Arguments of Cairo are different than that of Athens

While both Greece and Europe argue about the contents of the EEZ agreement made between Turkiye and Libya, Egypt instead opposes the signing of the agreement by the Tripoli government, which Egypt claims illegitimate.

Ankara’s agreement with the Tripoli government, on joint hydrocarbon drilling activities within the Libya’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the Eastern Mediterranean and over the Libyan territory, continues to be debated.

The preliminary of the Delimitation of the Maritime Jurisdiction Areas Memorandum between Turkiye and Libya in November 2019, was signed in Tripoli last week. The details of the preliminary are yet to be clarified, but according to the joint statements, Turkiye and Libya is set to start their joint oil and gas exploration and drilling activities in both the Eastern Mediterranean and the Libyan continental territories. The first country to react to this preliminary was Greece, just as it was back in 2019. Alongside the countries such as Germany and France, the European Union (EU) leadership also declared its opposition to this preliminary. Another reaction that was reflected among the public, came from Egyptian administration. Although it was being reported to the Turkish public as “Egypt opposes the preliminary”, under the headlines that of reactions from Greece and Europe, this is actually far from the full picture.

Nikos Dendias and Sameh Shoukry met in Cairo.

There are no comments on the content of the agreement

The truth is that, there have been two official statements from the Egyptian administration since the signing of this preliminary. Both were made by the Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry, and both were made after the meetings with the Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias. And when we take a closer look at the contents of these statements, it seems somewhat different from the statements made by Greece and the EU. The statements from Greece and the EU suggest that this preliminary violates the sovereignty of other countries (namely Greece), and therefore being contrary to international maritime law. So, there is an objection directed towards the contents of the agreement.

Egyptian objection is a ‘formality’

The Egyptian Foreign Minister Shoukry stated in both statements that the government of Abdul Hamid Dbeibeh does not have the authority to sign any international agreements, since his term has expired after the Tripoli government’s failed election process in December last year. Shoukry did not comment on any of the content of the preliminary, while calling for elections to be held in Libya and support the initiatives taken by the House of Representatives (HoR).

This is because Egypt argues that the government of Fathi Bashagha, that is appointed by the HoR, is the legitimate government in Libya. As a matter of fact, when the Arab League foreign ministers meeting in Cairo last month was chaired by Tripoli government’s Foreign Minister Najla Mangoush, the Egyptian delegation decided to leave the meeting. Therefore, there is a quite big difference between Egypt’s “formal” objections and the West’s “solid” objections.

Afterall, there are no EEZ disputes between Turkiye and Egypt in the Eastern Mediterranean. However, the two countries’ long-standing lack of dialog and their mutual “hostile” policies towards each other, had brought Cairo closer to Athens in the Eastern Mediterranean issue. Though, this situation has begun to change drastically in the last two years.

There are no obstacles for an Ankara-Cairo memorandum

Egypt has already signed maritime jurisdiction area delimitation agreements with both Greece and the Greek Cypriots, but has left a piece of EEZ between the limitations of the two other agreements, where they can still make an agreement with Turkiye as well. Although Athens demanded the limitations to be extended all the way to the Southern Cyprus in the memorandum signed with Cairo, Egypt kept the agreement limitations to 28th longitude. The memorandum’s exclusion of  Island of Meis (Kastellorizo) as a continental shelf, has also dealt a major blow on Athens’ Eastern Mediterranean claims. Again, Turkiye’s compliance to the continental shelf boundaries defined by the United Nations (UN) in its new hydrocarbon enterprises, has become one of the factors that opened up by the Ankara-Cairo rapprochement process.

Actually the “normalization” process between Ankara and Cairo had officially begun a little bit later, in order to re-establish the relations that were severed after 2013. And while the both foreign ministry delegations were establishing a dialog, the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu announced that the negotiations could be started over a delimitation of maritime jurisdiction areas if Egypt also demanded, and said “It is obvious that they will get more from an agreement they make with us”.

Both countries are desperate to sign it

This statement from Cavusoglu gave a blow on the Greek officials, who suddenly began to visit Egypt to persuade them to finalize the partial agreement they made in 2020. A possible EEZ memorandum between Egypt and Turkiye could mean the end of Athens’ maritime claims. Greece, which opposes the Turkish claims on the basis that islands have their own EEZ, even had to make concessions on the continental shelf of the Island of Meis (Kastellorizo), in order to get Cairo’s signature.

In the case of a maritime jurisdiction delimitation memorandum signed between Egypt and Turkiye, Greece would have lost a total of 15 thousand square kilometers of EEZ and the Greek Cypriot Administration would lose 11.5 thousand square kilometers. Turkiye on the other hand, wishes to scrap these two memorandums and sign another delimitation agreement between them and Egypt. Cairo, which will benefit from a possible deal with Ankara, is also leaving a way out for this hypothetical deal. However, the slowness of the progress of “normalization” between the two countries and the tensions created by some developments in Libya, where the two countries support different sides, offers Greece a great opportunity. In order not to hand Greece such opportunities, and also to ease its cause in the Eastern Mediterranean, Ankara definitely needs to reconsider its “normalization” schedule. It is basically up to Cairo to reclaim the stolen maritime zones. Moreover, Cairo also has to get a middle ground with Ankara in order to secure its vast border with Libya.