (accessed 24.04.2021).
14. Letter dated 13 May 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Libya to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council. S/2020/394 13 May 2020. Available at: https://undocs.org/en/S/2020/394  (accessed 24.04.2021).
15. Letter dated 14 February 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Greece to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/706. 19 February 2020 Available at: https://undocs.org/ru/a/74/706  (accessed 24.04.2021).
16. European Council meeting (12 December 2019). EUCO 29/19 Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/41768/12-euco-final-conclusions-en.pdf  (accessed 24.04.2021).
17. Note verbale dated 23 December 2019 from the Permanent Mission of Egypt to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/628. 24 December 2019 Available at: http://undocs.org/ru/a/74/628  (accessed 24.04.2021).
18. Çubukçuoğlu Serhat. Turkey's EEZ in the Mediterranean Sea: The Case of Kastellorizo. July 14, 2014. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/9532225/Turkeys_EEZ_in_the_Mediterranean_Sea_The_Case_of_Kastellorizob  (accessed 24.04.2021).
19. Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne. July 24, 1923. The World War I Document Archive. Available at: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Treaty_of_Lausanne  (accessed 24.04.2021).
20. Mirnyj dogovor s Italiej. Parizh, 10 fevralya 1947 g. Ministerstvo kul'tury Rossijskoj Federatsii, internet-proekt “Kul'turnye tsennosti – zhertvy vojny”. [Peace treaty with Italy. Paris, February 10, 1947. Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, Internet project “Cultural values – victims of war”. (In Russ.)] Available at: http://lostart.ru/ru/documents/detail.php?ID=916  (accessed 24.04.2021).
21. Siousiouras P., Chrysochou G. The Aegean Dispute in the Context of Contemporary Judicial Decisions on Maritime Delimitation. Laws, 2014, no. 3 (1), pp. 12-49. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/3/1/12  (accessed 24.04.2021).
22. Letter dated 13 November 2019 from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/550 Available at: https://undocs.org/ru/A/74/550  (accessed 24.04.2021).
23. Letter dated 18 March 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/757 Available at: https://undocs.org/ru/A/74/757  (accessed 24.04.2021).
24. Letter dated 20 April 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Greece to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/819. Available at: https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/74/819  (accessed 24.04.2021).
25. Gürdeniz Cem. Mavi Vatan'in Güney Cephesi: Dogu Akdeniz. Yayinlari, Pankus, 2020. 192 r. [Gürdeniz Cem. Southern Front of the Blue Homeland: Eastern Mediterranean. Yayinlari, Pankus, 2020. 192 r. (In Turkish.)]
26. Tikhomin K.V. Rol' ostrovnykh territorij pri razgranichenii morskikh prostranstv. Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava, 2008, № 3, ss. 151-171. [Tikhomin K.V. The role of island territories in maritime delimitation. Moscow Journal of International Law, 2008, no. 3, pp. 151-171. (In Russ.)]
27. Labut' D.A. Kontseptsiya “estestvennogo prodolzheniya sukhoputnoj territorii gosudarstva” v dokumentakh Komissii po granitsam kontinental'nogo shel'fa. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo, 2018, № 2, ss. 27-46. [Labut' D.A. The concept of "natural continuation of the land territory of the state" in the documents of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. International Law, 2018, no. 2, pp. 27-46. (In Russ.)] DOI 10.25136/2306-9899.2018.2.26992
28. Yoshifumi Tanaka. Predictability and Flexibility in the Law of Maritime Delimitation. Oxford and Portland, Oregon, Hart Publishing, 2006. 425 p.
29. Yiallourides C.  Part II: Some Observations on the Agreement between Greece and Egypt on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone. Blog of the European Journal of International Law, 25.08.2020. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/part-ii-some-observations-on-the-agreement-between-greece-and-egypt-on-the-delimitation-of-the-exclusive-economic-zone/  (accessed 15.03.2021).
30. Yiallourides S. Maritime Disputes and International Law: Disputed Waters and Seabed Resources in Asia and Europe. Oxford, Routledge, 2019. 292 p.
31. Van Dyke J.M. The Aegean Sea dispute: options and avenues. Marine Policy. 1996, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 397-404. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-597X (96)00025-5
32. Ioannidis N. The Continental Shelf Delimitation Agreement Between Turkey and “TRNC”. Blog of the European Journal of International Law, 26.05.2014. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-continental-shelf-delimitation-agreement-between-turkey-and-trnc/  (accessed 15.03.2021).
33. Gürel A., Mullen F., Tzimitras H. The Cyprus Hydrocarbons Issue: Context, Positions and Future Scenarios. PRIO Report, 2013. Available at: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/172873/Report%202013-1%20Hydrocarbons.pdf  (accessed 15.03.2021).
34. Maritime Delimitation and Offshore Activities in the Eastern Mediterranean. Legal and Political Perspectives. Recent Developments. 21 March 2012, Ankara. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Available at: https://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/html/maritime_delimitation.pdf  (accessed 15.03.2021).
35. Norris A. Troubled Waters in the Eastern Mediterranean. Blog of the European Journal of International Law, 24.08.2020. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/troubled-waters-in-the-eastern-mediterranean/  (accessed 15.03.2021).
36. Letter dated 4 September 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Greece to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council. S/2020/888 Available at: http://undocs.org/ru/S/2020/888  (accessed 15.03.2021).
37. Letter dated 21 August 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. A/74/997–S/2020/826 Available at: https://undocs.org/ru/A/74/997  (accessed 15.03.2021).
38. Konventsiya OON po morskomu pravu 1982 g. [1982, UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. (In Russ.)] Available at: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_r.pdf  (accessed 15.03.2021).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up