Seagulls fly above the Aegean Sea off Amorgos island. Greece’s maritime spatial plan reflects the country’s positions on the continental shelf, based on international law, and does not constitute a unilateral delimitation, says the author. [AP]
“Granted, Turkey’s declaration of marine parks is illegal, but we also went too far with our maritime spatial planning.” Thus goes the refrain of some commentators seeking to show that they take an impartial view of developments in Greek-Turkish relations.
Their criticism of Greece’s maritime spatial planning centers rests on the fact that it was not restricted to (a) Greek territorial waters and (b) the two continental shelf/exclusive economic zone (EEZ) areas where the country has signed maritime delimitation agreements with Italy (in the Ionian Sea) and Egypt (between Crete and Rhodes). It took a “maximalist” approach by including areas in international waters where no delimitation agreements exist with neighboring countries as part of its continental shelf. This provocative move inevitably prompted Turkey to overreact by designating marine parks in international waters. So, the theory goes, here we are, trapped, again, in a vicious cycle of fruitless confrontation.
